WEBVTT - Who Gets What in Adidas-Kanye Breakup

0:00:03.200 --> 0:00:07.960
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloombird Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:10.920 --> 0:00:14.640
<v Speaker 1>I could say anti semitic things and Adidas can't drop me.

0:00:15.720 --> 0:00:22.120
<v Speaker 1>Now what? Now what? But Adidas did just that, dropping Yea,

0:00:22.440 --> 0:00:26.320
<v Speaker 1>the volatile rapper formerly known as Kanye West, in the

0:00:26.320 --> 0:00:30.120
<v Speaker 1>wake of his barrage of anti Semitic remarks. The breakup

0:00:30.160 --> 0:00:33.839
<v Speaker 1>of the almost decade long collaboration will cost Adidas a

0:00:33.920 --> 0:00:37.080
<v Speaker 1>nearly two d fifty million dollar hit to its earnings

0:00:37.080 --> 0:00:41.040
<v Speaker 1>this year, but it will cost Yea even more, reportedly

0:00:41.240 --> 0:00:44.479
<v Speaker 1>one and a half billion dollars and his status as

0:00:44.520 --> 0:00:48.959
<v Speaker 1>a billionaire. It's also created a morass of intellectual property

0:00:49.080 --> 0:00:53.519
<v Speaker 1>rights from their multibillion dollar collaboration. My guest is attorney

0:00:53.600 --> 0:00:57.040
<v Speaker 1>Zach Kurtz, who founded the law firm Sneakers and Streetwear

0:00:57.160 --> 0:01:01.600
<v Speaker 1>Legal Services Zach So. About two weeks ago, Yea said

0:01:01.720 --> 0:01:05.160
<v Speaker 1>that Adidas can't drop him. Do you think there's something

0:01:05.200 --> 0:01:08.760
<v Speaker 1>in his contract that he thought would protect him. I mean,

0:01:08.800 --> 0:01:11.319
<v Speaker 1>I think that's just Kanye being Kanye, thinking that he

0:01:11.360 --> 0:01:14.000
<v Speaker 1>was invincible. I think it was almost the opposite that

0:01:14.120 --> 0:01:16.240
<v Speaker 1>there was something in the contract that a statement like

0:01:16.280 --> 0:01:20.120
<v Speaker 1>that could hurt him. Whether it's morals non disparagement. But

0:01:20.200 --> 0:01:22.319
<v Speaker 1>I think it was also a challenge to Adidas when

0:01:22.360 --> 0:01:24.800
<v Speaker 1>he said that, as well as his additional comments. We

0:01:24.800 --> 0:01:27.360
<v Speaker 1>don't see the contracts, so we don't know the specific language,

0:01:27.360 --> 0:01:29.440
<v Speaker 1>but I'm pretty sure there's a morals clause in it, and

0:01:29.400 --> 0:01:31.120
<v Speaker 1>and I'm sure you just had the right to do

0:01:31.120 --> 0:01:34.559
<v Speaker 1>that based on the situation here. When we're talking about sneakers,

0:01:34.720 --> 0:01:38.520
<v Speaker 1>are we talking about patents or trademarks? All types of

0:01:38.560 --> 0:01:42.319
<v Speaker 1>intellectual property, and a lot of people interchange all three

0:01:42.360 --> 0:01:45.200
<v Speaker 1>of them, whether it's patents, trademarks, copyright. But usually what

0:01:45.240 --> 0:01:48.200
<v Speaker 1>happens is you have a sneaker design and design will

0:01:48.280 --> 0:01:50.960
<v Speaker 1>typically have a design patent and you could get several

0:01:51.000 --> 0:01:53.600
<v Speaker 1>design patents for it. And as you know, the companies

0:01:53.600 --> 0:01:56.080
<v Speaker 1>will also have their trademarks, whether it's a Smooze or

0:01:56.120 --> 0:01:59.320
<v Speaker 1>Adidas sign, and they'll put those on the shoes as well.

0:01:59.480 --> 0:02:02.920
<v Speaker 1>So and when she was a combination of design, patent, trademarks.

0:02:03.000 --> 0:02:05.560
<v Speaker 1>Some companies even have trade dress. When the design patents

0:02:05.600 --> 0:02:08.440
<v Speaker 1>expire or at the same time, they'll get different aspects

0:02:08.520 --> 0:02:10.960
<v Speaker 1>or features of the shoe to be trademarked. So it's

0:02:11.000 --> 0:02:14.080
<v Speaker 1>really a combination of all the above. And in the contract,

0:02:14.160 --> 0:02:17.239
<v Speaker 1>the IP ownership and licensing and transferring and how the

0:02:17.280 --> 0:02:20.200
<v Speaker 1>IP will be used and shared is fuss In the contract.

