36 MAY 2018 • FOGHORN LEGAL Trusted to deliver excellence rolls-royce.com Kamewa Waterjets from Rolls-Royce Manoeuvrability and Efficiency Unchallenged Needless to say, there is great debate as to the propriety of this justification, and its complete disavowal of market factors such as supply and demand in setting workplace wage rates. Opponents to the new wave challenge the assumption that all wage inquiries engender discriminatory intent, or for that matter, “what is wrong with paying a person what they are willing to accept – they don’t have to take the job?” Wage inquiries serve legitimate purposes in the hiring process, for example, a review of wage history can indicate significant clues as to why individuals have changed jobs, a significant concern when reviewing any applicant’s stated reasons for changing jobs. Notably, not all states agree with the propriety of prohibiting wage background questions. On March 26, 2018, Michigan’s governor signed a bill that prevents local jurisdictions from regulating what employers can ask of applicants concerning past wages. On March 29, 2018, Wisconsin lawmakers passed legislation specifically prohib- iting salary question bans. Clearly, ju- risdictions are not of like mind on this controversial issue. In a pending court action before the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Chamber of Commerce for Greater Philadelphia v. City of Philadelphia, et al., business interests are challenging the constitutionality of Philadelphia’s wage background inquiry prohibition, which has been stayed by agreement pending the outcome of the litiga- tion. In an injunction hearing held on February 1, 2018, business interests challenged the constitutionality of the prohibition claiming that the First Amendment right to free speech was being improperly limited, a limitation that can only be held constitutional if there is a compelling reason for the pro- hibition. The Court appeared to find a material question as to whether the stated reasons for the prohibition were sufficiently demonstrated to justify the limitation on free speech. The outcome of that case may be a harbinger as to whether the wave of wage inquiry pro- hibition laws will continue. Vessel owners in jurisdictions yet to initiate legislation prohibiting past wage inquiries may wish to be vigilant for related bills and proposed ordinanc- es, and consider having their voices heard as to their feelings on the contro- versial topic. n About the Author Steven E. Bers, Esq., is Chairman of the Maritime and Employment Law Sections of the law firm of Whiteford Taylor & Preston, which has offices in Baltimore, Washington, Pittsburgh, Wilmington, Roanoke, Dearborn, Lexington, Roanoke and New York. He serves as PVA’s General Counsel, advising passenger vessel owners relating to marine and employment matters. He may be contacted at 410-347-8724, or sbers@ wtplaw.com