Seattle announces plan to raise minimum wage to $15/hour

Quote:

---

This month kicks off with May Day, an international holiday for workers, and in one US city they got a little bit of good news: The Mayor of Seattle announced a plan to raise the hourly minimum wage to $15.





That hourly wage would effectively be the world’s highest government-set minimum rate in a major city, unless Switzerland adopts a $25 minimum wage in a referendum scheduled for later this month. While other economies have higher minimum wages in exchange-rate terms (Australia’s is roughly $16 an hour), when you take into account spending power, the highest current minimum wage is Luxembourg’s, at the equivalent of $13.35 an hour.




Seattle’s proposed wage hike, produced by a special committee of business, labor and political leaders, is expected to be approved by city lawmakers, and will affect about a sixth of the city’s more than 600,000 residents. It will be instituted gradually, reaching $15 in 2017 for companies with more than 500 employees, and in 2021 for small businesses that offer their employees benefits or tips. After that, further increases will be indexed to inflation.

---

http://qz.com/205208/the-city-of-sea...-in-the-world/

By 2021, $15 won't be $15.

Why not index to inflation immediately?

It needs to be an all or nothing wage. Set an employee level, and business at 520 employees will lay of 20 of them. Besides, it is a losing proposition in that employers will seek to move their operations outside of Seattle city limits if large.

Why do liberals champion these "feel good" ideas without seeing the problems they cause?

The Seatac experiment is still new, but they have captive employers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

It needs to be an all or nothing wage. Set an employee level, and business at 520 employees will lay of 20 of them. Besides, it is a losing proposition in that employers will seek to move their operations outside of Seattle city limits if large.

Why do liberals champion these "feel good" ideas without seeing the problems they cause?

The Seatac experiment is still new, but they have captive employers.

---

Why do you champion "common sense" ideas that are not supported by empirical evidence?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Th'Pusher

Why do you champion "common sense" ideas that are not supported by empirical evidence?

---

LOL...

That seriously is what people lack these days, isn't it. Common sense...

Common sense is usually neither.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

By 2021, $15 won't be $15.

Why not index to inflation immediately?

---

It's still a 10.9% annual increase, and very likely to surpass the inflation. The seven year period from 2007 to 2014, the Washington State minimum wage has gone from $7.93/hr to $9.32/hr. An average increase of 2.35% annual. If this rate continues to 2014, then the minimum wage would be $10.97 without this proposed change.

This might not be such a bad idea since it is spread out over time.

More napkin math!

about time. i'm all for it.

socialists!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

It's still a 10.9% annual increase, and very likely to surpass the inflation. The seven year period from 2007 to 2014, the Washington State minimum wage has gone from $7.93/hr to $9.32/hr. An average increase of 2.35% annual. If this rate continues to 2014, then the minimum wage would be $10.97 without this proposed change.

This might not be such a bad idea since it is spread out over time.

---

Well, the big experiment will be starting.

Link in pic:

http://seattletimes.com/ABPub/2014/06/02/2023753808.gif

Text of bill:

http://murray.seattle.gov/wp-content...-Wage-2014.pdf

Because everyone knows the downward sloping demand curve is a myth.

Quote:

---

http://www.nwasianweekly.com/2014/05...-minimum-wage/

BLOG: What SeaTac tells us about $15 minimum wage
By Assunta Ng
While attending an event at a SeaTac hotel last week, I met two women who receive the $15/hour minimum wage. SeaTac has implemented the new law on Jan. 1. I met the women while they were working. One was a waitress and the other was cleaning the hallway.
“Are you happy with the $15 wage?” I asked the full-time cleaning lady.
“It sounds good, but it’s not good,” the woman said.
“Why?” I asked.
“I lost my 401k, health insurance, paid holiday, and vacation,” she responded. “No more free food,” she added.
The hotel used to feed her. Now, she has to bring her own food. Also, no overtime, she said. She used to work extra hours and received overtime pay.
What else? I asked.
“I have to pay for parking,” she said.
I then asked the part-time waitress, who was part of the catering staff.
“Yes, I’ve got $15 an hour, but all my tips are now much less,” she said. Before the new wage law was implemented, her hourly wage was $7. But her tips added to more than $15 an hour. Yes, she used to receive free food and parking. Now, she has to bring her own food and pay for parking.
Another staffer did not want to say anything, but he did say the $15 has a huge impact on the hotel.
The wait staff said the hotel across the street is unionized. Therefore, management is not required to pay the $15 wage. (end)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by angrydude

Because everyone knows the downward sloping demand curve is a myth.