0:02:20.680 --> 0:02:23.760
<v Speaker 1>Adida said in the statement that it is the sole

0:02:23.840 --> 0:02:27.280
<v Speaker 1>owner of all design rights to existing products as well

0:02:27.320 --> 0:02:31.079
<v Speaker 1>as previous and new color ways under the partnership. Is

0:02:31.120 --> 0:02:35.000
<v Speaker 1>this firing a warning shot at Kanye because he's claimed

0:02:35.040 --> 0:02:39.280
<v Speaker 1>that Adida stole his designs and took creative liberties with

0:02:39.360 --> 0:02:41.480
<v Speaker 1>his brand. Yeah, I think you had the nail on

0:02:41.520 --> 0:02:43.079
<v Speaker 1>the head of it there. I think that's exactly what

0:02:43.280 --> 0:02:45.480
<v Speaker 1>sort of a warning sign letting us know a little

0:02:45.480 --> 0:02:48.000
<v Speaker 1>bit of the contract terms that it probably says that

0:02:48.160 --> 0:02:51.200
<v Speaker 1>Adidas is going to own all those designs, Kanye will

0:02:51.240 --> 0:02:54.480
<v Speaker 1>not get them upon termination, and that any new iteration

0:02:54.760 --> 0:02:56.560
<v Speaker 1>will be controlled by Adida. I think it was a

0:02:56.560 --> 0:02:59.320
<v Speaker 1>warning sign to the public. It was also the Kanye saying,

0:02:59.320 --> 0:03:00.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, get out of here. Who don't think you're

0:03:00.600 --> 0:03:03.200
<v Speaker 1>going to take your designs with you. Kanye has the

0:03:03.280 --> 0:03:08.440
<v Speaker 1>trademarks for yeasy wi z e y yees Us, among others.

0:03:08.520 --> 0:03:12.000
<v Speaker 1>His company has more than a hundred and sixty trademark

0:03:12.120 --> 0:03:17.480
<v Speaker 1>applications and registrations for his easy brand. So Kanye has

0:03:17.560 --> 0:03:20.680
<v Speaker 1>the trademarks in this deal. What does Adidas have? So

0:03:20.800 --> 0:03:23.200
<v Speaker 1>Kanye owned his I P that he brought to the table,

0:03:23.320 --> 0:03:25.800
<v Speaker 1>which is, as you stated, easy and y z Y

0:03:25.840 --> 0:03:28.519
<v Speaker 1>and all the logos and trademarks associated with his brand

0:03:28.760 --> 0:03:32.760
<v Speaker 1>in this deal, all the new designs for the Adidas shoes,

0:03:33.160 --> 0:03:37.520
<v Speaker 1>the three fifties, the seven fifties, literally almost every shoe

0:03:37.560 --> 0:03:40.360
<v Speaker 1>that Adidas has made with Kanye, the design patents for

0:03:40.400 --> 0:03:42.720
<v Speaker 1>those appear to be owned by Adidas. What we see

0:03:42.760 --> 0:03:44.600
<v Speaker 1>from the facts and everything on the table, with the

0:03:44.640 --> 0:03:47.120
<v Speaker 1>design patents and the trademarks and such, it looks like

0:03:47.160 --> 0:03:50.200
<v Speaker 1>Adidas owns almost all of the designs of the shoes

0:03:50.440 --> 0:03:53.440
<v Speaker 1>and Kanye owns and was licensing his y z Y

0:03:53.520 --> 0:03:56.120
<v Speaker 1>and Easy brand to be put on those shoes. So

0:03:56.520 --> 0:03:58.800
<v Speaker 1>just to get to the you know, the basics here,

0:03:59.080 --> 0:04:02.560
<v Speaker 1>people who think they are buying a sneaker designed by

0:04:02.840 --> 0:04:07.840
<v Speaker 1>Kanye West or yea, they're buying a sneaker designed by

0:04:07.920 --> 0:04:11.080
<v Speaker 1>someone else. Yeah, I mean technically putting it. Kanye definitely

0:04:11.120 --> 0:04:13.160
<v Speaker 1>has his damp on it. And then that's sort of

0:04:13.160 --> 0:04:15.119
<v Speaker 1>one of his arguments and why he wanted to leave

0:04:15.120 --> 0:04:18.480
<v Speaker 1>Addis and a lot of the companies because control Ultimately

0:04:18.520 --> 0:04:21.280
<v Speaker 1>kanyell work with the designers and the contract will talk

0:04:21.320 --> 0:04:24.039
<v Speaker 1>about how much control he had, how much approval he

0:04:24.080 --> 0:04:25.880
<v Speaker 1>has when he can do this, when he can say that,

0:04:26.080 --> 0:04:28.640
<v Speaker 1>but ultimately it's it's gas or you know, the companies

0:04:28.640 --> 0:04:31.320
<v Speaker 1>who make a lot of the major decisions. What does

0:04:31.400 --> 0:04:35.200
<v Speaker 1>Kande have the right to do owning the trademarks? When

0:04:35.240 --> 0:04:37.919
<v Speaker 1>this deals terminate, he's going to have the ability to

0:04:38.000 --> 0:04:40.839
<v Speaker 1>use his own trademarks what he owns on other shoes.

0:04:41.040 --> 0:04:43.479
<v Speaker 1>Depending on the contract, it might have a wind down period,

0:04:43.640 --> 0:04:46.080
<v Speaker 1>might have some restrictions in it that say for X

0:04:46.120 --> 0:04:49.080
<v Speaker 1>amount of time you can't enter this sneaker market or

0:04:49.160 --> 0:04:51.919
<v Speaker 1>you know, running shoes or shoes something like that. But

0:04:52.000 --> 0:04:54.520
<v Speaker 1>I think upon termination like we have now, it's up

0:04:54.560 --> 0:04:56.720
<v Speaker 1>to Kanye to take his trademarks with him and to

0:04:56.760 --> 0:05:00.000
<v Speaker 1>have new designs or use his trademarks for other purposes.

