http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/05/01/3433227/seattle-15-dollar-minimum-wage/

Seattle will raise its minimum wage to $15 an hour over the coming years under a deal brokered by Mayor Ed Murray and blessed by labor and business groups alike, city leaders announced Thursday afternoon.

The new pay floor will phase in at different speeds for businesses of different sizes, but all employers will have to meet the $15 minimum wage by the end of the decade. Businesses with more than 500 employees nationwide will have a three-year phase-in period, while smaller employers get five years to ratchet up their payscales.

After reaching $15 an hour, the city’s minimum wage will automatically climb by 2.4 percent each year regardless of the rate of inflation. Even among states with relatively strong minimum wage laws, automatic increases are uncommon. Thursday’s deal will make Seattle the national leader on municipal minimum wage laws. Washington currently has the highest pay floor of any state at $9.32 per hour.

The deal was a long time coming, with Murray first indicating he wanted to establish a $15 floor back in September during the mayoral campaign. Murray created the 24-member advisory group that crafted the compromise package back in December, and the group of local business owners, restaurateurs, and labor leaders has been grinding toward an agreement for the past four months.

Approval from restaurant owners is especially noteworthy given the deal’s provisions for tipped workers. Tips can only be counted toward worker minimum pay for the next five years. After that, the separate minimum hourly pay rates for tipped and non-tipped workers will disappear, and all employees citywide will have to be paid $15 hourly or more.

An activist coalition called 15 Now led by the lone socialist member of the City Council, Kshama Sawant, has pledged to put an immediate wage hike before city voters in November if the deal falls short of the group’s goals. Another coalition, 15 For Seattle, issued a press release Thursday saying that “many of the coalitions 100+ progressive members have already endorsed” the deal but that others “are taking the Mayor’s proposal back to their organizations for review and approval.” Sawant’s ballot initiative would let employers with fewer than 250 workers phase in higher wages over three years but impose the $15 rate immediately for larger businesses.

Sawant is one of two members of the working group who is opposing the deal announced Thursday, according to a source close to the negotiations. The other is Craig Dawson, the owner of a payments processing company called Retail Lockbox. The head of the city’s Chamber of Commerce is abstaining. But the 21 votes in favor include representatives from two separate chapters of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) chapter, and the MLK Labor Council, as well as local hotel owners, restaurant owners, a pair of Councilmen, and the venture capitalist Nick Hanauer, who has made a name for himself in recent years as a wealthy champion of economic policies that focus on the middle class rather than on business owners and the wealthy.

There are 102,000 workers in Seattle currently earning less than $15 an hour. Raising those people’s wages will put about half a billion extra dollars of spending money into Seattle workers’ pockets. As SEIU 775 president and coalition co-chair David Rolf said in a statement Thursday, the deal “will pump nearly $500 million into Washington’s economy, proving that a higher minimum wage fuels business and job growth.”


And I'll submit ....on the same day Seattle McDonald's announces it's new Dollar Menu:
Kethcup, Salt, Napkin, a Straw, & Receipt.

While great for workers trying to make ends meet in expensive place to live, I cant help but think that this will make a lot of potential business owners think twice about opening up shop in Seattle.

your thoughts?

After reaching $15 an hour, the city’s minimum wage will automatically climb by 2.4 percent each year regardless of the rate of inflation.


I would love to get a 2.4% increase every year regardless of inflation.

I coach HS basketball and calculated my "hourly" wage based on my contract salary and time spent....less than $8 an hour. But, HS coaches don't coach for the money anyway.

In an sick and twisted way, I'm kinda ok with this.

I'm totally for limited "design for experiments" test cases that prove something doesn't work. Bring it on. I have my "told you so's" all ready to go.

It's just a shame the test case will be in our own backyard and hit us in the wallet (and while reducing service, selection, quality and customer experience). I'd much prefer it was tested in LA or San Fran but I digress...

Politcal operatives are licking their chops as they invent new ways to put WA in the family of Red.

I could care less about Wal-Mart, Coscto and the like.

However, this is going to be tough for some of the small business owners....

Are you saying that Costco pays below $15 an hour. I can remember a few years ago at a shareholder meeting there was complaints that Costco paid to much per hour.

Nope, I am sure they pay well. What I was trying to say (very poorly) was that the larger companies will be able handle this much easier. I just feel the very small businesses will be the ones hurt the most.

An interesting aspect of this is the fact that there are quite a few State jobs with wages below $15 per hour. That suggests that there will need to be a wholesale revision of the State salary schedule, at least for positions located in Seattle. City of Seattle, and maybe even King County offices located in Seattle probably also have positions under the $15.

