A08293 Summary:

BILL NO    A08293 

SAME AS    No same as

SPONSOR    Carrozza (MS)

COSPNSR    Rivera P, Pheffer

MLTSPNSR   Alfano, Boyland

Amd SS115 & 118, add S119, Civ Serv L

Seeks to comply with the federal equal pay act of 1963 by implementing a state
policy of compensating employees in state service equally for work of
comparable value by eliminating wage inequality in job titles having been
segregated by sex, race or national origin; requires the president of the civil
service commission to report annually to the legislature and the governor on
those segregated titles for which wage disparity exists; mandates governor to
appropriate monies to ensure wage disparities are corrected.

A08293 Actions:

BILL NO    A08293 

05/13/2009 referred to governmental employees
01/06/2010 referred to governmental employees

A08293 Votes:

A08293 Memo:

BILL NUMBER:A8293

TITLE  OF  BILL:   An act to amend the civil service law, in relation to
implementing a state policy of setting salaries on the basis of  compar-
ability of value of the work

PURPOSE  OR  GENERAL  IDEA  OF  BILL: : To implement the state policy of
compensating employees in state service equally for work  of  comparable
value  by  eliminating  wage  inequality  in  job titles which have been
segregated by sex, race or national origin.

SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS: : Section 115 of the civil service  law,
as  added  by  chapter  790 of the laws of 1958 is amended to define how
comparable value of job titles shall be determined Adds  a  new  section
119  to  the  civil  service  law which a) defines segregated titles, b)
mandates that the President of the Civil Service Commission report annu-
ally to the Legislature and Executive on  those  segregated  titles  for
which  a  wage disparity exists, and c) mandates the Governor to request
the  appropriation  necessary  to  ensure  that  wage  disparities   are
corrected.
  Adds  provisions  to the civil service law implementing a state policy
of setting salaries on the basis of comparability of value of work.

JUSTIFICATION:
  Only a portion of the difference between men's and women's pay can  be
attributed  to  measurable  differences  in women's and men's character-
istics, while the remainder of the pay gap is most likely due to system-
atic sex discrimination. That is the inference that a  reader  can  take
away from a study conducted by the Government Accounting Office (GAO).
  In  the  latest  GAO  report (2003) it analyzed data from 1983 through
2000 to find a wage gap of 44 percent (that is, women are paid about  44
percent  less than men in any given year over that period including both
full- and part-time workers, men and women).  A  statistical  model  was
used  to identify the factors that may contribute to the wage disparity.
Work experience, education, occupation and industry and other demograph-
ic and job characteristics, the model explains about half  of  the  wage
difference. But about 20 percent of that difference remains unexplained.
  While  the  salary gap between Men and women went down 3% in 2004. The
2005 IRS CareerBank Annual Survey states that women are presently  earn-
ing  76  cents  for  ever  dollar  that  men  earn  for  the  same work.
(www.careerbank.com)
  In 1987, New York State promulgated a compensation policy  to  address
equal  pay for equal work for its employees, however, it is not mandated
by law. This policy can be rescinded. Therefore, legislation is required
to make this policy permanent.

SUPPORT:  NOW, and other women's and equal rights organizations.

PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: This legislation was previously introduced.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The Department  of  Civil  Service  has  written  a
fiscal  note  dated April 20, 2007, which states: "In 1987, the State of

New York spent approximately 1.5 million dollars to conduct a pay equity
study which resulted in a new State compensation model. We estimate that
a new pay equity study, similar in scope  to  the  study  conducted  in.
1987,  would cost approximately 52.7 million.  Unfortunately, due to the
complexities of the proposed legislation and the uncertain nature of the
expenditures involved, a more precise projection of costs is not  possi-
ble.  Should  this legislation be enacted, a detailed project plan and a
specific budget would need to be developed.