Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Very diplomatic; Friedman and Meinert would have used the f-word.
OK, where's that proposal? Where's the law, the tax, collection and enforcement system? Lost in committee? Hiding up your backside? Put a real proposal out there, write the bill and campaign the council to pass it.
Or is that too much like real work?
Talking does not = legislating. Write the bill.
FYI: Note her Compromise is the same as 15now's Ballot initiative. So she basically said Fuck you to Mike Klotz and Small business owners. Join forces with me and go "Bankrupt" in our efforts to oust BIG Business cause that will show them..LOL
So if our local cafe's raise prices & SBUCKs doesnt thats great for small business how? If the local Deli shutters their doors that is Bad for Subway why?
At least be honest that this is an attempt to get all workers above $15 and you dont give a fuck about Small business. Big Business Operations can scale labor, change suppliers & automate. How are you going to hurt them exactly with our help.
I visualize a charicature picture of Amazon and Walmart Ceo's laughing at Sawant as she gives poison to Small business owners telling them it will cure what ails them.
@troll. What a profound ignorance of irony you have. Why don't you shut the fuck up, get elected and pass the bill yourself? But you won't. You'll just make anonymous comments on Slog. That'll fucking compel Sawant to follow your agenda. We applaud you for your civic participation. You'll sure show us with your initiative, connections and diplomacy.
Um, maybe this change in the focus of Council Member Sawant's response is because the person to whom she's responding ISN'T James McNerney, Jr.?
And if you ARE "a real live employer" why aren't you, oh I don't know, supervising your employees right now instead of bloviating on a blog?
Of course if she did spend her time proposing dead-on-arrival bills that have zero support from any of the other eight council members or the mayor, then the haters would be fuming that she's wasting time tilting at windmills and not serving her constituents working on things that are actually possible.
Concern troll is concerned.
If, as Sawant proposes, we phase in the $15 wage for small businesses and service organizations but make it immediate for big businesses, doesn't that mean that the more talented low-wage workers will gravitate to the big-business jobs? Who is going to make less money for three years working for a small business when they can be making up to 36% more by working for a larger business?
Naturally, this will mean that the more skilled workers move away from the small businesses. The problem is that a small business with <10 employees often needs those employees to be more agile and able to wear multiple hats (i.e., they need the more-skilled low-wage workers).
Outside of the reply, "Well, then, pay them more!" which completely ignores the reality that the phase-in is designed to address, how are small businesses expected to deal with that migration of skilled workers to the larger companies? Wouldn't a phase-in for ALL businesses make more sense for small businesses?
He just told Billy to mow a little closer to the rhododendron, so his employee has been supervised enough until his mom call him to dinner.
Stilettov you apparently do not see the irony in this whole article. Somehow Small business owners will benefit from a m.w hike while Big Business will not?
That is a tough selling point to make & disingenuous. As for having any influence i would say that if there is any merit to this article it would be Business owners are at the "Table" and have already pushed Sawant toward 3 years.
By my own admonition that is a concession. But its basically moving the gun from being pointed at my head to my knee. So yes..progress is being made!!But not enough and the voters will agree.
As for you socialist trolls.Perhaps you can tell me how this MW increase does not actually promote labor force rotation ie; Discrimination against low skilled workers and minorities. Thats just what we need more white males in Seattle.
Lot's of people! Big businesses have been able to offer more to their employees since the dawn of capitalism, and yet small businesses are often harder to get a job with because the culture and environment is often so much more rewarding.
Your a winner & real bright shining light of democracy. Gotta hand it to you, you keep taking abuse over and over and over again and come back for more. Its good to see your position is evolving with Kshama's over the past few weeks.
Pretty sure disregard for the Seattle Process was quite explicitly part of her platform. Voters who were satisfied with the venerable Process all went for Conlin, not Sawant. Turning into Richard Conlin after taking office would be a slap in the face to her supporters. You dance with the one that brung ya.
Another reading comprehension failure. They have free classes you can sign up for, you know. Reading is fundamental, don't you know?
I'm for a minimum wage increase, but people should also know that this movement has NOTHING to do with Seattle, it's the basis for a national campaign. This is great, but it cannot be a simple and flat increase. Without Total Compensation, this minimum wage increase is a threat to our entire restaurant and bar industry, which is one of the leading markets in the country.
You don't even have the Mayor's support for total compensation. I think it's dead, Jim.
"My God people, can you imagine how horrible a Minimum Wage/8 hour work day/5 day work week/Social Security/child labor/workplace safety/mandatory overtime/(add your own - it's fun!) plan will be? Such a thing has NEVER been done before!"
Well, it's good to know she's lying about that proposal then.
Again, I'm for an increase, but not without total compensation
Washington raised the rate for tipped workers by over 85% in 1989, after I-518. Restaurants showed no sign of distress from this increase in wages. None.