This won't solve any problems. It's a Pandora's box.

Which is exactly why I want it to happen. Theory only works in theory. Watch what happens. Design for experiment - prove it. It will be proven incorrect and the national stage can move forward. Margaret Thatcher.

Yeah - because politicians always fix things that are complete failures.




The War on Drugs and I had a little laugh about that one.

I know, I'm being a smart ass and that's the real risk you run. When it doesn't work, they'll say because it wasn't enough, so it should be $20.

If you ask me, this all comes down to the price of a gallon of gasoline, the ultimate weapon in the war on the middle class. Since the price of gas started going up, the cost of everything else has followed suit. Simple equation: when it costs more to transport goods, suppliers have to pass a lot of that cost down to their buyers (businesses, small and large). Most retail businesses make a small profit on their sales, so they can only eat so much of that cost without passing it on to their customers. This is especially true in the case of restaurants and other low margin businesses (the sort that typically pay minimum wage, because that's all they can afford). The true meaning of trickle down economics....

People that work for minimum wage have long been in a near survival mode, spending the vast majority of their earnings on bare essentials (rent, bills, food, and an occasional bottle of cheap booze or beer to wash down the misery). A notable commodity that fits in that essential category for most people is gasoline. A lot of that cost can be avoided in cities with good public transportation (Seattle's is pretty good), but for many, a car is a necessity to get to work, and even those who can ride a bus to work are subject to constantly rising costs for living essentials.

When I was cooking for a living, I worked a lot of near minimum wage jobs. This was in the mid-90s and early 2000s, when gas cost me an average of about $1.25/gallon. Even at that price, it was a significant expense, but it was bearable. I never had money to throw around, but I had what I needed most of the time, and when I didn't, I just took another part time job until I got back to even. Now that gas costs 3x as much or more, rents are up about 25%, and the cost of food has about doubled, while minimum wage has increased less than 50%, I can't imagine how the current minimum wage would allow a person to sustain even a minimal lifestyle. I think $15/hr. is probably about what it would take to stay fed, clothed, sheltered, and gassed up in Seattle these days, so from the worker's perspective, I think this makes sense.

Then, there is the small business owner's perspective, which is quite different indeed. I never felt like minimum wage was fair compensation for busting my a$$ in hot kitchens, often for 12 or more hours a day, but I fully understood, especially in the case of small, family-owned restaurants, that I was being paid as much as the business could afford to pay me while making modest (at best) profits. I also enjoyed the work most of the time, and that made it seem more worthwhile.

Anyway, the point is that while I think $15 is probably about right for minimum wage in Seattle, I realize that many businesses won't be able to pay it without either giving up their profits (which means going out of business) or raising their prices to a point at which they start losing customers, many of whom are scraping to get by themselves these days, and eventually are forced out of business. That all adds up to more bad news for the middle class, since a large percentage of the middle class has been small business owners all along, and they're steadily losing their ability to compete with big business in almost every major market.

Meanwhile, big oil corporations are enjoying record profits and conspiring with the rail tycoons to flood our seaports with oil and gas destined for points near and far, which will, by the laws of supply and demand, drive up the cost of fuel (and everything that depends on it to get to market) here at home, and traders on Wall Street are all laughing all the way to big banks (actually, most of those guys probably have enough sense not to do business with the big banks, but I had to write that for effect).

So who's the greater threat to small business and the middle class: a socialist city council member in Seattle who wants people to have enough money to sustain themselves (okay, maybe a little more than that), or corporate 'Merica and their government puppets?

Flea-
I totally respect your reply. It made me think about compensation within my own company, which varies widely by geographical location and is a relative factor in this conversation.

Where I work a Software Engineer in Seattle earns more than an Engineer in Atlanta ,New Jersey, or Dallas, but might earn less than and Engineer in San Francisco. They might all do the exact same job, but these differences of pay are by-design to match local cost of living standards & consequently the pay scales are loosely based upon cost of living norms in each area. Adjusting normalized pay to match the costs of living differences in that area is basic economics, and in some ways you can say from this perspective Seattle got it right.

In this day and age $15/hr is scraping by. I'm having a hard time figuring out why some are considering this an excessive wage.

If you have a car payment or student loans and pay rent, there will be almost no ability for someone to save or invest money. This is especially true in Seattle where the cost of living is very high. This would explain why a record number of people in their 20s are living with their parents.

The underlying issue here is people aren't concerned about workers or the general populace; they're concerned about business owners' profit.

