Skip to content
  • (413) 834-4284
  • [email protected]
  • 21 Grinnell St, Greenfield, Massachusetts
Search
Close
Sprawl-busters
  • Home
  • About
  • Resources
    • Links
    • Books
    • Movies
    • Home Towns, Not Home Depot
    • The Case Against Sprawl
  • Victories
  • Blog
    • Share Your Battle
  • Contact
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Resources
    • Links
    • Books
    • Movies
    • Home Towns, Not Home Depot
    • The Case Against Sprawl
  • Victories
  • Blog
    • Share Your Battle
  • Contact
  • Uncategorized

Living Wage Law Vetoed, But Not Gone

  • Al Norman
  • September 16, 2006
  • No Comments

This week, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley vetoed legislation that would have forced large companies to pay their workers a living wage. According to Wal-Mart, the wage law would not have affected them anyway. The Chicago City Council failed to raise enough votes to override the Mayor’s veto, and so the new law was defeated. Here is the press release from the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law, which helped draft the bill. ” Mayor Richard Daley, in his first veto in his seventeen years as Mayor of the City of Chicago, rejected a new ordinance requiring large retailers in the city to pay their employees a living wage. The proposal would have been the first of its type in the nation, and would have raised pay for tens of thousands of workers at large retailers such as Wal-Mart, Target, Toys R Us, Lowe’s and Home Depot. The City Council voted 31-to-18 to over-ride his veto, coming 3 votes shy of the necessary two-thirds needed to override. “Working families in Chicago understand that this law is about bringing living wage jobs to their communities,” said Paul Sonn, deputy director of the Poverty Program at the Brennan Center. “It’s unfortunate that politics trumped the needs of the city in this first round, especially when 71% of residents support the measure,” continued Sonn. “Cities across the country are facing growing numbers of working poor in their communities, and a key part of the problem is low-wage retail jobs,” said Annette Bernhardt, deputy director of the Poverty Program at the Brennan Center. “There is no question that Chicago and other cities will continue to pursue strategies like this one in order to ensure that economic development delivers good jobs for their residents.” The grassroots campaign for the law was led by Chicago’s Grassroots Collaborative and ACORN, and includes a broad coalition of labor, anti-poverty and faith community groups. The living wage law would have asked large retailers with sales of $1 billion or more operating stores larger than 90,000 square feet in Chicago to pay a living wage and contribute an additional amount for benefits or supplemental wages. The living wage would start at $9.25 an hour in 2007, and phase up to $10.00 by 2010. The supplement would start at $1.50 an hour in 2007, and phase up to $3.00 by 2010. In assessing the likely impact of the law on the local economy, advocates took their cue from the experience of other cities. In Santa Fe, Wal-Mart, Target and Sam’s Club quickly adapted to paying the city’s living wage of $9.50, and Wal-Mart, Lowe’s and Kohl’s are all opening new stores in the city. In San Francisco, the Home Depot recently agreed to adopt a starting wage of $10.75 an hour in opening its first store in the city. Leading
retailer Costco already pays all of its employees nationwide a living wage of $10 per hour plus health benefits. “Local wage laws have generally been upheld when challenged in court,” explained Sonn. “In 2005, the Brennan Center successfully defended Santa Fe’s wage ordinance in court. Just last month a federal court in California upheld a local wage law similar to the Chicago proposal.”

As of August 2006, Wal-Mart had 45,425 employees in Illinois. The company claims that the average wage for regular, full-time hourly Wal-Mart workers in Illinois is $10.41 per hour — 12.5% higher than the minimum hourly wage in the Chicago bill. Therefore, based on Wal-Mart’s unverified wage rates, the Chicago law would not have affected the company. After the Mayor’s veto, Wal-Mart released a statement that said, “This is a great day for the citizens of Chicago. The city council’s action to sustain the mayor’s veto will ensure more jobs, more convenience and more choice for Chicago’s working families. This opens the door for desperately-needed business investment and development in the city, with job opportunities and savings for those who need it most. We will open our first store in the city on Chicago’s west side later this month. This store will show what a great asset Wal-Mart can be to the community, as an employer and corporate citizen, and as an affordable resource for thousands of Chicago’s working families. We commend Mayor Daley for vetoing the ordinance and the city council for sustaining the veto to ensure more jobs, more savings and more economic development opportunities for all Chicagoans. ” In August, Wal-Mart announced that it was raising the starting rate in more than 1,200 Wal-Mart stores and Sam’s Clubs throughout the country. The company did not reveal what those “starting rates” are, only that “Wal-Mart pays competitive wages.” But if Wal-Mart wages are above the “living wage” levels set in the Chicago law, then why did Wal-Mart work so hard to lobby against it? Based on Wal-Mart’s self-described wages, the Chicago law wouldn’t have cost them a penny for years to come. Wal-Mart would only lobby aggressively to stop the Chicago law if it thought it would affect their operating costs. So either the company’s wage data is misleading, or the company likes to spend money fighting causes that don’t affect them. For earlier stories, search by “wages.”

