4A
THE DAILY ASTORIAN • MONDAY, OCTOBER 1, 2018
Pay equity analyses shake up state government
Unequal pay for
similar work
By CONNOR RADNOVICH
Statesman Journal
SALEM — Pay equity analyses in all three
branches of state government have exposed
instances of unequal pay for similar work and
created growing confusion among legislative
staff and members.
Intermittently during legislative hearings last
week, lawmakers and staff have emailed and
met to discuss the implementation of pay equity
and the corresponding analysis as required by a
law passed in 2017.
There is some concern the analysis has
lacked adequate communication or is mov-
ing too fast with what will directly impact state
workers’ pay.
Any changes to meet pay equity standards
can only come from an increase in salary. The
law states that a person’s salary cannot be
reduced to meet pay equity.
An analysis is being completed for every
department individually. The section of the law
dealing with the pay equity analysis and safe
harbor provision goes into effect in January.
The legislative and executive branch analy-
ses are in the information gathering stages. Staff
said even the documents sent out to help clarify
the process are subject to change.
That’s led to speculation throughout the
Capitol.
“There’s a lot of misinformation and not a
lot of understanding,” said state Sen. Floyd
Prozanski, D-Eugene, a member of the legisla-
tive work group.
Expanded protections
The Oregon Equal Pay Act of 2017 expanded
protections against pay discrimination. It added
several protected classes beyond gender to the
law, required that differences in compensation
be based on job-related reasons and banned
screening job applicants based on salary history.
The law passed out of the state House after
hours of debate and a split vote, but went to the
governor’s desk with unanimous approval after
several changes were made in the Senate.
The safe harbor provision was one of those
upper chamber additions. If an organization
completes a pay equity analysis and fixes any
problems it finds, then the law protects them
from paying compensatory and punitive dam-
ages in related lawsuits for the next three years.
The law does not require businesses to complete
an analysis.
The internal deadline for the analysis in the
legislative branch is Nov. 1. Any employees see-
ing a pay increase will get back pay to June 1.
The legislative branch has about 350 employ-
ees and consists of the legislative assembly and
six support agencies. An analysis is being com-
pleted for every department individually, but it’s
the assembly that’s proven the most challenging.
A work group consisting of four Democrats,
four Republicans, and various staff have met
twice to discuss implementation of the law. A
third meeting is scheduled for early October.
The six chiefs of staff of the caucuses and
presiding offices also have met separately.
In the past week, letters and emails were sent
to legislative assembly employees asking them
to make sure their experience and education
information was complete.
But to some, this is a premature step — gath-
AP Photo/Andrew Selsky
Pay equity is an issue at the state Capitol.
ering information to put into a calculator, when
that calculator isn’t yet complete.
“If (the work group) haven’t approved it,
then how the hell are you implementing it?”
said Sen. Brian Boquist, R-Dallas.
Alleged violations
These analyses come as an employee in the
Legislative Policy and Research Office is alleg-
ing Equal Pay Act violations.
In a Tuesday federal court filing, Chey-
enne Ross said she is paid less than her male
co-workers, giving one example of a colleague
of comparable skills, experience and responsi-
bility with an annual salary more than $30,000
higher.
Ross filed a similar suit in state court several
months ago.
Loren Collins, Ross’ lawyer, said the claim
is not based on the law passed in 2017 and the
pay differences were not discovered as a result
of the analysis.
“Changes in the 2017 law expanded cover-
age of the Equal Pay Act, but the Equal Pay Act,
as it related to gender, was a law already on the
books for the state of Oregon and a federal law,”
Collins said.
But the lawsuit does show one example of
what legislative leaders believe is the existence
of pay inequity in the Legislature.
How much is still unclear, and what the anal-
yses hope to eventually show.
“I am sure it’s going to cost us more money
than we’re paying right now,” said Senate Pres-
ident Peter Courtney, D-Salem. “We’re going to
have to find the money … I believe we should
pay people what they’re worth.”
The Department of Administrative Ser-
vices is responsible for analyzing about 35,000
employees in the state’s executive branch.
Each employee has received a survey asking
them to make sure their resume on file is com-
plete and up-to-date.
The same questions were also posed to
employees in the legislative and judicial
branches.