---

So a blogger asked a random hotel waitress and a cleaning lady? Not exactly a comprehensive study. Anecdotal, at best.

waitress/cleaning lady working minimum wage had a health insurance, paid vacation, and 401K ? :lol

Go ahead and call the chinks liars. The Northwest Asian Weekly is obviously in the bag for the GOP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

waitress/cleaning lady working minimum wage had a health insurance, paid vacation, and 401K ? :lol

---

:lol no shit

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/C...?tab=video&c=y

http://media.komonews.com/images/140609_minwage_big.jpg

Quote:

---

SEATAC, Wash. -- A locally-owned parking business is adding an unusual charge that customers are just starting to notice.

On every receipt from Masterpark, in between the "airport access fee" and the "sales tax," is a line that reads "Living Wage Surcharge." The company is tacking on an additional 99-cents per day fee now that the law requires paying employees at least $15 an hour.

"This is one way of business owners getting back at the public and passing on their costs," said Eric Colville, who has left his car at Masterpark in the past.

He was surprised to see the surcharge spelled out on a paper receipt.

"They park thousands of cars a day. I just really don't see that being totally spread out among all the employees," said Colville. "I'm sure that they're going to end up making a pretty good profit from this under the guise of living wage."

Masterpark is one of the SeaTac businesses that falls under the city's $15 minimum wage law voters narrowly passed last November. The measure went into effect in January.

The managers at Masterpark did not respond to our request for an interview, but the research director at the Washington Policy Center offered an analysis.

"I can see that a customer would say, oh you're showing me this cost just because you don't like the higher minimum wage," said Paul Guppy, research director of the independent, non-profit think tank. "I just think that Masterpark is trying to be transparent. They face a problem with having to raise prices, but they want customers to know why."

Washington Policy Center says it is non-partisan, but takes a more conservative, business-friendly approach when studying and taking positions on policy issues.

"I don't think they want to be blamed for just cranking up their prices for no reason," Guppy added. "So they want to be able to show the city of SeaTac changed the law, we are adjusting to the law, this is how much it will cost and we just want to show that."

Masterpark's website has the following under its "rates and reservations" page:

"MasterPark charges, taxes, and fees include a 'Living Wage' surcharge of 99 cents per day. This is due to the new $15 per hour minimum wage requirement for certain businesses in SeaTac. The surcharge covers a portion of the resulting increase in operating costs."

Guppy of the Washington Policy Center predicts some businesses in Seattle will experiment with printing a living wage surcharge on their receipts as the city enacts its new $15 minimum wage law.

---

That makes airport users pay usage fee, rather than general local/fed tax receipts paying public assistance to low-wage workers.

$15/hour should reduce/remove some public assitance.

If it doesn't, then raise the $15 until it kicks EVERYBODY at the low end off public assistance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by angrydude

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/C...?tab=video&c=y

http://media.komonews.com/images/140609_minwage_big.jpg

---

Wow.

About 25.7% total over retail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Wow.

About 25.7% total over retail.

---

Hmm? Explain your math.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Th'Pusher

Hmm? Explain your math.

---

The parking charge is $84.00.

84 x .257 = 21.588

21.588 + 84 = 105.588.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

The parking charge is $84.00.

84 x .257 = 21.588

21.588 + 84 = 105.588.

---

Oh. That's total taxes and fees. Not the living wage surcharge which is what the point of the image of the receipt.

Group of Seattle franchise businesses sue to stop $15 minimum wage

Five Puget Sound business owners and a trade group based in Washington, D.C., filed suit in federal court Wednesday to stop Seattle from enacting a $15-an-hour minimum wage, which would be the highest in the nation when it takes effect.

