05/05/2021 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB21 | |
| HJR19 | |
| HB159 | |
| Presentation(s): Women in the Workforce & the Gender Pay Gap | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 159 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 21 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HJR 19 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
May 5, 2021
3:16 p.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Zack Fields, Co-Chair
Representative Ivy Spohnholz, Co-Chair
Representative Calvin Schrage
Representative Liz Snyder
Representative David Nelson
Representative James Kaufman
Representative Ken McCarty
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 21
"An Act relating to mobile intensive care paramedics; relating
to duties of the State Medical Board and the Department of
Health and Social Services; and providing for an effective
date."
- MOVED HCS SB 21(L&C) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 19
Supporting widespread infrastructure investment in the state.
- MOVED CSHJR 19(L&C) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 159
"An Act establishing the Consumer Data Privacy Act; establishing
data broker registration requirements; making a violation of the
Consumer Data Privacy Act an unfair or deceptive trade practice;
and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PRESENTATION(S): WOMEN IN THE WORKFORCE & THE GENDER PAY GAP
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 21
SHORT TITLE: LICENSE MOBILE INTENSIVE CARE PARAMEDICS
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) REVAK
01/22/21 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/8/21
01/22/21 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/22/21 (S) HSS, L&C
03/02/21 (S) HSS AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/02/21 (S) Heard & Held
03/02/21 (S) MINUTE(HSS)
03/04/21 (S) HSS AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/04/21 (S) Moved SB 21 Out of Committee
03/04/21 (S) MINUTE(HSS)
03/05/21 (S) HSS RPT 3DP 1NR
03/05/21 (S) DP: WILSON, COSTELLO, HUGHES
03/05/21 (S) NR: BEGICH
03/15/21 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/15/21 (S) Moved SB 21 Out of Committee
03/15/21 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/17/21 (S) L&C RPT 4DP
03/17/21 (S) DP: STEVENS, GRAY-JACKSON, REVAK,
HOLLAND
03/22/21 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/22/21 (S) VERSION: SB 21
03/24/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/24/21 (H) HSS, L&C
04/13/21 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM DAVIS 106
04/13/21 (H) Heard & Held
04/13/21 (H) MINUTE(HSS)
04/15/21 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM DAVIS 106
04/15/21 (H) Moved SB 21 Out of Committee
04/15/21 (H) MINUTE(HSS)
04/16/21 (H) HSS RPT 5DP 2NR
04/16/21 (H) DP: FIELDS, SPOHNHOLZ, MCCARTY, PRAX,
SNYDER
04/16/21 (H) NR: KURKA, ZULKOSKY
04/30/21 (H) L&C AT 8:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
04/30/21 (H) Heard & Held
04/30/21 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
05/05/21 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
BILL: HJR 19
SHORT TITLE: SUPPORTING INVESTMENT IN INFRASTRUCTURE
SPONSOR(s): LABOR & COMMERCE
04/28/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/28/21 (H) L&C
04/28/21 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
04/28/21 (H) Heard & Held
04/28/21 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
05/03/21 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
05/03/21 (H) Moved CSHJR 19(L&C) Out of Committee
05/03/21 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
05/05/21 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
BILL: HB 159
SHORT TITLE: CONSUMER DATA PRIVACY ACT
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
03/31/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/31/21 (H) L&C, JUD, FIN
04/23/21 (H) L&C AT 8:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
04/23/21 (H) Heard & Held
04/23/21 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
05/05/21 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR JOSH REVAK
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, provided information and
answered questions during the hearing on SB 21.
JOSEPH JEROME, Director of Platform Accountability and State
Advocacy
Common Sense Media
Washington, D.C.
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony during the hearing on HB
159.
CAITRIONA FITZGERALD, Deputy Director
Electronic Privacy Information Center
Washington, D.C.
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony during the hearing on HB
159.
HAYLEY TSUKAYAMA, Legislative Activist
Electronic Frontier Foundation
San Francisco, California
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony during the hearing on HB
159.
MAUREEN MAHONEY, Senior Policy Analyst
Consumer Reports
Yonkers, New York
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony during the hearing on HB
159.
CHRIS KOA, Attorney
DataEsque Law Group PLLC
Seattle, Washington
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony during the hearing on HB
159.
KARINNE WIEBOLD, Economist
Research and Analysis
Administrative Services Division
Department of Labor and Workforce Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented a PowerPoint on Women in the
Workforce & the Gender Pay Gap.
LAURIE WOLF, President and Chief Executive Officer
The Foraker Group
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave a PowerPoint presentation on Women in
the Workforce & the Gender Pay Gap.
HILARY MORGAN, President and Chief Executive Officer
Resourceful Results, LLC
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave a PowerPoint presentation on Women in
the Workforce & the Gender Pay Gap.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:16:40 PM
CO-CHAIR ZACK FIELDS called the House Labor and Commerce
Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:16 p.m.
Representatives Spohnholz, Fields, McCarty, and Snyder were
present at the call to order. Representatives Schrage, Kaufman,
and Nelson arrived as the meeting was in progress.
SB 21-LICENSE MOBILE INTENSIVE CARE PARAMEDICS
3:17:35 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the first order of business would
be SENATE BILL NO. 21, "An Act relating to mobile intensive care
paramedics; relating to duties of the State Medical Board and
the Department of Health and Social Services; and providing for
an effective date."
