By Michael Brand
Since the beginning of the pandemic, worker’s rights have become a national issue. From the federal government allowing meatpacking companies to force their workers to work through outbreaks, to Amazon seeing its employees unionize on an unprecedented scale, to a Starbucks manager getting fired in Buffalo getting national attention, the fight for workers rights has taken the nation by the storm. Although it is a national issue, most reforms will come at the state level.
On Labor Day, California’s governor Gavin Newsom, signed into law the FAST Food Recovery Act. The bill “creates a 10-member council of fast food workers, franchisees, franchisors, advocates for fast food employees, and representatives from the governor's office… will establish minimum standards on wages, working hours, and other working conditions related to the health and safety of workers” (Luna). Additionally, it raises the minimum wage for fast food companies with over 100 workers to “$22 an hour next year, compared to the statewide minimum of $15.50 an hour” (Thompson). The bill serves as a major victory for workers rights.
The bill did not come without opposition. The bulk of the corporate response came from “restaurant groups and franchisees [who] lobbied aggressively against the bill and in recent days had urged Mr. Newsom to veto it” (Mai Duc and Haddon). The result of the industry’s lobbying was votes against the bill on both sides of the aisle. The bill passed the Assembly by a vote of 47-19, and the Senate by a vote of 21-12 (California Legislative Information). The main argument from the industry is rising consumer prices as “IFA president and CEO Matthew Haller said in a statement that the bill would hurt smaller franchise operators and pointed to a study that suggested higher wages could lead to 20% increases in menu prices” (Mossburg and Wiener-Bronner). But much like fast food, this contention is low in quality.
Policy analysts like “David Weil, who under President Barack Obama oversaw the agency that enforces the federal minimum wage, said that, while funding is critical for labor regulators, the new council could benefit a broad swath of workers even without additional funding” (Scheiber). Even if the fast food industry sees its prices increase, it could ultimately be a good action, as small businesses will have the upper hand on multinational corporations.
The bigger question comes in terms of unintended consequences. This type of legislation is unprecedented for a capitalist economy in the United States. With 4 members of the council being industry representatives it seems inevitable that they will gain control of the council and ensure that corporations get everything they want. Furthermore, with the wage increase only applying to large businesses, it could put pressure on small businesses who are struggling to get by. If a teenager is choosing between spending their summer working at a small business for $15 or a corporation for $22, it’s pretty obvious what they will choose. The worst impacts of this bill won’t be the consequences we can predict; it’ll be the ones we cannot.
Workers rights have become a national issue. California has taken the lead in establishing standards to protect them. Whether this piece of legislation will be effective depends on whether those on the council are ready and willing to stand up to corporations.
Comments