The suit, filed by the International Franchise Assn. and five local franchisees, argues that the new minimum wage discriminates against the owners of franchised businesses because it treats them like national corporations instead of the small businesses that they really are.

The ordinance, which was passed unanimously by the Seattle City Council on June 2 and signed into law by Mayor Ed Murray a day later, violates the U.S. and Washington state Constitutions, the suit says, along with federal statutes and state law, and could put some small franchisees out of business.

The law is scheduled to go into effect in April and will phase in the increased wages over three to seven years depending on the size of the business. Businesses with more than 500 employees will be required to pay higher wages sooner than those with fewer workers.

Under the new law, “a non-franchise business that has 500 employees is treated as a ‘small’ employer whereas a small franchisee with only five employees is treated as a ‘large’ employer if, as is usually the case, the franchisee is part of a network that employs more than 500 workers,” the suit says.

“As a result, until as late as 2025, the Ordinance will impose significantly higher labor costs on small franchisees than on their non-franchised competitors,” the document continues. “During that period, small franchisees are placed at an unfair competitive disadvantage.”

Murray defended the law, pointing out that it started when fast-food workers walked off the job. He said that restaurant franchise owners have corporate support for advertising, food supplies and menu development.

...

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nation...611-story.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Th'Pusher

Oh. That's total taxes and fees. Not the living wage surcharge which is what the point of the image of the receipt.

---

Yep.

Everything adds up.

down here minimum wage for adult now is 18-19bucks....lmao america still around 15?

Does anyone in SA actually pay minimum wage? Don't most fast food places start around $10? I know I hire part time laborers sometimes and pay them $12 an hour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TDMVPDPOY

down here minimum wage for adult now is 18-19bucks....lmao america still around 15?

---

Seattle is UNIQUE at $15, Federal is $7.25, but some Dem states and Dem cities have local minimums higher.

Fed rate won't change due to Repugs protecting business profits and maintaining corporate welfare (taxpayers subsidize corporate employees needing assistance to live).

Raising the Minimum Wage to $10.10 Would Benefit 4.7 Million Moms

In honor of Mother’s Day, we thought it would be appropriate to point out a gift millions of moms would appreciate: an increase in the minimum wage. About 22 million moms are working in the United States today. Over one-fifth of all working moms would get a raise if we increased the minimum wage to $10.10. That’s 4.7 million moms and their families who would see an increase in wages with that modest minimum wage increase.

And, not to be left out, 11.6 percent, or 2.6 million, working dads would also see a raise if we increased the minimum wage. That’s over 7 million parents who would see an increase in wages.

http://www.epi.org/publication/raisi...t-4-7-million/

A Minimum Wage That Makes More Sense

Travel around this country a bit and, assuming your purchases are not confined to airports and big hotel chains, you will find that prices vary a great deal. Prices in New York State are 15 percent above the national average, while those in Arkansas are 12 percent below average. Housing is about twice as costly in Massachusetts as in Mississippi.

These estimates arrive courtesy of the Bureau of Economic Analysis’ regional price parities, or R.P.P.s. The much better known Consumer Price Index, or C.P.I., tells us how national prices change over time. The R.P.P.s tell us how prices differ at a particular time across the country.

I’ve been thinking about these R.P.P.s since I read a new paper by the economist Arindrajit Dube, an associate professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, on ways to incorporate price differences across states when setting state or local minimum wages.

It’s a worthy idea: Just a quick look at an R.P.P. chart suggests that the buying power of a uniform federal minimum wage varies greatly across the land.

Since price differences correlate with wage differences, a proposal to increase the federal minimum will affect a greater share of workers in states with lower prices.

For example, consider the proposal to increase the minimum wage to $10.10. When we adjust a national minimum wage of $10.10 for regional differences, these are the amounts you’d need to have the same buying power: $11.94 in Washington, D.C., and $11.40 in California, but only $8.90 in Alabama and $9.08 in Kansas.

And of course, prices vary within states as well. In the New York City area, it would take $12.34 to meet the national buying power of $10.10; upstate around Buffalo, you’d need only $9.47. In the Los Angeles area, it would take $11.94; go up north a bit to Bakersfield, where prices are closer to the national average, and it’s $9.83.