3:17:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER moved to adopt Amendment 1 to SB 21,
labeled 32-LS0207\B.3, Fisher, 5/4/21, which read as follows:
Page 1, line 1, following "Act":
Insert "relating to occupational licensing of
members of the military and their spouses;"
Page 1, following line 4:
Insert new bill sections to read:
"* Section 1. AS 08.01.063(a) is amended to read:
(a) Except as provided in (d) of this section,
and notwithstanding another provision of law, the
department or appropriate board shall [MAY] issue a
temporary courtesy license to an active duty member of
the armed forces of the United States or the spouse of
an active duty member of the armed forces of the
United States if the active duty member or spouse
meets the requirements of this section and applies to
the department or appropriate board in the manner
prescribed by the department or appropriate board. An
application must include evidence satisfactory to the
department or appropriate board that the applicant
(1) is an active duty member of the armed
forces of the United States or is married to and
living with a member of the armed forces of the United
States who is on active duty and assigned to a duty
station in this state under official active duty
military orders;
(2) holds a current license or certificate
in another state, district, or territory of the United
States with requirements that the department or
appropriate board determines are equivalent to those
established under this title for that occupation;
(3) if required by the department or
appropriate board for obtaining a license in the
applicant's profession, has been fingerprinted and has
provided the fees required by the Department of Public
Safety under AS 12.62.160 for criminal justice
information and a national criminal history record
check; the fingerprints and fees shall be forwarded to
the Department of Public Safety to obtain a report of
criminal justice information under AS 12.62 and a
national criminal history record check under
AS 12.62.400;
(4) has not committed an act in any
jurisdiction that would have constituted grounds for
the refusal, suspension, or revocation of a license or
certificate to practice that occupation under this
title at the time the act was committed;
(5) has not been disciplined by a licensing
or credentialing entity in another jurisdiction and is
not the subject of an unresolved complaint, review
procedure, or disciplinary proceeding conducted by a
licensing or credentialing entity in another
jurisdiction; and
(6) pays any fees required under this
title.
* Sec. 2. AS 08.01.063(b) is amended to read:
(b) The department or appropriate board shall
issue a temporary license under this section to a
person who meets the requirements [EXPEDITE THE
PROCEDURE FOR ISSUANCE OF A LICENSE] under (a) of this
section within 30 days after the department or
appropriate board receives the person's completed
application for the temporary license."
Page 1, line 5:
Delete "Section 1"
Insert "Sec. 3"
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 7, line 25:
Delete "sec. 1"
Insert "sec. 3"
Page 7, line 26:
Delete "sec. 1"
Insert "sec. 3"
Page 7, line 29:
Delete "sec. 1"
Insert "sec. 3"
Page 8, line 1:
Delete "secs. 8 and 9"
Insert "secs. 10 and 11"
Page 8, line 9:
Delete "sec. 1"
Insert "sec. 3"
Page 8, line 10:
Delete "secs. 8 and 9"
Insert "secs. 10 and 11"
Page 8, line 11:
Delete "Section 17(c)"
Insert "Section 19(c)"
Page 8, line 12:
Delete "sec. 18"
Insert "sec. 20"
3:17:54 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS objected for the purpose of discussion.
3:17:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER pointed out that AS 08.01.063 addresses
licensure for the spouses of military members, but not the
military members themselves. She said the language in Amendment
1 would provide temporary licensure opportunities to active duty
military personnel.
3:18:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY stated his belief that similar
legislation had been passed "several years ago," and he asked
whether this amendment would duplicate that legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER expressed that Representative McCarty may
be referring to SB 86, which included language similar to
Amendment 1, but said that SB 86 had been withdrawn.
3:20:10 PM
SENATOR JOSH REVAK, Alaska State Legislature, stated his support
for Amendment 1 as prime sponsor of SB 21.
3:20:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NELSON thanked Representative Snyder for the
amendment and shared his desire to undertake more
"comprehensive" legislation in the future.
3:20:58 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS removed his objection. There being no further
objection, Amendment 1 to SB 21 was adopted.
3:21:11 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ moved to report SB 21, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, HCS SB 21(L&C) was
reported out of the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
HJR 19-SUPPORTING INVESTMENT IN INFRASTRUCTURE
3:21:45 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 19, "Supporting widespread
infrastructure investment in the state."
CO-CHAIR FIELDS noted that the House Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee had reported CSHJR 19(L&C) out of committee on May 3,
2021, without mentioning the fiscal note in the motion. He
asked Co-Chair Spohnholz to "retake action" with a [corrected]
motion.
3:21:56 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ moved to report HJR 19, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
zero fiscal note. There being no objection, CSHJR 19(L&C) was
reported out of the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
HB 159-CONSUMER DATA PRIVACY ACT
3:22:29 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 159, "An Act establishing the Consumer Data
Privacy Act; establishing data broker registration requirements;
making a violation of the Consumer Data Privacy Act an unfair or
deceptive trade practice; and providing for an effective date."
CO-CHAIR FIELDS stated that the presentation of the sectional
analysis had commenced during the meeting of the House Labor and
Commerce Standing Committee on April 23, 2021. He said that the
administration is working with stakeholders on what constitutes
a "rewrite" of the bill and said that expert testimony would be
heard during today's hearing. He said that the purpose of the
invited testimony was to learn about the elements of the
proposed legislation and to ensure that it would not be a burden
on Alaska's businesses.
3:24:11 PM
JOSEPH JEROME, Director of Platform Accountability and State
Advocacy, Common Sense Media, stated that he is a lawyer
focusing on privacy issues, and that Common Sense Media has been
involved in several privacy efforts across the country. He
shared that there is a "general unease" about the volume of
information collected from consumers and about it's possible
uses. He said companies are now facing global privacy rules
including the European Union General Data Protection Regulation
(EU GDPR), as well as privacy rules in India, Brazil, and Japan;
the United States, he said, has "fallen behind." He said,
"Animating this conversation is an endless stream of headlines
documenting irresponsible data collection and use by tech
companies." He said some of the biggest companies in the world
testify about how burdensome a "patchwork of U.S. laws will be,"
and he opined that the "patchwork" already exists. He discussed
the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
and the Graham-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), both of which include
privacy protection as an afterthought to larger regulatory
efforts. Because of this sectoral approach, he said, there are
gaps in privacy regulations. As an example, he asked the
committee to consider the matter of student health; regulators
don't fully appreciate that most Americans have "absolutely no
grasp" of when their health information is protected by law.
