Search

Why are cities acting against inequality? We attribute the growth of municipal economic policy to multi-city urban policy entrepreneurship networks. These networks combine activists who create pressure to address inequality with policy experts who supply the legislative means to do so. We illustrate the concept through the Fight for $15 campaign in Seattle and Chicago. Drawing on more than 100 interviews, participant observation and secondary documents, we show that advocates for municipal policy reform use national policy entrepreneurship networks to develop policy-specific and generalized policy advocacy techniques. Centering urban policy entrepreneurship brings into focus three important aspects of current municipal public policy: 1) The two-way interaction between national and local policy campaigns. 2) Partnerships between activists who set the political agenda and policy entrepreneurs who act on political opportunity. 3) The role of national advocacy and policy entrepreneurship networks in converting new policy ideas into routine, off-the-shelf policy solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the past 6 years, a wave of local minimum wage laws passed in the United States with policymakers and advocates framing the policy as a means of reducing income inequality. This report evaluates whether one of the first of these efforts, Seattle's $15 minimum wage ordinance, lowered inequality of earnings of workers in the city. I find that inequality among workers who earned less than the city's median wage was modestly reduced, yet overall earnings inequality substantially increased during the period in which the ordinance was phased in, likely for reasons unrelated to the minimum wage law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research Summary: In 2017, Seattle, Washington, became the first city in the United States to increase its minimum wage to $15 per hour, more than double the federal minimum wage. Not only was a $15 minimum wage unprecedented, but the increase was also extremely rapid, with the minimum wage rising by nearly 60% in just 2 years. Using a synthetic differences‐in‐differences estimator, we consider the impact of Seattle's landmark minimum wage legislation on public safety. Although there is speculative evidence for an increase in commercial burglaries, we find little evidence that Seattle experienced a change in its aggregate rate of violent or property offending relative to other U.S. cities. To better understand the mechanisms underlying our findings, we investigate the impacts of the local wage law on employment and earnings for Seattle's low‐skilled labor market. We detect no meaningful adverse effects on the employment rates of low‐wage workers. Policy Implications: Our results suggest that Seattle increased its minimum wage without compromising public safety. Seattle's experience shows that increasing wages can be a tool for increasing the opportunity cost of crime without reducing employment levels. To the extent that other cities enact higher minimum wages to a level that generates unemployment among low‐skilled workers, public safety changes could be considerably different. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nearly 40 local governments adopted minimum wage rates higher than the federal minimum in the last decade. Research on such laws focuses on employment and price adjustments of for-profit firms. Higher minimum wage rates, however, may pose unique challenges to community-based nonprofit organizations, many of which serve vulnerable communities and have limited ability to modify business practices. We use survey and in-depth interview data with more than 125 nonprofit executives to explore how nonprofit organizations were exposed to, understood, and responded to the initial phase-in of Seattle's $15 minimum wage ordinance. Although most nonprofits with low-wage workers do not report substantial programmatic changes in response to the minimum wage, we do find evidence nonprofits are pursuing several avenues to raise revenue to cover higher anticipated labor costs. Results suggest that the channels of adjustment available to nonprofits have a different character than those available to for-profit firms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A growing number of cities and counties have recently raised their minimum wages. How employers respond to these mandates provides insight into the impact such policies might have on workers and local labor market. Drawing on two survey waves tracking initial responses to Seattle's $15 Minimum Wage Ordinance by 439 employers with low-wage workers, we show how employers adjusted to higher wages. Most commonly, firms raised prices (56% reported this); smaller percentages reduced employee headcount or hours, limited internal wage progression, or took other measures. Single-site Seattle employers responded similarly to those with multiple sites. Food and accommodation sector employers were more likely to raise prices than firms in other sectors. Relative to other ownership structures, franchises disproportionately reported reducing their workforces. Very few employers reported withdrawing from Seattle. Overall, initial employer responses to this city-level minimum wage law align with predictions from the literature, findings that highlight trade-offs that policy makers must consider in future local wage regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Day‐labor markets are characterized by chronic instability, low pay, and weak institutional protections against violations of labor standards. In the U.S., worker centers address these conditions through the operation of hiring halls that dispatch workers, set minimum wages, and redress wage theft. Surveys conducted in Seattle in 2012 and 2015 were used to evaluate wage rates, employment rates, and wage theft variables for workers at a worker center and those seeking employment at four informal hiring sites. Worker center members were found to have significantly higher wages, higher employment rates, and lower rates of wage theft than day laborers who search for employment in public spaces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine the impacts of Seattle's minimum wage ordinance on food prices by food processing category.Design: Supermarket food prices were collected for 106 items using a University of Washington Center for Public Health Nutrition market basket at affected and unaffected supermarket chain stores at three times: March 2015 (1-month pre-policy enactment), May 2015 (1-month post-policy enactment) and May 2016 (1-year post-policy enactment). Food items were categorized into four food processing groups, from minimally to ultra-processed. Data were analysed across time using a multilevel, linear difference-in-differences model at the store and price level stratified by level of food processing.Setting: Six large supermarket chain stores located in Seattle ('intervention') affected by the policy and six same-chain but unaffected stores in King County ('control'), Washington, USA.Subjects: One hundred and six food and beverage items.Results: The largest change in average price by food item was +$US 0·53 for 'processed foods' in King County between 1-month post-policy and 1-year post-policy enactment (P < 0·01). The smallest change was $US 0·00 for 'unprocessed or minimally processed foods' in Seattle between 1-month post-policy and 1-year post-policy enactment (P = 0·94). No significant changes in averaged chain prices were observed across food processing level strata in Seattle v. King County stores at 1-month or 1-year post-policy enactment.Conclusions: Supermarket food prices do not appear to be differentially impacted by Seattle's minimum wage ordinance by level of the food's processing. These results suggest that the early implementation of a city-level minimum wage policy does not alter supermarket food prices by level of food processing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]