Big Don
Sr. Grandmaster
Complex calculations behind the Wal-Mart vote
By Lydia DePillis, Updated: July 11, 2013 Washington Post Excerpt:
Wednesday’s vote on the District’s new “living wage” law had about a decade of history behind it.
Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D), a longtime friend of labor, has tried several times to pass a bill mandating a higher minimum wages for big box stores. In the past, they’ve been almost symbolic efforts, a duty to the unions who knew they didn’t really have a chance.
As Wal-Mart announced plans for store after store last year, with little resistance from the D.C. Council and and no binding community benefits agreement, it appeared that the company’s triumph was complete.
And yet, when the final vote came on a bill that would require retailers with more than a billion dollars in sales and operating in spaces larger than 75,000 square feet to pay a minimum wage 50 percent higher than the District currently mandates, eight council members voted yes.
****SNIP****
Labor leaders, which drafted the bill originally, met with Wal-Mart representatives to say they would pull the bill if Wal-Mart agreed to collective bargaining. Predictably, the mega-retailer said no. “They pulled out all the stops and said this is our number one priority,” said a council staffer who requested anonymity to speak freely. “And when all labor pulls in one direction, that is a powerful thing in this council.”
END EXCERPT
How many people who buy their things at Wal-Mart will be screwed by this blatant play by unions?
By Lydia DePillis, Updated: July 11, 2013 Washington Post Excerpt:
Wednesday’s vote on the District’s new “living wage” law had about a decade of history behind it.
Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D), a longtime friend of labor, has tried several times to pass a bill mandating a higher minimum wages for big box stores. In the past, they’ve been almost symbolic efforts, a duty to the unions who knew they didn’t really have a chance.
As Wal-Mart announced plans for store after store last year, with little resistance from the D.C. Council and and no binding community benefits agreement, it appeared that the company’s triumph was complete.
And yet, when the final vote came on a bill that would require retailers with more than a billion dollars in sales and operating in spaces larger than 75,000 square feet to pay a minimum wage 50 percent higher than the District currently mandates, eight council members voted yes.
****SNIP****
Labor leaders, which drafted the bill originally, met with Wal-Mart representatives to say they would pull the bill if Wal-Mart agreed to collective bargaining. Predictably, the mega-retailer said no. “They pulled out all the stops and said this is our number one priority,” said a council staffer who requested anonymity to speak freely. “And when all labor pulls in one direction, that is a powerful thing in this council.”
END EXCERPT
How many people who buy their things at Wal-Mart will be screwed by this blatant play by unions?