Top 5 reasons pay equity is still on the table in pay bargaining right now
- We need to maintain the progress of the 2023 pay reset, and CFPB’s proposal will take us backwards
- The goal of our salary reset- that people with the same amount of work experience who do the same work get equal pay- is at risk with the proposals management has sent to us. If we accept management’s latest proposal, this will wind back the pay disparities we tried to close and open the field once again for differences in pay.
- One of the major concerns is creating a two-tier workforce who will have the same experience but will not be paid the same if they are hired in the coming years. This is unfair treatment- if we believe in equality and equal pay, we cannot accept an agreement that does not further implement and integrate the salary reset into our merit pay.
- We need to raise salaries to make additional progress on pay equity.
- In order to close the remaining racist pay gaps that were not fully fixed by the 2023 reset, we need to keep raising base salaries via pay bands increases every year. Without those increases to salaries based on years of experience, employees who are still making less than our highest-paid counterparts, can never catch up to those higher-paid counterparts.
- Those higher-paid counterparts will have salaries “frozen,” meaning they get lump sums instead of base salary increases, each year that their coworkers with the same years of experience are still at a lower base salary. So, they are not happy either, even though they already make more money than their counterparts, through no fault of their own (rather, at the fault of CFPB’s faulty and discriminatory pay setting over the years). CFPB saves money through ongoing discrimination by keeping pay gaps in place, taking advantage of the discriminatory pay gaps to keep salaries artificially lower than they would be if all employees were paid at the same, equal higher salaries.
- Over time those higher-paid employees still have higher base salaries, higher retirement contributions, higher benefits, higher savings, and accrue more wealth than those with the same experience who are underpaid (those being disproportionately Black and Latinx employees).
- We need to stop CFPB from creating a new system of pay discrimination.
- EEO experts agree that CFPB’s proposed unequal, two-tier pay system will create yet another group of illegally underpaid people of color, through disparate impact.
- Black employees, Latinx employees, Native American employees, people of color, women of color and other protected groups would be paid less than their coworkers with the same years of experience once hired into CFPB’s proposed lower pay tier. Folks hired since July 2023 are among those potentially affected by the disparities.
- CFPB’s two-tier system guarantees the pay gap would increase over time. For example, an employee hired in 2026 would instantly make 10% less than employees hired before that year, despite having the same total years of experience in their job. People of color hired at CFPB would be affected by the disparate impact of being paid less for the same work experience.
If in 2026 a new CN51 employee with between 3 to 4 years' experience was hired, the matrix would indicate a salary of $84,057, which is 9.8% lower than an existing CFPB employee with the same years of experience who would be earning $92,286.
- This discourages and disincentivizes recruitment of people of color in fields where they are already underrepresented at CFPB, because the Bureau would be liable to a claim of pay discrimination due to the disparate impact from that employee’s very first paycheck.
- We need to fix pay disparities based on grade assignments, hiring and promotions.
- Delays in reaching agreement on pay are preventing CFPB Union from negotiating fixes to pay disparities resulting from grade classification.
- Our CFPB Union 2020 pay study (www.nteu335.org/paygap) showed that a significant portion of the pay gap that discriminates against Black and Latinx employees comes not just from how your salary is set, but which grade you are hired into. Black and Latinx employees are disproportionately hired into the lowest pay bands.
- Since the 2023 pay reset, the Bureau and the Union are able to use the work experience data to see that Black and Latinx employees with the same years of experience are in lower grades than white male peers in the same job with the same years of experience. This automatically results in lower pay for the same job and same experience.
- The Union intends to propose changes to grade classification including a Bureau-wide review and reset to fix these disparities (we proposed it for the 2023 reset but the Bureau refused to do this at the time). Every day that our pay contract is delayed, is a day we are delayed in negotiating this other major aspect of pay discrimination at CFPB.
- We need to hold CFPB accountable based on its past and current pay discrimination, one of many illegal practices that harm employees of color.
- Past pay discrimination. CFPB has a disappointing history with pay discrimination. As we’ve mentioned, CFPB just settled a 6 million dollar lawsuit that alleged over 80 current and former BUEs were paid less than their counterparts. Also, we moved from a pass/fail performance metric because their rating system was found by independent consultants to be discriminatory based on race and age and sex. There has been concerning rhetoric at the table relating to performance which we believe is a pretext to reintroduce pay discrimination and managers patting themselves on the back. We do not want to go back down that road.
- Breach of contract with union. Holding our Agency accountable means enforcing our agreements and combating agency breaches of contract. We want to make sure that when management agrees to our contracts they abide by them. In our former agreement we have a stipulation to negotiate on the payband issue. We believe they have not met their legal obligations of the contract. If we fold, we will set the tone for further negotiations. We want to make sure we show them we are strong. They can stonewall us, but we cannot submit to an agreement that would in effect allow discrimination in compensation to continue.
- Lack of comparable pay under Dodd Frank. Dodd Frank requires for our salary to be comparable to the Federal Reserve, and we look to other FIRREA agencies as well to make sure our salaries are on equal footing as our other sister agencies.
- Despite the common practice at other agencies of increasing base salaries via increases to pay bands each year, management is bucking this practice. If we do not continue to increase our base salaries each year, we will fall further behind our counterparts, our salaries will not be competitive, our agency is less attractive to highly sought-after workers from underrepresented groups, and we risk losing current and future employees to other agencies.
- Without competitive, comparable pay, we lose our best and brightest to our sister agencies who offer higher pay, fairer pay, and annual increases that meet and exceed inflation
It appears that the Board wishes not to hear anyone’s opinion opposite of theirs or question their tactics, because that have blocked me from being on slack. Interesting to see if I have a cause for a ULP against the Union. If I am not on by this afternoon then I will have no choice but to file one by Friday.
This Board has lied to us.
We could have gone to Impasse by February. We could have gone around the current Mediator and request Impasse from the committee overseeing this mediator. Also, Impasse Panel does not and will not ever award retroactive pay.
We will lose the ULP and lose months of pay. This Board suppresses BU opinions and selectively deletes our Slack Accounts without any warning of those they disagree. They also unfairly and unequally subject BU members to their subjective standards of what opinions are allowed. Their conduct violated our rules and that is why I am filing a ULP.