Skip to main content

What I’ve Been Reading This Week


I came across a couple articles this week in relation to hourly pay that I want to bring to the attention of readers.  In regard to the first article, even for those readers that are not in California (or do not deal with California employment matters), it is still worth paging through this article for an in depth dialogue on the benefits/drawbacks of pinning wage hikes to rising inflation rates.

As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week.


Potential $15.50/Hour Wage Rate in California: Good or Bad?

It is widely expected the the statewide hourly minimum wage rate in California will rise to $15.50/hour in January, triggered in part because of rising inflation.  (Currently, employers with at least 25 workers must pay at least $15/hour.  Employers with less than 25 workers must pay at least $14/hour.  By 2023, all employers will be required to pay their workers at least $15/hour.  However, there is a trigger for a quicker wage hike in the event that inflation rise above 7%.)  The San Diego Union Tribune recently conducted a round table to address whether this potential wage hike will be a benefit or burden to employers and employees alike in the state.  I encourage readers to page through this article for a more in depth discussion of the matter.


Apple to Raise Retail Pay to $22/Hour

Earlier this week, it was announced that Apple would raise the hourly pay rate for its retail workers to at least $22/hour, up from $20/hour.  Readers will likely recall that there have been several recent actions taken by Apple retail workers to unionize.  Part of those unionization efforts have focused on a desire for increased pay.  Will Apple’s move to boost hourly wages for its retail workers curb those unionization efforts?  Probably not, but it might at least slow that unionization momentum just a bit.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per