So if you want to go on forever denying that there is any precedent for this increase, you can, but that's not true.
It's a free country. You can say the trickle down economics was a huge success and the middle class isn't disappearing. You can say things that people can see with their own eyes are false. Go ahead and keep saying it.
But when you ask again and again and again why rational people disagree, there's your answer. Your answer is that the tipped wage once jumped by over 85% and no harm was done. Ask again, and you'll get the same answer.
The other thing that's unprecedented: letting real wages fall so low for so long. That experiment failed and it's time to end it.
stupid communist should be run out the country.
There is a reason you dont make shit for a salary cthulhu - its because you are stupid fool.
In addition, the 67% is an increase ONLY if you are paying your workers minimum wage. If you are already paying 15.00, there will be no change. If you pay a variety of wages in that scale, you'll be somewhat affected.
If you pay your entire crew minimum wage, then you're going to see the most significant increase, and that's GOOD, because if you are running a business and paying all of your workers minimum wage, your business deserves to fail.
It only hurts if you're currently treating your workers like shit.
The reason you're heading straight into a buzzsaw when the voters go to the polls is your undisguised contempt for low wage workers. The real fun starts when the business owners in the anti-15Now campaign have their Mitt-Romney-47-percent-moment and they get caught on tape saying what they really think of minimum wage workers.
In short, thanks for the raise.
Honestly neither side knows how seattle voters will react. I will take my chances with the ballot. And the only contempt for low wage workers is coming from the white guy like you who has never employed or helped be in their life.
State Treasurer, PHD Economist & Democrat who is in favor of raising the minimum wage, Jim McIntire did a study on the effects of the last time Seattle had a large minimum wage increase back in 88/89 when I-518 passed. Of the 100000 who received wages, 11,700 jobs were eliminated because of the increase. Of the almost 12k jobs that were lost almost half were refilled in a couple years, but by older more experienced workers, meaning less opportunity for minority & unskilled workers. Again this study was done by someone who is in favor of raising the minimum wage, they are just being honest about the cost of it, unlike Sawant.
Also during the 3 years after the passage of I-518 Seattle experienced an 3 yr inflation rate of 17.9%, this is 4.6% higher than the national rate over the same period of time. Not to say that raising the minimum wage is the only reason for inflation, but there is a correlation between I-518 & the highest inflation rates Seattle has seen in 35 yrs.
I support raising the minimum wage, but if you look at recent Seattle history it will cost some jobs & cause some inflation.
Having the neighbor's boy mow your lawn two days a week does not make you an employer, and certainly not a "player". You fell for John McCain's "We're all Joe the Plumber" line.
It brought the tipped wage up to the national average non-tipped wage. Most the rest of the country kept a tipped wage, which today is still only $2.13/hr.
The reason it is the same situation is that it makes no difference to a Washington restaurant how much employees make in Waterloo, Iowa. All that matters to them is that their 1988 tipped employee payroll added up to X, and after 1991 it added up to 85% more than X. Today the same X is being increased by only 67%, not 85%.
Tipped employees are not their whole payroll, they weren't then and they aren't now. Yet then, they absorbed an 85% increase in that portion of their payroll that went to tipped employees.
Now you're here saying that in 2015, they can't absorb a much smaller 67% increase in the same portion of their payroll. They did it once, but now? What's changed?
And the 85% increase not only didn't drive the industry to bankruptcy, it didn't cause even a ripple. No detectable change at all. But now all of a sudden, for no known reason, a smaller increase in the same portion of their payroll will bankrupt them all.
Except big chains, who have some magic that allows them to defy gravity.
Not plausible. It would be plausible if you had data that showed getting rid of the tip penalty caused any detectable harm. Or any data that showed tip penalty state restaurants, employers, employees, customers, or any body, are better off than in Washington.
We've had no tip penalty for 26 years and everywhere you look, we appear to be better off than those states with a tip penalty.
And of course, nobody says how they're going to monitor and enforce this Seattle total compensation system. Wage theft is bad enough, but now you need a large auditing bureau to keep track of every employers compensation package. Expensive! Who will be taxed to pay for it? What city services will be cut to pay for it?
There will be fewer jobs inside Seattle with a $15/hr. minimum wage. There are jobs that do not make economic sense at $15/hr. or they can be replaced with automation or moved outside the city limits.
The impact will be on the young and the less educated. Those of you who have ever argued against things with a "disparate impact" should check yourselves now. This proposal is racist in the extreme.
I imagine there will be a number of service companies (i.e. janitorial) located in Shoreline, serving clients in Seattle. The Jack-in-the-Box ordering kiosk is going to be a standard item.
