Legislature(2001 - 2002)
03/13/2001 10:02 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE BILL NO. 65
"An Act requiring a study to determine if gender is a
determinant in state employee compensation."
[Note: A committee substitute was distributed to the Committee. The
two-page committee substitute inadvertently included the first page
of 22-LS0060\J and the second page of 22-LS0060\L. All references
to the version "J" committee substitute during the hearing pertain
to this J/L combination. A copy of this is on file.]
This was the second hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Co-Chair Donley, sponsor of the bill, spoke to a proposed committee
substitute that develops additional background information to
clarify that the intent of the legislation is to ensure that the
state is in compliance with current federal and state laws
requiring equal pay for equal work.
Co-Chair Donley called members' attention to a memorandum from his
office detailing the requirements of the study. He noted this
includes defining the differences between equal pay for same work,
equal pay for comparable work, and equal pay for equal work. He
also referenced a section analysis for the committee substitute.
[Copies on file.]
Co-Chair Donley moved for adoption of CS SB 65, 22-LS0060\J, 3\5\01
[See note above.] It was adopted without objection.
Co-Chair Donley continued addressing the committee substitute. He
described the difference between equal pay for equal work and equal
pay for comparable work. He defined this as making sure that
identical jobs as well as jobs that are substantially equal in
terms of composite skill, effort, responsibility, work conditions
and other material aspects, are paid equally and not paid different
amounts based upon domination by a particular gender.
Co-Chair Donley stressed that Alaska has a superior classification
method compared to most states, and that he believed no significant
discrimination would be found. However, he emphasized that until a
study is done, no one could be absolutely sure. He noted earlier
litigation over nursing classifications, which he said have been
addressed and the need to ensure there are no other instances.
He understood the concerns raised at the previous hearing regarding
how complicated a comparable work-study could be. In recognition of
this, he said he endeavored to clarify the study to ensure the
study addresses equal pay for equal work rather than comparable
work.
Co-Chair Kelly stated that the nurses versus physician assistants
issue is a good example of equal work and asked Co-Chair Donley to
elaborate.
Co-Chair Donley detailed that the Human Rights Commission found
that the classification of nurses was gender dominated by females
and the classification of physician assistants was gender dominated
by males, but that both were performing the same work and should
have been paid equally. However, he pointed out that the physician
assistants were paid more than the nurses. He continued that the
Commission's findings were appealed up to the Supreme Court and
that the court found that there were some duties performed by the
physician assistants that were different from those performed by
the nurses. Therefore, the court determined that there was no
improper discrimination under the equal pay for equal work laws.
Co-Chair Donley stated that as a result of this case, adjustments
have been made to eliminate the perceived problem. He gave a
hypothetical example of two employees doing the same job, but one
is classified as a janitor and the other as a maintenance
technician, and receives higher pay. In this instance, he said, if
most of the janitors are women and most of the maintenance
technicians are men, the equal pay for equal work rules are
violated.
Senator Olson clarified that the nurses in question were actually
nurse practitioners.
Co-Chair Donley was unsure, noting that the case was handled ten
years prior and was resolved by the Supreme Court, which found in
favor of the state. He spoke to his knowledge of the nursing
profession, citing that his mother was a nurse. However, he
maintained that he found the different classifications of nursing
confusing because of the different educational requirements for
each classification.
Senator Leman appreciated Co-Chair Donley's efforts to clarify the
issue. Senator Leman stated he had been concerned that attempting
to determine the worth of a worker, "against the marketplace" was
unwise. However, he stated that he has always supported equal pay
for equal work. He requested the bill be held in Committee to allow
him to further "tighten" the language.
AT EASE 10:15 AM / 10:20 AM
Amendment #1: This amendment makes a title change to the committee
substitute as follows.
Page 1, lines 1 and 2:
Delete:
An Act requiring a study to determine if gender is a
determinant in state employee compensation.
Insert:
An Act requiring a study regarding equal pay for equal work.
Co-Chair Donley moved for adoption.
Senator Hoffman asked if the intent is to continue to limit the
study to state employees.
Co-Chair Donley replied that is the intent, noting that language
within the bill provides such.
Senator Hoffman pointed out that the title would leave open the
possibility to expand the study while the House of Representatives
considered the bill.
Co-Chair Donley AMENDED his motion as follows.
Page 1, lines 1 and 2:
Delete:
An Act requiring a study to determine if gender is a
determinant in state employee compensation.
Insert:
An Act requiring a study regarding equal pay for equal work
for certain state employees.
The amendment was ADOPTED without objection.
Amendment #2: This amendment inserts, "in compliance with equal pay
for equal work laws" following "employees" on page 2, line 11 of
the committee substitute. The amended language reads as follows.
GENDER PAY EQUITY SURVEY. The Department of
Administration shall conduct a study to determine whether
gender is a determinant in setting compensation for state
employees in compliance with equal pay for equal work laws…
[See above note regarding the committee substitute. This change
impacts language contained in the "L" version, page two of which
was distributed along with page one of version "J". This
combination is referred to in Committee action as version "J".]
Co-Chair Donley moved for adoption.
AT EASE 10:23 AM / 10:24 AM
The amendment was adopted without objection.
Co-Chair Donley offered a motion to report from Committee, CS SB
65, 1-LS0060\J, as amended with accompanying Department of
Administration, Centralized Administrative Services BRU fiscal note
for $50,000. [See above note.] There was no objection and the bill
MOVED from Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|