Envision Spokane, a labor and enviro backed group, has filed an initiative to amend the City of Spokane’s charter to include a “Worker Bill of Rights.” If approved by voters in November, the measure would impose a sweeping set of new labor mandates on Spokane employers.
The group describes the “Worker Bill of Rights” as building “the people’s vision” of an “economically just, and democratic community.” The measure includes four key sections that apply to employers of differing sizes.
“Right to a Family Wage”
This cornerstone of the Worker Bill of Rights would guarantee a “family wage” that is indexed annually to inflation for workers in the city who are employed by businesses with 150 or more employees. While the city would determine the actual “family wage,” the initiative specifies that it must provide “for basic needs and a limited ability to deal with future emergencies without the need of public assistance.”
The City would be required to base the wage on a household size of two with one person employed and the wage rate could not be less than the Self-Sufficiency Standard for Washington State 2014. The problem is the initiative language does not specify whether the person not working in the two-person household is an adult, an infant, preschooler, school-age child or teenager. The Self-Sufficiency Standards wage rates vary greatly depending on which. For example, for Spokane County the Self-Sufficiency hourly wage for an adult and an infant is $18.13 and for an adult and teenager it is $11.85. The Self-Sufficiency hourly wage for two adults is $14.06. So which does Envision Spokane envision being the mandated “family wage?” As a side note, these Self-Sufficiency wages do not include the monthly contribution amount (ranging from $62 to $82 per month) the Standards specify are needed for an “emergency savings fund,” which the initiative’s “family wage rate” specifically includes.
If the City does not calculate a “family wage,” employers would be required to pay wages that are the higher of three times the federal poverty level for a family of two ($15,930 in 2015), or any family wage previously calculated by the City of Spokane. Three times the 2015 poverty level for a family of two would be $47,970 per year. How an employer is supposed to convert this to hourly wages is not explained; but based on a 40-hour workweek for 52 weeks a year, the hourly wage would be $23.06. per hour.
Which of these wages—from $11.85 to $23.06 per hour—would be the mandated “family wage rate?”
Employers would be able to pay less (how much less is not specified) than the family wage if they provide benefits whereby “one or more basic needs are covered elsewhere in a workers’ compensation package.” Of course, the amount of the deduction is not specified or defined.
The new wage mandate would be phased in—employers would be required to pay 60% of the required wage on the effective date (one year after the issuance of the certificate of election), and 80% of the required wage one year from the effective date.
“Right to Equal Pay”
This section would establish rights to equal pay for equal work, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender express, familial status, race, ethnicity, national origin, citizenship, economic class, religion, age or developmental, mental, or physical ability.”
Essentially, anyone would become a “protected class.” Employers would feel immense pressure to unfairly pay the same wages to workers with different experience, skills and productivity, just to avoid lawsuits. And employers would be reluctant to tie compensation to work performance, so some workers would unfairly earn equal wages for unequal work.
Washington already has the Equal Pay Act, the Civil Rights Act and the Washington Law Against Discrimination to guard against unfair treatment in the workplace.
“Right Not to be Wrongfully Terminated”
This provision would require employers in the City with 10 or more workers to show “just cause” to terminate an employee, nullifying the “at-will” employment relationship that allows employers to lay-off or fire employees with no prior warnings or for any reason. Washington is one of 49 “at-will” states (Montana is the exception).
“Just cause” would be interpreted in accordance with “established, common law principles of collective bargaining and labor relations.” Employers would be required to demonstrate any termination is for “work performance reasons,” unless they can demonstrate the lay-off is “necessary for economic hardship.” Employers would be required to prove they provided “timely and adequate work performance warnings and opportunities to correct work performance,” and that there was a “fair, objective, and non-discriminatory termination process” that allowed the worker oppose the termination.
Just-cause employment can create many legal problems for employers if an employee is terminated and the proper documentation was not in place, was not thorough enough, or the employee claims the termination was simply not justified. These problems are why 49 states are “at-will” employment states.
“Corporate Powers Subordinate to People’s Rights”
This would strip any current legal rights of incorporated businesses to “challenge” the measure in court or otherwise “interfere with the rights” enumerated in the initiative.
This conflicts with state and federal law that recognizes corporations engaging in legal commerce as having the same legal rights as individuals.
Like Seattle’s minimum wage law, when determining employer size franchisees would be treated as a single employer with the franchisor and parent corporation, with workers employed outside of the City of Spokane by the franchisor and parent corporation counting toward an employers’ size. And like Seattle’s paid sick leave law, workers who spend any time in the City during their work hours would be covered, even if their employer is based out of another city. However, unlike Seattle’s paid leave law, which specifies that a worker must clock at least 240 hours a year in Seattle to be eligible, the Spokane measure includes no such threshold. A worker who spends “any portion” of their employment “physically present” within Spokane city limits would be covered by the “Worker Bill of Rights.”
Wondering why the Worker Bill of Rights doesn't include paid sick leave? The Spokane City Council has already said it will soon consider the issue of paid sick leave. Passage of that mandate is not far behind if one City Council member's recent comments are any indication:
So keep the east side pitchfork team at bay, and thank and brag on our friends in Seattle and the west side of the state for leading the country on paid sick leave…”