0:05:00.040 --> 0:05:03.560
<v Speaker 1>Is on clothing, and he does own several other design patents.

0:05:03.960 --> 0:05:06.640
<v Speaker 1>One was for the easy Slide, and I think to

0:05:06.720 --> 0:05:09.719
<v Speaker 1>me that's the most interesting one because although his name

0:05:10.040 --> 0:05:13.000
<v Speaker 1>is on the design patent as an owner and the inventor,

0:05:13.560 --> 0:05:16.720
<v Speaker 1>it's still associated with Adidas. When everyone thinks of the slide,

0:05:16.720 --> 0:05:19.839
<v Speaker 1>which is one of the top selling Easy shoes. Adidas

0:05:19.880 --> 0:05:24.400
<v Speaker 1>Easy Shoes they associated with Easy Adidas Kanye Easy Slide.

0:05:24.839 --> 0:05:26.960
<v Speaker 1>So I think that if Kanye wants to bring it

0:05:27.040 --> 0:05:29.960
<v Speaker 1>with him, or if Adidas wants to use that same side,

0:05:30.000 --> 0:05:33.440
<v Speaker 1>you know, without the branding, there'll be a good legal argument,

0:05:33.520 --> 0:05:35.520
<v Speaker 1>or it'll be tricky to say, hey, there's that there's

0:05:35.560 --> 0:05:40.039
<v Speaker 1>not confusion, or that consumers don't associate whatever that is

0:05:40.080 --> 0:05:42.760
<v Speaker 1>with Kanye or with Adidas. So he also owns a

0:05:42.880 --> 0:05:46.080
<v Speaker 1>high heeled shoe, and I would usually say he'd be

0:05:46.080 --> 0:05:47.719
<v Speaker 1>able to take those with him and use it, But

0:05:47.760 --> 0:05:49.360
<v Speaker 1>I'm not sure about the Easy Slide. I think if

0:05:49.360 --> 0:05:52.479
<v Speaker 1>he couldestingly makes some arguments. So essentially as Kanye just

0:05:52.760 --> 0:05:55.080
<v Speaker 1>working with new designers and creating his new designs and

0:05:55.120 --> 0:05:58.720
<v Speaker 1>new sneakers, brand new. So now as far as Adidas

0:05:58.920 --> 0:06:02.080
<v Speaker 1>they on these signs, can they just put out the

0:06:02.160 --> 0:06:06.920
<v Speaker 1>same shoes without the Easy trademarks. There's been talking about that,

0:06:06.960 --> 0:06:09.599
<v Speaker 1>you know, and that has happened before. Other companies have

0:06:09.720 --> 0:06:11.800
<v Speaker 1>done such a thing. You know, it's an athlete leaves

0:06:11.839 --> 0:06:14.240
<v Speaker 1>or the contract expires, they'll take off his branding and

0:06:14.279 --> 0:06:17.000
<v Speaker 1>his trademarks, and people have in the sneaker community. Some

0:06:17.240 --> 0:06:19.000
<v Speaker 1>don't like that when that occurs. And I think in

0:06:19.040 --> 0:06:22.039
<v Speaker 1>this situation, if Adidas to drift the easy branding and

0:06:22.080 --> 0:06:24.840
<v Speaker 1>started selling easy, there'll be a lot of outrage just

0:06:24.960 --> 0:06:27.880
<v Speaker 1>that Adidas for doing that after they terminated with Kanye,

0:06:28.000 --> 0:06:29.400
<v Speaker 1>But I think there would be all sneaker heads and

0:06:29.400 --> 0:06:32.080
<v Speaker 1>seas in the community who purposely wouldn't buy the shoes

0:06:32.120 --> 0:06:34.400
<v Speaker 1>for that reason. At the same time, there probably would

0:06:34.440 --> 0:06:36.960
<v Speaker 1>be the opposite, though. The sneaker world is crazy, to

0:06:37.040 --> 0:06:40.919
<v Speaker 1>be honest. Sketcher said that Ye showed up unannounced and

0:06:41.040 --> 0:06:45.359
<v Speaker 1>uninvited at its corporate headquarters in Los Angeles on Wednesday

0:06:45.400 --> 0:06:48.239
<v Speaker 1>for what reason they didn't say. So if he wants

0:06:48.279 --> 0:06:50.760
<v Speaker 1>to make his own sneakers, that's not going to be

0:06:50.800 --> 0:06:53.400
<v Speaker 1>so easy, is it. It's a lot harder than it look,

0:06:53.560 --> 0:06:55.400
<v Speaker 1>you know, And only a couple of companies have the

0:06:55.440 --> 0:06:58.040
<v Speaker 1>ability to do what Adidas is doing, you know, to

0:06:58.040 --> 0:07:01.000
<v Speaker 1>produce sneakers at such back turn around times at the

0:07:01.040 --> 0:07:04.240
<v Speaker 1>same time that amount of stocks, the three fifty, they

0:07:04.240 --> 0:07:06.360
<v Speaker 1>had made so many of those, and it's very rare

0:07:06.400 --> 0:07:09.159
<v Speaker 1>that companies could manufacture the amount that Kanye want. I

0:07:09.200 --> 0:07:10.720
<v Speaker 1>think that was a big part of the deal to

0:07:11.080 --> 0:07:13.080
<v Speaker 1>Kanye when he was shopping and trying to get out

0:07:13.080 --> 0:07:15.360
<v Speaker 1>of Adidas before this all occurred, and he was reaching

0:07:15.360 --> 0:07:18.160
<v Speaker 1>out to other companies and he just couldn't find another companies.