I'll have to go to Mountlake Terrace to get a Dick's Deluxe and a chocolate shake. What? You think a labor intensive burger joint like Dick's is going to survive in Seattle. Think again. Their well-known, very generous non-wage compensation package won't survive with a base labor rate at $15/hr. The increase will have to come from somewhere on the non-wage side. And those Dick's employees that are making between MW and $15/hr? They get a raise and lose their non-wage benefits, so they get a small raise, but their Federal taxes go up. What? you expect an employer to raise everyone's wages by $6/hr just because the MW got raised? Not likely.
The absolute # of dollars per hour made by an mw worker are meaningless. What matters is the cost of living for these people.
Case 1 - an mw worker makes $300 a week, and has $20 left over as discretionary income.
Case 2 - an mw worker makes $500 a week, and has $15 left over as discretionary income.
How exactly has the mw worker benefitted?
Every single commodity and service will increase in price, unless you think that "The market charges what the market will bear." is an incorrect axiom.
Guess what, it's an axiom because it's been proven true. Rent, food, etc - all are going to increase in rate to make this 15now agenda a zero net gain for mw workers - *at very best*.
We have yet to hear how simple market dynamics are not going to apply in this case as they have in every other case.
Please, can you at some point address the fact that it isn't the # of dollars made per hour that matters, but rather the purchasing power of whatever dollars are made which matters?
Please? Pretty please, with sprinkles?
Many of those workers were hired back over the next few years, but this is still not remotely close to the proposal we're facing today. No matter what the position, raising the minimum wage up to the national standard is a lot different than taking the highest minimum wage and attempting to increase it by 67%
Citation please, indeed. Thirty percent! That would be a bombshell. If only there were proof of these mass layoffs, you'd have something to make a case with. Maybe just hoping everyone will believe you without any fact-checking?
Maybe Seattle will stop sucking the air out of the room when it comes to jobs if Seattle widens the lead over the MW in the rest of the state and other areas of the US.
Sshhhh! Stop that now.... we're not supposed to talk about that uncomfortable little fact.
The reason nobody gets the satire is that so few Seattleites have ever heard of Dori Monson.
Really? VAST body of evidence demonstrates?
San Jose, fast food stats after a 30% increase?
WA mincrease for tipped employees '89?
I am not reassured by her words here.
Just because you didn't look for evidence doesn't mean there isn't any evidence. Here you go:
Study - Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment?:
"Economists have conducted hundreds of studies of the employment impact of the minimum wage. Summarizing those studies is a daunting task, but two recent meta-studies analyzing the research conducted since the early 1990s concludes that the minimum wage has little or no discernible effect on the employment prospects of low-wage workers."
Study - Earnings and Employment: The Effects of the Living Wage Ordinance in Santa Fe, New Mexico:
"The most controversial and hence interesting conclusion suggested by the analysis is that large businesses in the retail and accommodations and food services sectors increased both employee earnings and employment relative to large Albuquerque and small Santa Fe businesses after the LWO. This increase was somewhat lower for female and youth workers, though still an increase relative to large Albuquerque and small Santa Fe businesses. Certainly the data do not suggest that the increase in the minimum wage had any negative effect on these two industries or on earnings and the number of jobs as a whole."
Study - Minimum Wage Shocks, Employment Flows and Labor Market Frictions:
"Clearly, minimum wage policies substantially reduce turnover and increase job stability, even without affecting overall employment levels for highly affected groups, such as teens. An important proportion of this reduced turnover seems to occur by reducing job-to-job transitions, indicating the presence of frictional wage dispersion. The likely reduction in flows to unemployment suggests the minimum wage also affects firm decisions to lay off workers and search anew, versus retain an existing match."
Study - Minimum Wage Channels of Adjustment:
"Further, our study does not find evidence of clear-cut employment losses – even over three years and a 41% increase in the MW."
If you're truly concerned about increasing the minimum, please read these studies.
* People deserve to work and be in poverty because business owners have unsustainable business models.
* If you wave your hands, studies can be ignored.
* Washington State's multi-year experiment in having the highest or among the highest minimum wage in the country in the face of a terrible economy counts for nothing.
* People keep citing a 67% raise when even the complaining business owners note that many of their employees make well above Washington minimum wage, and thus the disparity will be much smaller or very small.
And nobody seems to mention the health-care subsidies which boost the real take-home wages of many workers and could allow businesses to drop healthcare coverage in some cases while still allowing their employees to come out far ahead (with portable health insurance instead of the expensive COBRA post-employment coverage), thus freeing cash for increasing wages.
I've totally read all of those.
Cool. So you forgot to list them, then?
Don't forget about these:
"Over 650 economists, including five Nobel Prize winners and six past presidents of the American Economics Association, recently signed a statement stating that federal and state minimum wage increases 'can significantly improve the lives of low-income workers and their families, without the adverse effects that critics have claimed.'"
It's disingenuous to claim that there isn't significant evidence showing minimal negative effects in employment when raising the minimum wage. I hope this information can finally reassure you.