Big Box Blues
Today in Chicago an ordinance was passed (the mayor can still veto it, but there were enough votes in favor to override if necessary) which will require "big box" stores--Wal-Mart and the like, behemoth-sized stores owned by behemoth-sized companies, sprouting up all over the country--to pay a minimum wage of $10/hour and provide $3/hour worth of benefits for all employees.
Wal-Mart is claiming this is bad for workers. (Huh?! Show me a retail clerk who is better off making $7/hour than $10. All the stuff about hiring fewer workers because they cost more: bullshit. It takes however many workers it takes to ring registers and stock shelves, and if you don't have enough, you don't have a store. These people have run a few of these stores; they know that.)
Wal-Mart and Target are complaining that the requirement that they pay their employees almost enough to live on will keep them from opening more stores in Chicago. You know, because one of the most populous cities in the U.S. won't provide them with a large enough customer base to make money if they have to pay a slightly larger pittance to their serfs. This is just a negotiating ploy. I guarantee that after the whinging is over, they will once again notice that Chicagoans' money is still green and clamor to open all around the city.
And if they don't--GREAT! Good for small businesses the boxes might have driven out. And if they prefer, Chicagoans needn't be deprived of cheap goods sold in giant quantities, because Costco has no problem with the ordinance: they already pay their workers in accord with the ordinance minimums. Costco will happily, I expect, take over the Chicago market if the others make good on their threats (which, as I said above, they won't). Because Costco management has noticed that people making ten bucks can afford to spend more in their stores and communities than people scraping by on six or seven bucks. And people making ten bucks are a little more likely to stick around long enough to become skilled at their jobs and thereby work more efficiently.
So kudos to the Chicago City Council for showing some guts, doing something right for the city and the people, and not being bought. (That last proves that this is not the City Council of my youth, that's for sure.) And if Daley the Second even thinks of vetoing this, well, I think we all know what that says about him.
Yup, they still play the Blue State in my home town. Yay, Chicago!
Addendum: Whoa, the Republican Party has finally figured out that hourly workers have the same right to vote as CEOs. There is movement to increase the federal minimum wage before they have to face the electorate.
Wal-Mart is claiming this is bad for workers. (Huh?! Show me a retail clerk who is better off making $7/hour than $10. All the stuff about hiring fewer workers because they cost more: bullshit. It takes however many workers it takes to ring registers and stock shelves, and if you don't have enough, you don't have a store. These people have run a few of these stores; they know that.)
Wal-Mart and Target are complaining that the requirement that they pay their employees almost enough to live on will keep them from opening more stores in Chicago. You know, because one of the most populous cities in the U.S. won't provide them with a large enough customer base to make money if they have to pay a slightly larger pittance to their serfs. This is just a negotiating ploy. I guarantee that after the whinging is over, they will once again notice that Chicagoans' money is still green and clamor to open all around the city.
And if they don't--GREAT! Good for small businesses the boxes might have driven out. And if they prefer, Chicagoans needn't be deprived of cheap goods sold in giant quantities, because Costco has no problem with the ordinance: they already pay their workers in accord with the ordinance minimums. Costco will happily, I expect, take over the Chicago market if the others make good on their threats (which, as I said above, they won't). Because Costco management has noticed that people making ten bucks can afford to spend more in their stores and communities than people scraping by on six or seven bucks. And people making ten bucks are a little more likely to stick around long enough to become skilled at their jobs and thereby work more efficiently.
So kudos to the Chicago City Council for showing some guts, doing something right for the city and the people, and not being bought. (That last proves that this is not the City Council of my youth, that's for sure.) And if Daley the Second even thinks of vetoing this, well, I think we all know what that says about him.
Yup, they still play the Blue State in my home town. Yay, Chicago!
Addendum: Whoa, the Republican Party has finally figured out that hourly workers have the same right to vote as CEOs. There is movement to increase the federal minimum wage before they have to face the electorate.
posted by Maines at 11:25 PM
4 Comments:
Yay Chicago indeed! I'm very impressed. Anybody who makes WalMart & Co. treat their workers better is on the side of the angels.
Hi, Wayne--I thought Daley had opposed the big box law. Is that not the case?
Hi, Susan--welcome!
Daley was in fact very strongly against it. This issue demonstrated clearly his waning power. Unfortunately, kings sometimes die slowly, as the kingdom crumbles around them. Hopefully that won't be the case here.
And this king is the son of an old king . . . much as I am not a fan of the Daley monarchy and never have been (I spent many winter afternoons in high school canvassing for Daley the Elder opponents and getting doors slammed in my face), Richie definitely turned out to be less awful than I thought he'd be. Not that it would take much to exceed expectations that low.
One should buy a certain other blogger of my and Wayne's acquaintance a few drinks, then ask him for his uproarious impression of Daley the Younger trying to pronounce "Mike Royko."
(And of course: Hi, Mike!)
Post a Comment
<< Home