Because employers might have unique configurations that would inadvertently exclude certain workers, such as virtual or highly mobile workers, from reporting, the California Pay Data Reporting feature generally errs on the side of including employees that might have ties to California.
The Civil Rights Department (CRD) expects the following:
...that a single-establishment employer in California will include on its pay data report all employees (including any employees outside of California) whether or not teleworking.
Similarly,
CRD expects that a multiple-establishment employer with establishments only in California will include across its establishment-level data in its report all employees (including any employees outside of California) whether or not teleworking.
For multiple-establishment employers with establishments inside and outside of California, employers aren't required to—but might—report establishments and employees not specifically covered by the reporting requirements. Employers with uniquely assigned employees might want to err on the side of including these workers in the reporting.
For additional guidance on unique work scenarios, the CRD notes the following:
For the purposes of the reports due to the CRD, employers should assign employees to the establishment where the employer reports the employee for federal EEO-1 purposes, for consistency with federal reporting and to ease the reporting burden on employers. To the extent employers need additional guidance, CRD advises employers to assign employees to the establishment that the employee formally reports to during the Snapshot Period. If an employee reports to more than one establishment during the Snapshot Period, employers should assign the employee to the establishment that the employee reports to for the majority of their work.
To help support these requirements, California Pay Data reporting will include employees in the following configurations:
- Non-virtual employees assigned to a California work location.
- Non-virtual employees assigned to a California work location, despite further work location overrides.
- Virtual employees assigned to a California work location, regardless of the employee’s residence.
- Virtual employees assigned to a non-California work location, but who reside in (and presumably work from) California, despite further work location overrides.
If desired, employers might choose to manually remove employees included based on the configurations described above, but who wouldn't, in practice, be considered to be assigned to or working in California.
California Pay Data reporting will exclude employees in the following configurations:
- Virtual and non-virtual employees with no link to California.
- Non-virtual employees whose only link to California is residence.
- Virtual employees assigned to a California work location, but with non-California work location overrides.
- Non-virtual employees with non-California work locations, regardless of the employee’s residence, unless California work location overrides apply.
Important: Due to the complexity introduced by applying multiple overrides to an employee’s work location, employers using work location overrides should review final reporting results to ensure that employees who would be considered to be assigned to or working in California have been captured in the report.
For more information about California Pay Data Reporting regulations, see https://calcivilrights.ca.gov/paydatareporting/