And what did McGinn do about it in the first 3 years of his term? Oh right - nothing. Like so many other issues.

Too bad the state did nothing for so many years ... Who was at the Leg during that time, anyway?

The money ultimately gets spent into the local economy, some perhaps in the long-term after sitting in a savings or retirement account. If the budgeting process is capable of foreseeing the long-term results of increasing the flow of income to equalize pay they shouldn't hesitate.

The first of many populist promises, now that he's trailing badly. He did this the last time, flat out lied about not blocking the tunnel, only to turn around and attempt to block it a month after being sworn in, just to get votes.

It's a good step, one I hope gets continued no matter what happens with the election.

And this might give him some badly needed help capturing women and young voters, too.

Publicola's reporting the crosstabs from the poll released today show only 24% of women identify as McGinn voters, compared to 52% for the challenger.

And as for young voters, of 18-34s only 32% were for McGinn, compared to 49 percent for Murray.
http://www.seattlemet.com/news-and-profi…

In general, the type of work that is background -- coming in every day, providing knowledge, answering questions, helping others -- is paid less than the dynamic builders and doers. Even though, often the doers only do one or two things and then parade around telling everyone how great the thing they did is...and half the time it's a flop or ends up losing or costing a lot of money. No problem, as the doer will move on to graze down another budget.

So, I see the pay disparity problem as beyond male-female and more towards implementing all the ideas from the..oh, 30 some years...of books with advice for making our organizations better, and helping weed out or at least curtail the top feeders. (Based on the recent Fortune 400 list, I'd say the top feeders are pretty much still in control.)

Take that money and get some men on that right away.

The highest paid jobs in the city tend to be either highly technical (engineers, IT folks) or the skilled trades (electrical, cops, firefighters). The highly technical are well paid because we have a region full of companies that are clamoring for IT workers and Engineers, and competition is stiff. The skilled trades are highly paid because they can get that wage in the market, in part because of their strong unions.

Unfortunately, all of these highly paid job areas are overwhelmingly male, for a variety of reasons, and despite the city making a multi-generational effort to hire women in these jobs. City Light was the first utility to even allow women line workers and engineers, and the Police and Fire Department have been making efforts to get women in their ranks since the 1970's. how successful and/or sincere they have been is up for debate, but the programs have existed.

As for the rest of the rank-and-file office worker and customer service types, everyone is paid the same within a job classification, and it is all a matter of public record. The salary schedule for every job in the city is listed on Seattle.gov, and real compensation rates for individual employees is listed on several sites. I make the exact same amount of money as the woman sitting next to me, even if she is more competent than me, and anyone can find that information out.

So it seems to me that the real way to increase pay equity is to make a sincere effort to get more women in the high paid job classifications, but if they want to take the easy way out, and just raise the wages on all of the clerical jobs, that's cool with me. But the powerful trades unions will just want more money, and the situation will continue as it is now.

And one other thing (yes, this topic is dear to me) : Back in the 90's, City government (or perhaps it was just City Light) had a program called Upward Mobility that encouraged low paid, mostly female, employees to apply for better paying jobs. It allowed, among other things, for job shadowing help with the interview process and resume writing. I've had the pleasure of working with several smart, competent women who went from being secretaries and clerks to supervisors, managers, service designers, and system operators - jobs which were traditionally male-oriented, and compensated thusly - because of that program.

If they really want to invest in this issue, that's the way to do it.

@2, exactly.

Gender Pay equality,

In a state where, outside of the top 1%, white women earn the same or more than white men.

The "gender pay gap", nationally has more to do with race than anything because its more prevelent and stark in minorities. White women earn 81 cents for every dollar a white man earns, but they also earn about 15-35 cents more than any other demographic, male or female.

http://www.aauw.org/files/2013/02/The-Si…

Something tells me the 'gender pay gap' issue isnt really aimed at the truth of the gender pay gap in Washington, but rather getting white female votes, a demographic which was leaning towards the progressive, pro-civil liberties candidate Ed Murray.

@10, nails this. The break in our system is getting women into skilled careers. Any program that does this should be considered a good idea. Paying secretaries or clerks more is not the answer.

For anyone asking where this was a year ago? The task force hadn't released their report a year ago; they were working on it. The work the mayor did leading to this happened in 2012.

Just counting down the days at this point. Like most, I'm tired of this city being under the thumb of a guy who from day one has never been genuine about what they stand for.