“We now consider en banc whether Yant’s prima facie standard is good law. . . . In Yant, this circuit added an extra element to an EPA claimant’s prima facie case—namely, a showing that the pay differential ‘is either historically or presently based on sex.’”
“We conclude it is not. . . . We . . . take this opportunity to bring this circuit in line with our sister circuits and the Supreme Court. To make out a prima facie EPA case, a claimant bears the burden to ‘show that an employer pays different wages to employees of opposite sexes “for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions.”‘ . . . Yant is overruled to the extent it is inconsistent with the foregoing.”
