ARS on Twitter
RSS
It’s all about wages
Posted by Raven on July 27th, 2006
Chicago wants larger employers to pay it’s workers more money than other employers.
CHICAGO, Illinois (AP) — Brushing aside warnings from Wal-Mart Stores Inc., City Council approved an ordinance Wednesday that makes Chicago the biggest city in the nation to require big-box retailers to pay a “living wage.”
“It’s trying to get the largest companies in America to pay decent wages,” said council member Toni Preckwinkle.
The ordinance passed, 35-14, after three hours of impassioned debate.
The measure requires retailers with more than $1 billion in annual sales and stores of at least 90,000 square feet to pay workers at least $10 an hour in wages plus $3 an hour in fringe benefits by mid-2010. The current minimum wage in Illinois is $6.50 an hour and the federal minimum is $5.15.
What is a “living wage”? I suppose this would be different for every city, town, region, state. Who is defining this? Does it mean making enough money to support everyone’s lifestyle? Or just enough money to support a very basic lifestyle? If so, who is defining that? The questions and battles could go on forever.
In New Hampshire, they recently debated the issue:
With the state’s low unemployment rate and thriving economy, even the youngest teenagers are earning more than the $5.15 federal and state minimum wage this summer.
So how much of an impact would raising the minimum wage have in New Hampshire, when very few workers, even in traditionally low-paying jobs, are making that rate?
According to New Hampshire Employment Security, approximately 16,000 workers out of a statewide labor force of 726,400 — that’s around two percent — make $5.15 an hour or below. And many of those work in “tipped positions,” such as waiters/waitresses, who by law only have to be paid 45 percent of the minimum hourly rate.
Anita Josten, a research analyst with the Economic Labor Market Information Bureau at DES, said a recent state survey of employers found the average hourly pay for retail cashiers in Salem is $6.85. Up north, a cashier will earn $6.16 an hour.
Another traditionally low-paying job is food preparation. In the North Country, a food service worker will make $5.79 on average. In Salem and Manchester, he’ll make $7.45 and $7.55, respectively, according to NHES.
Not to shabby- these wages that go to unskilled people, mostly high school kids working their first jobs.
Still, as Congress appears poised to take up minimum wage legislation before mid-term elections this fall, several business owners tell the Sunday News they prefer to let the market define what’s a reasonable wage. It’s a system they say is working in New Hampshire.
Among them is Ron Evans, the owner/operator of three McDonald’s restaurants in Manchester.
At Evans’ restaurants, even 14-year-olds start at just over the minimum wage. And adult managers can make $12 an hour.
“With unemployment being as low as it is in the state, it’s a challenge for us to find and keep good employees,” Evans said. “And if we’re not willing to pay them more than $5.15 an hour, they’re not going to stay with us very long.”
“I think it’s a balancing act, between should you let the wage be what the market will require, or should you force a wage that could have a damaging influence,” he told the Sunday News. “I personally come down on the side of letting the market tell you how much you should have to pay people, with a fair bottom end to it, whatever that bottom end should be.”
I find many places here in NH do pay more than minimun wage. They have to in order to keep help. But they don’t go overboard with pay either. And no business is required to pay a certain amount. The pay rates are based on what the competition pays and what the prevailing wages of similar positions are…it’s pretty simple.
Arguments for raising wages tend to lean towards claims that people use the welfare systems when they work at lower paying jobs. This drains local communties and states…I just don’t see this all that often. I really don’t. And I have a lot of friends who work at Wal Marts and Target stores and the like. It seems to me that it’s better to have a JOB, than to not. When they get going about mandating wages and benefits, things like this happen:
Wal-Mart spokesman John Bisio said earlier that if the measure passed, “We’d redirect our focus on our suburban strategy and see how we could better serve our city of Chicago residents from suburban Chicagoland.”
Some aldermen also warned that Target Corp. might rethink its presence in the city — though the Minneapolis-based company has not discussed the issue.
“It’s going to hurt our economy,” said Alderman Bernard Stone, who voted against the measure.
Business stay out of town. They set up shop elsewhere. They close down…and who looses out? The workers. Who were making money- no, not the best money- but money nonetheless. Unskilled workers should stop demanding high wages. They should seek out some education to earn better wages and live a better life. Unions and city councils should keep their economy in mind when they write ordinaces like this one.
July 27th, 2006 at 7:47 pm
At least Maryland got slapped down in its effort to “lay a hurtin’” on WalMart be requiring them to spend at least 8% of its payroll in Maryland on health care for its employees.
The groups pushing for such a measure didn’t work for WalMart. In fact, the biggest proponent for the since struck down law was organized labor.
The law, which was supposed to affect only employers with more than 10,000 employees in the state – meaning it was aimed WalMart and only WalMart – caused WalMart to reconsider opening a large distribution center in one of Maryland’s poorer counties. About 800 new jobs went “Poof” because of this kind of thinking.
I had hoped that Chicago would be smarter…but they proved me wrong. How many of those future ex-amployees of WalMart in Chicago will end up on public assistance?
Talk about shooting one’s self in the foot!
July 27th, 2006 at 7:49 pm
Boy, my speeling and grammar really suck tonight. It must be the hayfever that’s knocking the poopies out of me today.
July 29th, 2006 at 2:18 pm
If you support minimum wage increases, then you are pro-middle class. If you do not support them, you are pro-upper class.
Most of the information presented in the above article that attempts to explain why minumum wage is fine how it is was generated by rich, wealthy companies that make huge profits from cheap labor.
July 29th, 2006 at 7:48 pm
We are not a socialist country, Mr. Reason. If you own a business, whether it’s a small mom & pop operation or a multibillion dollar dynamo, it is up to you to pay what you feel a specific job is worth. It is not the government’s concern, nor is it up to a vote by “the people”.
If an employer is not willing or able to pay you what you think he should, you always have the option of looking elsewhere for work.
Oh, yeah, did I say that the U.S. isn’t a socialist country?
July 29th, 2006 at 9:52 pm
Well Seth- remember the Democrats and leftist have an identity crisis. They serisouly believe it is the job of American business to over pay employees- to pay unskilled workers ridiculously high wages so the workers never have a need to better themselves…like go to college and get a degree AND…lo and behold…earn good above average money- above poverty levels!!!