News

Done Deal?

The Mayor's $15-Minimum-Wage Legislation Is "a House of Cards," and That May Be Its Greatest Strength

Done Deal?

If there's one thing Mayor Ed Murray can learn from his minimum-wage dealings, it may be to rethink the way he sets deadlines. At a Friday, May 9, media availability, the mayor told a room of reporters that the landmark minimum-wage legislation his office is drafting based on an advisory committee's agreement "will be in [the city council's] hands by 2:30 this afternoon." By the time The Stranger went to press on Tuesday, May 13, the legislation still hadn't made an appearance.

Murray spokesman Jeff Reading said via e-mail that staffers had worked through the weekend and were still "working hard to finalize" the bill on Monday—and, that while "the mayor mentioned 2:30 p.m. on Friday... I think calling it a 'deadline' isn't quite accurate."

Anyone closely watching Seattle's minimum-wage process may notice a pattern here. Murray also missed his self-imposed deadline on getting the agreement out of his committee last month, going so far as to hold a deal-announcing press conference at which he had to announce that there simply wasn't a deal yet.

But whatever the precise time frame, legislation is heading for council desks, and the mayor has said he expects to have "at least five sponsors" for the bill (a majority of the nine-person council). Council members are now carefully positioning themselves for a debate that doesn't have much, well, room for debate. The legislation that the mayor hands down will essentially have already been decided on by his 24-member advisory committee, in a delicate compromise that could be unraveled completely by a single council amendment. So what are city council members supposed to do as their due diligence? Amend the font it's printed in? Or try to change the fundamentals and risk dismantling the deal?

Here's what we know so far:

• The council is afraid.

On the matter of how precarious this deal really is, Council Member Jean Godden says it best. Asked if the council would consider substantively amending the mayor's legislation, Godden replied in the negative. "Unless we want the thing to crash down like a house of cards," she told me. Council Member Sally Clark adds her own metaphor, saying that in this deal, "there are big strings and there are little strings. So if you pull on a big string, you have to start thinking about if you'll have to remake an entire compromise." But that leaves a lot of room for tampering, depending on what you call a "little string." (For the record, The Stranger still prefers to call this deal a "Jenga game.")

• Still, there's room to legislate.

Council Member Mike O'Brien says he sees two areas the council can still negotiate "without unraveling the deal." First is the enforcement of a minimum-wage law, a place where Council Member Nick Licata is also hanging his hat. Licata has long hoped to create a city office of labor standards enforcement, based on San Francisco's model, that would be adequately funded and staffed to make sure that this complicated law, along with other city labor laws, enjoys better (and more proactive) enforcement than the abysmal enforcement the city currently musters.

The other area, says O'Brien, involves measuring the effects of the law after its passage. Throughout this debate, the council has relied on current data surrounding other minimum-wage laws, O'Brien says, so "it would be great for the City of Seattle to be adding to that body of evidence." He hopes the city can partner with an educational institution like the University of Washington.

Clark, who heads the council's minimum-wage committee, says that what date the law goes into effect is also on the table. And she goes a step further. While a "training wage," Clark says, is a "really loaded phrase," she doesn't rule one out. Training wages can mean anything from a lower wage for a short period at the beginning of employment, which is what Clark is talking about (with the goal of getting low-skill employees into jobs, she says), to a permanent lower wage for certain classes of employees. Calling the debate a "minefield," she says she doesn't support anything that "institutionalizes a substandard minimum wage."

• What's a "deal," anyway?

In terms of outside groups exerting influence, the labor-side backers of the mayor's minimum-wage deal appear to be in lockstep. But the business side seems to be hedging—and hard. A member of the mayor's committee who had reportedly signed off on the deal, restaurant owner David Meinert, recently sent a letter to council members saying he "only agreed to 'tentatively' support the proposal," and that he thinks core components of the plan, like phasing out a tip and benefit credit and not including a training wage, are "a big mistake." Asked for comment, Meinert says he's "not actively lobbying the city council to make changes to the proposal," just explaining his position. But he adds that he "didn't vote 'yes'" on the committee proposal, since "there was no official 'vote' that I was aware of."

Meanwhile, the business coalition OneSeattle met after the proposal's announcement, and a source who attended the meeting reports that they were drafting their own minimum-wage initiative, potentially including things like a training wage and the permanent inclusion of a tip and benefit credit. OneSeattle spokesman Alex Fryer says the idea that they might run an initiative is "nothing new," since his organization has "said for weeks that that's a possibility, and it remains a possibility." (It's also a mirror image of the strategy the 15 Now folks are pursuing.) At the same meeting, another member of OneSeattle reportedly discussed potential litigation with the city to define the cutoff between large and small businesses, which are treated differently under this proposal. Fryer, for his part, says, "I don't remember anyone mentioning litigation, [but] I could've missed it." recommended

 

Comments (9) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Nick CapHill 1
Having Seattle raise the minimum wage to the highest level in US history is an experiment on our town.