Raising the minimum wage will simply decrease the number of those employed at those wages. The math is simple, and this economic "law" is undeniable.

So, SOME workers who haven't lost their jobs will benefit from this. Others will be harmed because instead of being paid low wages, they will be paid no wages.

IMO, this action will solve nothing. It will just move hardship from one person to another. You don't fix a sinking ship by putting a hole in the other side.

Not sure how this will all work out in the end...but one thing is for 100% certain...every time the naysayers have flipped their lid over some action that is going to ruin the economy and make the US a third world country they have been completely and utterly wrong.

Every single time, with every single labor law, with car mpg laws, with emissions laws, with pollution laws...every single time they have been wrong.

With that track record I have a hard time accepting that they are right this time.

Fish on...

Todd

Hunk's feelings are hurt now.

I got my first "job with a paycheck" in 1965 at the then minimum wage of $1.25/hr. In the run up on raising the minimum wage I read that if it had kept up with inflation, the minimum wage today would be $21/hr, not the $15 being sought. I haven't calculated it myself, so I don't know if that's true. However it does seem like the lowest paid workers have fallen behind when it comes to keeping up with the cost of living, in Seattle, and anywhere.

So here's a fun tidbit for you fellow middle-classers out there... If, indeed, the minimum wage in Seattle should be $15/hr., what's that tell you about your current wage (which reports show has gone up very little on average since the 1970s)? Not that I needed statistics to show me, but to me, it means my purchasing power has steadily decreased relative to the same rate of inflation that is driving this proposed increase in the minimum wage. It pisses me off, and if it doesn't have that effect on you, my guess is it just hasn't hit you yet.

Looks like the pitchers and catchers were cobbling each other's goop until FP spoilt the party with some sanity. I prefer the garlic growers study in California when they raised the minimum wage and forced an entire industry offshore. Now the garlic you eat is fertilized with some Chinese dudes feces. Ho li fuk! sum ting Wong!

It's not Politics, its Economics 101.

You know that a group of Costco shareholders was upset about the wages that Costco paid.

One thing is for damn sure...when the TeaBaggers have anything to say at all their track record is perfect...they are wrong 100% of the time.

When the right wing fruitcakes say something will ruin the economy, they, too, have a perfect track record of being wrong 100% of the time.

And lastly...when Hankster tells you about that vaunted economy that he "votes for", he shares the same record as the TeaBaggers and fruitcakes...

He is wrong 100% of the time.

Based on those perfect track records I would figure a few things...Hank and JG are wrong, again, and that this will work out great.

Fish on...

Todd

I run a 100 person biz outside Seattle (so we're not directly affected) but I sure find the arguments against this -- other than the "total compensation" ones for tipped workers -- to be hollow.

YES it will increase some labor costs, that's the point.

NO I don't care if this means fast food costs $0.50 more per item, we'd all be marginally better off if we ate less of it anyways.

NO I don't find the Wal-Mart/big box retailers complaints valid -- especially when the enterprises are generating such large corporate profits and employees are paid well below the poverty line.

The small biz case (which again, I'm a part of) is the emotional center of this, and it could have an impact on some. But maybe we should consider this in more abstraction -- there are 2 questions -- should there be ANY minimum wage? If yes, then is the current minimum wage CORRECT? If there's no credible argument that it's too high presently (and I sure don't know of any), then maybe it's worth considering seriously that it's in fact too low.

I would listen to you on this subject if had even one shred of credibility...the last several years have had what? Two quarters of negative GDP?

How many times have you voted "for the economy" by voting for a GOP candidate that will assure you negative profits, negative income growth, negative GDP growth, poorer stock market performance?

That's right...every time. And you'll do it again.

For the economy.

Fish on...

Todd

And though you are clearly just quoting FauxNews to get your "negative territory", you know that slowing of the growth is not really "negative", right?

"Negative" is how your last GOP President that you voted for..."On the Economy"...left it.

Minus 4%.

That's "negative"...and that's what you vote for, not me. It's what you've voted for since you were 18, and will presumably vote for until the day you die...you will vote...

"On the Economy"

...by voting for the party that almost invariably is terrible for every phase of the economy, and has been for decades...and you'll do it by voting against the party...

"On the Economy"

...that is almost invariably better for every single phase of the economy, and has been for decades.

On the Economy...you should never be allowed to discuss "On the Economy" at all.

Fish on...

Todd

No, to be clear, I am saying that you constantly vote in direct contravention of your purported beliefs, that you know you are voting in direct contravention of your purported beliefs, yet you will continue to do so because there is no other way to vote GOP and vote "For the Economy" at the same time...because in that world that the rest of of live in...the "Real World", voting for the party that is bad for every single aspect of the economy while claiming to vote "For the Economy" is also known as...

