Comments on: AATA Mulls Living Wage, Adds Chelsea Trip

By: Joel Batterman

Joel Batterman — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:21:42 +0000

Another vote for a living wage here.

Have AATA and the City considered requiring private developers to pay for the cost of bus stop improvements when they build new projects? Compared to the cost of new entrance drives, etc., the cost for shelters and concrete pads is minimal.

I think of The Courtyards on Plymouth Road, which brought substantial numbers of new riders to the stop out in front; they’re still waiting to get a concrete pad, let alone a shelter. Plymouth Green was also marketed as transit-oriented, but there are no pads or shelters there either. Seems like an easy fix might be possible.

By: jcp2

jcp2 — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 15:37:50 +0000

Without accounting for family size and make-up, the living wage ordinance is simply a higher minimum wage policy. Even so, the rates set within the ordinance are not sufficient to meet the living wage as defined by the Economic Policy Institutes's metropolitan living wage tool for a single income earner household for our area, unless that household is a household of only one adult. [link]

By: Chuck Warpehoski

Chuck Warpehoski — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 02:54:36 +0000

I do think that a living wage policy is appropriate for the AATA. I want my tax dollars to provide good jobs, not poverty jobs. And, in this era of outsourcing, we need policies that ensure a fair wage for employees payed with public funds.