Winning a Massachusetts Equal Pay Act claim does not mean you also win a sex discrimination claim under Chapter 151B. In this case, the employee won her equal pay claim at trial, but the Appeals Court upheld summary judgment against her Chapter 151B claims because she lacked enough evidence that the employer intended to discriminate. This is an unpublished Appeals Court decision under Rule 23.0, which courts may cite as persuasive but not as binding precedent.
What happened
The employee had worked at the University of Massachusetts since 1996. In 2016 she was promoted to assistant dean for graduate programs at one of its colleges. Following its standard procedure, a human resources analyst compared her credentials and the salaries of eight employees of both sexes. The two strongest comparators, both men, had prior faculty experience and supervisory experience, which the employee lacked. After she negotiated, the dean raised the offer, and her accepted starting salary was higher than either comparator’s starting salary. She also pointed to two remarks the dean made during an earlier salary discussion about another job, which suggested her husband’s income was what mattered. A Superior Court judge granted summary judgment to the employer on the Chapter 151B claims. A jury later found for her on the Equal Pay Act claims.
What the court decided
The Appeals Court affirmed in Pacheco v. University of Massachusetts, No. 23-P-984 (Mass. App. Ct. January 17, 2025) (Rule 23.0 decision).
The two laws are different. The Massachusetts Equal Pay Act, G.L. c. 149, § 105A, bars paying someone less than employees of a different gender for comparable work. It does not require proof that the employer meant to discriminate. Jancey v. School Comm. of Everett, 421 Mass. 482 (1995). Chapter 151B, § 4, bars discrimination in pay because of sex, and it does require proof of intent.
The elements of a 151B claim. You must prove membership in a protected class, harm, discriminatory animus, and causation. Sullivan v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 444 Mass. 34 (2005). Since direct proof of bias is rare, you may use circumstantial evidence, and your first-step burden is not heavy. Summary judgment is disfavored in these cases. But it is still proper when an employee has no admissible evidence of discriminatory intent.
The salary comparison failed. The record showed the employer followed a standard process, examined comparators of both sexes, and identified job-related reasons, faculty and leadership experience, for viewing the two men as stronger candidates. Even so, the employee was offered more than they were. That did not show she was disadvantaged in pay.
The remarks were not enough alone. The court called the remarks sexist. But isolated or ambiguous remarks, standing alone, are not enough to prove discriminatory intent. Fontaine v. Ebtec Corp., 415 Mass. 309 (1993). Here, the remarks came during an earlier salary discussion for a different job, and nothing else in the record tied them to the starting salary.
The jury verdict could not be used. The employee asked the court to use her Equal Pay Act win to decide the Chapter 151B claims in her favor. The court refused. She had not raised it in the trial court, the verdict came after the rulings under review, and she had never asked the trial court for judgment in her favor. The court also noted that the two claims raise different issues, since only one requires intent.
What this means for you
If you think you are underpaid because of your sex, Massachusetts gives you two different tools. The Equal Pay Act focuses on the numbers: are you paid less than someone of a different gender for comparable work, and does a permitted reason explain it? Chapter 151B asks why: did the employer act because of your sex?
The lesson is that a 151B claim needs more than a pay gap and a bad comment. Courts look at how the employer set pay. If it followed a regular process and has job-related reasons, you need evidence that those reasons are not the real story. Remarks help most when they connect to the decision you are challenging and when other evidence backs them up.
The case also shows the value of pleading both claims. The employee lost one theory and still won the other.
What to do now
- Write down any comments about your sex, family or pay, with the date, speaker, witnesses and what decision was being discussed.
- Collect your offer letters, salary history and job descriptions, and note who held similar jobs and what they earned.
- Ask how your pay was set, and keep any written explanation.
- Talk to a lawyer about both the Equal Pay Act and Chapter 151B. Each has its own filing rules.
If this is your situation, call Doubleday Law at (617) 575-2006 or tell us what happened. Deadlines for discrimination and employment claims can be short.