0:07:18.200 --> 0:07:20.000
<v Speaker 1>But it sounded like to actually do this, and that's

0:07:20.000 --> 0:07:21.559
<v Speaker 1>just a big thing. If you want to do something

0:07:21.600 --> 0:07:23.560
<v Speaker 1>by yourself, like Kanye wants to do, he's gonna have

0:07:23.600 --> 0:07:26.480
<v Speaker 1>a hard time finding a manufacturer, especially now after everything

0:07:26.480 --> 0:07:30.760
<v Speaker 1>has gone down. Do these celebrity endorsements or celebrity co

0:07:30.960 --> 0:07:34.640
<v Speaker 1>branding do they bring the sales to these sneakers? I mean,

0:07:34.680 --> 0:07:37.120
<v Speaker 1>can Adidas just put out the same kind of sneaker

0:07:37.160 --> 0:07:39.520
<v Speaker 1>but it won't get as many sales because it doesn't

0:07:39.560 --> 0:07:43.760
<v Speaker 1>have that celebrity factor. Yeah, definitely. I think what we

0:07:43.840 --> 0:07:47.080
<v Speaker 1>see in the sea industry is is exactly that celebrities influenced.

0:07:47.080 --> 0:07:50.560
<v Speaker 1>There's collaborations. They've been going through the roof lately, and

0:07:50.880 --> 0:07:53.600
<v Speaker 1>because of the collaborators, these companies are able to sell

0:07:53.640 --> 0:07:56.600
<v Speaker 1>out shoes quicker and Nike's insect will tell out no

0:07:56.640 --> 0:07:58.600
<v Speaker 1>matter what, to be honest, but when you add the

0:07:58.640 --> 0:08:01.360
<v Speaker 1>Travis Scott to it, it's just turned the fact that

0:08:01.400 --> 0:08:04.680
<v Speaker 1>the wow factor and the price of penfold. So I

0:08:04.720 --> 0:08:06.560
<v Speaker 1>think you're right. That's why all these companies are reaching

0:08:06.560 --> 0:08:10.440
<v Speaker 1>out the celebrities and doing collaboration shoes because people want

0:08:10.440 --> 0:08:12.000
<v Speaker 1>to see that now. They don't just want to regular

0:08:12.280 --> 0:08:15.080
<v Speaker 1>you know too, or a different color way. They want

0:08:15.480 --> 0:08:17.520
<v Speaker 1>someone that they know and someone they connects with. So

0:08:17.640 --> 0:08:21.320
<v Speaker 1>there's an artist and entertainer, someone they like on that shoe.

0:08:21.640 --> 0:08:23.840
<v Speaker 1>And when the companies do that, it definitely helps their

0:08:23.840 --> 0:08:26.480
<v Speaker 1>bottom line. So do they have to be careful though?

0:08:26.520 --> 0:08:30.760
<v Speaker 1>Because the celebrity has pinash is one thing, but a

0:08:30.800 --> 0:08:34.880
<v Speaker 1>lot of celebrities like Kanye come with, you know, different problems,

0:08:34.920 --> 0:08:38.880
<v Speaker 1>so there is this explosive element added. You're exactly right.

0:08:38.880 --> 0:08:40.640
<v Speaker 1>I think that's the most important thing that we should

0:08:40.640 --> 0:08:43.120
<v Speaker 1>take out of the situation. Influencers are great and they

0:08:43.120 --> 0:08:45.319
<v Speaker 1>could help your bottom line with sales, and you know

0:08:45.360 --> 0:08:47.840
<v Speaker 1>they could. If you pick the right one, you can

0:08:47.920 --> 0:08:50.679
<v Speaker 1>make a company, you know, explode and do great, especially

0:08:50.679 --> 0:08:53.240
<v Speaker 1>for these small startups. But picking the right one and

0:08:53.280 --> 0:08:56.959
<v Speaker 1>doing your due diligence is super important. I remember reading

0:08:57.000 --> 0:08:59.720
<v Speaker 1>something recently where they said in two was the first

0:08:59.760 --> 0:09:04.120
<v Speaker 1>time that the stock market when they're analyzing companies for

0:09:04.160 --> 0:09:06.520
<v Speaker 1>their I p O that they had the risk of

0:09:06.640 --> 0:09:09.880
<v Speaker 1>influencers listed, and I think that says a lot that

0:09:10.040 --> 0:09:13.480
<v Speaker 1>influencers in society now have. You know, they're they're good,

