Reply With Quote
By 2021, $15 won't be $15.
Why not index to inflation immediately?
http://qz.com/205208/the-city-of-sea...-in-the-world/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 ins uted 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.
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.
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.
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!
Well, the big experiment will be starting.
Link in pic:
Text of bill:
http://murray.seattle.gov/wp-content...-Wage-2014.pdf
Because everyone knows the downward sloping demand curve is a myth.
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)
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 ?
Go ahead and call the s liars. The Northwest Asian Weekly is obviously in the bag for the GOP.
waitress/cleaning lady working minimum wage had a health insurance, paid vacation, and 401K ?
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/C...?tab=video&c=y
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.
Wow.
About 25.7% total over retail.
Hmm? Explain your math.
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 Cons utions, 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 compe ors,” the do ent continues. “During that period, small franchisees are placed at an unfair compe ive 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
Yep.
Everything adds up.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
