Comments on: Living Wage: In-Sourcing City Temps

By: jcp2

jcp2 — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 10:17:17 +0000

The living wage concept has changed a lot since its introduction. I think of it as being a rough guideline of how much it would take for an individual (or family) to earn in aggregate to have a certain standard of living. The living wage for a single individual would be much less than the living wage for a family of four, and in this family of four, the living wage for a single earner would be much more than that for a family with two earners, although the aggregate would be close to the same, except for childcare expenses. In fact, having relatives close by able to provide that care would impact the living wage negatively, because child care costs might be reduced.

As none of these factors are taken into consideration, what the city is doing is defining an alternate minimum wage rather than a true “living wage”, and should call it as such.

By: Vivienne Armentrout

Vivienne Armentrout — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 19:33:02 +0000

An excellent report and analysis. Thank you.

A couple of minor notes:

One of the early episodes in this drama had to do with Republic Parking employees (or perhaps it was an earlier contractor with the DDA). They had not been making the living wage amount and there was a complaint. I’m not sure whether it was a legal complaint or just a protest. Ultimately the DDA raised the wages and the city gave over the parking meter revenue to the DDA (it had been collected by the city up to then).

Also, I believe that some nonprofit organizations that receive grants (and thus contracts) from the city may not pay a living wage for some programs and that they may receive an exemption from the ordinance. I haven’t tried to define the limits of that exemption, but it has come up from time to time.