Would liberals please explain why union workplaces are exempt from SeaTac’s $15 minimum wage law?

wordpress ^ | September 7, 2014 | Dan from Squirrel Hill

[grundle]

Dan from Squirrel Hill's Blog

Would liberals please explain why union workplaces are exempt from SeaTac’s $15 minimum wage law?

The Washington Post recently published this article on the new $15 minimum wage law in SeaTac, Washington. The article states:

“… union workplaces are exempt…”

This exemption is wrong because the law is supposed to treat everyone equally.

But also, it is an extreme example of hypocrisy. It was unions who got the ball rolling on this $15 minimum wage. It was unions who said that all workers should be paid at least $15 an hour.

But now, these very same unions are getting an exemption from the very same law that they so strongly supported.

Would liberals please explain why union workshops got an exemption from SeaTac’s $15 minimum wage law that was initiated and supported by these very same unions?

[Pearls Before Swine]

Maybe the unions think their members’ minimum wage should be $15 before the union membership fees? /S

[devolve]

- I was ignore because I snore -

[EQAndyBuzz]

Unions supported Obamacare. Then they were exempted. The monied left wing “always” supports left wing causes then gets exemptions.
If they didn’t get exemptions,they would be Republicans.

[Truth29]

Just a guess, but probably something to do with negotiated contract provisions that can’t be overridden without legal complications.

[Salgak]

There might actually be a good reason for it. In a lot of areas, Union Base is Minimum Wage + X dollars an hour. IF the Unions aren’t covered by the local Minimum Wage, then they cannot argue that they deserve local Min + X dollars, but the much lower Fed Minimum + X dollars. . .

[Hugin]

To prevent union members from losing jobs. They know a lot of businesses will just move, they don’t want to lose the dues.

[kaehurowing]

Usually union contracts are tied to minimum wage. If the minimum wage increases,then usually union wages under the contract go up by the same amount. That is why the motivating force behind minimum wage increases is union political money, not real minimum wage workers.

[Fido969]

Just a guess, but probably something to do with negotiated contract provisions that can’t be overridden without legal complications.

How could you have a "legal" contract that has a wage below minium?

If the class of unionized workplaces is exempt, I forsee legal challenges.

[humblegunner]

Let me guess.. you’re going to add this to your list.

[grundle]

Thanks for the explanation.

[Tau Food]

It’s probably because we have a Federal statutory scheme for union labor contracts and Federal laws are the supreme law of the land, trumping local laws like this one. That would be my guess.

[kaehurowing]

WSJ:

The Labor Department’s collective-bargaining agreements file has a limited number of contracts available, so we were unable to determine how widespread the practice is. But the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union says that pegging its wages to the federal minimum is commonplace. On its website, the UFCW notes that “oftentimes, union contracts are triggered to implement wage hikes in the case of minimum wage increases.” Such increases, the UFCW says, are “one of the many advantages of being a union member.”

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324048904578318541000422454

“Why Unions Want a Higher Minimum Wage
Labor contracts are often tied to the law—and it reduces the competition for lower-paying jobs”

[Pollster1]

George Orwell had it right decades ago: Some animals are more equal than others in the Animal Farm that Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and their supporters are creating.