It turns out that the true picture is more like, well, your and your neighbors' situation. Aside from the federal census jobs that expire in a few months, governments on the whole are trimming their work forces, particularly at the state and local level, as the recession drags on. And while highly paid employees can be found there, as in the private sector (though at a lower average salary), the majority of government workers are trying to get by, just like most Americans.
Nashville government has many employees at or near minimum wage, often making less than workers in unskilled private-sector service jobs. That concerns Mayor Karl Dean, Metro Council members Megan Barry and Ronnie Steine, and others. They want to raise pay rates for Nashville's lowest-paid workers to a "living wage" of $10.77 an hour.
A living wage is considered to be the amount needed for an individual to afford food, shelter and other basic needs for an extended period of time, based on the cost of living in their community. Social scientists consider it to be a more realistic level of pay than the minimum wage, which is the least amount that public or private employers must pay according to law - and bears little connection to the cost of living. Currently, that wage is [$7.25] an hour.
A 2008 study by Vanderbilt University Professor Melissa Snarr determined that a wage of over $10 an hour is needed to subsist in this city without government assistance, and that's the basis of the new proposal. A living wage has been adopted by a number of municipal governments nationwide, including Memphis, and even private employers, such as Vanderbilt. And in those instances, worker satisfaction reportedly increased.
Still, the concept of a living wage does not sit well with a number of people who consider it to be social tinkering. In their interpretation, wages should be determined completely by the vagaries of the free market: A business owner brings in X amount of profit, pays himself and pays for equipment, etc. Whatever is left is disbursed to the number of people he needs to run his business.
This view may have worked at some time in our nation's past. In today's society, there is so much more to consider. Many employers want a stable workforce, where individuals work for most of their careers. This builds teamwork skills and productivity. Paying workers less than they can afford to live on has the opposite effect.
When the Metro Council looks at this proposal, probably at tonight's meeting, there will be some opposition, and they may cite the economy as a reason the city cannot afford to pay a living wage. But the fact is that we all pay more in the long run if employers compensate their workers inadequately. Not only does productivity suffer, but minimum-wage workers, especially those with families, must then rely on government assistance - paid for with tax dollars that should be going for other needs.
Dean's proposal would be paid for under the recently approved plan to restructure Metro's bond obligations. This is a timely opportunity for Metro Nashville to show it is an employer that values people and bring the wage up to a realistic level.
© 2010 The Tennessean
Email this page
