On Wednesday, a small crowd of activists gathered in
front of Philadelphia’s City Hall to demand that City Council raise the city’s
minimum wage to $15 dollars an hour. They rallied under the banner of a largely
volunteer organization, 15 Now, which gained nationwide attention for its role
in Seattle’s historic increase earlier this year. (The group is distinct from
Fight for 15, which orchestrates one-day strikes for a $15 wage for fast-food
workers and is backed by the Service Employees International Union.)
Despite the bitter cold, 40 to 50 attendees milled
around, trying to keep warm, and singing a revamped version of “This Land Is
Your Land” (“We work all day for minimal pay, raise the wage for you and me”).
Near the end of the rally, Councilman Kenyatta Johnson showed up, talked about
the labor struggles at the airport, and led the crowd in chanting for a $15
minimum wage. “I came out here today to support your efforts to make sure we
raise the minimum wage here in the city of Philadelphia,” said Johnson. “I will
continue to stand with you.”
15 Now is demanding that City Council act despite a
preemption clause inserted in Pennsylvania’s minimum wage law the last time it
was increased (in 2006). The law reads “this act shall preempt and supersede
any local ordinance or rule concerning the subject matter of this act.” But 15
Now claims it has found a way around the preemption clause, laying out their
case in a well-researched and carefully argued legal memo.
Their argument rests on the idea that the law’s statement
of policy shows that the intent of the legislation is to be a substitute for
low-wage workers’ minimal bargaining power and prevent “the depression of
wages.” Read in light of the statement of policy’s clarity on this point and
the preemption clauses’ relatively vague wording, 15 Now argues that the
legislature’s intent regarding preemption is ambiguous. It could be read only
as a ban against municipalities reducing their own minimum wage below that of
the state, still allowing for the possibility of higher local floors. In the
case of such ambiguity, 15 Now argues that the state Supreme Court would rule
in favor of the city’s right to raise its own minimum wage.
“I think they are good arguments,” says Bob Curley, a
labor lawyer who works with the building trades, after reading 15 Now’s memo.
Asked what would happen if City Council attempted to act on these
recommendations, he says, “I think the Chamber of Commerce would challenge it,
but I’m not sure the courts would agree. It would really need to be enacted,
then … business interests would seek an injunction until it’s constitutionally
ruled on.”
As of yesterday, no members of City Council have endorsed
15 Now’s specific position or committed to introducing legislation. Councilman
Johnson’s office confirmed his support of raising the minimum wage, but was not
prepared to discuss 15 Now’s preemption claims. Organizers say all the Council
members they’ve talked to are broadly supportive of raising the minimum wage;
the city’s Law Department is studying their position.
Many states do not allow cities to set their own minimum
wage laws. New York Mayor Bill DeBlasio was prevented from fulfilling his
campaign promise to increase his city’s minimum wage by Democratic, but
industry-friendly, Governor Andrew Cuomo and his allies in the legislature. The
state of Illinois is considering legislation to forestall a successful ballot
initiative for a $15 minimum wage last spring.
“15 Now is in many cities across the country with similar
[situations], but Philadelphia had the preemption with the vaguest language,”
says Philadelphia 15 Now organizer Kate Goodman, who is the only paid staffer
in the city. “We think we could win here and set a precedent for other places.
There are 17 [other cities with 15 Now campaigns] with similar preemptions,
although ours seems the most vulnerable.”
Santa Fe’s 2003 citywide minimum wage increase was one of
the first municipal laws to mandate a raise and was unsuccessfully challenged
by the state legislature after passage. (The preemption clause in
Pennsylvania’s state law was no doubt a response to the New Mexico city’s
victory, followed by similar policies in San Francisco and a few other cities.)
Last month, legislators in Minneapolis began exploring the legality of their
own citywide increase. No other city has tried what 15 Now is campaigning for
in Philadelphia.
“I think they are reading too much into the declaration
of policy … they are going to have more problems with preemption than that memo
suggests,” says Adam Bonin, a Philadelphia lawyer who mostly focuses on
political cases. “Declarations of policy are important. But they have to be
read in the light of the subsequently passed preemption positions, which I
understand were part of real legislative debate and comprise the last time [the
statewide minimum wage] was raised back in 2005. [The legislature] really tried
to seal the door here.”
The state supreme court has also established, firmly,
that when clauses are clear in their intent they cannot be “contradicted” by a
law’s title or preamble. “Although titles and preambles are accepted aids in
resolving ambiguity in an enacting clause, they may not be used to create
ambiguity where none exists in the clause,” the Court wrote in 1987.
15 Now is planning to press forward. If no one on City
Council agrees to put forward legislation, the group plans to collect
signatures in attempt to convince Council to put a charter amendment on May’s
ballot to amend the city’s home rule charter to state the city’s ability to
raise its wage. Such a tactic would be difficult to achieve, however, if the
city’s legislative body does not care to pursue such a strategy: If Council
wants to add a charter amendment to the ballot, a two-thirds majority must
approve it, but if a petition with at least 20,000 voter signatures is
presented, then it can be added to the ballot by a simple majority vote. In
either case, the final power rests with the politicians.
No matter the legal outcome, it is difficult to argue
against 15 Now’s goal to raise the minimum wage. Philadelphia is still the
poorest of the nation’s 10 largest cities, and many workers are stranded in
low-wage drudgery.
“I was working at an elder care home. One of the reasons
I’ve gotten involved is because the job I was doing [is] a thankless job,” says
Denise Jones, 59. She’s a member of 15 Now, and experienced violence and sexual
harassment from patients — for $7.25 an hour and no benefits. “You are on your
feet non-stop, working with people who are mentally and physically handicapped.
It was too much. For doing that sort of work, I think $15 an hour would be
worth every penny.”
Source: Next
City
No comments:
Post a Comment