Historical Account

Fall 1999

WPEA Files Class Action Lawsuit for Equal Pay

To continue our pursuit of resolving disparities in pay between General Government and Higher Education pay scales for similar or identical classes, WPEA filed a class action lawsuit in October of 1999. A similar suit (Shroll v. State) was also filed in October by class-action counsel for non-WPEA member plaintiffs in the Warner case. The two cases were consolidated for trial purposes before Judge Berschauer.

A stay of proceedings was ordered by Judge Berschauer on November 12, 1999. The stay, intended to allow time for the State to resolve the pay disparities underlying the suit, remained in effect until after the 2001 legislative session.

On December 17, 1999, District 1199NW Hospital and Health Care Employees Union, SEIU, AFL-CIO, was allowed to intervene as a plaintiff in the consolidated case on behalf of a class of registered nurses represented by UFCW Local 1199NW.

2000

Settlement Proposed

As a part of the settlement of Warner I, a committee comprised of WPEA, WFSE, and Department of Personnel representatives was formed to review and recommend a course of action with regard to other common classes. A common class list and a proposed funding plan to equalize salaries between common classes was adopted by the Personnel Resources Board in 2000.

April 2001

Settlement Contingent on Legislature Funding

A proposed settlement was signed by WPEA and other parties, contingent upon funding by the 2001 legislature.

June 2001

Court Approves, Legislature Kills Common Class Settlement

The State legislature has killed a proposed settlement of the long-running common class lawsuit by refusing to provide funding in the 2001-2002 budget. The legislature’s failure to fund the proposed settlement torpedoes the plan approved by the Thurston County Superior court on June 8, 2001 and sends the case back to court.

"We are very disappointed that the Legislature refused to agree to this settlement," said Mark Lyon, former WPEA General Counsel. "I’m surprised that the legislature voted against paying equal pay for equal work."

"Failure of the legislature to fund the settlement means that the settlement is completely off and the case returns to the courts," Lyon added.

The Governor's proposed budget sought $11.3 million over three years to complete the pay equity process started in Warner v. State of Washington for employees working in common job classifications in both general government agencies and at institutions of higher learning. This funding would have settled the lawsuits in WPEA v. State of Washington and Shroll vs. State of Washington, which seek equalization of base salary ranges for these state employees working in the common job classifications.

In May, the court sent notices to about 4,300 state employees regarding the proposed class-action settlement. At the subsequent hearing to approve the settlement, Judge Berschauer stated that a failure to fund the settlement by the legislature is "clearly . . . not to the benefit of the public."

"If you want to quote me, you may quote me," said Berschauer. "I'm not allowed to lobby on behalf of these issues, but I am allowed to state an opinion which relates to a lawsuit, and clearly my opinion is that this settlement is appropriate. It is in the public's interest as well as the private interests of individual parties in this lawsuit."

Failure to settle the current common class litigation means that the focus will return to the courts, where the cases have been waiting pending resolution of the settlement efforts. ". . . [A]s I understand the parties' agreement, all bets are off, and this thing goes back to litigation, and I think that's not to anyone's benefit," Judge Berschauer noted at the settlement hearing.

According to Lyon, court resolution could take several years. " It is almost certain that if this case is not settled, it will go on appeal," he said. "It could also prove very costly to the state", Lyon noted. "The settlement that the legislature just turned down only cost $11.5 million over three years because it did not include any back pay and only applied to current employees. A victory in the courts would include back pay, and also apply to former employees as well as current employees. That could bump up the eventual cost to the state to $50 million or even $100 million if the case is eventually successful."

The two lawsuits seek to equalize base salaries and recover back pay for past and present state employees working in classes common to both the State’s general government and higher education personnel systems. Plaintiffs charge these employees have been unlawfully deprived of "equal pay for equal work" because employees performing substantially similar work in one personnel system have been assigned to a lower base salary than similarly situated employees working in the parallel personnel system. The term "common classes" refers to job classifications in the general government system which are substantially the same as job classifications being used by the Higher Education system ( i.e., job classes which are substantially common to both personnel systems).

