Skip to main content

Florida Attorney Moves to Put $15/Hour Minimum Wage Measure on the Ballot


This past Tuesday morning, Florida attorney John Morgan announced plans to take steps to put a minimum wage hike ballot measure before voters in 2020.  The ballot measure would seek to raise the hourly minimum wage rate in the state from its current rate of $8.46/hour up to $15/hour.  (The hourly wage rate would go up to $10/hour on September 30, 2021 and then rise $1/year until it hit $15/hour in September of 2026).  Notably, the proposal would place this minimum wage hike in the Florida Constitution as an amendment.  Within the past year or so, Morgan's law firm has raised nearly $500,000 for a committee that has been pushing for a minimum wage hike.

Readers might wonder why a Florida attorney (that is not the Attorney General of the state nor a politician) would put such time and effort toward a ballot measure.  That is a good question.  It is worth nothing that in 2016, Morgan helped a ballot measure succeed that legalized marijuana in the state.  Building off that success, he has now apparently turned his focus to minimum wage arguing that minimum wage workers should be entitled to a "living wage".  While succeeding in the efforts to legalize marijuana a few years ago does not mean the $15/hour ballot measure would succeed, if voters get a say, it does lend credence to the fact that Morgan appears ready and willing to fight for its success.  After all, late last year he indicated he was ready to pledge $1 million to support a $15/hour minimum wage movement in the state.

It will be interesting to see whether this effort gains any steam in the coming months.  Stay tuned.


Comments

Post a Comment

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,...
Post a Comment
Read more

Breaking: Labor Secretary Rumored to Be Leaving Administration

A few hours ago, word leaked out that Labor Secretary Marty Walsh (“Walsh”) is in the midst of negotiations to head up the NHL Players Union and leave his position at the Labor Department. Walsh, who has served as the sole Labor Secretary under President Biden, has taken part in a labor renaissance of sorts as support for organized labor has increased during his term as Labor Secretary (although the number of workers that have joined a union over the past two years has not grown as mush as some expected.)  He has also overseen the ongoing negotiations with rail workers over a new contract, although that matter is still on shaky ground and playing out as we speak. As for who might step into the vacant Labor Secretary role, there are already rumblings that President Biden should nominate Deputy Labor Secretary Julie Su (a strong labor advocate) or even a progressive like Senator Bernie Sanders.  Until Walsh officially gives his notice, however, I would expect some/many potential...
Post a Comment
Read more

Distance in a Non-Compete Agreement Measured "As the Crow Flies"

Ginn v. Stonecreek Dental Care - Court of Appeals, Twelfth Appellate District of Ohio Facts :  Dr. R. Douglas Martin ("Martin") sold his dental practice to an employee who worked there, Dr. David Ginn ("Ginn").  In doing so, Martin and Ginn signed a contract for the sale which contained a non-compete provision that prohibited Martin from engaging in business "within 30 miles" of the practice for five years starting from October 2010.  While Martin initially stayed on and worked with Ginn for a period, the relationship subsequently deteriorated between the two and Martin went to work for another dental office.  The new dental office was less than 30 miles away when measuring the distance in a straight line.  However, when driving between the offices, the distance was more than 30 miles. Ginn filed a claim against Martin on the grounds that Martin breached the non-compete.   At the trial court level, the court found that "within 30 miles"...
Post a Comment
Read more