Like this article?

Share on facebook
Share on Facebook
Share on twitter
Share on Twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on Linkdin
Share on pinterest
Share on Pinterest
Al Norman

Al Norman

Al Norman first achieved national attention in October of 1993 when he successfully stopped Wal-Mart from locating in his hometown of Greenfield, Massachusetts. Almost 3 decades later they is still not Wal-Mart in Greenfield. Norman has appeared on 60 Minutes, was featured in three films, wrote 3 books about Wal-Mart, and gained widespread media attention from the Wall Street Journal to Fortune magazine. Al has traveled throughout the U.S., Barbados, Puerto Rico, Ireland, and Japan, helping dozens of local coalitions fight off unwanted sprawl development. 60 Minutes called Al “the guru of the anti-Wal-Mart movement.”

Leave a comment

Find Us

  • 21 Grinnell St, Greenfield, MA
  • (413) 834-4284
  • [email protected]

Helpful Links

  • Terms
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
Menu
  • Terms
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy

Recent Posts

CHRISTIAN SMALLS, FIRED AMZN WAREHOUSE WORKER, FILES RACE DISCRIMATION LAWSUIT. …

November 16, 2020

DUE TO THE SURGE IN CORONA CASES, WMT IS LIMITING SHOPPERS TO 5 PER 1,000 SF. A…

November 16, 2020

AMAZON RECENTLY ANNOUNCED FREE 1 HOUR GROCERY PICK UP FOR PRIME MEMBER ORDERS &g…

November 15, 2020

AFTER BEING REJECTED BY THE DEERFIELD, MA PLANNING BOARD, DOLLAR GENERAL APPEALS…

November 15, 2020

WILL TRUMP ALLOW ORACLE & WALMART TO INVEST IN TIK TOK? The deadline to ban …

November 14, 2020

AMAZON ACCUSED OF BREAKING ANTITRUST RULES IN EUROPE. “Data of 3rd-party sellers…

November 14, 2020

WALMART PET CARE NOW SELLING PET INSURANCE. My 3 year old mixed breed cat would …

November 13, 2020

WALMART’S GOING TO THE DOGS. 90 M OF ITS CUSTOMERS HAVE DOGS. You’d be Goofy not…

November 13, 2020

WALMART CASHIERS STILL LOOKING FOR A SEAT. They won a $65 M lawsuit in 2019, but…

November 12, 2020

4 DAYS BEFORE THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION,THE CO-FOUNDER OF HOME DEPOT SAID: “Pres…

November 12, 2020

Recent Tweets

Al Norman 15 hours ago

DEAD ON ARRIVAL: “WMT’s board of directors approved a plan in November 2018 to build 4,000 [health]clinics by 2029...to become ‘America's neighborhood health destination.’” They pulled the plug. https://t.co/QMmOo1h9nK

Read More
Al Norman 15 hours ago

AFTER 25 years with no pay, Pikachu is finally made a Walmart employee with his own name tag. Starting wage $11 per hour? Even cartoon characters can be exploited. https://t.co/rkfjVfvUzG

Read More
Al Norman 2 days ago

WMT Workers “rely on food stamps to feed their families, paid for by the U.S. taxpayer; public housing to put a roof over their heads, paid for by the U.S. taxpayer; and Medicaid to get the health care they need, paid for by the U.S. taxpayer." https://t.co/DMxAeg4BXt

Read More

Ⓒ 2020 - All Rights Are Reserved

Design and Development by Just Peachy Web Design

Download Our Free Guide

Download our Free Guide

Learn How To Stop Big Box Stores And Fulfillment Warehouses In Your Community

The strategies written here were produced by Sprawl-Busters in 2006 at the request of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW), mainly for citizen groups that were fighting Walmart. But the tips for fighting unwanted development apply to any project—whether its fighting Dollar General, an Amazon warehouse, or a Home Depot.

Big projects, or small, these BATTLEMART TIPS will help you better understand what you are up against, and how to win your battle.