AI and the gender pay gap: What Oregon lawyers need to know

By Andrea Flanagan, General Counsel at LeadVenture Inc.
Published on April 25, 2025

In a recent NPR interview, Jonathan Hersh discussed his research findings that suggest AI adoption in the workforce will have differing impacts across demographic groups. While it wasn’t an explicit conclusion, he inferred that a potential outcome is wage depreciation for women. 

While early studies indicate AI could serve as an equalizing function in the workforce, more recent articles suggest AI could exacerbate income inequality by benefiting high-income workers in the short term. Hersh’s research spoke to potential disparate impacts across demographics which was the first I’d heard of impacts specifically for women. To be fair, I have a two-year-old and spend less time reading industry news than I used to. As I learned during said two-year-old’s nap later that day, turns out there is a lot of support for the assertion that women hold more of the jobs predicted to be disrupted by AI. 

A 2025 article by the London School of Economics notes that roles involving routine cognitive tasks—such as clerical support, education services, and customer operations—are most exposed to AI substitution. These are also fields where women hold a disproportionately high share of jobs. Similarly, a 2025 workforce analysis by Success Quarterly highlights that AI’s greatest disruption potential is concentrated in sectors where female employment is dominant. Indeed Hiring Lab conducted research in 2023, leveraging Indeed U.S. job postings, and found that 73% of women work in jobs that have moderate or high exposure to GenAI, compared to 68% of men.

In some cases, implementation of AI in the workplace will result in direct job displacement. In others, it leads to deskilling or restructuring that can depresses wage growth. In either case, these consequences may disproportionately impact women. 

For Oregon employers, and the lawyers who advise them, these trends could implicate state equal pay, anti-discrimination laws, and wage and hour laws.

Legal risk areas for Oregon lawyers to consider

Disparate impact claims
Oregon’s civil rights laws (ORS 659A.030 and related administrative rules) prohibit not only intentional discrimination but also facially neutral employment practices that have an adverse impact on protected classes, including sex. If AI-driven business decisions disproportionately affect women’s job roles, hours, or pay—even without intent—they may be subject to scrutiny under state law.

Oregon Equal Pay Act compliance
Under Oregon’s Equal Pay Act (ORS 652.210–652.235), employers are prohibited from paying employees less than others for work of comparable character based on protected characteristics, including sex. If AI-driven job changes consolidate roles in ways that unintentionally create disparities, employers could be at risk—even absent intent or human decision-making.

Third-party AI systems and audit rights
Employers using third-party AI tools to assist with performance reviews, scheduling, role classification, competency development, job description creation or hiring should ensure those tools are tested for bias across protected categories. Legal teams should negotiate transparency and audit rights in vendor contracts to understand how the system functions and what bias mitigation practices are in place.

Regulatory and reputational exposure
Oregon’s Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) has shown increasing attention to pay equity enforcement and systemic bias in employment practices. Counsel should anticipate and plan for questions about how AI tools are being evaluated for legal compliance and workforce equity.

What Oregon lawyers can do now

For Oregon legal counsel, understanding how these tools interact with state-level pay equity and discrimination laws, and federal wage and hour laws, is essential to mitigating risk and providing practical, forward-looking advice to clients and employers.

  • Work with HR and procurement teams to identify AI tools that affect job structure, job descriptions, competencies, compensation, timekeeping, evaluations, and classification.
  • Ensure vendors are disclosing relevant bias testing procedures or performance audits.
  • Include AI-specific review in internal equal pay audits and workforce planning initiatives.
  • Document internal diligence and cross-functional engagement when AI affects workforce decisions.
  • Collaborate with HR teams to design and implement training programs to support employees in their career migration or advancement. 

About the Author:
Andrea Flanagan is General Counsel at LeadVenture Inc., where she oversees global legal and compliance operations, M&A, and strategic transactions. As a technology executive, she partners with leadership teams to scale businesses and manage risk at the intersection of law, business, and innovation. Her work spans commercial transactions, privacy and security programs, and emerging issues in tech regulation.