 July 11, 2002
Wednesday's news release said that Senate Bill 180, which was sponsored by Senator Dave Donley (R-Anchorage), would have revised the geographic differential payments made to state employees who are not union members. This would have been the first change since 1976 and would have been based on the most recent study to determine geographic differential payments for cost-of-living differences across Alaska. State employees covered by collective bargaining agreements have been paid according to the differential proposed in Senate Bill 180 for several years. The governor's reason for vetoing this legislation on the basis that it treats state employees differently and might violate constitutional equal protection clauses was flawed say Co-Chairs Donley & Kelly. State employees currently are treated differently depending on when they were first hired by the state, how long they have been in a particular job class, where they live and to what, if any, collecting bargaining unit they belong. The courts have not found any of these differentiations in violation of the equal protection clause according to the news release. Donley & Kelly say that Senate Bill 180 would have actually brought state employee salaries more in line with each other by applying the same cost-of-living adjustments to newly hired non-union employees that union employees receive. All state employees would gradually be paid under the same calculation as current State employees retired and were replaced by new hires. When the geographic differential for union employees was revised, in areas where the salary adjustment decreased, existing employees' salaries were frozen until they had worked long enough that merit or longevity increases finally brought their salaries in line with the new differential. The Co-Chairs of the AK Senate Finance Committee say this was not fair or equitable treatment of employees who gave Alaska the benefit of their experience gained by remaining at their jobs. They were punished by having their salaries frozen, while newly hired employees were given more frequent salary increases. According to the news release, Senate Bill 180 insured that no state employee lost any benefit currently being received. There was no reduction of pay and there was no delay in merit or longevity increases. It had the further benefit of increasingly saving state dollars as turnover in state employees occurred. There is no perfect solution when adjusting salaries based on cost-of-living changes. Senate Bill 180 would have provided for the most equitable treatment of employees, both current and new, had the governor not chosen to veto it, according to Senators Donley & Kelly.
Source of News Release:
|