0:09:13.480 --> 0:09:16.360
<v Speaker 1>but they're also so risky that people must analyze that

0:09:16.440 --> 0:09:19.280
<v Speaker 1>in every aspect of you know, a company, and I

0:09:19.280 --> 0:09:21.480
<v Speaker 1>think these brands should be doing that for sure every

0:09:21.480 --> 0:09:24.680
<v Speaker 1>single time with the contract your firm does sneaker and

0:09:24.760 --> 0:09:29.240
<v Speaker 1>streetwear legal services, how much litigation is there or legal

0:09:29.280 --> 0:09:33.079
<v Speaker 1>work is associated with sneakers and shoes. It's a lot,

0:09:33.120 --> 0:09:34.640
<v Speaker 1>it's a lot. It's just enough that I could have

0:09:34.679 --> 0:09:37.640
<v Speaker 1>my own practice strictly doing sneakers in streetwear and I

0:09:37.679 --> 0:09:40.120
<v Speaker 1>love it, and it's more just than just litigation. But

0:09:40.400 --> 0:09:42.320
<v Speaker 1>we're touching on a lot of the main areas that

0:09:42.320 --> 0:09:45.520
<v Speaker 1>are covered in here, sneaker design and contracts, and it's

0:09:45.559 --> 0:09:47.600
<v Speaker 1>a lot of I P. You know, it's heavy i

0:09:47.720 --> 0:09:50.960
<v Speaker 1>P and heavy contracts and it's really fun. But you

0:09:51.000 --> 0:09:54.240
<v Speaker 1>get in these situations with influencers or you know, designers

0:09:54.280 --> 0:09:57.160
<v Speaker 1>and shoes and such, and there tends to be litigations.

0:09:57.679 --> 0:09:59.480
<v Speaker 1>So it's been taken off a lot. As you see

0:09:59.480 --> 0:10:01.000
<v Speaker 1>in the past four years has been a lot of

0:10:01.000 --> 0:10:05.600
<v Speaker 1>litigation relating to UH independent designers and trademark. So how

0:10:05.600 --> 0:10:14.520
<v Speaker 1>many sneakers do you own? A? Probably? But I'm like that,

0:10:14.760 --> 0:10:17.760
<v Speaker 1>how about you? No, No, I don't own any sneakers,

0:10:17.760 --> 0:10:20.040
<v Speaker 1>And you can tell I don't have much knowledge of

0:10:20.080 --> 0:10:24.840
<v Speaker 1>this area of designers sneakers, but maybe after this I'll start.

0:10:25.000 --> 0:10:27.959
<v Speaker 1>Thanks so much, Zack that Zack Orts, founder of the

0:10:28.040 --> 0:10:33.760
<v Speaker 1>law firm Sneakers and Streetwear Legal Services. Next Tuesday, New

0:10:33.840 --> 0:10:37.920
<v Speaker 1>York City's wage transparency law goes into effect. It will

0:10:37.920 --> 0:10:41.280
<v Speaker 1>make it mandatory for employers to share the salary or

0:10:41.360 --> 0:10:44.760
<v Speaker 1>hourly wage and postings joining me is and Dana, a

0:10:44.840 --> 0:10:47.720
<v Speaker 1>partner at King and Spalding, tell us about New York

0:10:47.800 --> 0:10:51.400
<v Speaker 1>City's new law. So I think it's important in understanding

0:10:51.400 --> 0:10:54.480
<v Speaker 1>the New York City pay transparency law to place it

0:10:54.559 --> 0:10:59.520
<v Speaker 1>into the broader US context of pay disclosure laws that

0:10:59.559 --> 0:11:02.679
<v Speaker 1>are getting past right now. In the past few years,

0:11:02.880 --> 0:11:06.559
<v Speaker 1>we've seen a real proliferation of these types of laws,

0:11:06.600 --> 0:11:09.320
<v Speaker 1>and that trend is expected to continue, and I think

0:11:09.320 --> 0:11:12.480
<v Speaker 1>it's important to understand that context in order to see

0:11:12.520 --> 0:11:15.040
<v Speaker 1>how New York City is kind of at the forefront

0:11:15.240 --> 0:11:17.640
<v Speaker 1>of some of the changes in these laws. So one

0:11:17.679 --> 0:11:20.840
<v Speaker 1>of the key differences that we've really been seeing in

0:11:20.880 --> 0:11:24.559
<v Speaker 1>the passage of these laws is that originally the laws

0:11:24.559 --> 0:11:28.680
<v Speaker 1>were really focused on being reactive, and they were only

0:11:28.760 --> 0:11:34.320
<v Speaker 1>requiring pay disclosure when somebody asked for salary information, whether

0:11:34.320 --> 0:11:36.680
<v Speaker 1>it was an applicant or when they were given a

0:11:36.720 --> 0:11:39.920
<v Speaker 1>conditional offer. And now what we're seeing is a shift

0:11:39.960 --> 0:11:43.479
<v Speaker 1>in the laws, and the laws are becoming more proactive,

0:11:43.640 --> 0:11:47.920
<v Speaker 1>with states and cities amending these pay disclosure laws requiring

