In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

309 E L E V E N Mandates lessons learned and future prospects Miranda Dietz, Ken Jacobs, and Michael Reich As a result of the policies discussed in this book, tens of thousands of low-wage workers in San Francisco receive higher pay. They are not as compelled to come to work when they are sick, and they are more able to take care of their loved ones when they are sick. An even larger number of workers have greater access to health care services. They no longer face discrimination in benefits based on their sexual orientation. Adding up the results reported in each of the chapters gives us a sense of the scope of the policies’ effects. An estimated 77,500 workers received pay increases as a result of the living wage, citywide minimum wage, and IHSS policies.1 Some 59,000 workers gained access to paid sick leave. Slightly more than three-fourths (76 percent) of private employers with twenty or more workers surveyed by Colla, Dow, and Dube reported 1 Includes an estimated 47,000 with increases due to the Minimum Wage Ordinance (54,000 estimated by Reich and Laitinen minus 7,000 estimated overlap with other wage policies), 8,000 at SFO, 18,000 home care workers, and 4,500 other workers on city contracts (Reich, Hall, and Hsu 1999). 310 m a k i n g t h e m a n d a t e s w o r k making changes to health care spending or coverage. Nearly one thousand employers paid into the City health plan in 2010, contributing a total of nearly $80 million on behalf of over 55,000 participants. By 2004, 66,500 people working for companies contracting with San Francisco had taken advantage of equal benefits for domestic partners.2 To put these numbers in perspective, in 2012 slightly fewer than 560,000 people worked in San Francisco (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 2013). Considering only those who received wage increases and work in San Francisco, the workers who benefited make up about 12 percent of the city’s workforce. The benefit mandates, moreover, reached workers at higher income levels than did the wage mandates. Paid sick leave was newly offered at 15 percent of higher-wage employers; 14 percent of City health plan participants are above two times the federal poverty line (Healthy San Francisco 2012). San Francisco may be unique in the unusual scope of these employer mandates. But it is not unique in the economic conditions that created the need for the policies or in the efforts of labor and community coalitions and local governments to address them. Rising income inequality and eroding federal protections for workers affect the country as a whole. Increased urban growth and the revival of central cities have not led to shared prosperity ; the resulting increase in housing costs has left many further behind. More than 130 cities and counties have living wage laws. Organizations such as the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy, Working Partnerships USA in San Jose, and the East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy in Oakland were early innovators in living wage policies and community benefits agreements. Santa Fe, New Mexico, and Washington DC have long had citywide minimum wage laws and Albuquerque and San Jose have just instituted them. Cities continue to innovate. Emeryville, California, passed a living wage law for large hotels in 2005, which was followed by a similar law in Los Angeles applying to hotels near Los Angeles International Airport. Seattle, New York, and Washington DC all have adopted paid sick leave policies. The Los Angeles, Oakland, and San Jose airports all have living wage policies. 2 Includes people working for those companies outside of San Francisco. [3.17.128.129] Project MUSE (2024-04-25 21:43 GMT) m a n d a t e s 311 States are also taking action on low-wage work. Eighteen states have minimum wage laws above the national standard; ten of those states index their minimum wage to inflation. In 2011, Connecticut passed a paid sick leave law. New York’s Domestic Workers Bill of Rights provides overtime pay for domestic workers and three paid rest days a year. In 2002, California instituted partial wage replacement for paid family leave, followed by New Jersey in 2008 (Appelbaum and Milkman 2013). In 2012, California passed legislation to create a retirement savings program for workers who do...

Share