Ikea had this very notion in mind when it announced that it would raise the minimum wage of its employees. The hourly wage for each store will be based on the cost of living in that particular area, ranging from $8.69 to $13.22.

Because most workers’ wages are lower in states where prices are relatively low, a $10.10 minimum wage will tend to reach a lot more workers in Alabama than in Connecticut. According to an analysis by David Cooper at the Economic Policy Institute, the proposed federal increase would lift the pay of 24 percent of Alabama’s work force, but only 14 percent of Connecticut’s.

Some states and cities have already taken this matter into their own hands, setting their own minimum wages above the federal level to account for price and wage differences. (They have also done this because the federal minimum wage has become a political football that is often fumbled.)

At the current $7.25, the minimum wage is too low pretty much anywhere to provide working families much of an income (and, as I explain here, adults increasingly depend on the minimum wage to make ends meet). This year, 22 states have their own minimums, ranging from $7.40 in Michigan to $9.32 in the state of Washington. Seattle just agreed to take its minimum up to $15 on hour, though with a phase-in period of quite a few years.

Mr. Dube suggests two ways to set the minimum wage to account for this price and wage variation. One, set the minimum at half the state median wage. Why half? Why median? While any such choice would have an element of arbitrariness to it, in the 1960s and 1970s, when policy makers regularly attended to the national minimum wage, its average relative to the median was 48 percent. That’s one reason economic inequality didn’t grow much in those years. Internationally, the average minimum-to-median among countries tracked by the O.E.C.D. is also about 50 percent. “In contrast,” Mr. Dube writes, “the U.S. minimum wage now stands at 38 percent of the median wage, the third-lowest among O.E.C.D. countries after Estonia and the Czech Republic.”

How does this idea relate to R.P.P.s? As I noted, the correlation between state-level wages and prices is high, so benchmarking a state’s minimum wage to its median is one way to account for regional price differences.

But a more direct way is to simply take half the national median, $9.75 in 2014, according to Mr. Dube, and adjust it for R.P.P.s.

Since median wages vary a lot more than prices across states, I tend to think that this recommends the R.P.P. To me, it’s (slightly) more attractive to adjust minimum wages for price differences/buying power than for relative wages.

But there’s a larger point here. Economists endlessly and fruitlessly argue about whether the impact of minimum wages on jobs is very small or zero. Policy makers who most resist minimum wage increases tend to be ones representing the interests of states with lower prices and wages. To their credit, many states and even some cities are ignoring this unhelpful debate and taking action to raise the pay of their low-wage work force, push back a bit on inequality, and work around Washington’s dysfunction. If adjustments for local wages and prices makes this go down easier, so much the better.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/28...om=upshot&_r=0

On the one hand Conservatives told us that if the minimum wage gets raised it hurts job growth.

As CEPR noted in March and April posts, economists at Goldman Sachs conducted a simple evaluation of the impact of these state minimum-wage increases. GS compared the employment change between December and January in the 13 states where the minimum wage increased with the changes in the remainder of the states.

The GS analysis found that the states where the minimum wage went up had faster employment growth than the states where the minimum wage remained at its 2013 level.

Continuing the timeless level of inaccuracy the right-wing has had in America, from how awesome Iraq would be to how Americans will always hate soccer, a really really high rate of being wrong.

But hey, when it works it works, even though it plainly does not actually work.

The Great Recession and Not-So-Great Recovery have been bad news for most Americans, but some people have suffered more than others. We call those people “Southerners.”

North Carolina and a handful of other Southern U.S. states saw the biggest increases in the number of people living in what are known as “poverty areas” between 2000 and 2010, according to a new Census Bureau report.

The GOP also knows this as “their base”, their gullible, gullible base.

http://firedoglake.com/2014/07/07/fu...l-that-works/#

States with Higher Minimum Wage Boast Faster Job Growth


Workers in New York City rally to raise the minimum wage. (Photo: All-nite Images/ cc/ Flickr)Adding fuel to the growing populist call for a higher minimum wage and throwing water on the conservative argument that fair pay will threaten employment, new data released Friday shows that states with higher wages are gaining more jobs.

