In fact the union has itself based its requests of raises on the market so what the union is effectively saying you can look at the market if it produces a wage increase, but if it doesnt then we dont look at the market. That runs counter to what they agreed to in negotiations. Its certainly not consistent and not with our obligations under the charter. With your permission i would like to touch on a couple other points. Please continue. If i drink water is that like the republican okay. Sorry. I wanted to in view of time i know there is plenty of people that would like to peek and doubtedly chastise me but i would like to touch on the key element salary setting by any formula, standardization or comparable worth was changed in the charter. The unions proposed it. They agreed to it. They wanted the right to bargain about Health Premiums and about all of these things, and that is why we have the formula, the charter factors that we have and the labor language that we have, so i think th
Earned. Notice its not much higher than 1955. Men worked in 1200 classes and women were concentrated under 500 classes. The conclusion of that report said mens jobs pay more with comparable education and experience. The context at the time there was a Supreme Court case and they ruled title seven covers wage discrimination whether or not the jobs are exactly the same or not, so it was considered a landmark decision. However, in the application of this court case since 1981 there has been a narrowing of the application. A lot of cases have used the bennett amendment to justify pay differentials based on gender, and actually in fact there have been few successful cases of comparable worth violations. The seiu City Committee on comparable worth was convened in 1981 as was referenced by supervisor avalos the board passed a resolution stating adopting a policy to erase pay inequities and based on race and sex and bringing the un classified positions towp charter and law. At the same time th
By minorities and women judged to be of equal in value and higher pay classes occupied strongly by non minority males so that was proposition h. In the same year the Mayors Task Force issued their report and seiu and the city came to an agreement how to implement pay equity. In 1994 to 99 there was a move to collective bargaining where discussion about pay equity moved into a negotiation between the union and the department of Human Resources Employee Relations unit. Meanwhile in 1998 San Francisco became the first municipality in the world to adopt a local ordinance perfecting the principles of the Un Convention and end all discrimination against women and in this ordinance there is a provision woman are able to get remiewnination and that in is the code. There was a review of the report on pay ecequity and said that 101 classes continued to receive pay equity leading to smaller gaps. The 12 year study said that study should be conducted since it was 12 years since the beginning of th
Prop h, so with collective bargaining came a complete aggregation of the prior salaries standardization ordinances with the exception of the rns and the transit operators. In other words, not part of the 1996 charter. Okay. Thank you. So to the extent im sorry. We spoke on monday and on monday you said that the proposals that you have preserve comparable worth and that was one thing that we asked you to come back and tell us exactly how that has happened but knowing there are different standards presented from the standard discussed by ms. Keely looking at market surveys and two tiered system does not necessarily address comparable worth issues and we are seeing a reduction in proposed classifications and that widens what we set in terms of a comparable worth in the past so i would like to hear from you how you say how you know materially that we are preserving comparable worth . Considered from your lens or the lens that were looking at. I would say first although its my belief that c
Hard to reconstruct what it is because even if one wanted to do a historical look its whatever we say it is then. Well, the jobs have changed. Even if we have said a laundry worker is equivalent to a Data Entry Operator. The laundry worker doesnt exist anymore and it was merged into another classification. The Data Entry Operator doesnt exist anymore. We had 20 years of collective bargaining and unions making different decision how to spend the money and seiu decided to do one thing and they had obligations and laying a pure salary analysis is collective bargaining like things in the last Contract Health premiums. Unions have different provisions about premiums, about all kinds of things, and its somewhat driven by the market. Its driven by the decision in bargaining. To enroll 20 years of collective bargaining and say we should maintain the relationship that existed in 1994 or whatever year we pick because apparently those relationships changed over a 10 year period is virtually impos