"For all the talk about HIPAA," he said, "student immunizations
and other school health records are covered by our federal
[Family] Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) - that's
from 1974. FERPA, in turn, intersects with, and conflicts with,
our Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, and that only
covers the information of children under 13." He commented that
such gaps in protection leave the general public to rely on
state attorneys general, which often do not have adequate
resources to police commonly-used technology.
MR. JEROME said that dozens of states have introduced dozens of
privacy laws, but only California and Virginia have enacted such
laws. There are several different privacy models to consider,
he said, and states across the political spectrum have made
progress. He pointed out that North Dakota introduced what he
characterized as "probably the strongest single privacy law,"
and Oklahoma and Florida have debated similar laws up until the
last day of their respective legislative sessions. He said that
what Common Sense Media looks for in feasible privacy
legislation is extra protections for kids and teens; limits on
the abilities of advertisers and data brokers to circumvent the
law; and real enforcement "teeth."
3:29:53 PM
CAITRIONA FITZGERALD, Deputy Director, Electronic Privacy
Information Center (EPIC), shared that current laws in the U.S.
state that companies may collect any consumer data, as long as
the data's use(s) isn't misrepresented in the companies' privacy
policies. She said that allowing an individual to know the data
a company collects, and demand deletion of such data, puts the
entire burden of data protection on the individual consumer; a
good privacy bill would include strong data minimization
provisions such as limiting data collection to what is
reasonably necessary to provide a better service to the
consumer. Another component of data minimization provisions,
she said, would be the requirement that companies delete the
personal data when it's no longer needed for the original
purchase, which would blunt the impact of data breaches because
there would be less data at risk. She said that secondary uses
of data should be limited; downstream parties such as service
providers that collect data should be subject to the same
obligations as the original data collector.
MS. FITZGERALD then discussed promoting privacy-enhancing
technologies, which would make it easier for consumers to
enforce their right to privacy. She said that it's not
realistic to expect Internet users to take multiple steps to opt
out of data disclosure; every website uses banners to inform the
user that it's collecting "cookies," and the website makes it
difficult to allow users to opt out of data collection. There
are global mechanisms that allow settings to be configured in
Internet browsers that sent a signal to all websites saying that
a user wants to disallow the sale of data. This mechanism is in
the California Consumer Protection Act, she said, and technology
companies now comply with global privacy controls allowing
consumers to opt out of having their data sold.
3:35:15 PM
HAYLEY TSUKAYAMA, Legislative Activist, Electronic Frontier
Foundation (EFF), stated that strong laws require strong
enforcement, and EFF often studies the enforcement sections of
proposed legislation to determine not only how seriously
consumers would be protected, but whether the proposed
legislation addresses the widespread concern that drives the
call for such legislation. She encouraged the committee to
ensure adequate funding for enforcement mechanisms. She said
the "right to cure," usually existing within the enforcement
section of a bill, would give companies in violation of the law
a period of time to correct the violation and avoid disciplinary
action. She expressed that the right to cure is a "get out of
jail free" card that would mean no consequences for companies
that break the law, thus allowing consumers to be harmed with no
remedy to address the harm. She said that the strongest
enforcement mechanism EFF has seen is "private rights of action"
(PRAs), which play out in privacy laws across the country.
Illinois's Biometric Information Privacy Act contains a PRA, she
said, and was used to bring suit against Facebook over its use
of face recognition.
3:39:55 PM
MS. TSUKAYAMA discussed the importance of ensuring that
consumers who exercise their right to privacy aren't penalized
through mechanisms such as paying more for a service or being
ineligible for discounts offered to the general public. She
expressed approval for the prohibition on retaliation for
exercising privacy rights under HB 159, but she noted that the
proposed legislation still includes language regarding charges
that vary according to the value provided by the consumer's
data, which could open the door to privacy violations. She
discussed "dark patterns," otherwise known as "coercive design,"
which she described as mechanisms to undermine consumer consent
by presenting information in a certain way. A good example of
coercive design, she said, is a request to collect data with the
option to accept the request displayed in bright, colorful
graphics, while the option to opt out is in small text. She
discussed the possible harms of data abuse, pointing out that
data use often exacerbates existing discrimination; information
such as the high school a person went to can influence their
mortgage worthiness. She said that using data algorithms to
make decisions should require a mechanism for transparency
regarding the information that goes into the algorithm, and the
algorithms themselves should be audited.
3:44:09 PM
MAUREEN MAHONEY, Senior Policy Analyst, Consumer Reports, shared
that her comments would focus on the importance of covering
targeted advertising in proposed legislation, which she
characterized as an "under-discussed issue" in privacy
legislation. She said that "targeted advertising" refers to
data about consumer behavior that is shared with other companies
for the use of directing ads to the consumer; consumers are
constantly tracked, and said, and information about their online
and offline activities is used to glean detailed insights into
consumers' most personal characteristics. Everything from
health conditions to political affiliations is used to deliver
targeted advertising, she explained, which could lead to
disparate outcomes along racial or ethnic lines. She pointed
out that job or housing advertisements can target only certain
consumer demographics. Covering such data transactions is one
of the key motivators for consumer privacy legislation, she
said, and she noted that many companies are working to undermine
such legislation by adopting bad faith interpretations of such
legislation, such as claiming that targeted advertising isn't
covered by the law.
