Living Wage Group Backs Measures to Increase Pay

Advocates for the working poor are set to propose ordinances for Ventura County and the city of Oxnard that would require companies doing business with the government to pay their employees substantially more than the minimum wage.

If the measures are adopted, the county and Oxnard would join a growing list of local governments nationwide that require contracting businesses or those that receive subsidies to pay employees enough to keep them above the federal poverty level. Federal minimum wage is $5.15 an hour, while California minimum wage is $5.75.

The proposal, which will be announced publicly next week by the Ventura County Living Wage Coalition, calls for contractors and recipients of more than $25,000 in assistance to pay their employees $8 an hour with benefits or $10 an hour without. The wages, which would be paid to both full- and part-time workers, were calculated as the amount required to keep a family of four off welfare.

While many elected officials expressed general support for the proposal, some local business leaders called it “unrealistic,” saying it could drive companies from the region.

Members of the coalition, including union leaders, community activists and clergy, say businesses that enjoy government contracts or subsidies are shirking their responsibility to taxpayers by paying such low wages that employees then turn to welfare, food banks and Medicaid to get by.

“Taxpayers are having to pay the social costs of poverty: from public assistance to Medicaid to a higher crime rate,” said coalition chairman Marcos Vargas. “The coalition is asking for a return on our investment. Our money should go to creating jobs where workers can feed their families.”

The reach of the proposed measure would be modest in terms of the overall labor force. For contractors, it would likely affect companies employing janitors, gardeners, security guards and the like. Low-wage service workers employed by companies receiving financial aid are also likely to benefit, although the measure would not be applied retroactively. It would also exempt businesses with fewer than five employees and many nonprofit organizations.

The coalition will file its proposals next week and the Board of Supervisors and the Oxnard City Council are likely to consider them later this month.

Sensing the measures’ potential for stirring up controversy, most elected officials this week shied away from taking a position on them.

Oxnard Mayor Manuel Lopez, echoing the comments of other city and county officials, said, “I’m receptive to the concept of a living wage. . . . I’ve seen it work in other cities.”

But others boldly expressed their support for the proposals. Supervisor John Flynn, while citing reservations about including companies that receive subsidies within the sweep of the measure, called it a “prudent policy” to require contractors to pay a living wage.

“It makes sense to me, “ he said. “The contractors are using government money. At least they ought to pay enough so people don’t have to use food stamps.”

*

And while the living wage coalition is not currently targeting the city of Port Hueneme, Councilman Murray Rosenbluth said he plans to propose such an ordinance once Oxnard has acted on the measure.

“If the head of a household goes out and works and is not on welfare, he or she ought to be able to not live in poverty,” Rosenbluth said.

To avoid some of the political fallout, Flynn suggested that the county and the cities that are interested act together to adopt such ordinances.

Efforts to pass living wage ordinances elsewhere, including the city and county of Los Angeles, have been met with resistance from business leaders, and that is likely to occur in Ventura County as well.

As part of its campaign, coalition members are singling out companies that receive taxpayer money but do not pay what they call a living wage, including Wal-Mart, which received development subsidies to open its store in Oxnard.

Because the measures would not be applied retroactively, if adopted they would not affect wages at the Oxnard store, but could affect future stores that were granted subsidies.

While not disputing that some non-management employees in the Oxnard store earn less than the wages proposed, a spokeswoman defended the company’s pay scale.

“In this tight job market, our associates don’t have to work for Wal-Mart,” Jessica Moser said. “They come because we offer competitive wages.”

An executive with a recycling company named by the coalition as a low-wage employer with a local government contract called the proposed wages an “unrealistic price to pay” for that industry.

“Our biggest cost is labor,” said the executive, who requested that he not be identified. “Any increase will certainly hurt us.”

Don Facciano, executive director of the Oxnard Chamber of Commerce, said he is concerned that if the proposed wage increases are adopted, they would create a domino effect, with employees already earning $8 and $10 an hour demanding higher pay.

“If we raise wages too high, we won’t be able to attract businesses to the area, and we’ll price ourselves out of the market,” Facciano said.

But coalition member Barry Hammit dismissed concerns that businesses would be driven from the community. “Where is McDonald’s going to go?” he said.

*

Hammit, executive director of the Service Employees International Union, Local 998, said with the living wage, workers would have more money to put back into the local economy. He called companies “hypocritical” for taking government money and not paying their employees a living wage.

“We live at a time of all-time high corporate profits,” he said.

While singling out lower-paying businesses as part of their campaign, coalition members also plan to generate good will with some local companies by showcasing those they say already pay decent wages.

Haas Automation, one of Oxnard’s largest employers and a recipient of an industrial development bond, currently pays its non-management staff wages at or above the amounts proposed in the measure.

Marketing director Scott Melamed said paying a living wage is part of the philosophy of the business.

“It doesn’t make sense to invest in people and train them, if they’re going to leave if someone else offers more money,” Melamed said. “But we also need happy workers who are able to feed their families.”