Should the Mayor Veto the Living Wage Bill?

The New York City Council voted 45-5 on Monday to approve a living wage bill that mandates employers receiving city-subsidized funding with annual gross revenues of over $5 minimum pay its employees a minimum wage of $10 per hour with benefits or $11.50 per hour without benefits.

That’s $2.75 over the state's minimum wage of $7.25, and the mandate would not include those in the nonprofit and manufacturing sectors.

However, Bloomberg already has vowed to veto it. He says that in the current economic climate, if employers are forced to pay workers more, they will simply cut back on the projects they fund and the number of employees they hire.

The mayor points to a city-funded study that shows the bill would hurt small businesses, increase unemployment and “drive private investment in the city down.”

A study conducted by the Fiscal Policy Institute shows also that average earned wages for working people have actually decreased the past 20 years when adjusted for inflation, even though the city’s economy has grown by 2.9 percent annually.

For example, online grocer, Fresh Direct, which delivers regularly to Bed-Stuy, receives $2 million in subsides annually for its warehouse in Queens. But according to the report, 63 percent of Fresh Direct’s employees earn less than $25,000 a year, with many of the employees starting wages either at or below NY State minimum wage.

 “Poverty is on the rise in many communities in our city, and the living wage bill is a significant response to the growing plight of the working poor," said James Parrott, chief economist and deputy director of the Fiscal Policy Institute.

What do you think? If further unemployment is indeed a risk, should the mayor veto the Living Wage Bill, or should he support the City Council’s decision to increase wages?