"Being Stupid"

Fish on...

Todd

Nope. Nobody all that close actually.

I understand the logic behind there being a certain pile of money out there and if you cut the pie pieces bigger there will be less pieces to go around...it's an attractive argument.

There's also the idea that people with more money...especially those who are making minimum wage...spend more money. That makes for bigger pies.

So far my only contention in this thread is to point out the incontrovertible fact that TeaBaggers, Naysayers, Hank, and JG have all managed to be 100% wrong with their constant doomsday predictions, so when the TeaBaggers, Naysayers, Hank, and JG all agree that this will ruin the economy and turn us into a Communist country...well, you can understand why I'd assume that they will all be 100% wrong again.

Sooner or later, I guess, if they make the exact same prediction over and over again, they'll eventually be right. Maybe this time will be the one.

But I doubt it.

Fish on...

Todd

P.S. If you are bored by being told that you are a total fuckin idiot for voting GOP "On the Economy" when every GOP administration has been nothing but a disaster for the economy in every single economic indicator for decades, there are a few ways you can be less bored about it.

One, stop doing it. It's the best way to not be called a fuckin idiot...stop acting like one.

Two, continue being an idiot...but stop coming on here and telling us about how you are voting GOP "For the Economy" when anyone with five minutes and Google can see that anyone doing that is a total fuckin idiot.

Those are your two options...somehow I think you'll choose Option Three, which is not only continue to defy all logic by voting GOP "On the Economy", but also come here and tell us how much of a fuckin idiot you are for doing so.

I've been told that a blind man can't see.

Apparently that is true?

First, listening to Dan is a good suggestion on many many topics.

That said, I find it interesting that Hank is willing to listen to economists on this topic, when he actively shuns the overwhelming opinions of climate scientists in their area of expertise.

Because this one feeds Hank's preconceived notions, plus FoxNews would agree with it. The other one goes against both.

Fish on...

Todd

I visited my buddy in San Diego recently. He is a doctor there. Over beers he was ranting about the future of this country based on his encounters with patients. He said that a lot of the people he sees from all walks of life are simply confrontational, argumentative, think they know everything, and think they can do no wrong. He said he feels a big part of his job is just dealing with people's baggage, and not health. He has trouble helping these people because they are so adrift in their own world where they are exemplary and everyone around them, including doctors they went to see, are idiots.

During this conversation we laughed because he was essentially describing the Republican Party and tea party attitude to the T. Attitude, it is what is wrong with America and it's politics.

Remember the whole, do unto others as you would have others do unto you thing? Seems like it was forgotten last century.

Cost of everything is up more than 45% in the last 10 years so let's inflate wages as well . It's been tried time and again and never worked so no reason not to try it again. There is a bigger issue in the economy and band aids won't fix it. Blaming Obama won't help , he is the exact incompetent fool the powers that be wanted sitting in the big chair. Everyone was appropriately distracted by either his race or natural origin so his lack of ability was unimportant. Let's double down on that and give the twat a shot in 16 because it's a woman's turn to be the engineer on the train running out of track that is the US. One thing is sure no one will take credit for their part when this whole [Bleeeeep!] house goes up in flames.

I don't know if Hank had a stroke or what, but using me to bolster his side of the argument may not be his best move.

Heysoose,

Dan, even a stopped clock is right twice a day,

We all probably had close to minimum wage jobs when we were young. Must of us figured out that hard work will get us to the higher wages we wanted.

When I was younger, we used to pay $30 an hour for a back hoe or bull dozer with a 2 hour minimum. The minimum wage was $3.85 an hour. I was paid $5.00. I remember spending a full day shoveling, because it was cheaper than the bulldozer. In this argument, the question I see is, when does the cost of labor cost or than the expense of mechanization? Almost all the grocery stores around here are going to self checkout centers. Loggers are going to self pickers (?) and laying off many of the workers. It is the same question Pol Pot tried to answer when he tried to go back to an agricultural bases society. How do we handle the loss of labor as productivity increases? How much do you pay the sign waver before you go to more expensive but more productive means of advertising?


