OLYMPIA – The state’s minimum wage would go up for some workers and down for others under proposals moving through the Legislature this week.
It would go up to $12 an hour by 2017 for all hourly workers under a proposal approved Wednesday by the Democratic-controlled House Labor and Work Force Development Committee. It would be at least $15 an hour for school employees under a separate proposal the committee passed.
It would go down to as low as $7.25 an hour for teenagers under a proposal approved by the Republican-controlled Senate Commerce and Labor Committee.
Washington’s minimum wage, currently at $9.32 an hour and adjusted every year based on cost of living because of a voter-passed initiative, is the highest minimum wage in the country. But that doesn’t keep it out of the political debate over income inequality, and minimum wage is getting maximum exposure this winter in the state.
Voters in SeaTac raised the minimum in their city to $15 an hour – what some call a livable wage – in last November’s election, although the courts have scaled back where that pay floor must be applied. Seattle’s new mayor, former state Sen. Ed Murray, has called for a similar bump to the minimum wage in that city. Gov. Jay Inslee, in his State of the State address, called for an unspecified increase – somewhere between $1.50 and $2.50.
House Democrats were happy to quantify the bump with HB 2672, which would raise it to $10 next Jan. 1, $11 a year later and $12 on Jan. 1, 2017.
“This is not a living wage, it’s a survival wage,” said Rep. Chris Reykdal, D-Olympia. Statistics show most workers receiving the minimum wage are adults, he said, and the state owes them a floor above $9.32 an hour.
But Rep. Matt Manweller, R-Ellensburg, called the higher minimum wage “legislative cotton candy” that won’t solve the nation’s serious economic problems like income inequality.
“This bill does not qualify as basic common sense,” said Manweller, a professor of political science at Central Washington University. “If you believe you can raise the minimum wage and have no job loss … why not a $20-an-hour minimum wage? Why not $30?”
“No one has said it will solve income inequality,” countered Committee Chairman Mike Sells, D-Everett. “It will raise some people out of poverty.”
The committee passed that proposal, and another to set a minimum of $15 per hour for all school employees, on partisan 5-4 votes. That bill comes with a price tag of $54 million, and Manweller pointed out the state wasn’t promising to give local school districts the money to cover it. Sells agreed it was something the state must pay for, but said the committee was just setting the policy and leaving it to the Appropriations Committee to come up with the money.
The Senate, meanwhile, moved forward a proposal to lower the minimum wage for teenagers to the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour between June 1 and Aug. 31. Supporters said that would help combat high teen unemployment by allowing employers to pay them a “training wage” for temporary summer jobs.
Sen. Steve Conway, D-Tacoma and a retired union business agent, warned employers could use the law to lower wages for 18- and 19-year-olds who are established workers: “We’re running against the current of opinion about the inadequacy of the minimum wage.”
Majority Republicans on the panel, however, voted to send it to the committee that schedules legislation for debate by the full Senate.
Political geeks may surpass even baseball nerds in their love of numbers. The American political system probably aids and abets this through a complicated set of rules, districts and qualifiers ...
A GRIP ON SPORTS • A weekend in late July. It’s more than 90 degrees outside. Is this the proverbial “dog days of summer?” Read on.
I scratched another back yard honey-do off my list this weekend already by finishing another one of those projects that had been on the waiting list for years. It involved ...
Today marks my 25th anniversary with The Spokesman-Review. Though things have changed quite a bit since I joined the newspaper as its Idaho editor in 1991, we’re still in the ...
sponsored According to two 2015 surveys, 62 percent of Americans do not have enough savings to handle an unexpected emergency, much less any long-term plans.