Posted on 07/26/2006 2:39:50 PM PDT by jaydubya2
Big-box retailers would be required to pay their Chicago employees a “living wage” — at least $10 an hour and $3 in benefits by 2010 — under a groundbreaking ordinance approved today that sets the stage for a court fight.
The 35 to 14 vote by a bitterly divided City Council is a victory for organized labor, a stunning defeat for Wal-Mart and the latest in a string of legislative embarrassments for Mayor Daley.
Chanting protesters on both sides of the contentious debate lined up early and jammed the Council chambers to witness a vote that could change the economic landscape of a city becoming more and more service-oriented every day.
A lobbying campaign waged behind the scenes for the last two years culminated in a more than three-hour debate that aired all of the old arguments and some new ones.
Chief sponsor Ald. Joe Moore (49th) likened the ordinance to President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s efforts 68 years ago to impose a 40-cent-an-hour minimum wage, outlaw child labor and mandate a 40-hour work week. “Our job is not to safeguard the profit for the world’s wealthiest corporations. Our job is to look out for our constituents,’’ he said.
Moore scoffed at the threat by Wal-Mart and Target to cancel their ambitious Chicago plans. “There is a buck to be made. A lot of bucks. They’ve saturated the rural markets,’’ he said.
Moore’s New Deal comparison did not sit well with his seatmate, Ald. Bernard Stone (50th).
“Instead of wrapping himself in President Roosevelt’s cloak, he should be wearing a little cap with a feather. This is Sherwood Forest. My colleague is Robin Hood. What he wants to do is steal from the rich and give to the poor,’’ he said.
Nowhere was the bitter division more evident than among African-American aldermen. Ald. Dorothy Tillman (3rd) said she “resents outside forces manipulating our community,’’ especially when it is “unions that have not been fair to us,’’ she said.
Ald. Isaac Carothers (29th) said he finds it “amazing’’ that his colleagues are willing to ‘take the risk’’ and hope that Wal-Mart and Target are bluffing. “When it comes to the West Side, ‘Let’s gamble.’ They’re willing to gamble with my side of town.’’
Ald. Ed Smith, 28th, chairman of the City Council’s black caucus, took the opposite view. He presented charts that showed the average Wal-Mart employee is paid $7.70 an hour and $16,016 a year, while Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott is paid $16,826 an hour (figuring on a 40-hour week) and $34.9 million a year.
“How can I tell Mrs. Jones I won’t support an extra $2 an hour?’’ he said.
Earlier this week, Daley refused to tip his hand for fear it would let aldermen off the hook.
“First the City Council has to make this decision. It’s called, `Profiles in Courage.’ Simple as that,” he said Monday.
The mayor tried desperately — albeit at the 11th hour — to avert the veto dilemma he now faces.
He branded the ordinance as “redlining,” arguing that mandating wage and benefit standards would deprive impoverished African-American communities of the jobs, shopping alternatives and revenues they so desperately need.
Wal-Mart and Target underscored the mayor’s claim with threats to abandon their ambitious Chicago expansion plans.
Wal-Mart threatened to cancel plans to build as many as 20 new Chicago Wal-Marts over the next five years. Target put plans to build three South Side stores “on hold” — and made thinly veiled threats to close existing Chicago stores.
But, in the end, none of that sabre-rattling mattered.
Aldermen had made their commitments to organized labor months ago. They were not about to renege — and test labor’s threat to run candidates against sitting aldermen who dare to oppose the “living wage — just seven months before the election.
The ordinance that will make Chicago the first big city in the nation to mandate wage and benefit standards for retailing giants is a watered-down version of the original.
Last month, proponents made a series of concessions aimed at softening the blow to business.
Instead of raising wages and benefits in one fell swoop, they agreed to a four-year phase-in that calls for giant retailers to pay: $9.25-an-hour and $1.50 in benefits on July 1, 2007; $9.50 and $2 a year later; $ 9.75 and $2.50 on July 1, 2009 and the full $10-an-hour and $3 in benefits on July 1, 2010. After that, the “living wage” would be raised annually to match the rate of inflation.