MS. MAHONEY urged the committee to keep the language in HB 159
regarding targeted advertising, and she noted that the
definition of "personal information" in the proposed legislation
covers information associated both with the consumer and with
the household. She proposed adjusting the text of HB 159 to not
require consumers to verify their identities in order to opt out
of the sale of their information; since a lot of data used for
tracking isn't associated specifically with a name or email
address, she said, requiring identity verification would open a
loophole for targeted advertising. Research done by Consumer
Reports has shown that consumers have been asked to provide
their social security or driver's license number in order to opt
out of data distribution, she said, and consumers are
uncomfortable sharing such information with an unknown data
broker. She recommended adjusting the definition of "sale"
within the text of HB 159 to include coverage of all data
disclosures to a third party for a commercial purpose; the
importance of such coverage, she said, is to ensure that
companies aren't able to circumvent the regulation by not
technically receiving money in the transaction.
3:48:42 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS noted the importance of hearing testimony from
unbiased sources. He pointed out that there will be testimony
from organizations that are funded by the businesses who
practice stealing, reselling, or aggregating data.
3:49:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN mentioned Ms. Fitzgerald's discussion of
essential elements to include in data privacy legislation and
expressed interest in receiving a copy of the list. He then
asked Ms. Mahoney to talk about the "Internet ecosystem" in
which many services are "free" but use data as part of a
company's business model.
MS. MAHONEY said that consumer privacy is a right which should
be afforded to everyone regardless of their income or ability to
pay; the baseline, she said, should be consumers' ability to
safely use online services or apps without having their privacy
compromised. If prices need to be adjusted to ensure online
safety, she said, such an action could be appropriate.
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN hypothesized about a company offering a
mapping app with a "free" version that monetizes consumer data,
or a "paid" version that does not monetize consumer data. He
asked whether offering the two versions would be a form of
discrimination.
MS. MAHONEY responded that consumers should have the basic right
to use apps and services without having to compromise their
privacy, and that consumers shouldn't have to pay more or less
depending on their level of acceptance of privacy violations.
She said that consumers should, at the very least, have the
option of opting out of the targeted advertising ecosystem due
to the lack of transparency in how data is used and monetized.
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN expressed concern for protecting consumer
privacy in an "effective and efficient" manner that doesn't
jeopardize the benefits of data collection. He said that if
data is a commodity, consumers should be able to give it away or
profit from it. He expressed the perspective that, under Ms.
Mahoney's model, consumers wouldn't have the option of allowing
unfettered data collection. He asked Ms. Mahoney whether her
vision of data privacy would prevent a consumer from
commoditizing their own data.
MS. MAHONEY deferred to Mr. Jerome from Common Sense Media.
3:55:02 PM
MR. JEROME surmised that Representative Kaufman's question
pertained to the relationship between secondary uses of
information and general online advertising. He said that none
of the consumer privacy proposals would end online advertising,
and that it's important to acknowledge that some of the data
collection business models aren't effective. He said that one-
third of the money spent on online advertising ends up going to
fake traffic and automated bots. Due to market dominance, he
said, Google and Facebook comprise up to 60 percent of all
online ad revenue; contextual advertising that does not invade
consumer privacy is as effective as targeted advertising. A
2019 study found a revenue discrepancy of only 4 percent based
on whether or not cookies were disabled, he said, which means
that using personal data increases revenue by only .00008 cents
per ad. He said that former digital advertisers at The New York
Times and Washington Post have argued that the entire model is
overhyped in its value to data publishers. He stated that the
imposition of strong privacy rules would likely not have the
negative impact many assume it would.
3:57:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE stated that he understands the concerns
around racial targeting and the targeting of children. He then
said that he doesn't understand how his privacy is being invaded
by a company simply knowing what he views online, asserting that
such targeted advertising could actually be of benefit in that
it reduces his search time.
3:58:17 PM
MR. JEROME stated that the reality is that kids and teens could
be "outed" if ads for issues around sexual orientation pop up on
shared devices. He shared the example of a pregnant teenager
whose family was informed of her pregnancy by targeted
advertising. YouTube and Facebook are constantly in trouble for
how they profile, he said. Kids can be profiled as "gamers,"
"impulsive purchasers," or "anxious oversharers," and are then
targeted by ads encouraging more of those behaviors. Facebook
has categorized hundreds of thousands of kids as "interested in
gambling" or "interested in alcohol," and has told advertisers
that they could identify teens who feel stressed, defeated,
anxious, or nervous, and could target such children with online
advertising for coffee or makeup tutorials. He said that such
commercial manipulation is endemic across the targeted
advertising ecosystem.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE said that he understands the concerns
about children but that he is still confused about the issue
with cookies. He opined that targeted advertising has benefits
in that companies may better tailor offerings to individuals
based on their shopping habits.
4:01:12 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ expressed the perspective that there are many
ways in which data tracking is useful, sharing that she likes
getting targeted ads for products in which she's interested.
She then shared a personal experience in which a text exchange
with her husband resulted in a Facebook advertisement within
moments of the exchange. She said that Facebook is mining data
in ways not anticipated by the average consumer, and parts of
consumers' lives are now digitized in ways that had never before
been imagined. She characterized data privacy as the "Wild
West" and shared her concerns about the fact that a company in
another state could be mining texts between herself and her
husband for marketing purposes. She stated that there seems to
be no expectation of privacy, reminding committee members that
privacy issues were revealed by companies suing each other
rather than by governmental regulation. She expressed that the
government awareness and regulation of such issues lags behind
actual business practices, and parents often don't know or
understand the online environment in which their children are
operating. She said that the right to privacy has been upheld
many times in the last century by the U.S. Supreme Court and
that there is a strong right to privacy in Alaska, and that
ensuring a continued right to privacy is the responsibility of
legislators.
4:05:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER shared that she does not find value in
being the target of advertisements, expressing that she doesn't
want to be tempted by the next piece of consumerism or for her
online experience to be interrupted. She said that, regardless
of the rationale, consumers should be able to say they don't
want their data used in such ways.