0:11:48.000 --> 0:11:54.720
<v Speaker 1>employers to provide proactively salary ranges upfront with posting of

0:11:54.960 --> 0:11:58.000
<v Speaker 1>job advertisements. And that's exactly what the New York City

0:11:58.080 --> 0:12:01.120
<v Speaker 1>law is doing. So all in employers in New York

0:12:01.160 --> 0:12:04.120
<v Speaker 1>City are going to be required to include the minimum

0:12:04.280 --> 0:12:09.560
<v Speaker 1>and the maximum annual salary or hourly wage in any

0:12:09.960 --> 0:12:13.920
<v Speaker 1>advertisement for a job or an advertisement for a promotion

0:12:14.000 --> 0:12:17.880
<v Speaker 1>or transfer opportunity internally at the company, and that range

0:12:18.400 --> 0:12:21.560
<v Speaker 1>may be extended from the lowest to the highest salary

0:12:21.760 --> 0:12:25.720
<v Speaker 1>or wage the employer in good faith believes at the

0:12:25.800 --> 0:12:28.640
<v Speaker 1>time of the posting it would pay for the advertised job,

0:12:28.679 --> 0:12:31.960
<v Speaker 1>promotion or transfer opportunity. And this is going to be

0:12:32.040 --> 0:12:34.600
<v Speaker 1>a big change for a lot of employers who haven't

0:12:34.640 --> 0:12:39.319
<v Speaker 1>necessarily been disclosing that information publicly. Why don't employers want

0:12:39.360 --> 0:12:42.560
<v Speaker 1>to disclose that information? Because as a job seeker, you

0:12:42.600 --> 0:12:45.880
<v Speaker 1>look at an AD and should I apply for this ad? Well?

0:12:45.920 --> 0:12:48.000
<v Speaker 1>How much does it pay? A lot of times that

0:12:48.160 --> 0:12:51.240
<v Speaker 1>must stop people from applying for the job. Well, I

0:12:51.280 --> 0:12:54.400
<v Speaker 1>think there's a variety of reasons that businesses may not

0:12:54.600 --> 0:12:59.120
<v Speaker 1>want to actively disclose in a job posting what they're

0:12:59.120 --> 0:13:01.120
<v Speaker 1>willing to pay. So, but that might be they don't

0:13:01.120 --> 0:13:03.680
<v Speaker 1>want their competitors to know what they're willing to pay.

0:13:04.120 --> 0:13:06.440
<v Speaker 1>Part of it, maybe you know that they want to

0:13:06.440 --> 0:13:08.720
<v Speaker 1>be able to look at the candidates and assess, you know,

0:13:08.880 --> 0:13:11.320
<v Speaker 1>I'd be willing to pay more for candidate A who

0:13:11.400 --> 0:13:15.440
<v Speaker 1>has fifteen years of experience versus candidate B, who maybe

0:13:15.480 --> 0:13:18.400
<v Speaker 1>only has two years of experience. Is setting that range

0:13:18.520 --> 0:13:21.280
<v Speaker 1>upfront in a job posting may not be the place

0:13:21.320 --> 0:13:25.160
<v Speaker 1>where they want to originally open that discussion. However, they're

0:13:25.200 --> 0:13:27.200
<v Speaker 1>not going to have an option anymore. When it comes

0:13:27.240 --> 0:13:30.319
<v Speaker 1>to New York City and other similar jurisdictions, does law

0:13:30.320 --> 0:13:33.880
<v Speaker 1>apply to all employers whoever puts out a job application?

0:13:34.040 --> 0:13:37.560
<v Speaker 1>Or are there limits? So it's going to apply to

0:13:37.720 --> 0:13:41.480
<v Speaker 1>all employers with four or more employees as long as

0:13:41.520 --> 0:13:44.280
<v Speaker 1>there's at least one employee in New York City, and

0:13:44.320 --> 0:13:48.040
<v Speaker 1>it's going to apply to all positions that can or

0:13:48.160 --> 0:13:52.200
<v Speaker 1>will be performed at least in part in New York City.

0:13:52.280 --> 0:13:54.640
<v Speaker 1>So that is going to be a little bit complicated

0:13:54.720 --> 0:13:59.600
<v Speaker 1>for some employers to figure out, particularly for multi jurisdictional employers. Obviously,

0:13:59.640 --> 0:14:03.000
<v Speaker 1>with the COVID pandemic, we've seen the rise of remote workers,

0:14:03.440 --> 0:14:06.800
<v Speaker 1>whether that is kind of a fully remote position versus

0:14:06.960 --> 0:14:09.760
<v Speaker 1>a partially remote position where a worker maybe in New

0:14:09.840 --> 0:14:12.199
<v Speaker 1>York City two days a week, but in Connecticut three

0:14:12.280 --> 0:14:15.200
<v Speaker 1>days a week. In that situation, the New York City

0:14:15.280 --> 0:14:18.959
<v Speaker 1>law would apply to that job posting. For large, multi

0:14:19.040 --> 0:14:24.080
<v Speaker 1>jurisdictional employers who are possibly looking for employees in any

0:14:24.160 --> 0:14:27.720
<v Speaker 1>state um to fill a job position that's fully remote,

