|
|
OUR VIEW
‘Living wage’ issue raises questions, brows
As Santa Fe
leaders prepare to raise the minimum wage from $8.50 to $9.50 an hour just
three months from now, and Albuquerque
voters face a ballot question on a $7.50 “living wage” as part of Tuesday’s
municipal election, our state is aswirl in
studies supporting and refuting the wisdom of paying people more than the
$5.15 federal minimum.
The latest is by economist Aaron Yelowitz of the University
of Kentucky, claiming the $8.50
phase has cost our city 540 jobs. Could be — but higher-wage advocates cite
reports that Santa Fe has
gained 1,400 jobs.
The City Council should take both claims with a
grain of salt: As one of a few test-case cities, Santa
Fe is attracting nationwide attention — and all
manner of outside influence, for and against higher pay. That includes
analyses of varying quality, conducted with built-in biases to please
whoever paid for the studies.
The issue also is a focal point for flat-out false
information — including a bogus claim that the living wage has driven The
New Mexican out of Santa Fe.
This paper was paying more than $8.50 before the
living wage took effect. And while our new printing plant is out past the
city limits where our supply and delivery trucks have ready access to the
freeway, our corporate offices remain a block and a half from the Plaza,
where they and the newsroom soon will be rebuilt. We’re subject to the new
wage ordinances — but we’ve known for years that better pay goes hand in
hand with better workers.
For some employers, that’s been a bit of a
revelation during the first phase of the city’s living-wage campaign.
Because the higher wage allows businesses to be a bit fussier about whom
they hire, less-dedicated workers might be having trouble finding and
holding jobs.
But are there reliable statistics to support even
that theory? And are there numbers accurately reflecting the reality of
mandated higher pay?
How do the new wages relate to the cost of, say,
the fast food now being prepared by $8.50-an-hour workers? For that matter,
are higher wages a factor in grocery prices — or do those tabs reflect what’s
happening nationally rather than locally?
Santa Feans long have
sensed that we pay more for just about everything, especially housing — but
it doesn’t take many trips out of town to know we’re not alone in the
inflationary spiral our national leaders love to deny.
If Albuquerque
voters approve their “living wage,” the Duke
City still will be a buck an
hour behind Santa Fe. So would
the rest of the state if Gov. Bill Richardson and House Speaker Ben Luján succeed in their campaign for a minimum wage,
also likely to be pegged at $7.50.
It’s too late for a truly objective study that
would guide the Albuquerque
vote; it’ll be influenced instead by wild claims from proponents and the
opposition. But our City Council, and the state Legislature, should seek
nonpartisan advice before taking another step up the wage ladder.
The University
of New Mexico’s Bureau of
Business and Economic Research might be the ideal agency; the bureau is
expected to issue a report between now and the end of the year. Itchy as
some councilors are to enact the $9.50-an-hour step, they should wait at
least until they’ve heard from UNM.
|
|
