Nikki Carlson wrote:
A living wage policy for Minneapolis:
http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2005/10/07_scheckt_wage/<http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2005/10/07_scheckt_wage/>
Ostrow: is supportive
Zerby: is supportive
Progressive MN: supports it, is pushing it
Mpls Central Labor Union: supports it, is pushing it
several faith organizations: support it
McLaughlin: fully supports it
Rybak: isn't sure...
What's the deal?
**********************************
Mark Hanson
Pondering difficult questions in Prospect Park
replied
In my capitalist mind, it raises a question about the role of government
(again). Should the City of Minneapolis be in the business of engaging
reputable vendors who will provide high quality goods and services for the
best possible price, or should the city be trying to remedy a serious social
problem through vendor micro-management?
For the record, I'm gay, and I have comparable questions about monitoring a
vendor's employee benefit programs as they relate to domestic partners.
I have personal knowledge of a large, prominent company with whom the city
does business, where entry level pay rates for some clerical employees are
below the rates named in the policy. Those clerical employees are
represented by a union.
I'm not defending low rates of pay for anybody - I have no idea how adults
survive on $10.00 an hour. But, I don't know that it's the city's role to
turn that around. Vendors who might otherwise be very good may not be
willing to open up their books and comply with this proposal.
***********************************
"The living wage proposal would require businesses that receive more than
$100,000 in city contracts to provide their employees at least $12.09 an
hour, and $10.23 an hour if they provide their employees with good health
insurance coverage. Businesses that receive city subsidies of $100,000 or
more would have to create living wage jobs." --MPR story
So it is okay in your capitalist mind for Wal-Mart to tell Rubbermaid that
you will produce this much of this item and we will pay you only this much
or we will take our business elsewhere thus forcing many companies in
America to close their plants here and open up new ones in places with cheap
labor like China--but it is not okay for those who represent the people
whose jobs have been lost to such tactics to make a demand of living wages
and health coverage for businesses that wish to receive contracts over
$100.000.00 of those same workers taxes?
America needs business as long as business provides jobs with wages that
allow for individual growth economically. The ability for an individual to
"get ahead" in their lives through hard work has long been part of America's
social contract with its corporations--until Ronald Reagan came along and
the only gage of success became the number of dollars in the bank and the
growth in the dividend at the end of the quarter. Twenty years of this
short-sighted economics have nearly destroyed this country and it is time
for our government--note "our" government, not corporate stooges who get
elected to protect corporate interests over public ones--to once again start
drafting legislation that will level the playing field in the workplace and
return the focus of corporate decision making to ALL stakeholders instead of
all stockholders.
Our corporations have the wherewithall to pay good wages but they lack the
will to tell the stockholders that the dividend this quarter will only be up
10% instead of 20%. We wonder why our economy seems so sluggish without
bothering to look at the glaring fact that corporate employees are also
customers and how can you expect a vigorous economy when your customers have
no money. It was just reported that the average American is carrying
$80,000 in credit card debt and most of it is not going into new products
but simple food and shelter and utility bills with cheap clothing thrown in.
Corporations exist currently with only one objective--make money. They are
doing that very effectively at the expense of the rest of us. Government is
there to act as the conscience that we exempt corporations from having. It
is perfectly reasonable for the government to look out for the best
interests of the entire community and the living wage ordinance is a good
tool to that end.
Steve Nelson
Willard Hay
REMINDERS:
1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If
you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL
PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn
E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
