In the run-up to yesterday’s election, the New York Times reported on the overwhelming popularity of minimum wage increases. Even in several solidly Republican states, these measures are “so overwhelmingly popular . . . that the opposition has hardly put up a fight.” The election bore out this optimistic forecast. Four states, Alaska, Arkansas, Nebraska, and South Dakota, approved increases to the minimum wage, while a fifth, Illinois, passed a nonbinding advisory measure in favor of an increase. The new state minimum wages ranged from $8.50 per hour in Arkansas and South Dakota to $9.75 per hour in Alaska, according to the Times. In Alaska and South Dakota, the wage will continue to rise with inflation. For additional reporting on these results, see Time and the Huffington Post.
Meanwhile, minimum wage increases also passed in some local elections. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that voters in San Francisco approved an increase to $15 per hour, joining Seattle as the cities with the highest wages in the nation. Across the bay in Oakland, voters approved a similar measure raising the minimum to $12.25 per hour.
The Huffington Post and the Boston Globe also report that Massachusetts voters have approved a measure giving the state “the nation’s strongest requirement for providing paid sick time to workers.” Under to the measure, “employers will have to provide their workers with one hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours they work, to be capped at 40 hours of leave for the year,” according to the Post.
Moving away from election news, the Atlantic features a story about National Nurses United, a California-based union that has grown substantially in recent years, even as union membership has continued to decline nationally. The union’s leader, RoseAnn DeMoro argues that something that differentiates her union from others is that “[h]er nurses aren’t out for better wages or pensions, she says, they’re out for their own safety and the safety of their patients.” The article claims that “nurses might be most able to lead a labor resurgence because of the fact that they’re highly-skilled workers, and not easily replaceable.” As a result, “[n]urses are less afraid to strike than fast food workers, for instance, because they know their employer won’t have an easy time finding someone to replace them.”
Daily News & Commentary
Start your day with our roundup of the latest labor developments. See all
September 18
Senate Democrats introduce a bill to nullify Trump’s executive orders ending collective bargaining rights for federal employees; the Massachusetts Teachers Association faces backlash; and Loyola Marymount University claims a religious exemption and stops recognizing its faculty union.
September 17
A union argues the NLRB's quorum rule is unconstitutional; the California Building Trades back a state housing law; and Missouri proposes raising the bar for citizen ballot initiatives
September 16
In today’s news and commentary, the NLRB sues New York, a flight attendant sues United, and the Third Circuit considers the employment status of Uber drivers The NLRB sued New York to block a new law that would grant the state authority over private-sector labor disputes. As reported on recently by Finlay, the law, which […]
September 15
Unemployment claims rise; a federal court hands victory to government employees union; and employers fire workers over social media posts.
September 14
Workers at Boeing reject the company’s third contract proposal; NLRB Acting General Counsel William Cohen plans to sue New York over the state’s trigger bill; Air Canada flight attendants reject a tentative contract.
September 12
Zohran Mamdani calls on FIFA to end dynamic pricing for the World Cup; the San Francisco Office of Labor Standards Enforcement opens a probe into Scale AI’s labor practices; and union members organize immigration defense trainings.