And instead of applying those standards to newly built and existing stores with at least 75,000 square feet of space, the store size was raised to 90,000 square feet. Small vendors renting less than 50 percent of the space inside big-box stores were exempt from the standard.
The so-called “living wage” would apply to any employee who works more than 10 hours a week. The old version would have kicked in at five hours a week.
The Illinois Retail Merchants Association has vowed a court challenge to block the ordinance from taking effect.
The association has already commissioned a legal opinion that claims the ordinance would interfere with interstate commerce; violate the Equal Protection clauses of the state and federal constitutions by singling out large retailers and exceed the city’s home rule powers because minimum wages are the exclusive purview of the Illinois General Assembly.
Complicating the mayor’s position is the fact that the law firm of Daley & George — which once included Mayor Daley and still counts his brother, Michael, as a partner — represented Wal-Mart on the West Side zoning change that paved the way for Wal-Mart’s entry into the Chicago market. The Austin store is scheduled to open in September.
Two years ago, a bitterly divided City Council handed Wal-Mart a split decision: zoning approval to build its first Chicago store in the West Side’s Austin community and a one-vote defeat in Chatham.
The vote followed an acrimonious debate that saw organized labor’s City Council’s allies throw the kitchen sink at Wal-Mart. They talked about a “predatory pricing” scheme that drives smaller competitors out of business and about a retailing behemoth that provides low-paying jobs with meager benefits and faces lawsuits for allegedly forcing hourly workers to work overtime without pay.
The failed effort to stop Wal-Mart gave birth to the big-box movement. Opponents claim that labor leaders’ real beef is their failure to unionize Wal-Mart.
"union stores in Chicago pay a starting salary of less than $10 "
Don't forget to pay your union dues outta that 10 bucks!
They need to pull completely out of the city and then they need to run free shuttles. That will take the taxes and jobs outside the city. Eventually, the city will scream.
The WalMart pegged for 83rd & Stewart ended up at 94th & Western in Evergreen Park because of folks like my rep Mary Flowers and Flaky Father Pfleger not wanting "slave jobs" in their areas. They would rather have no jobs:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/243655/thread/1133847187/last-1151164901/What%27s+next%2C+Wal-Mart-
One is due to open up on North Avenue and the sout' side one ended up in Evergreen Park/Drury Lane.
WalMart Ping..............criminy.
Shrug Atlas, shrug...
North and what?
There are Targets and Target says it will pack up and leave if this law passes. The dem aldermen say that Target is bluffing.
We'll see.
I love stupid Democratic politicians. And Chicago aldermen are the dumbest.
A fat lie.
the average wage for regular, full-time hourly associates in Illinois is $10.41 per hour (Wal-Mart Discount Stores, Supercenters, and Neighborhood Markets). Additionally, associates are eligible for performance-based bonuses.
http://www.walmartfacts.com/StateByState/?id=14
I'll bet they can design a perfectly good store that will fit into 89,999 Sq. Ft.
In Detroit, the city is down on the ground and keeps digging the hole deeper and deeper. It never seems to occur to them that this ain't working. They blame the "rich" who all fled years ago, and raise taxes, beggering the few remaining businesses, like tics on a dying dog. How do you take it back? You can't change tax policy until you get a majority, and you'll never be able to run a business long enough to start building a conservative majority. Will Chicago go the same way?
Sounds like Daley is screwed, and knows it.
The location discussed a few years ago was Grand and Kilpatrick:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/243655/message/1083804056/Protesters+bash+Wal-Mart%27s+attempt+to+open+2+stores+in+Chicago
Maybe oprah will put all the newly unemployed people on her staff.
(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em Down Hezbullies.)
Sounds to me like Chicago just handed an economic boom to the surrounding towns and cities.
So essentially it boils down to this... if the board and CEO agreed to take his $34.9 million in compensation and reduce it to $7.70 and give away the remaining $34.88 million to employees to raise their pay by $2.00 an hour, a whopping 8,386 employees could make $9.70 per hour and they could begin looking for a new CEO. According to their 2006 financial report they employ over 1.3 million U.S. associates. If they have only 1.7 million worldwide they all could get a penny an hour raise using that $34.88 million from the CEO's salary.
What a bunch of mindless feel good moronic policies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.