Editing Equal pay for equal work (section)

====Washington state====

In [[Washington (state)|Washington]], Governor Evans implemented a pay equity study in 1973 and another in 1977.<ref name=Remick>Remick, Helen.  "'A Want of Harmony': Perspectives on Wage Discrimination and Comparable Worth."  Ed. Remick, Helen.  Comparable Worth and Wage Discrimination: Technical Possibilities and Political Realities.  Temple University Press: Philadelphia, 1984, pg. 102.</ref>  The results clearly showed that when comparing male and female dominated jobs there was almost no overlap between the averages for similar jobs and in every sector, a twenty percent gap emerged.  For example, a food service worker earned $472 per month, and a Delivery Truck Driver earned $792, though they were both given the same number of "points" on the scale of comparable worth to the state.<ref name=Remick/> Unfortunately for the state, and for the female state workers, his successor Governor Dixie Lee Ray failed to implement the recommendations of the study (which clearly stated women made 20 percent less than men).<ref>Stewart, Debra A.  "State Initiatives in the Federal System: The Politics and Policy of Comparable Worth in 1984."  Publius, Vol. 15, No. 3 (Summer 1985), pg. 84.</ref>   Thus in 1981, [[AFSCME]] filed a sex discrimination complaint with the [[EEOC]] against the State of Washington.  The District Court ruled that  since the state had done a study of sex discrimination in the state, found that there was severe disparities in wages, and had not done anything to ameliorate these disparities, this constituted discrimination under Title VII that was "pervasive and intentional".<ref>American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO (AFSCME), et al. v. State of Washington et al.  No. C 82-465T (District Court for the Western District of Washington), 1983.</ref>   The Court then ordered the State to pay its over 15,500 women back pay from 1979 based on a 1983 study of comparable worth.<ref>Legler, Joel Ivan.  "City, County and State Government Liability for Sex-Based Wage Discrimination After County of Washington v. Gunther and AFSCME v. Washington."  The Urban Lawyer, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Spring 1985), pg. 241.</ref>  This amounted to over $800&nbsp;million.  However, the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit]] overturned this decision, stating that Washington had always required their employees' salaries to reflect the free market, and discrimination was one cause of many for wage disparities.  The court stated, "the State did not create the market disparity ... [and] neither law nor logic deems the free market system a suspect enterprise."<ref>American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO (AFSCME), et al. v. State of Washington et al.  770 F.2d 1401 (9th Cir), 1985.</ref>   While the suit was ultimately unsuccessful, it led to state legislation bolstering state workers' pay. The costs for implementing this equal pay policy was 2.6% of personnel costs for the state.<ref>"[http://www.pay-equity.org/info-Q&A.html National Committee on Pay Equity]," pay-equity.org, Accessed Nov. 8, 2010</ref>