Chicago requires big-box stores to pay 'living wage'

[MrRant 0]

Wednesday, July 26, 2006; Posted: 9:43 p.m. EDT (01:43 GMT)

 

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/07/26/bi...s.ap/index.html

 

CHICAGO, Illinois (AP) -- Brushing aside warnings from Wal-Mart Stores Inc., City Council approved an ordinance Wednesday that makes Chicago the biggest city in the nation to require big-box retailers to pay a "living wage."

 

"It's trying to get the largest companies in America to pay decent wages," said council member Toni Preckwinkle.

 

The ordinance passed, 35-14, after three hours of impassioned debate.

 

The measure requires retailers with more than $1 billion in annual sales and stores of at least 90,000 square feet to pay workers at least $10 an hour in wages plus $3 an hour in fringe benefits by mid-2010. The current minimum wage in Illinois is $6.50 an hour and the federal minimum is $5.15.

 

[...]

 

This is stupid simply because it forces only successful companies to overpay employees for the same thing by effectivly doubling their wages. If it applied to everyone then it would be fine IMO.

 

Here's to hoping Walmart, Target, etc close their stores in Chicago proper and move to the suburbs.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Maryland did sorta the same thing by signing a bill that would require companies that employee large number of people in the state to pay a percentage of the healthcare (or something like that). WalMart was the only company that the bill affected, they complained and then the feds just ruled the law wasn't allowable.

 

Same thing will happen with this.

[Art Sandusky 0]

All right, go ACORN. Come on, the increase just means that the Walton family earns the annual wages of any given worker in three hours of being alive, not just one. This is simply a city-wide law, so we'll see if it works or not before such things are considered on the state or national level.

[Guest Felonies!]

they complained and then the feds just ruled the law wasn't allowable.

 

Same thing will happen with this.

Blagojevich won't do shit. I'm not sure how this law is fair, though.

[MrRant 0]

All right, go ACORN. Come on, the increase just means that the Walton family earns the annual wages of any given worker in three hours of being alive, not just one. This is simply a city-wide law, so we'll see if it works or not before such things are considered on the state or national level.

 

You can't be that stupid. It's discriminating against larger companies. Walmart, Target, K-Mart, Sears, Home Depot, Lowes, etc. They will close down in areas like this. What about midsize or small companies? They still get to dick their employees for $6.

[Guest Felonies!]

Daley was actually against all this stuff, knowing that it would just take jobs away from the city. Looks like City Council voted around him anyway.

[snuffbox 0]

The Walton kids will now bribe Lincoln Towing to focus solely on the City Council.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

In Wisconsin, they're having similar issues. I don't think forcing them to pay a higher wage is the answer, because that is going to have massive unintended consequences for smaller stores.

 

The problem with places like Wal-Mart is that they abuse state health care systems. Wal-Mart is the largest employer in Wisconsin, but they have more employees on "BadgerCare" (the state's health care system) than any other company. It's stuff like that which should be ended.

[Danville_Wrestling 0]

Well the funniest thing, though, is that big box retailers actually have fewer health insurance coverage problems than small businesses. However, the states in question ignore the fact that a greater proportion of people who work in small businesses have health insurance problems as compared to the big box retailers.

[NoCalMike 0]

Did you guys hear about the Wal-Mart in Canada, I believe it was Toronto, where the workers voted to unionize, so when it passed overwhemingly by the workers, the Wal-Mart closed shop and left.

[Guest Felonies!]

Sounds like a setup to a joke.

[Guest Smues]

Did you guys hear about the Wal-Mart in Canada, I believe it was Toronto, where the workers voted to unionize, so when it passed overwhemingly by the workers, the Wal-Mart closed shop and left.

 

I remember about. I thought it was in B.C. or Alberta, but not like it matters where it was. Always makes me laugh when I think about that.

[The Metal Maniac 0]

It was in Quebec, and I don't think it was overwhelming, but it was voted in. Wal-Mart says that the store didn't make enough money in the first place, and that it was now making less, and that the Union were being a bunch of crybabies and not agreeing to things.

 

Of course, Wal-Mart also claims to NOT be anti-union, and to have a higher percentage of full-time workers then most any other department store (which is an easy task to accomplish when you define full time as <28 hours a week).

 

Besides, it's silly. I'm sorry, but I work at a Wal-Mart, and I'm telling you right now, no one there deserves $10 an hour. You wanna make better money? Get a better job.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Besides, it's silly. I'm sorry, but I work at a Wal-Mart, and I'm telling you right now, no one there deserves $10 an hour. You wanna make better money? Get a better job.

 

The man is smart.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

Did you guys hear about the Wal-Mart in Canada, I believe it was Toronto, where the workers voted to unionize, so when it passed overwhemingly by the workers, the Wal-Mart closed shop and left.

 

I remember about. I thought it was in B.C. or Alberta, but not like it matters where it was. Always makes me laugh when I think about that.

 

Jonquiere, Quebec. A "Hometown Store" they're called in Wal*Mart lingo. They voted, and the store promptly shut down, citing "financial difficiculties", (which isn't that farfetched, as hometown stores are usually break-even or slightly better). But come on.

 

We've gotten a lot of propoganda since then about unions and what not. Some of it has been pretty shamless, stuff that started with "We respect your right to choose, and if you'd like to implement a union, you're more than welcome to. But here's ten reasons why it's bad"

 

According to similar literature given to us, union reps have tried to, in unnamed stores:

 

-Get on-the-clock employees to break into the personnel office and get employee/financial records

-Get female employees to meet union reps alone in hotel rooms.

-Two employees were physically assaulted by union reps in the parking lot.