0:14:27.840 --> 0:14:29.760
<v Speaker 1>they're going to need to look at New York City's

0:14:29.800 --> 0:14:32.200
<v Speaker 1>law as well. I take it the point of this

0:14:32.320 --> 0:14:36.080
<v Speaker 1>is not just to make life easier for job seekers,

0:14:36.640 --> 0:14:39.480
<v Speaker 1>that there is also a hope that it will promote

0:14:39.640 --> 0:14:44.000
<v Speaker 1>pay equity. Yes, I think proponents of pay disclosure laws

0:14:44.080 --> 0:14:47.080
<v Speaker 1>do argue that these types of laws will help close

0:14:47.120 --> 0:14:50.280
<v Speaker 1>the wage gap for women and minorities. You know, while

0:14:50.320 --> 0:14:53.280
<v Speaker 1>it remains to be seen if this becomes a reality

0:14:53.360 --> 0:14:56.280
<v Speaker 1>as these laws get past, I think there's no doubt

0:14:56.320 --> 0:14:59.840
<v Speaker 1>that these laws provide more pay information to applicants and

0:15:00.040 --> 0:15:03.360
<v Speaker 1>to employees, and I think that we do anticipate that

0:15:03.400 --> 0:15:07.479
<v Speaker 1>we're going to see that impact in the workplace, particularly,

0:15:07.520 --> 0:15:12.320
<v Speaker 1>you know, I think some commentators are predicting that companies

0:15:12.360 --> 0:15:14.440
<v Speaker 1>are going to be able to see what salary ranges

0:15:14.480 --> 0:15:18.200
<v Speaker 1>their competitors are offering and therefore kind of match what

0:15:18.320 --> 0:15:21.960
<v Speaker 1>competitors are paying, which could actually alter some of the

0:15:22.040 --> 0:15:25.760
<v Speaker 1>recruiting methods that are going on right now. I think

0:15:25.800 --> 0:15:28.800
<v Speaker 1>other people are also anticipating that this may give rise

0:15:28.880 --> 0:15:32.720
<v Speaker 1>to more pay equity litigation. So explain what kind of

0:15:32.720 --> 0:15:36.240
<v Speaker 1>pay equity litigation you're talking about. So one of the

0:15:36.320 --> 0:15:40.800
<v Speaker 1>recommendations we are making two employers is to carefully take

0:15:40.840 --> 0:15:43.640
<v Speaker 1>a look and assess whether or not they need to

0:15:43.960 --> 0:15:48.200
<v Speaker 1>do an internal pay equity audit and look at how

0:15:48.360 --> 0:15:53.640
<v Speaker 1>their salary ranges are being paid for current employees. So obviously,

0:15:53.720 --> 0:15:57.840
<v Speaker 1>once you're posting job salary ranges for a position that

0:15:57.960 --> 0:16:01.280
<v Speaker 1>is being advertised, current employees are going to be able

0:16:01.320 --> 0:16:04.200
<v Speaker 1>to look at that job posting and determine whether or

0:16:04.200 --> 0:16:08.720
<v Speaker 1>not they are currently making an amount within that salary range,

0:16:09.200 --> 0:16:13.000
<v Speaker 1>and as more employees are having access to information about

0:16:13.040 --> 0:16:17.720
<v Speaker 1>pay ranges, some commentators do expect that workers will become

0:16:17.760 --> 0:16:21.880
<v Speaker 1>more disgruntled and may start asking more difficult questions about

0:16:22.000 --> 0:16:25.160
<v Speaker 1>why they're making less money than somebody else of a

0:16:25.200 --> 0:16:28.200
<v Speaker 1>different gender or a different race, giving rise to more

0:16:28.240 --> 0:16:31.720
<v Speaker 1>pay equity litigation. I suppose that answers my earlier question

0:16:31.760 --> 0:16:35.720
<v Speaker 1>about why employers wouldn't necessarily want these kinds of laws.

0:16:36.800 --> 0:16:41.520
<v Speaker 1>Have you found more companies focusing, you know, without being

0:16:41.640 --> 0:16:46.400
<v Speaker 1>pushed by outside agencies, focusing on E s G? Definitely.

0:16:46.440 --> 0:16:49.480
<v Speaker 1>I think more companies are becoming focused on E s

0:16:49.560 --> 0:16:55.680
<v Speaker 1>G as more customers, consumers employees are asking questions related

0:16:55.760 --> 0:16:58.040
<v Speaker 1>to their E s G. So tell me that the

0:16:58.080 --> 0:17:02.400
<v Speaker 1>penalties associated with these laws. So this is one of

0:17:02.400 --> 0:17:06.359
<v Speaker 1>the key differences in how different states and jurisdictions are

0:17:06.960 --> 0:17:09.840
<v Speaker 1>looking at what the penalties will be for favor to

0:17:09.880 --> 0:17:13.520
<v Speaker 1>comply with these types of laws. Here in New York City,

0:17:13.600 --> 0:17:17.719
<v Speaker 1>the Commission on Human Rights is entitled to investigate complaints

0:17:17.920 --> 0:17:23.080
<v Speaker 1>by employees or applicants, and the Commission can actually issue penalties.