4:06:46 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS stated his belief that Alaska has some of the
strongest constitutional privacy protections in the country, and
he characterized HB 159 as a discussion on how best to meet a
constitutional privacy mandate. He shared his concern that
biometric information and artificial intelligence (AI)
replicates and perpetuates racist power structures. He said
that the U.S. has less socioeconomic mobility than any other
developed country and noted the recent case of Google's photo
app placing photos of black people in albums called "gorilla
albums." He wondered what should be considered in questions of
biometric information, and he asked whether there exists a
consensus that the model for such data in Illinois is the best
one.
4:08:27 PM
MS. TSUKAYAMA responded that the Electronic Frontier Foundation
(EFF) considers Illinois's model to be the "gold standard" of
biometric privacy, pointing out that Co-Chair Fields' statement
highlighted many of the concerns surrounding the use of
biometric information. She stated that EFF advocates for a ban
on government use of face recognition.
4:09:21 PM
MS. FITZGERALD stated her agreement with Ms. Tsukayama's
statement and shared her understanding of Co-Chair Fields'
concern that AI can be used to perpetuate systemic inequalities.
She said society is now living with the consequences of allowing
social media to self-regulate, and she expressed the hope that
AI doesn't follow the same path. She said there exists language
in various proposed legislations requiring companies to engage
in activities such as impacts assessments before using new
algorithms, and performing audits during the life of the
activity to ensure that it's fair and nondiscriminatory.
4:10:44 PM
MR. JEROME expressed agreement with the previous statements and
added that using biometric products to authenticate an
individual can easily lead to profiling. He pointed out that
Black people tend to represent as being "angrier" in many AI
systems; in this context, he said, technology that analyzes
whether students or employees are paying attention can be
discriminatory.
4:12:06 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS expressed the desire to see an industry-funded
mechanism to establish a strong state enforcement unit within
the Department of Law, as well as a private right of action. He
pointed out that Alaska doesn't have a large tech industry, and
is not naturally going to have lawyers with tech industry
experience working in the Office of the Attorney General. He
expressed wanting a model for a robustly-funded enforcement wing
of the Department of Law, and he asked whether the panelists'
organizations would be interested in working with the committee
to draft a model for enforcement to ensure adequate capacity in
Alaska to police the companies with a record of inappropriate
data use.
4:13:08 PM
MS. TSUKAYAMA responded that EFF has not yet seen what it would
consider an adequately-funded department to address digital
privacy laws. She said EFF would be happy to work with the
committee on a private right of action and an agency to oversee
the issues.
4:14:00 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS stated his desire to establish strong standards
of enforcement for multinational companies that have a record of
exploiting data information, as well as to ensure that the law's
structure doesn't burden Alaska's small and medium-sized
businesses that are using data to serve their customers. He
asked whether there is a threshold for striking the right
balance between capturing the multinational companies while
protecting smaller businesses that collect information to
conduct legitimate business.
MS. MAHONEY, on behalf of Consumer Reports, responded that there
is no specific threshold to hit but that California, with its
threshold of 50,000 users per year, or Virginia's threshold of
100,000 users per year, both ensure that small and medium-sized
businesses aren't unduly affected by the law. She expressed
that many privacy laws under discussion at the state level put
few limits on a company's ability to collect data and advertise
to their customers; the main concern is putting controls on the
disclosure of data to third parties, and the associated sale and
resale by data brokers.
4:16:30 PM
CHRIS KOA, Attorney, DataEsque Law Group PLLC, stated that he is
a privacy, security, technology, and corporate attorney
representing Lynden, Incorporated ("Lynden"). He explained that
he is collaborating, in good faith and at the invitation of the
governor, with several other Alaska companies that would be
similarly impacted by the original version of HB 159. As
initially drafted, he said, Lynden opposes the proposed
legislation and would characterize it as among the most onerous
state privacy laws in the country and that it would not be in
the best interest of Alaska. He said that Lynden "conceptually"
supports the goal of increasing privacy protections and wants to
find ways to support that goal while ensuring that companies
with primarily business-to-business ("B2B") models that don't
engage in the sale of consumer data aren't adversely impacted,
especially in the absence of corresponding consumer protection
benefits that outweigh the anticipated burdens and costs to
businesses. The goal, he said, is to find a middle ground that
balances the interests of the administration, the Office of the
Attorney General, the legislature, businesses, and consumers.
MR. KOA said that as a B2B company, Lynden focuses on using data
solely to provide services requested by the customers, unlike
business-to-consumer ("B2C") organizations that heavily use
personal data. The initial draft of the proposed legislation,
he said, would hurt B2B companies that don't sell personal
information; that don't have high-risk business models that
depend on heavy use of personal information; and have not
engaged in systematic patterns of abuse. To ensure the ability
of B2B companies like Lynden to continue to serve Alaska, he
said, he recommends consideration and implementation of the
critical amendments he submitted [included in the committee
packet].
4:21:11 PM
MR. KOA expressed that the amended version of HB 159 would
provide a more focused approach, intended to avoid burdening B2B
companies such as Lynden, oil companies, mining, and
telecommunications, which don't sell data, and which employ
thousands of Alaskans while providing valuable services. Key
suggestions for HB 159, he said, include the following: delete
the standalone revenue threshold as a trigger for determining
companies for regulation; exclude B2B contacts and employees
from the scope of the proposed legislation; exclude personal
data provided by a consumer for the purpose of providing a
product or service requested by that consumer; delete the
private right of action and allow enforcement by the Office of
the Attorney General; provide a cure period, especially for
companies that are not repeat offenders; shorten the lookback
period to one year; and clarify ways for companies to comply
with reasonable security obligations.
MR. KOA stated Lynden's support for the goal of protecting
consumer privacy in a manner consistent with how businesses
operate and can respond, without disrupting a business's ability
to serve Alaska, and without incurring costs and burdens without
a corresponding consumer benefit. He said the intention for the
suggestions reflected in the suggested amendments is to balance
valid public policy interests and consumer privacy with the
realities of business operations.