On a different note, I think we have entered a unique society where the rich are using social means to maximize profits. Almost every restrictive law said to protect us, benefits someone. Mandatory insurance benefits the insurance company, mandatory seat belt laws do the same. Consumer protection laws often benefit those with the means to met them and limit entry into market for smaller companies. In my business, the industry keeps trying to rise the education requirements for entry, while exempting those already in the business. Limit competition = an increase your market share and increase in the cost for the product.
Want to increase demand, simply make everyone purchase it, from insurance to carbon monoxide detectors. My nephew wants to be a doctor, but could not get accepted into medical school, despite stellar grades in one of the toughest undergraduate programs around. Seems only a very small percentage get accepted to medical school and then upon graduating, some are denied residency. Yet all we know that there is a shortage of doctors, right?
It seems all of the economy is using the government to full fill the position of the Union. I loved listening to right wing radio scream about government intervention. I wonder who protects their radio waves? Would it be ok for me to build a tower next to theirs and drown out them out? If we don't like socialism, should we get rid of public roads? Schools? Police? What about the military or boarder patrol?
In then end it really gets down to deciding what is the best level of social intervention is needed. The answer to that seems to be controlled wholly by greed. On one side big business been able to pigeon hole the government to give them what they want, why trying desperately to keep others from getting the same. On the other side the Unions are trying to do the same. Everyone outside each protected group can easily see the problem, but individually we do not have the power, motivation, or means to combat them all. A major correction is needed as I believe it is getting out of control, in all areas.

Just like fishing, one has to pay attention to what's going on to be successful. The "media" distractions du jour overwhelm all of us, considering all the important things Kim K. is doing for the world at large....

Given that most everything in our modern world revolves around international banking and the USD as the reserve currency for same, let's look at a couple charts to get some context to present circumstances.

From it's inception, the USD has been subject to inflation as it historically approaches its ultimate value. One could say from the graph that the value of a buck is inversely proportional to the monetary base. The linked chart's timeline ended in 2009. Let's look at a more current graph that comes to us straight from the horse's mouth.

From this second graph, one could safely state that prior to 2008 inflation was tracking its historically steady as she goes path to USD = 0.00. After QE infinity that began in 2008, what happens to the USD in economic terms when the monetary base increases more than 4-fold in the blink of an international banker's eye?

Are you paying attention?

Exactly Driftin, and as wages remain low while prices continue to rise specifically due to inflation...guess who continues to win in the end. The Poor and middle class get squeezed harder and harder. I say [Bleeeeep!] the peripheral issues and consequences with raising the minimum wage and give it everyone nationwide. It's the only way the common person can possibly keep up with rising costs which they have no control over. Those that do have control and influence over rising costs due to inflation can eat the higher wages they'll be forced to pay, because ultimately they did this for, and to, themselves. But why rush? ... the 1% is making a killing paying low wages.

Most of us also know how to use Google for one minute to see that your "minimum wage" in 1971 would be the equivalent of about $22 an hour right now.

Let me guess, though...you had to walk uphill in the snow both ways to get to your minimum wage job, right?

Fish on...

Todd

The way Hank rages on about this, I'm guessing he must be making all of $9.36 an hour by now, and he doesn't want the burger flippers making more than he does.

How many Mexicans are you sharing your apartment with Hank?

Wow Hank, you must be making out like a Market Street hedge fund manager!

making fun of his living arrangements salmo? real mature from an 'expert'. maybe put the drink down for a bit.

Dark Side, fuckhead.

Cruzn99,

This is the dark side. Maturity has its place, but here it enjoys only a checkerboard pattern, at best. I'm ethically obligated to raze Hank about nearly everything here. I expect he'll let me know when it stops being funny.

Sg

go eat a cock cake since you love both.

Go back to the main board, Sally.

You aren't cut out to hang around here.

Where's the like button?

I can visualize it. A lovely celebration cake, placed on a low table with phallic candles alit, and does Dan want to blow them out, no, he chooses to push the table, with candles ablaze under the drapes.

Now, Dan is happy.

I don't think Dan S could resist not blowing the phallic candles.

Dans talks more about cock sucking than everyone combined , I think it's to throw a false trail . I don't see him as a cock sucker but more of a ball gargler or a ball washer/sniffer. Definitely need some cake shaped balls to tickle his fancy.

Aww. Your mangina still packed with sand?

Quit your fuckin' crying already you pussy and act like you're on the Dark Side. Either that or get a room with that cockgobbler 43-8/TheKing/whateverqueerusername and enjoy yourselves.

Be careful if Dans offers you a Slurpee , he's not talking about a frozen drink at 7-11

Try to be aware Dan. If you could see over the table you would realize that I am no whiner. I'm not pusillanimous and looking for quarter, that's your game.

Oh, and by the way, buck up buckaroo.

The wise Indian says if you can't gather food or water, you will starve to death, or die of dehydration.