Four female employees of a power company sued, claiming their employer had violated the Equal Pay Act by paying women less than men for the same work. They all worked in a position called field representatives, in two different locations in Minnesota. They also charged violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act.

What happened. Northern States Power Company (NSP) employed a number of field representatives, whose job involved collections from delinquent customers and service shut-offs for those who would not pay their bills. All field reps were chosen from other jobs at NSP, and their base pay was initially the amount they had earned in their previous jobs. The women identified the period of the violation as the 2 years beginning in September 2007; EPA specifies that plaintiffs must sue within 2 years of violation, although earlier incidents can be accepted in court if a judge sees a pattern of discrimination.

The women alleged that many male field reps, including a number who had started in the position later than the women had, were paid more than they were. They did not argue that all male field reps were paid more. NSP argued that all pay differences were the result of the initial pay structure (called red circling) and subsequent annual evaluations with a system called Individual Performance and Development. In that system, each employee received a rating between 1 and 5, which then determined the percentage of the raise each would be given.

When the women’s case got to federal district court, the judge found that one of the women was earning more than any other field representative at her location, and that the other three were earning more than some of their male colleagues. He ruled the women hadn’t shown any EPA violation. They appealed to the 8th Circuit, which covers Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.

What the court said. Appellate judges could find no fault with the district judge’s reasoning. The women admitted they had heard no overtly discriminatory statements, and judges found the red circling and evaluation system legitimate reasons for varying pay within the same job. “A raw difference in pay between men and women” is not enough, they ruled, to prove discrimination. Price et al. v. Northern States Power, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, No. 11-1497 (12/22/11).

Point to remember: It’s hard to understand why this group sued, but they seemed particularly unhappy with a particular supervisor at one of the locations. It’s also likely that they didn’t understand the company’s compensation program well. All employees should be very clear about how they are compensated.