4:25:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN asked how much content is in a typical
profile for an individual consumer.
MR. JEROME, on behalf of Common Sense Media, responded that the
amount of content varies, and that data brokerage is a
complicated ecosystem. The Federal Trade Commission, as well as
a report from the World Privacy Forum called The Scoring of
America, have made such information available. The challenge
with companies such as Google and Facebook, he said, is that
their information is not made available to consumers.
4:27:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE asked how multinational online companies
determine which state privacy laws to follow. He expressed that
he sees the merits of protecting privacy and wondered whether
the issue would be better addressed at the federal level.
MS. FITZGERALD, on behalf of the Electronic Privacy Information
Center, stated that the federal government has not moved to act
on this issue, which is why states are beginning to act to
protect citizens. Because it's difficult for large companies
such as Google or Facebook to comply with many different state
laws, she said, "The state with the strongest law sets the bar."
She pointed out that companies are already complying with the
European Union's General Data Protection Regulation.
4:30:12 PM
MS. MAHONEY, on behalf of Consumer Reports, noted that companies
can identify a consumer's location based on a consumer's
internet protocol (IP) address. She agreed that strong federal
privacy legislation would be the goal, but in the absence of
such legislation, states need to ensure that consumers have
strong privacy protections.
4:30:52 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS referred to Mr. Koa's suggestion to delete the
standalone revenue threshold and to exclude B2B contacts from
the proposed legislation. He asked for discussion on the
practicality of excluding B2B exchanges.
MS. MAHONEY said that, while there are a number of ways to
determine an appropriate threshold for regulation, the number of
consumers on which data is collected is an appropriate metric to
consider. She stated that the main concern of Consumer Reports
is to make sure consumers have strong privacy protections and
that they are able to exercise their preferences.
4:32:48 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that HB 159 was held over.
^PRESENTATION(S): Women in the Workforce & the Gender Pay Gap
PRESENTATION(S): Women in the Workforce & the Gender Pay Gap
[Contains discussion of HB 146.]
4:32:54 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the final order of business would
be a presentation on Women in the Workforce & the Gender Pay
Gap.
4:33:19 PM
KARINNE WIEBOLD, Economist, Research and Analysis,
Administrative Services Division, Department of Labor and
Workforce Development (DOLWD), presented a PowerPoint titled
"Women & the Pandemic" [hard copy included in the committee
packet]. She began her presentation with slide 2, which
displayed graphs showing the percentages of men and women in the
workforce, as well as corresponding average annual wages, over
the past 30 years. She pointed out that both average annual
wages and the workforce composition have been slowly converging,
with women now comprising 48 percent of the workforce; however,
she said, wages for women are still lagging behind those for
men. She said that the most significant change in the gender
pay gap has occurred in the last couple of years; for the past
20 years, she said, average wages for women have been 68 percent
of those for men, but it's recently risen to 72 percent.
MS. WIEBOLD presented slide 2, "Men Earn More in All Age
Groups," which displayed a graph showing the wage gap widening
with age. Teenage workers have a minimal wage gap, she said,
and as the compounding employment history of men and women
continues, the wage gap increases. She pointed out that
averages wages peak when women are in their forties, while men's
average wages continue to increase into their fifties before
showing a slight decline into their sixties. The largest wage
gap was among those between the ages of 50 and 59.
4:38:32 PM
MS. WIEBOLD moved to slide 4, "Men earn more at all education
levels," which displayed a graph showing average men's and
women's wages at various education levels. She pointed out that
all wages increase with more education, but that the wage gap
doesn't necessarily decrease; jobs that require only a high
school education demonstrate a 61 percent earnings ratio, but
positions that require a doctoral degree demonstrate a 70
percent earnings ratio. She said that in Alaska, women comprise
a larger percentage of positions that require higher education.
She then presented slide 5, "What does the national data tell us
about the pandemic, and what was happening before?", and said
that Alaska is not unique in the gender wage gap.
MS. WIEBOLD presented slide 6, "National Labor Force
Participation Rates," and noted that individuals are considered
part of the labor force if they are either working or looking
for work. She said that men's labor force participation has
been on a gradual decline over the past 20 years, with the past
10 years showing a more significant decline. Conversely, she
said, labor force participation among women has been increasing.
In 2020, she said, women's labor force participation rate
dropped from 58 to 54.5 percent, while the rate for men went
from 69 to 66 percent. Nationwide, she said, between January
2020 to January 2021, 1.8 million men left the labor force,
compared to 2.5 million women; the setback from the pandemic has
pushed women's labor force participation rate to that which was
last seen in 1987.
4:43:19 PM
MS. WIEBOLD presented slide 7, "Unemployment Rates," and
explained that women were hit harder by the immediate effects of
the pandemic and have experienced a slower recovery. She
pointed out that the unemployment rate for women was highest in
April 2020 at 16.1 percent, while the rate for men at the same
time was 13.6 percent. She then presented slide 8, "Where do
Alaskan women work?", which displayed a pie chart showing that
more than half of women work in state and local government,
healthcare, and private education. Trade, transportation, and
utilities, the sector which includes retail sales, was the third
largest segment.
MS. WIEBOLD presented slide 9, "Alaska lost 27,200 jobs in
2020," which displayed a pie chart showing job loss by industry.
The leisure and hospitality sector lost almost 10,000 jobs;
trade, transportation, and utilities, including retail sales,
lost 6,500 jobs. She noted that the leisure and hospitality
sector employs approximately even proportions of men and women;
however, the occupations within that sector that employ more
women than men, such as waitstaff and housekeeping, were hit
disproportionately hard by the pandemic. Government job losses,
she said, tended to be in the areas of local government and
schools, areas which tend to disproportionately employ women.