0:17:23.800 --> 0:17:27.359
<v Speaker 1>So the Commission came out with guidance that effectively said

0:17:27.960 --> 0:17:31.159
<v Speaker 1>that there will be no money for the first violation

0:17:31.600 --> 0:17:35.160
<v Speaker 1>if an employer can cure the violation within thirty days

0:17:35.200 --> 0:17:41.800
<v Speaker 1>of service of the complaints. Um, however, you know second penalty.

0:17:41.800 --> 0:17:44.800
<v Speaker 1>You know a second violation, the Commission can end up

0:17:44.840 --> 0:17:48.720
<v Speaker 1>issuing a penalty of up to two dollars, and it

0:17:48.760 --> 0:17:51.600
<v Speaker 1>really remains to be seen what these penalties will look

0:17:51.680 --> 0:17:55.960
<v Speaker 1>like for a second or third violation. Also important is

0:17:56.000 --> 0:17:59.560
<v Speaker 1>to understand that there's a private rate of action under

0:17:59.600 --> 0:18:02.880
<v Speaker 1>the New York City law, but it's limited to current

0:18:03.080 --> 0:18:06.680
<v Speaker 1>employees who are bringing a claim against their current employer.

0:18:07.280 --> 0:18:10.800
<v Speaker 1>Applicants for a new position who are not employed by

0:18:10.800 --> 0:18:13.240
<v Speaker 1>the employer do not have a private right of action,

0:18:13.320 --> 0:18:17.040
<v Speaker 1>so they can't bring civil litigation against the employer in court.

0:18:17.560 --> 0:18:20.200
<v Speaker 1>Will this be a heavy lift, you know, complying with

0:18:20.280 --> 0:18:24.120
<v Speaker 1>these laws? Would it be a heavy lift for big employers?

0:18:24.560 --> 0:18:27.199
<v Speaker 1>Will they all be calling their attorneys to ask what

0:18:27.280 --> 0:18:30.919
<v Speaker 1>to do? I think it really depends how much thought

0:18:31.040 --> 0:18:35.679
<v Speaker 1>employers have put into what they're paying their employees. For

0:18:35.760 --> 0:18:40.160
<v Speaker 1>those employers who have seen this legislation coming, a lot

0:18:40.200 --> 0:18:42.600
<v Speaker 1>of them have been preparing and thinking through how to

0:18:42.680 --> 0:18:46.320
<v Speaker 1>make these pay disclosures. Once the laws are in place.

0:18:47.000 --> 0:18:50.200
<v Speaker 1>For other employers who are caught a little bit flat footed,

0:18:50.320 --> 0:18:52.240
<v Speaker 1>they may not be as prepaired and they may be

0:18:52.359 --> 0:18:56.000
<v Speaker 1>scrambling come November one. You said earlier that you see

0:18:56.040 --> 0:18:59.200
<v Speaker 1>this as a trend that's going to spread, these pay

0:18:59.240 --> 0:19:02.080
<v Speaker 1>transparent see laws. Do you think it depends on how

0:19:02.119 --> 0:19:05.640
<v Speaker 1>well they work out in the states where they are

0:19:05.640 --> 0:19:08.439
<v Speaker 1>currently on the books, or that it's just a trend

0:19:08.440 --> 0:19:11.320
<v Speaker 1>that's going to continue no matter what. I think it's

0:19:11.359 --> 0:19:14.000
<v Speaker 1>a trend that's going to continue no matter what. I

0:19:14.040 --> 0:19:17.400
<v Speaker 1>think that there's a real hunger right now from employees

0:19:17.520 --> 0:19:20.920
<v Speaker 1>for access to more information about pay, and I think

0:19:20.920 --> 0:19:24.880
<v Speaker 1>that there's a trend with employers really looking to ensure

0:19:25.560 --> 0:19:28.480
<v Speaker 1>they have employee trust and pay disclosure is one of

0:19:28.480 --> 0:19:32.040
<v Speaker 1>the ways to do that. I also think that, you know,

0:19:32.200 --> 0:19:34.679
<v Speaker 1>how these laws work out, it will take a while

0:19:35.040 --> 0:19:38.840
<v Speaker 1>for any sort of real data to come out, and

0:19:38.920 --> 0:19:41.000
<v Speaker 1>so I think in the meantime, we're going to see

0:19:41.000 --> 0:19:44.760
<v Speaker 1>a continuation of these laws being passed. Well, thanks so much. Ann.

0:19:45.240 --> 0:19:48.520
<v Speaker 1>That's and Dana a partner at King and Spalding. And

0:19:48.560 --> 0:19:50.720
<v Speaker 1>that's it for this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show.

0:19:51.040 --> 0:19:53.359
<v Speaker 1>Remember you can always get the latest legal news on

0:19:53.440 --> 0:19:57.719
<v Speaker 1>our Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,

0:19:57.920 --> 0:20:02.040
<v Speaker 1>and at www Dot Blue Bomberg dot com, slash podcast

0:20:02.240 --> 0:20:05.160
<v Speaker 1>slash Law, and remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law

0:20:05.240 --> 0:20:08.399
<v Speaker 1>Show every week night at ten pm Wall Street Time.

0:20:08.920 --> 0:20:11.639
<v Speaker 1>I'm June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg