1. What are the benefits of providing a livable wage?
2. What
are the costs of Non-Livable Jobs?
3. Which critical success factors for my business can be affected
by improved employee productivity and commitment?
4. What
about the business argument that a free market, increasing worker productivity, and minimal regulation are the best way to a strong economy with livable wages for all?
5. Aren't there some businesses out there that would like to pay living wages, but
really can't?
6.
What are the Options for Upgrading Pay Levels?
7.
How can I help my employee’s economic security?
8. If wages go up, won't businesses just leave Vermont and go elsewhere?
9. If I pay my employees’ more won’t I have to hire less people?
10. Increasing the minimum wage will be good for businesses.
Facts
What
are the benefits of providing a livable wage?
Increasing wages, benefits, and workplace practices pays for itself. Increasing
productivity and quality decreases recruitment and training costs resulting from lower turnover. By providing a livable wage, businesses can create a committed workforce, which can become a
powerful source of competitive advantage. That means they need to attract, keep, and get the most out of their employees.
It's also worth noting when businesses do not pay a livable wage because public
assistance often makes up the difference. So when Vermonters turn to food stamps or heating assistance, our tax dollars are subsidizing those costs.
What are the
costs of Non-Livable Jobs?
“We’ve always told customers ‘you get what you pay for.’ We suddenly realized
that’s true with our employees too,” said one manufacturer of premium goods. Employees who cannot afford to meet the basic needs of food, housing, health care, transportation and child care
cannot focus on being reliable and productive workers.
To demand superior workmanship and service from those being paid low-wages could
lead to a higher turnover rate, as current and prospective employees may be attracted to other more enticing and fair-paying employers. The high cost of recruitment and training new
employees, coupled with a high turnover rate, will certainly be a financial detriment to the employer.
A study by William M. Mercer, Inc on the cost of employee turnover found that
after factoring in lost productivity, search fees, management interview time, and new-hire training costs, 45% of surveyed companies said it costs more than $10,000 to fill a vacated job
(Training, August 1998).
Which critical success factors for my business can be affected by
improved employee productivity and commitment?
Depending on your industry it can be gross sales per square foot, average dollars
a plate, billable hours per employee, error-free widgets per production hour, or customer repeat sales ratios. Whatever the factor, calculate what a 5%, 10% or 30% increase would mean to
your bottom line.
What
about the business argument that a free market, increasing worker productivity, and minimal regulation are the best way to a strong economy with livable wages for all?
History has shown that as worker productivity and skill level increase with new
technology and profits go up, this does not necessarily translate into better wages. The productivity of American workers increased significantly from 1973 to 1997. However, during the same
period, wages fell by 16% (when adjusted for inflation), corporate profits hit record levels, CEO salaries skyrocketed, and the richest 1% of Americans took control 42% of the nation's
wealth.
So, in this example, increased productivity and profits did not result in
increased wages and wealth for all, but only for business owners and management. Arguing for a "free" market really means allowing employers to do whatever they want, regardless of what's
right.
The free market is hardly free. For example, over $250 billion tax dollars is
given out annually as subsidies to United States corporations. U.S. arms merchants alone get $500 million a year to advertise and promote their products. When was the last time you heard a
business complaining about this interference with the free market? Raise the Floor notes that “businesses that pay poverty wages indirectly rely on government assistance programs to make up
the difference between these wages and what it costs their employees to live.” There are countless examples of how our economy is managed and subsidized through political policies. The only
question is who is going to benefit from these policies? Working people, who constitute the vast majority of Americans, or a wealthy few?
Aren't there some businesses out there that would like to pay living wages, but really
can't?
Undoubtedly there are. Perhaps employers who can't afford to pay livable wages
could qualify for tax cuts that would enable them to. Other ideas and possible solutions exist, and it is up to employers, employees, and elected officials to come up with a fair solution
for all parties. Employers can also try creative solutions to improve the environment of the workplace, such as flexible work arrangements and lax dress codes. Non-monetary benefits are
routinely identified by employees as an important need. But the days of balancing the books of businesses on the backs’ of employees are over.
See: Options for moving towards a more livable-job workplace
What are
the Options for Upgrading Pay Levels?
In addition to pay increases, some small Vermont companies have developed
creative ways to increase their employees’ take-home pay and personal time, reduce their living expenses, and increase productivity.
Group purchases and discounts can reduce employee expenses; increased wages
create opportunities for employer tax benefits; giving more personal (vacation) time to employees can create a less stressful and more comfortable work environment, one that will eventually
lead to increased productivity; and more equal profit distribution and open book management are a few imaginative ways of improving the workplace.
How can
I help my employee’s economic security?
Providing benefits that reduce employees’ financial risk, leverage pre-tax
dollars, or extend the value of take-home pay are some ways to enhance economic security and help create a worry-free workplace. The value of these and other benefits to employees varies
based on age, lifestyle, and life stages.
Creativity counts. Employees frequently describe seemingly small things that
make a big difference: worksite flue shots, transportation, parking assistance, parent support groups facilitated by the local child care resource and referral agency, and health club or
wellness allowances, etc.
Some other options include: company-paid health and dental insurance, company
life and disability insurance, hardship fund, flexible spending account plan, dependent care assistance plan, cafeteria plan, retirement savings plan, and education in financial management.
If wages go up, won't businesses just leave
Vermont and go elsewhere?
In general, this is not a big concern. More and more businesses begin to
recognize that wages must go up. One member of the Central Vermont Chamber of Commerce stated, "From our view point, the economy is not doing well in
Central Vermont. We need to raise the wage structure in the area." (Times-Argus, 9/16/99)
One reason why businesses simply will not leave is the vast majority of low wage
jobs are in industries that are geographically dependent, particularly retail and service. This means that the food has to be cooked here, and the offices, classrooms, and restrooms cleaned
here. Since a minimum wage increase affects all businesses equally, few jobs or businesses, if any, would be lost.
Nationally, 76% of low-wage jobs are in the geographically dependent service
industry. 24% are in manufacturing, which is more mobile, but typically manufacturing already pays well above the minimum wage.
While the dire predictions of businesses are often exaggerated, a certain amount
of concern is deserved, particularly along the border with New Hampshire. A New Hampshire legislative committee is currently conducting a Job Gap Study, to look at the pros, cons,
and in-betweens of livable wage versus the current minimum wage. In any event, this problem should not be used as an excuse for businesses to not pay livable wages.
If I pay my employees’ more won’t I have to hire less people?
If the minimum wage was raised as high as $8.50 an hour, the impact would be
modest at best; in the range of 1% to 3% "dis-employment." Dis-employment is a term used to describe company lay offs or reduction in hiring due to higher wages. At lower a level, such as
$7.50, there is no expected impact.
The same businesses that now hire low-wage workers will still need those jobs
done, and the same pool of workers will still apply for those jobs, except now they will be working for livable wages.
Oregon's experience in raising the minimum wage shows this. Between 1997 and 1999 Oregon raised its minimum wage from
$4.75 an hour to $6.50 an hour. A study by the Oregon Center for Public Policy found that "Oregon's 'highest in the nation' minimum wage continues to raise wages for former welfare
recipients and other low-wage workers without harming their employment opportunities. The increase has reversed years of declining wages for welfare recipients and other low-wage workers."
Increasing the minimum wage will be good for businesses.
When we have more money we will spend it. Higher wages will leave more unrestricted income for people to use once the bills are
paid. Although employers will have to pay that higher wage, they will get their money back in increased business. This money will circulate in the economy and multiply, leading to increased
economic growth for everyone.