 

Some of this is getting a little excessive, as it's always posted in our lounge and amongst our pay stubs. We don't need a union by any means, but we're getting a bit bombarded.

[Art Sandusky 0]

Shouldn't the fear on the part of businesses be enough to convince us that it's better for actual people? Cripes, singling out these multi-billion dollar companies for this stuff is made to sound like kicking babies for sport. For some reason, no matter how much wealth that we can't imagine on an everyday scale that these larger retailers accrue, they're made into victims instead of the people who have families and have a hard time making ends meet thanks to greater costs for everything and stagnant growth in our lower wages. What the fuck is that? Since when do we argue in favor of the big guy? These companies can afford this, guys. Let me know when something that's actually outrageous happens, or when energy costs are the root of rising prices across the board instead of higher wages, whichever happens first.

[MrRant 0]

The issue is NOT higher wages.

 

It's making a certain class of business pay more. If it was across the board I would champion it.

[Art Sandusky 0]

You can blame the specialization of this on how Wal-Mart itself has been thrust to the political forefront and thoroughly (and rightly) demonized. I wasn't even aware that you called those places "big-box stores." Must be a regional thing. This is a foot in the door for more broad and meaningful reform down the line. Think trickle-down socialism. You get the people up top to front more for their workers, and once everyone realizes the "higher wages = higher prices" fallacy is just that, the scope of legislation like this widens.

 

I hate to keep harping on this, but energy costs are going to send prices through the roof, not better pay.

[MrRant 0]

No, this specific targeting will just lead to store closures and people being out of the job. Companies do not like be specifically targetted and will move to places that welcome them and the jobs they create.

 

And to be honest, $10 an hour for pushing carts is bullshit.

[Guest Felonies!]

$10 an hour for pushing carts is bullshit.

CronoT begs to differ!

 

I wasn't even aware that you called those places "big-box stores." Must be a regional thing.

I think it's more industry jargon than regional slang. I think they're called such because with the lack of windows or any effort to blend into the surroundings, it looks as if a big box was dropped into place.

 

For whatever it's worth, the Borders(es) in downtown Chicago are very nice.

[Slayer 0]

$10 an hour for pushing carts is bullshit.

CronoT begs to differ!

He needs the money for more empty shelves

[Slayer 0]

On a serious note, Kotz's reference to "higher wages = higher prices" as a fallacy is laughable, even when considering the source

[Guest Felonies!]

Tribune poll is at about 35% in favor, 65% against, by the way.

 

Daley expressed disappointment in the council's action, contending that companies will decide to locate stores outside the city limits.

 

The council next could vote to reduce the size of stores that come under the wage requirements and, ultimately, work down to such franchise operations as McDonald's, he said.

 

"Next week, it is going to be something else."

 

Gerald Roper, president of the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce, put it in more dire terms.

 

"I think that the aldermen who voted in support of this helped put the sign up, really big, that development in Chicago is dead," he said. "There is no sense of coming to this city because there is no predictability ... And it is a sad day."

[NoCalMike 0]

Well also you might think of it like this. Wal-Mart was once probably thought of as a stepping stone job that a high-school or college student would work until the graduated, but since a lot of manufacturing jobs and tech jobs have left, people are left with places like Wal-Mart as a career, rather then one link in the chain. It's not like Wal-Mart is the only one, I mean if you drive on any major interstate highway these days, you will see that every 20-30 miles of road, you will get the same REPEAT of the exact same big box top stores, whether it is Wal-Mart, Kohls, Target, etc etc etc....Wal-Mart seems to get singled out a lot, but they aren't the only ones. I think they also did a study and it found that a lot of Wal-Mart workers still have to collect some type of government assistance, whether it be welfare, food stamps or some type of health insurance, in order to make ends meet, so all this nonsense about "If Wal-Mart leavs, jobs leave" is just that nonsense. It actually costs local and state governments a lot of money for Wal-Mart to keep it's workforce working at low wage and shit benefit rates because these people end up going to the state for help, which costs the taxpayers. So who ends up subsidizing Wal-Mart for paying so shitty and not giving health benefits? I know out here in Sacramento they want to put a big Target in the middle of our downtown, where right now it features stores you don't find in other places, a lot of unique-brands, so yeah if the Target moves in, sure people will come to work there, because they probably just lost their job at the store that had to close down to make room for Target.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

America is a free, capitalist economy, though. How can you single out one type of store for punishment? Competition is good for the consumers.

[Guest Felonies!]

I mean if you drive on any major interstate highway these days, you will see that every 20-30 miles of road, you will get the same REPEAT of the exact same big box top stores, whether it is Wal-Mart, Kohls, Target, etc etc etc....Wal-Mart seems to get singled out a lot, but they aren't the only ones.

Yeah, that's life in the exurbs. Big pile of big-box stores outside of town on the cheap real estate, kills off the downtown, that whole thing. It's a real drag. McHenry, Rockford, Woodstock, DeKalb, all of their downtowns have been ruined now because of big-box aggregations outside of town. Granted, it's not like McHenry was that nice before all that development north of town, but the point stands.

 

However, you do have to acknowledge that Borders, Barnes & Noble, Target, Home Depot, etc., are successful for a reason, and it's not fair to single them out and punish them for it.

[snuffbox 0]

Some fine, upstanding folks in Rockford.

[Guest Felonies!]

Rockford is kind of a dump. I do love Beef-a-Roo, though! I have a coupon for some free Beef-a-Roo, and I might just make the drive down there to get some.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Eventually, I think the min. wage will go up because I dont know what else that can be done with the prices of everything going up and wages for most people being stagnant. Leaving things as they are is only creating bigger problems down the road.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Costco seems to do okay with paying an avg. $17/hr with nice benefits.