approximately ninety six percent of school crossing guards now this case is about the violation of the equal pay act so to e p a as it relates to equal pay for equal work what this case is also about is the fact that the city employees traffic enforcement agents who are predominantly male and when those traffic enforcement agents are assigned to school crossing got posts they are paid significantly more than the school crossing guard themselves this case covers a period of four years agent was twenty dollars sixty five cents i take it that your claim to be that the traffic enforcement agents really have to have kind of two schedules for their salaries one when they're doing school crossings and one when they're doing all the other stuff that's not that's not our position here on what i don't stand how these jobs are comparable i mean the otherwise school crossing guards have other different have certain responsibilities and traffic enforcement agents can be school crossing guards as part of their duties but they have much broader duties and much more responsibility in many ways that maybe sawyer on out but in ought to look at an appropriate comparative and all the case law as well as the e p a says the following what you focus on is job function and job content when you're comparing the job done by that city school crossing guard walked the reef party and the person they're comparing themselves to yana and if i may continue now there was a case in which focusing on one individual that was a case involving a professor who believed she was being underpaid and she was permitted to look at all the departments in the university up maris college and look at the salaries of the male professors across several of the pop men's not just the department that she was taught in and as a result of that it came up with a statistical imbalance in terms of the salary that was being paid and that's what we asking this court to do here main job that is the sea fleet cross children and make a given at school crossing poles that's it as a matter of fact traffic enforcement agents that's not a part of their job description is not a part of what they normally do however on a daily basis at least seventy to eighty traffic enforcement agents up pull from the ranks and put in school crossing posts and they work the entire shift school crossing guards w ok or responsibilities for law enforcement or as we know they are not the only i presume they can be but i don't think that would be f e n now assists in this case because the only people we comparing them to are the traffic enforcement agents yana and they are on a daily basis as a matter of fact it's quote in our brief in a nine month period in two thousand and sixteen they logged over twenty thousand hours in school crossing posts but it's not something to do as a happenstance it's not something to do f a once in a while it's something to do every single day including today or every day and i'm sure they're out there right now day and they're not said there are not told when you're at the traffic story when you're school crossing guard space i think this gets back to one of judge walker's early questions when you're doing school crossing duty you're going to get paid fifteen dollars an hour and then when you get back on your other duties that you are supposed to be also doing that you're going to get paid through it again your honor i don't think that's a proper analysis because under the a you don't look you don't punish the highest paid employee you want the lower paid employee you bring them up to what the higher paid employee is being paid to do they had jobs there is no differen you know some precinct sergeant said sorry officer x you've got to go to school crossing guard duty because everybody in the area is responsible got the flu but you're on it then argue that that now everybody has to be paid what the police officer no i wouldn't argue that because that will never be the case you don't want to because they will never police up with us and they happened during the period that's relevant in this case put a police officer the only people they put their traffic the job of a level two traffic enforcement agent is substantially different from that of a school crossing guard in terms of duties responsibilities qualifications skill levels and working conditions the district court correctly a and new york city and state human rights watch quite to be clear the appellants have abandoned the position that they took below that school crossing guard to do substantially the same job as traffic enforcement agents performing the full when they are fulfilling the function of school crossing guards they are doing the i got a cool job and yet the traffic enforcement officers are getting paid at their significantly higher rate or higher rate for the school crossing aspect of the two jobs that are different and as we explained in our brief and average traffic enforcement agent spends only one percent of his or her hours substituting in a school crossing guard  what the opponent is asking this court to do is to ignore the other ninety nine percent of the time that can't stand that this does not constitute substantially equal work and there is no viable equal pay act claim the other issue is that the opponents approach is is contrary to equal pay act and its purpose equal pay act into provide equal pay for equal work by focusing on the one percent of the time the opponent seeks to avoid the very question of whether school crossing guards and traffic enforcement agents are do work that requires equal skill effort and responsibility appellants cited the merest college case which which does not support their point in that case this court approved use of statistical analysis to create a comparable male professor but that statistical regression analysis was specifically designed to control for differences between positions franks years of service division the opposite approach they're asking the court to ignore all the differences between the positions and focus only on the one percent of the time that traffic enforcement agents and school crossing guards are doing the same job  clearly that does not address the question of whether these jobs are substantially similar under the equal pay act and frankly in arguing for this particular framing the appellants are really just exposing the differences between the two positions for example school crossing guards only work near schools where as traffic enforcement agents can be posed can be posted anywhere at any intersection in the city as a district co pointed out this ng could include being posted to times square in the middle of the scope of these positions and their responsibilities are are vastly different the argument that the district court did not focus on to all job content is on a billing case port authority the e e o c conscience only against focusing on job titles and classifications but that's what the district court did in this case the district court looked very carefully at the job requirements training manuals deposition testimony as to each of the two positions this was not some generalized account what each party means by direct traffic in six is very different school crossing guards only interact with traffic to the extent that they are required to do so to safely cross children and they're not allowed to that the employer has to pay a different wages to different sexes we already established that when there is a pay disparity so we could dispense with that the nd part is that the employees before work and i'll quote equal work on jobs effort and responsibility it is our position that since boat traffic enforcement agents and the school crossing guards do the exact same function at the school crossing else inhaling the small in a daily basis so i think we have the three prong satisfied in respect of proving a violation of the equal pay act now we've had testimony and it's in testimony that was elicited from our school crossing gods as well as we had an affidavit from a gentleman named mrs sharjah hand he is the secretary treasurer of the communication workers of america that's the union that represents a ones and twos and he said yet they do the same thing and they are there they just like us these we do no difference when they're at a school crossing post now what i'm asking this you want us to hold that it makes no difference using your adversaries figures it makes no difference that one percent of the traffic control officers job maybe school crossing guard jobs w one hundred percent of the school crossing guards job is school yet those statistics debatable i don't think they are correct here on it because i know up to five or ten are right but again the case law is pretty clear in respect of high up late paid employee is doing the work of a lower paid employee and there is a male female disparity that you have to elevate the lower paid employee to the high a