This is not only the highest minimum wage in US history, but quite possibly the world. See article (http://www.slate.com/articles/business/m…).

I hope it all falls like a house of cards. I dont like experiments on my city.
Posted by Nick CapHill http://thestranger.com on May 14, 2014 at 3:11 PM · Report this
2
Yes, Nic, you might have to pay a little more for coffee and booze in your trendy little neighborhood, god forbid people make a living wage... How much do you par your rent boy?
Posted by Arthur Zifferelli on May 14, 2014 at 6:52 PM · Report this
melvidaloca 3
Every time someone comes out and days they are concerned about the impact $15 hr will have on everyone, or question the wisdom of this plan being the most effective way if dealing with poverty people like Arthur villianize them. If you don't blindly agree you are clearly a shitty person, who must also be making tons of money. It is beyond weird to have supported many of the movements to make life better for everyone including the underprivileged, only to be judged, heckled, and even called a troll just for questioning something that is considered by many to be radical, and possibly reckless. It's ugly business.
Posted by melvidaloca on May 15, 2014 at 9:30 PM · Report this
4
@2 Certainly folks in the middle class who won't be getting raises in this proposal don't need any sympathy from folks making MW. But it's not like a lot of people in the middle can or will pay more for such things, at least not without cutting back someplace else. When my rent increase outpaced my raise, I cut back spending on other things. Raise the price of daycare, and someone for whom daycare is essential will cut back on something else - or find a cheaper alternative, which for many things will be as easy and as close as the city limits.

The magnitude of the proposed MW increase will only succeed if the spenders can and will absorb it. If they don't, traffic in the shops and restaurants will go down, they'll need to employ fewer people. That'll ultimately be the trade-off.

And that is the gamble here. It'll be interesting to see how it ultimately plays out. But I'll be one who won't be paying a little more - that's outside of my budget.

Posted by madawa on May 16, 2014 at 5:44 PM · Report this
5
Due the lack of federal and state enforcement for illegals working off the books--this law is useless. It will incentivize businesses hiring illegals. Good job!
Posted by Superawesome on May 19, 2014 at 11:02 AM · Report this
6
With the exception of my fellow Leftist - Seattle Councilwoman Kshama Sawant - all the actors at City Hall are weathervane/opportunists. Expect a ballot within months. --- http://www.15now.org
Posted by 5th Columnist on May 19, 2014 at 11:26 AM · Report this
7
Where do the so-called "unions" on this bourgie plan? Affordable-shelter advocates? (like the WLIHA? The Tenants' Union of Washington State?).Hell, where does the SHA,the KCHA,Porchlight, and Plymouth Housing Group fall?NAACP?La Raza? Youth-advocacy groups?The VA? The National Urban League? Students'-rights groups?All those groups should be championing a livable wage! (if they are not).
Posted by 5th Columnist on May 19, 2014 at 11:30 AM · Report this
Nick CapHill 8
@7

Opportunists aligned with the bourgeoisie?

No. Silly communist. Perhaps, like the citizens of Switzerland, they know that loosing opportunity to work and gain skills is exactly what keeps people in poverty.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/19/busine…

Best NYT quote, “If the initiative had been accepted, it would have led to workplace losses, especially in rural areas where less-qualified people have a harder time finding jobs. The best remedy against poverty is work.”
Posted by Nick CapHill http://thestranger.com on May 19, 2014 at 4:28 PM · Report this
9
The proposal on the table is a "House of Crap".

Sadly, it appears neither the Mayor, nor the City Council understands that the minimum wage has nothing whatsoever to do with a "living wage".

A min wage is a "starting wage"!

It is a minimum pay level or for lack of a better word ...a safety net, so low skill, non experienced workers...many times minorities or immigrants can get a job and from there, gain experience, skills and advance to earn more.

Employers will be disinclined to hire unskilled labor or first time-no work experience labor at these impractical government legislated rates.

So I say to the City Council & the Mayor, while it is a great political sound bite, feel good thing, it is very poor economic policy and both of you should have a plan to deal with all the unemployed low skill workers who will be closed out of the market.

Maybe the Mayor's plan to beef up the police for the pending crime wave is a good one.

I do hope the Washington State Legislature steps in and establishes a STATE WIDE MIN. WAGE which will quash all this nonsense.

In some way, Seattle is beating up on its poorer adjoining cities by stealing all the good workers and in turn by harsh, raw, economic reality will be exporting its poor to say Renton, Tukwila or Shoreline as there will be no jobs available for them in Seattle.

This is indeed a cruel twist of fate for such a liberally minded, socially do good town.


Posted by mistral on May 20, 2014 at 10:00 AM · Report this

Add a comment