4:49:57 PM
MS. WIEBOLD presented slide 10, "Unemployment Insurance Claims-
something we can see now," which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
multiply Historically, more men than women file for
unemployment (60/40)
multiply Claims are record high for both
multiply Since the pandemic, more men than women have received
UI.
multiply BUT, women, as a percent of claimants, has grown more
than men
4:54:06 PM
LAURIE WOLF, President and Chief Executive Officer, The Foraker
Group, presented a PowerPoint titled "The Gender Pay Gap in
Alaska" [hard copy included in the committee packet]. She
shared that approximately 17 percent of Alaskans work for a
nonprofit organization, and that approximately 65 percent of the
employees are women, compared to the 48 percent workforce
participation rate for women in Alaska. She said that, despite
passage of the Equal Pay Act in 1963, which mandated equal pay
for equal work, the gender pay gap persists in Alaska and
nationwide. She presented slide 2, "What's in a day?", and
pointed out that March 24 is Equal Pay Day in the United States,
which represents how far into the new year women would have to
work in order to make the same salary of their male counterparts
in the previous year. She said that the date shifts when
factoring in issues such as race or motherhood; Equal Pay Day is
March 9 for Asian and Pacific Islander women; August 3 for Black
women; September 8 for Native American women; and October 21 for
Latina women. She said that the impact of COVID-19 will hit
working mothers especially hard, as the lack of child care or
school closures force more women than men out of the workforce.
4:58:09 PM
MS. WOLF presented slide 3, "Too Long to Wait," which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
257 YEARS
At the current rate of change, the gender pay gap in
Alaska won't disappear until the year 2277.
MS. WOLF presented slide 4, "The Gender Pay Gap in Alaska,"
which showed that Alaskan women earn 72 cents for each dollar
men earn; in the nonprofit sector, women earn 79 cents. She
then presented slide 5, "The Gender Wage Gap is Real," which
displayed a graphic showing the average wages for men and women
in the nonprofit sector compared to for-profit wages. She then
presented slide 5, "Loss of Pay Over a Lifetime," stating that
the average women loses over $530,000 over her lifetime because
of the gender wage gap; the average college-educated woman loses
over $800,000 over a lifetime.
MS. WOLF presented slide 7, "Traditionally-Female Occupations
Pay Less," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
The gender pay gap is smaller within traditionally-
female occupations, but traditionally-male occupations
pay higher wages. Only 6% of Alaska's female workers
are employed in traditionally-male occupations. For
nonprofits, the figure is only 2%.
MS. WOLF presented slide 8, "Why Legislation Matters," and she
stated that fair and equitable pay is the law in the U.S. Slide
8 read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Steps you can take:
Publish pay ranges in job announcements.
Don't ask for an applicant's pay history.
Share total compensation not just the wage so all
employees understand the full value of benefits and
salary.
MS. WOLF said that HB 146, introduced during the House Labor and
Commerce Standing Committee meeting on April 23, would take
"monumental" steps in the right direction by establishing
provisions to prohibit certain workplace policies that could
lead to pay inequity, such as prohibiting employers from using
prior wages to determine future compensation, codifying the
right of employees to inquire about their co-workers'
compensation, and requiring employers to disclose the range of
salaries on job listings.
5:04:09 PM
HILARY MORGAN, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Resourceful Results, LLC, offered a PowerPoint presentation
titled "EconEquity; Gender Pay Gap in Alaska" [hard copy
included in the committee packet]. She presented slide 2,
"EconEquity," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
? 1963. Equal Pay Act passes
? Women earned 59 cents on the dollar nationally.
? 2014. 51 years later
? Women earned 79 cents on the dollar nationally
MS. MORGAN presented slide 3, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
2021. Nationally
? women earn 82 cents on the dollar.
? 2019. Alaska Economic Trends
? Alaska Women earned 72 cents on the dollar.
MS. MORGAN presented slide 4, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
The pay disparity is more pronounced for women who are
Black, Indigenous or people of color; ranging
nationally from 55 cents for Latinx women to 63 cents
for Black women in 2021.
In Alaska, these figures are even lower.
MS. MORGAN noted that her data is somewhat outdated, and she
urged committee members to concentrate on the message. She
presented slide 6, which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
The pay gap has closed only 5? between 1990 and 2014.
Without action, Alaskan women won't have equal pay
until 2142.
MS. MORGAN presented slide 7, "Equal Pay Adds Up." She pointed
out that women are increasingly the primary earner, and are the
sole earner in 40 percent of U.S. households. She said that
it's estimated that closing the gender wage gap would decrease
the poverty rate for working women and their families by 50
percent; as women are increasingly the primary or sole earner in
their families, it's critical that women are paid equal to men.
5:08:10 PM
MS. MORGAN presented slide 8, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
"We need to understand why there is a gap."
No. Act now and figure out why along the way.
"Well, you know men are stronger."
In 2017, Alaska female lawyers earned 77 cents
for every dollar their male counterpart earned.
MS. MORGAN presented slide 9, "The wage gap persists regardless
of industry," and slide 10, "Ratio of Women's to Men's Earnings
by Industry, Alaska 2010," which displayed a graph of industries
showing the array of Alaskan industries and their gender wage
gaps. She then presented slide 11, "The wage gap is present
within occupations," and slide 12, "Earnings gap smaller in
occupations dominated by women," which displayed a bar graph
showing female-dominated occupations. She pointed out that 89
percent of registered nurses are women, yet they earn only 95
percent of what male registered nurses earn.
MS. MORGAN presented slide 13, "The wage gap exists regardless
of education level," and slide 14, which displayed a graphic
showing that Alaskan women with a bachelor's degree are paid 63
percent of what men with the same education level are paid. She
stated that women with graduate or professional degrees are also
paid less than men with a bachelor's degree, and women with a
bachelor's degree are paid less than men with even lower
education levels. She said, "Unfortunately, in Alaska, women do
not see the same return to their education that men see."