From there, an analysis is done of each
employee’s experience, education, seniority
and additional training, to determine what their
monthly salary should be on a step and range
salary scale.
A back-of-the-envelope calculation earlier
this year from a preliminary analysis and con-
versations with lawyers showed a potential bud-
get impact of $400 million in the executive
branch.
Mark Rasmussen, manager of classification
and compensation within the Department of
Administrative Services, said that number was
a “worst-case scenario” based on an interpreta-
tion of how the new law might intersect with
collective bargaining agreements.
Rasmussen said they now expect the fis-
cal impact to be much less because of evolving
interpretations of the law. He considers the $400
million estimate to be “irrelevant.”
But there is not a current estimate because
“we’ve been too busy trying to get the actual
work done,” he said.
Creating rules
The Bureau of Labor and Industries is in the
process of creating rules for implementation of
the law. The majority of the law becomes oper-
ative in January, though the provision disallow-
ing businesses from using salary as a job screen-
ing method took effect last October.
It’s still unclear how those rules could impact
state government employees. The Bureau of
Labor and Industries recently extended the com-
ment period for rule-making into mid-October.
“BOLI has been very late to the game,” said
Betsy Imholt, chief of staff in the Senate presi-
dent’s office.
The judicial branch, with more than 1,500
full-time equivalents on staff, is far ahead of
its legislative and executive counterparts and
nearly done with their analysis.
Phil Lemman, acting deputy state court
administrator of the Judicial Department, said
there are fewer than 100 employees left to ana-
lyze, and so far more than 100 people will see a
pay increase.
A dollar figure, however, has not been deter-
mined yet, because the department is waiting
until the analysis is finalized before doing those
calculations, Lemman said.
But he said it’s clear the judicial branch will
need to re-evaluate its personnel hiring rules
based on the pay equity law. Those rules are also
used in budgetary assumptions.
Another structural change as a result of
implementing pay equity will be the loss of
some flexibility among lawmakers of how much
they can pay staff.
The staffing needs of legislators vary
depending on all sort of factors, including com-
mittee assignments, legislative focus, and even
district location.
Budget wonks tend to look for aides with
accounting experience, while knowledge of the
medical field might be important for other law-
makers. Some hire family, contending they are
the most trustworthy and helpful aides they can
find.
Legislators also pay legislative staff out of
campaign funds, a subset of employees not
addressed by this analysis.
While legislative aides are technically
already designated placement on the pay scale,
it has not been enforced.
“Basically everybody has been allowed to
do whatever they wanted to do,” said Robin
Maxey, communications director for the Senate
president’s office.
Ongoing conversations
Conversations are ongoing as to how much
influence lawmakers will have in paying their
staff.
The current, general understanding is that
lawmakers will be able to have a discussion
with Employee Services about why their aide’s
experience and education should entitle him or
her to a certain salary, if there is a disagreement.
There was a pay snapshot taken in May as
a starting point for part of the analysis, but that
too is unsettling some in the building.
The 2018 short session ended in March, and
some year-round legislative aides get paid less
during the interim. The fear is that the lower sal-
ary will be used to calculate future pay.
It’s one more factor complicating an uncer-
tain process.
“They’re all in this range,” Imholt said, “but
I can’t tell if there’s any rhyme or reason to it.”
‘‘
At the Smokehouse Butcher Block we know
fresh cuts and smoked meats, however we
don’t know advertising. That is why we are
SO grateful for The Daily Astorian! We had
no idea how affordable and/or responsive a
simple, little advertisement with them would
be. Thank you for all of your help, Heather.
Nan & Jeremy
Smokehouse Butcher Block
F
O
WHEN:
7 p .m . W ed n esd a y
Octo b er 3
WHERE:
Asto ria H ig h Sch o o l
1001 W . M a rin e D r.
P resen ted b y Asto ria AAUW a n d
Th e D a ily Asto ria n
R
U
M
Come listen to
and ask questions of
candidates for City of
Astoria, City of
Warrenton and Clatsop
County representatives
REACH
NEW CUSTOMERS!
n Drive More Business
n Find New Customers
n Marketing assistance from print/digital experts
n Gain Exposure. Over 10,000 Clatsop county readers every day
Talk to our customer success team today! 503.325.3211
T HE D AILY A STORIAN