According to an Associated Press analysis of the Labor Department's latest hiring statistics, in the 13 states that raised their minimum wage at the beginning of 2014, the number of jobs grew an average of 0.85 percent from January through June—compared with just 0.61 percent in the remaining states.
"It raises serious questions about the claims that a raise in the minimum wage is a jobs disaster," said John Schmitt, a senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research. Schmitt added that although the data "isn't definitive," is is "probably a reasonable first cut at what's going on."

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/07/19-1

iow, Repugs/VRWC ideology of War on Employees is 100% WRONG, as Repugs/VRWC always is about the 99% and almost everything.

http://seattletimes.com/html/busines...oymentxml.html

Quote:

---

Teen-employment rate sharply down in Seattle area, study says

A Brookings Institution study paints a darkening jobs picture for American youth in the late-teen years. Over the past dozen years, teen-employment rates have plunged nationwide, with the Seattle area seeing one of the steepest declines.

Cleia Kim spent the winter looking for work, applying to dozens of jobs and getting only a handful of callbacks.

The 18-year-old wants a job to support herself through college. But the biggest barrier has been her limited work experience.

“They usually want one or two years of experience,” said Kim, who graduated last year from Bellevue High School. “It’s hard to get that when you’re just out of high school. I feel like there should be more opportunities for young people, even if it’s something small.”

...

“They’re competing with adults who have years of seniority on them,” she said. “You might have college graduates working as waiters or coffee baristas, even though you don’t need a college degree to do that.”

The study’s time span roughly coincides with Washington’s enactment years ago of a minimum wage above the federally mandated level, so it could add fodder to an already intense debate over a $15 wage floor in Seattle.

---

I'm sure this will help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by angrydude

http://seattletimes.com/html/busines...oymentxml.html

I'm sure this will help.

---

13 states, not only WA, in the study.

So far totally refutes the Repug LIE, surprise!, that raising the minimum wage increases unemployment.

The "fodder", the fake controversy, is pure bullshit from the Repugs.

Alan Grayson To Force Republicans On The Record On Minimum Wage

Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) proposed an amendment to a House spending bill Tuesday that would raise the minimum wage for federal government workers. A roll call vote on the amendment, scheduled Wednesday, will force Republicans to go on the record opposing a living wage for federal employees.

Grayson pitched a minimum wage of $10.10 an hour for federal employees, which he said was "still a very modest amount." He said the U.S. government should set an example for business owners. The current federal minimum wage is $7.25.

"This amendment would end the federal government's practice of paying poverty wages to its workers, and hopefully set an example for the private sector to stop paying poverty wages to its workers," Grayson said on the House floor.

The amendment would remove the lowest pay grades for federal workers, forcing them into higher pay categories.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...ml?cps=gravity

http://www.legistorm.com/member_of_c..._salaries.html

McDonalds Loses Ability To Shield Itself From Worker Lawsuits


In a ruling that raises the stakes for numerous fast food worker efforts, the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) top lawyer said on Tuesday that McDonald’s Corp. is responsible for the actions of the owner-operator franchisees who run the vast majority of its stores.

The arrangements McDonald’s makes with its franchisees have long been understood to insulate the corporation from worker lawsuits. Because the buck stopped with individual owner-managers rather than with at the company’s Illinois headquarters, worker lawsuits and unionization efforts were limited in scope and unable to seek remedies from the company’s $5.6 billion in annual corporate profits.

Workers have repeatedly challenged that interpretation of the franchisee relationships, most recently in a slew of class-action wage theft lawsuits this spring. Those cases centered on a computer system installed by McDonald’s at franchisee stores that compares labor costs to money coming in in real-time, encouraging managers to fiddle with workers hours and timesheets as necessary to keep that expenses ratio as low as possible at all times.

The suits named both franchisees and McDonald’s itself, and workers and attorneys were optimistic that the legal challenges would poke holes in the company’s claims to legal indemnity. Tuesday’s ruling did just that, though it stemmed from separate, older claims involving workers who had attempted to unionize and were fired in retaliation.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/201...nchise-ruling/