Salary Equity Changes Forums
The federal district court ruling that the California State Employees Assn. failed to prove deliberate sex discrimination in the setting of salaries for female-dominated jobs is not a vindication of those who claim salary discrimination does not exist. The decision does demonstrate, however, that cases involving the “comparable worth” issue are sometimes best handled outside the courtroom.
U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel, who once worked as a lawyer for the National Organization for Women, dismissed the key part of what was the largest sex-bias salary lawsuit in the nation. The judge said that lawyers representing 60,000 past and present state workers failed to prove that jobs largely held by women--usually clerical--were undervalued just because women held them.
The lawsuit filed by state workers cited the gap between certain gender-dominated jobs: The starting salary for licensed vocational nurses was $1,376 a month, while the pay for automotive equipment operators was $1,645. But the judge said the state made a good case that its salaries reflected market rates, without specific discriminatory intent. She did allow union lawyers to submit arguments that the state has policies that appear to be neutral but in practice keep women’s wages down. But that route is made more difficult because of a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that sets a heavier burden for proving discrimination.
These decisions, and others, all appear to point to the problems of resolving thorny pay equity issues in court. The threat of a lawsuit remains an important prod for forcing action; but in the current court climate other methods, including use of political pressure and negotiation, must be stressed.
Exemplary agreements have stemmed from the collective bargaining process, although the Deukmejian Administration resisted settling this issue through compromise. The city of Los Angeles is an example where political will provided an atmosphere in which city and union negotiators in 1985 were able to hammer out an agreement that provided fairness without bankrupting the city.
The salary adjustments closed the 15% pay gap between wages paid to the city’s librarians and clerical employees and wages paid to those in traditionally male jobs, such as drivers and gardeners. Over a three-year phase-in, the adjustments cost about one-half of 1% of the city’s budget.
In spite of the tenor of recent court decisions, the notion that vocational nurses should be paid at least as much as automotive equipment operators is not a wacky idea. But translating that idea into results for working women increasingly seems best suited for employee-management negotiation.
