Feinstein Put It on Ballot : S.F. Voting on Comparable Worth Issue

Voters here have elected a woman as mayor and given women the majority on its board of supervisors, but this city’s leaders are nonetheless split over a fundamental feminist issue--comparable worth.

Mayor Dianne Feinstein and a majority of the supervisors agree there is a need to correct pay inequities among jobs requiring equivalent skills and responsibility, but they disagree on how to achieve it. So voters will go to the polls today to express their opinion on the issue.

The matter is unlikely to actually be decided by voters because the unusual ballot measure proposes to rescind a plan that already has been withdrawn and dissolve a special fund that lawyers say cannot be dissolved by popular vote.

Despite this, civic leaders look to the election to gauge public sentiment on the two-year, $28-million pay-raise package worked out between supervisors and city unions. The mayor proposes a one-year, $2-million package as “all we can afford.”

Other Proposals

Besides comparable worth, voters will decide on proposals to end all high-rise development for three years, start a city commission to assist small businesses, increase funding for undercover police drug operations and make it easier for severely disabled workers to be hired by the city.

The comparable-worth measure grew out of a debate that began in 1981, when the mayor ignored the board’s resolution to provide equal salaries for city jobs requiring similar degrees of skill.

Feinstein reversed herself and signed a second such resolution earlier this year, and the board then drafted a plan for a two-year, 5%-a-year pay increase for 7,000 city workers in jobs traditionally held by women and minorities. The increase was proposed in the form of a $5-a-day “meal allowance.”

When the city attorney warned that the meal allowance was not allowed under the city Charter, the board established a reserve fund to hold the $28 million in added pay until a legal distribution method is devised.

Called Too Generous

Feinstein rejected the plan as too generous for a city facing a $76-million deficit next year. When her veto was overridden, she ordered a ballot proposal to repeal both the meal allowance and the reserve fund that replaced it.

Lawyers, however, have said since the reserve fund is included in the city’s contract with its biggest union, it cannot be rescinded by popular vote but must instead be renegotiated.

The mayor has been talking with union leaders about a compromise proposal, but both sides are waiting for the results of today’s vote to see how much political support their particular positions are given by voters.