MS. MORGAN presented slide 15, "Alaskan businesses and community
are ready for change," which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Between May 2014 and January 2018, EconEquity asked
132 businesses, organizations, politicians and
individuals to endorse closing the gender pay gap in
Alaska by 2025.
Only 5 declined.
MS. MORGAN presented slide 16, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
? EconEquity asked for demonstrated support through a
signed endorsement.
? The Endorsement asked only for 3 things of the
signer:
? an acknowledgement that the pay gap existed,
? that they stand with us as we eliminated the
gap,
? that is be signed by the CEO or Chairperson of
the Board.
MS. MORGAN presented slides 17-20, which listed dozens of
businesses and individuals who endorse gender pay equity. She
said that the list of endorsers are posted on the EconEquity
website, and the list of companies who decline to sign the
endorsement are listed once a year in the program of the
EconEquity Summit. She said that the simple act of asking a
company to endorse gender pay equity resulted in the company
becoming aware of their own gender pay equity status.
5:14:19
MS. MORGAN presented slide 21, "Women make less in every part of
Alaska," which displayed a map of Alaska's boroughs and showed
each borough's gender pay gap using data from 2019. She then
presented slide 22, which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
? The persistent wage gap between working men and
women is a barrier to women's success and to the
success of Alaska.
? When women are underpaid and undervalued, it is more
challenging for them to pay off student debt, provide
for their families, contribute to their communities,
and save for retirement.
? Women's options become limited and so does their
ability to strengthen our businesses and our state.
5:15:31 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS commented that two pieces of proposed
legislation, focusing on addressing child care issues and wage
disclosures, have been reported from the House Labor and
Commerce Standing Committee.
5:16:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE asked about the lack of maternity
policies and the effect on the gender pay gap.
5:17:05 PM
MS. MORGAN shared that one of the problems with not having equal
opportunities for maternity and paternity leave is that women
who take maternity leave often subsequently lose seniority in
the workplace. She said that this is a reason why single
mothers in Alaska earn less than single fathers, even when
controlling for the number of children. She said that by
offering paternity leave as well as maternity leave, companies
may begin to level the playing field.
MS. WOLF added that as of 2018, a mother's wage decreases
approximately 4 percent per child, while a father's wage
increases approximately 8 percent. She said that, as of three
years after childbirth, only 28 percent of mothers work full
time or are self-employed, compared to 90 percent of fathers.
She encouraged committee members to consider the concept of
"family leave" as opposed to "maternal or paternal leave," due
to the likelihood of women being in the position of caring for
parents as well as children.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE noted the 8 percent increase of wages for
fathers, and he asked why a father's wage would increase after
having children.
MS. WOLF replied that there is research showing that men are, in
general, better advocates for pay increases and are encouraged
to negotiate for better pay. She discussed bias around the idea
that men, as opposed to women, need to provide for their
families.
5:20:34 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS added, "The literature does indicate that
employers see the necessity of fathers providing for their
children, and are actually very willing to give them wage
increases, but don't have that same inclination with women."
5:20:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER shared her agreement with the idea of
"family leave" and pointed out that her maternity leave was
unpaid and limited to six weeks.
5:22:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY shared that his son-in-law is a stay-at-
home father. He asked for copies of the research.
MS. WOLF replied that the research is published on The Foraker
Group website and that there are links to additional studies.
5:23:27 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS commented on the value of paid family leave.
5:23:53 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ mentioned that committee members have copies
of studies of the gender pay gap by education and occupation.
She said, "What we know now is that the gender pay gap starts
from the first job ... and then it builds on itself over the
course of a career." She said that it's always been supposed
that more education would solve the problem, but that studies
show that women need doctorate degrees in order to earn as much
as a man with a bachelor's degree. She commented that fields
dominated by women earn less than those dominated by men, and
that even in fields dominated by women, men earn more and
advance more quickly. She said women were overrepresented in
fields that were disproportionately affected by the COVID-19
pandemic, and that when there is an issue with child care, the
rational decision is that the parent who earns less money is the
parent who will stay home with the kids. She said that even
women who weren't in occupations impacted by the pandemic tended
to leave the workplace to care for their children. She pointed
out that the policy changes recommended by Ms. Wolf align with
the legislation proposed in HB 146, sponsored by Representative
Snyder.
5:29:02 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Labor and Commerce Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at
5:29 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 21 Amendment #1 5.4.21.pdf |
HL&C 5/5/2021 3:15:00 PM |
SB 21 |
| SB 21 Statement of Zero Fiscal Impact 3.5.21.pdf |
HL&C 5/5/2021 3:15:00 PM |
SB 21 |
| DOLWD Gender Pay Gap Presentation 5.5.21.pdf |
HL&C 5/5/2021 3:15:00 PM |
|
| HB 159 Ad Trade Letter of Opposition 4.22.21.pdf |
HL&C 5/5/2021 3:15:00 PM HL&C 5/12/2021 3:15:00 PM |
HB 159 |
| CS HJR19 (L&C) Fiscal Note.pdf |
HL&C 5/5/2021 3:15:00 PM |
HJR 19 |
| CS HJR19 (L&C).pdf |
HL&C 5/5/2021 3:15:00 PM |
HJR 19 |
| Gender Pay Testimony House Labor Commerce - Foraker Group 5-5-2021.pdf |
HL&C 5/5/2021 3:15:00 PM |
|
| Gender Wage Gap - Hilary Morgan 5.5.21.pdf |
HL&C 5/5/2021 3:15:00 PM |
|
| DOLWD Analysis - The Gender Wage Gap, September 2019.pdf |
HL&C 5/5/2021 3:15:00 PM |
|
| Alaska Economic Trends - The Gender Wage Gap, 2017.pdf |
HL&C 5/5/2021 3:15:00 PM |