Lori Sturdevant: Gosh, you'd think the pay equity issue was solved

Break out the bubbly, Minnesota feminists.The pioneering policy aim you helped set for state agencies in 1982 -- equal pay for comparable work by men and women, better known as "pay equity" -- has finally been realized.

The latest pay equity compliance stats were tabulated last month, and showed that for the first time, women in state employment finally earn $1 for every $1 paid to male employees in comparable jobs.

It only took 29 years.

You'd think feminists would throw a party in the Capitol rotunda to celebrate. And that pay equity would be firmly in the "if it ain't broke" category of public policies that work as intended and are best left alone.

Instead, pay equity advocates are back at the Capitol this year to play defense.

The 1984 local government pay equity requirement -- the second of Minnesota's one-two punches against pay discrimination a generation ago -- is on the docket for repeal this year.

Its every-three-years reporting requirement is being tarred as a costly and unnecessary mandate for cities, counties and school districts.

Tell that to Connie Andrews of the parks and trails division of the Department of Natural Resources, based in Grand Rapids. She attests to the need for a pay equity law -- and to the cost of not having one.

Andrews went to work for state government in 1977. Before long, she was the fiscal agent managing the $1-million-plus annual accounts of the state's busiest state park, Itasca.

"I was literally counting money on my desk," she recalls.

But she was paid $8 an hour, while the men who drove trucks and picked up garbage at the park were paid a $12 hourly wage.

When she questioned the disparity, "I was told that the men were doing hazardous work and I wasn't."

The 1982 pay equity law led to a reevaluation of her responsibilities, which in turn led to a pay raise. Within five years, she was paid as much as the park's male outdoor crew.

The difference for her was "huge," she said. "It was not only a pay increase, but also a morale boost," one that helped her decide to remain in state employment to this day.

She's also decided to stick her neck out to keep pay equity for local employees, putting her story on a flier on the subject prepared by her union, AFSCME.

Yes, that's the union that camped at the Wisconsin State Capitol last week to oppose a Republican attempt to repeal key legal protection of its right to organize and collectively bargain.

Minnesota's pay equity repeal effort isn't evoking that kind of response -- not yet.

But it punches emotional buttons, especially among a cohort that politicians mess with at their peril: middle-aged women.

"It doesn't make sense," Andrews said. "Why do they think it wouldn't go back to the way it always was before the law was passed? It would be draconian. It would be like repealing the Civil Rights Act."

With that kind of resistance, why would the normally enlightened League of Minnesota Cities be among those saying it's time to scrap the local pay equity requirement?

The league's Laura Kushner explained that filing the requisite compensation reports every three years is time-consuming and typically costs a few thousand dollars.

(The pay equity program administrator, Faith Zwemke, countered that a recent software upgrade makes it possible for most local reports to be prepared and filed in a matter of hours, not days.)

Kushner said that many cities find they must hire consultants to set and maintain the employee classification system the pay equity law requires. (Pay equity advocates say the need for consultants' help is overstated.)

I noted that she did not say that the cost of actually paying women equitable wages is burdensome. That's because after 26 years, the fixes typically needed every three years to comply with the law are minor.

In 2010, the average monthly cost for an out-of-compliance local jurisdiction to satisfy the law was a whopping $348 per month.

About a quarter of the 500 jurisdictions that reported in 2010 were initially out of compliance, but in short order all but 23 of them made satisfactory adjustments or changes to their reports.

Then Kushner hit on what sounded like the deeper reason for city council members and mayors to resent pay equity. "The private sector doesn't have to do this," she said.

Pay equity laws push governments to pay women, especially those in low-wage jobs, more than they might make in at least some comparable private-sector jobs.

That helps explain why among low-wage workers, public-sector compensation tends to be slightly higher than the private sector's.

That gender gap that just disappeared in state government? It's still open everywhere else. The latest U.S. Census Bureau accounting said that Minnesota women's median earnings are 77.3 percent of men's.

Pay equity laws were enacted at a time when Minnesotans thought differently about government than they seem to today. They wanted it to reflect their ideals and to serve as a model for the private sector to follow.

They wanted public service to be a high calling, not something to denigrate. They understood that the public sector had to function well to create an environment in which the private sector can flourish.

That isn't the dominant strain of thought at the 2011 Legislature. And that's why I won't be surprised to see female government workers assembling in the rotunda one of these days not to celebrate, but to protest.

Lori Sturdevant is a Star Tribune editorial writer and columnist. Follow her on Twitter @sturdevant.