{news} Fw: WFP Update: Manchester passes Living Wage

Wed Apr 12 23:23:34 EDT 2006

Kudos to John Taylor and the Working Families Party for leveraging this ordinance!  This demonstrates the power that third-party candidacies can have.

David Bedell

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Jon Green 
To: jgreen @workingfamiliesparty.org 
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 3:24 PM
Subject: WFP Update: Manchester passes Living Wage 

www.ct-workingfamilies.org

The Manchester Living Wage ordinance passed last night on a 6-3 party-line vote. For the Working Families members in Manchester, last night's vote was a victory that had been over a year in the making. At the first organizing committee meeting of the Manchester area chapter, members brought up the fact that the Manchester Board of Directors had voted against a Living Wage proposal the previous year. And the Living Wage was certainly one of the issues that motivated Machinists union leader John Taylor to petition onto the ballot as Working Families candidate for Board of Directors. Although John later withdrew from the race, his candidacy certainly raised the profile of the Living Wage among voters and elected officials alike - prompting Republicans to make wild accusations of a "quid pro quo."

After the election, Working Families members continued to press the issue, bringing together a coalition with church leaders, peace and justice activists, and union leaders. We held rallies, spoke at public hearings, and held our elected officials feet to the fire. The 6-3 party-line vote showed a clearly philosophical divide between those who believe our economy should support workers trying to raise their family and those who insist that only the "invisible hand" of supply and demand should determine wages -- even at businesses that profit from public tax dollars.

The ordinance itself is fairly strong, as it covers both town contractors and recipients of tax abatements. It sets a Living Wage of $11.06 per hour (115% of the poverty level for a family of four) and includes an additional payment of $3 per hour if family medical benefits are not offered.

Congratulations to the staff and members who made this victory happen, along with allies ranging from the Manchester Peace and Justice Coalition, the Greater Hartford Labor Central Labor Council, Teamters and Machinists union activists, AFSCME Local 991, UFCW Local 371, St. Bridget's Church, St. James Church, and the Unitarian Universalist Church. A special thanks is owed to John Taylor whose candidacy last fall certainly raised the profile of this important issue.

If you or someone you know wants to get involved in Working Families in the Manchester area, join us at the next chapter meeting: Monday, April 16th, 6:30pm at the Machinists Union Hall, 357 Main Street in East Hartford.

You can read the gory details in the Hartford Courant article posted below.

*******************************************
Jon Green 
Working Families 
621 Farmington Avenue, 2nd Floor 
Hartford, CT 06105 
(860)523-1699 
Cell: (203)243-8941 
e-mail: jgreen@ workingfamiliesparty.org 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.courant.com/news/local/hr/hc-manbod0412.artapr12,0,7066517.story 

      Officials Pass Living-Wage Ordinance, 6-3 

      Issue Provokes Political Mudslinging Before Partisan Vote 

      By REGINE LABOSSIERE
      Courant Staff Writer

      April 12 2006

      MANCHESTER -- Like a tennis ball being smacked back and forth over a net, Republicans and Democrats threw biting words to and fro before voting 6-3 Tuesday in favor of a living-wage ordinance.

      The political mudslinging went as far as Republicans accusing Democrats of pushing for a living wage as political payback to the Working Families Party. A local member of the party, which has been a major advocate of the ordinance, dropped out of the municipal elections last year, probably, Republicans suggested, to help give Democrats more votes.

      The political volley caused Democrat Director Dave Sheridan to reply, "I guess the election season is officially underway."

      In response to the allegations concerning the Working Families Party, Sheridan acknowledged that there are organized groups in favor of the ordinance that traditionally back the Democratic Party but, "I think you go a step too far by making a causal connection."

      Sheridan drafted the ordinance, which instantly turned into a hot topic when Democrats proposed it a few months ago. 

      The goal of the living-wage ordinance is to help employees work their way out of poverty and provide for a family of four. Companies affected would be those with at least 25 employees, that either have a service contract with the town of at least $25,000 a year or receive a tax benefit of at least $25,000 a year. The ordinance requires those companies to pay certain full-time employees $11.06 an hour plus health benefits, or $14 an hour if no health benefits are offered.

      As expected, the six Democrats voted for the ordinance and the three Republicans voted against it. The living wage will affect future contracts and tax benefits that fall under the ordinance.

      Supporters have said formalizing a living wage is a moral decision that could only help, not hurt, residents and local workers. Opponents of the ordinance have called it a noble and moral effort that is "grossly insufficient," would be a "bureaucratic nightmare" to enforce and would cause residents to pay more in taxes while only helping a dozen or so local workers.

      "This is about helping people in need," Democratic Mayor Josh Howroyd said. "This may not be a far-reaching ordinance, but I think it is an important policy that we make."

      Republican Director Cheri Ann Pelletier questioned the proponents' push for the ordinance.

      "As a director of this board, it is not my job to govern morality," Pelletier said.

      She said that the fiscal effect of the ordinance has not been determined, yet Democrats are moving forward with spending an unknown amount of residents' money.

      "Is this the statement the majority wants to make to the taxpayers?" Pelletier asked.

      Minority Leader Louis Spadaccini agreed that a municipal government should not mandate living wages and said that, because the ordinance would affect perhaps a dozen local workers, it was a waste of time and money.

      "You know an ordinance is a bad idea when it applies to virtually nobody," Spadaccini said.

      He argued that the board should focus more attention on public safety and an upcoming property revaluation, among other town issues.

      "Manchester continues to face real problems that are not going away," Spadaccini said. 
      Copyright 2006, Hartford Courant 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/private/ctgp-news/attachments/20060412/28bdb359/attachment.html>