RSSLawmakers must halt runaway minimum wage
Yakima Herald-Republic editorial board
E-mail
Print
Comments
More 'Opinion'
- Ruling underscores school districts' need for levies
- State must assure safety of its most vulnerable citizens
- Enforcement is key to any panhandling decision
- Bid to unionize child-care centers still a bad idea
- Confidential bank oversight won't return confidence
- Here's a chance to make a difference for heart attack victims
- CWU's plea for stable state funding is sensible (and unlikely)
While it's not surprising that Washington's highest-in-the-nation minimum wage has popped up on the campaign trail, it is curious that it's mainly in the governor's race and not so much in legislative elections.
The big issue in the gubernatorial election is whether Dino Rossi would cut the minimum if elected governor. His latest TV ad says he would "never" reduce it for "adults." Be that as it may, the constantly increasing minimum wage must be addressed -- but by the Legislature, not the governor.
The driver for corrective action is the fact that the minimum wage is tied to an automatic escalator, which will push it up another 48 cents, or nearly 6 percent, to $8.55 per hour on Jan. 1, 2009. The Legislature starts its 105-day regular session on Jan. 12 and must revisit this issue. We simply must eliminate the escalator that has made the minimum wage unrealistic in today's workplace.
Washington's minimum wage applies to workers in both agricultural and nonagricultural jobs, although 14- and 15-year-olds may be paid 85 percent of the minimum wage.
To review the history of how we got to the $8.55 wage: Initiative 688, approved by Washington voters in 1998, requires the state Department of Labor and Industries in September to make a cost-of-living adjustment to the minimum wage each Jan. 1, based on the federal Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers.
A check with L&I on the history of increases shows that the initiative initially raised the minimum to $5.70 in 1999 and to $6.50 an hour on Jan. 1, 2000. The first indexed increase boosted it to $6.72 on Jan. 1, 2001.
Now it will be $8.55. Compare that to the federal minimum wage of $6.55 per hour, which will increase to $7.25 on July 24, 2009.
The law can be changed by simple-majority vote and it is clearly time to do so and stop the automatic hikes. Future increases should be determined by separate legislative action. And while it's a legislative function, whoever is governor in January should use all the influence of the office and its bully pulpit to pressure the Democratic-controlled Legislature to restore discretion to determining the wage base.
The constantly increasing state wage base is outstripping the original intent of a minimum wage. It was never designed to be a living wage. It was supposed to be an earnings floor for workers in entry-level, low-skilled or unskilled, often menial jobs, protecting a vulnerable work group from exploitation.
If someone doesn't want to earn just the minimum wage, then the solution is to get the education and/or skills and training needed to go up the wage ladder to qualify for better jobs.
Our editorial position on this issue has been consistent: There comes a time when it simply is not worth it to an employer to pay a wage that is not reasonable compensation for the type of work being performed. And Washington is leading the way to getting there with its constantly increasing wage base that consistently ranks it first among the states.
The escalator has become the problem, rather than the solution. It's time for lawmakers to get some political backbone and strike it.
* Members of the Yakima Herald-Republic editorial board are Michael Shepard, Sarah Jenkins, Bill Lee and Karen Troianello.
So, the costs of living increases, which our society and economy efficiently pass off to America's basic consumers, is supposed to be eaten by the entry level workers!? That's a mistake. This opinion accepts an unjust way to subsidize/socialize profit margins for those citizens holding the options/power to make the necessary,rational market adjustments. AMERICA CAN DO A BETTER JOB at generating sustainable economic development by not selling out to the agri-business ENTITLEMENTS, etc., inherited over the past centuries.
Report ViolationYour complaints about agri-business entitlements are reasonable, but your understanding of the economics dealing with the minimum wage are lacking.
Liberals love to complain about how conservatives don't listen enough to scientists, and there is some basis for this complaint. However, they never think that maybe they should actually listen to economists. Our minimum wage law will decrease the number of entry level jobs available. This increases unemployment and removes opportunities to learn on the job. Minimum wage jobs are stepping stones. There is no way to go from no skill to skilled without training.
If people need to get an education to earn more, how are they supposed to get by in the mean time? By relying on financial aid? By taking out huge loans? And how are they supposed to qualify for loans when they earn minimum wage?
Lets face it. Some people have to get by on the minimum wage. If we lower it, then these people will have to start taking on two and three jobs at a time. Leaving less employment for other minimum wage earners. Next you will be complaining that their teenage children are out spraying paint on your garage- where are their parents? Yeah, they at one of their three jobs because you decided to cut their paycheck at the one that allowed them to spend time with their kids.
OK, so why isn't the minimum wage $15/hour or $20/hour or even $30/hour? If you see that these might not be realistic, can you accept that policies have consequences? What would be the consequences of a $15/hour minimum wage?The same consequences happen when you take the minimum wage from $8.07 to $8.55, just at a smaller scale.
It is noble to want to help people who could use it, but we should target that help directly. Playing with markets can have unintended and undesirable consequences. Why make it harder for teens to get a job, when the goal is to help families? Why make a business owner bear the entire cost when the goal is meant to be beneficial to all?
Posting Guidelines - Updated Aug. 21 2009
Readers are encouraged to use these forums to discuss issues affecting the
Yakima Valley. Debate the ideas presented in stories and other comments, but
refrain from personal attacks and offensive remarks aimed at others; e.g.,
you may call an idea idiotic, but don't say the person is an idiot. The
Herald-Republic reserves the right to remove any comment for any reason.
Examples include material that is obscene, encourages illegal activity or
stereotypes based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs and
other factors. Continued violation of these guidelines can lead to
suspension or revocation of your ability to post comments. If you believe a
comment is inappropriate, you can bring it to our attention by clicking the
"report violation" link by each comment. Guidelines revised Aug. 21, 2009.
Registered User?
