Legislature(2001 - 2002)
02/26/2001 09:05 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."
Co-Chair Donley stated that SB 65 would require the State of Alaska
to conduct a study to determine if gender is a determent in State
employee compensation. The State has never performed a pay equity
study. The bill would provide a mechanism to bring the State into
compliance with federal law and put an end to any wage-based sex
discrimination in State employment.
Co-Chair Donley continued that state employees should be paid based
on the value of the work they perform, not based on whether they
are men or women. He stated that passage of SB 65 is the right
thing to do. Failure to address the situation will expose the
State to expensive, time-consuming and divisive litigation. The
approach established in the bill would first identify if there were
instances in which the State is illegally paying women less than
men. If the study finds such instances, then the State will
develop phased strategies to eliminate such sex discrimination. SB
65 promotes fairness in the workplace and recognizes the valuable
work that is being performed by the men and women in State
government.
SENATOR ROBIN TAYLOR indicated that a major question was being
raised and that the pay equity question is one that has always
haunted the State of Alaska. He acknowledged that a study does
need to be done. In the last 15 to 20 years, the State has seen a
lot of change and tremendous transition. He pointed out that
anyone could go to most construction jobs and see women operating
heavy equipment. Senator Taylor noted that he supported Co-Chair
Donley's effort.
DAVID STEWART, Personnel Manager, Division of Personnel, Department
of Administration, understood that the Department of Administration
would be required to create a study to determine if gender plays an
inappropriate role in determining State of Alaska personnel wages.
He pointed out that the current system follows the laws adopted by
the Legislature, which requires a regular integrated salary program
based on the nature of the work being done. It requires equal
treatment of employees and applicants and requires recruitment and
advancement of employees based on their relative ability, knowledge
and skill. Furthermore, Alaska Statute (AS) 18-80-220, makes it
unlawful to discriminate against sex when the reasonable demands of
the position don't require that on the basis of sex. The State's
current pay systems have been tested in Court and have been found
to be fair.
Mr. Stewart added that the Department would work with the bill
sponsors to help define the problem and the issues inherent within.
The current system contains supervisory and management reviews and
Union appeal processes. Decisions affecting pay are not unilateral
and based on universally applied criteria. He added that the
external review processes was designed to produce appropriate
warning signals. Mr. Steward advised that rarely does the State
receive pay disputes. The current system does not illegally assign
pay raises based on gender. He noted that the Department does
support checking the efforts and practices.
Senator Green asked if there was anyway to allow "lag" time for
corrective action to take place.
Co-Chair Donley believed that could happen with a simple majority
vote. He recommended consulting with the legislative drafters to
see if that was correct.
Co-Chair Kelly asked if there had been discrimination claimed
against men. He recommended that the criteria of the study should
be broadened in order to look at sex discrimination both ways.
Co-Chair Donley responded that the legislation would be gender
based and not limited. Language referenced in the sectional
analysis was used only as an example and that there would be a full
analysis of both gender classes.
Co-Chair Kelly pointed out that the proposed legislation was not an
equal pay for equal work-study, but rather pay equity. He asked
Senator Donley to explain the difference.
Co-Chair Donley discussed that given two truck drivers, a man and a
woman, if either of them is paid differently with the same duties
and experience, then an equal pay problem exists. However, if
there is a class called assistant truck drivers and a class called
truck driver assistant, and one is dominated by women and the other
is dominated by men, and one class is paid differently from the
other, then there exists a pay equity situation.
Senator Leman asked what the legislation was attempting to solve.
He did not think that the legislation really addressed the concerns
voiced by Senator Donley. He suggested that looking at the class
could determine the difference in the pay scheme.
Co-Chair Donley pointed out that Alaska has the advantage of
looking at the results from other states that have already
undertaken the study. He stressed that there is legitimate concern
and perception that there is discrimination happening in Alaska
against women. It is a fact that women in the State are paid less
than men overall. He reiterated that there could be a potential
problem and the only way to alleviate the concern would be to
undertake such a study.
SFC 01 # 24, Side B 09:56 AM
Co-Chair Donley interjected that there is no conclusion that
discrimination exists, however, there exists a possibility.
Senator Leman suggested there could be other ways to address the
concern. He proposed "actively recruiting" into those
classifications. Additionally, wages paid should be marketplace
wages. Implementing both of those would accomplish more than going
through the recommendations proposed in the bill.
Co-Chair Kelly perceived that the career path within State workers
appears to be clear and that women do not seem to be impeded on
that path. He stated that different job classifications have to do
with the marketplace. He encouraged Mr. Stewart to work with
Senator Donley in order to guarantee that the study was crafted to
answer all the questions and concerns.
Co-Chair Kelly stated that the bill would be HELD in Committee
until Senator Donley and the Department could determine what was
needed done.
Senator Austerman asked if the study would be contracted out or if
it would be an independent study.
Mr. Stewart replied that the study would be contracted out.
Co-Chair Donley acknowledged that was the intent and in other
states where it had been contracted out, it was successful.
Senator Green questioned why the Department of Labor or the
Department of Community & Economic Development were not being used.
Co-Chair Donley explained that he was trying to integrate the State
of Alaska's employment system and compare it with other state
surveys. He added that job classifications in our State system are
different from the surveys performed in other states.
Senator Ward reminded members that the University of Alaska had
undertaken a study like this. He recommended checking with them
regarding the company who was contracted with. That study exposed
that the engineers were predominately males and that other classes
were predominately female. He believed that there was
justification for doing the survey.
Co-Chair Kelly inquired if it had been an equal pay study
undertaken by the University.
Senator Ward remembered that the study addressed classifications.
The females were being paid less because of their classification
and that the study had been done five years ago.
Co-Chair Kelly claimed that women tend to be the lower paid member
of most family units because they make the lifestyle choices for
the betterment of the family. He did not know how that information
would be quantified in a study.
Co-Chair Donley cautioned that the Committee must be careful not to
override a truly objective study. There needs to be an objective
frame of reference and analysis. Until that occurs, the perception
will continue.
SB 65 was HELD in Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|