There are 141 common job classifications in both general government and higher education with pay disparities in the base salary range. Of the 141 common job classifications where a pay disparity exists, 76 job classes are in general government and 65 job classes are in higher education. Under the settlement rejected by the Legislature, there are a total of 4,234 state employees in these 141 common job classes who would have received increases in pay over the next three years to achieve pay equity with their higher paid counterparts in general government or higher education.

In an earlier lawsuit, Warner v. State, a group of general government trades employees brought a class action on behalf of 27 common trades classes claiming they were paid less than their higher education counter parts. In a ruling in1999, Judge Berschauer held that employees in common classes prior to 1993 were entitled to back pay, but employees after 1993 were without a claim because of a change in the civil service statue. Before the case could go on appeal, the case was settled.

June 2003

Superior Court Says State in Violation of Civil Service Laws

On June 13, 2003, the Thurston County Superior Court granted summary judgment to the State dismissing claims that the state’s pay practices violate the state civil service laws and the equal protection clause of the U.S. and state constitution. While disappointing, the courts ruling is not unexpected and WPEA remains optimistic that it will prevail on appeal. The ruling by Judge Berschauer is not unexpected because he had made similar rulings in an earlier case several years ago.

The two lawsuits seek to equalize base salaries and recover back pay for past and present state employees working in classes common to both the State’s general government and higher education personnel systems. Plaintiffs charge these employees have been unlawfully deprived of "equal pay for equal work" because employees performing substantially similar work in one personnel system have been assigned to a lower base salary than similarly situated employees working in the parallel personnel system. The term "common classes" refers to job classifications in the general government system which are substantially the same as job classifications being used by the Higher Education system ( i.e., job classes which are substantially common to both personnel systems).

There are 172 pairs of common job classifications in both general government and higher education, most with pay disparities in the base salary range. About 31 common class pairs are paid the same. Of the 141 common job classifications where a pay disparity exists, 76 job classes are in general government and 65 job classes are in higher education. Under the settlement rejected by the Legislature, there are a total of 4,234 state employees in these 141 common job classes who would have received increases in pay over the next three years to achieve pay equity with their higher paid counterparts in general government or higher education.

In an earlier lawsuit, Warner v. State, a group of general government trades employees brought a class action on behalf of 27 common trades classes claiming they were paid less than their higher education counter parts. In a ruling in 1999, Judge Berschauer held that employees in common classes prior to 1993 were entitled to back pay, but employees after 1993 were without a claim because of a change in the civil service statue. Before the case could go on appeal, the case was settled.

In 2001, the State legislature killed a proposed settlement of the long-running common class lawsuit by refusing to provide funding in the 2001-2002 budget. The Governor's proposed budget for 2001-2003 sought $11.3 million over three years to complete the pay equity process started in Warner v. State of Washington for employees working in common job classifications in both general government agencies and at institutions of higher learning. This funding would have settled the lawsuits in WPEA v. State of Washington and Shroll vs. State of Washington, which seek equalization of base salary ranges for these state employees working in the common job classifications. Affected employees would have received approximately $21 Million in additional salary over three years.

At present, there are no settlement negotiations and none are planned. Failure to settle could prove very costly to the state. The settlement that the Legislature turned down only cost $11.5 million over three years because it did not include any back pay and only applied to current employees. A victory in the courts could include back pay, and also apply to former employees as well as current employees. That could bump up the eventual cost to the state to $50 million or even $100 million if the case is eventually successful.

While Judge Berschauer’s ruling is disappointing, it is not unexpected given the significant legal issues and the policy issues involved. This case has always been destined for appeal, no matter which side prevailed in superior court, and WPEA is eager to begin the appeal. We remain optimistic that we will win in the end.

While both SEIU and AFSCME joined the common class lawsuits at the time of the proposed settlement, neither union has taken an active role in the case since it returned to court. In particular, the Washington Federation of State Employees filed no briefs and took no part in the argument before Judge Berschauer on June 13, 2003. WPEA remains the only state employee union to continue to pursue the common class issue.

 Common Class Lawsuit

 Chronology of Litigation

  Prospective Common
     Classes

 Prospective Series
     of Classes