"Sir, would you like me to add french fries to your order?" |
December 30, 2011
On January 1, the minimum wage in
San Francisco will cross the psychological threshold of $10 an hour. An
automatic cost-of-living adjustment built into city law will raise the
wage floor 3.2 percent, from its current $9.92 to $10.24. Predictably,
employers have been warning that the increase will cost jobs. In fact, a great deal of economic evidence suggests otherwise.
Last March, my CEPR colleague, David Rosnick, and I finished a detailed study of
the employment impact of the first three years of the San Francisco
minimum wage. Back in early 2004, San Francisco established a city-wide
minimum wage of $8.50 --25 percent higher than the $6.75 California
state minimum wage at the time and 65 percent higher than the prevailing
federal minimum of $5.15.
We
analyzed employment patterns in a range of industries with a high share
of low-wage workers, including fast food and retail. We compared trends
in wages and employment in San Francisco before and after the increase
with trends over the same period in San Francisco's adjacent suburbs
and, separately, in nearby Oakland, two areas where the minimum wage was
unchanged.
To rule out
statistical flukes, we looked at the impact after one year, then two
years, then three years. We also examined the impact on low-wage
employers, regardless of industry, and we isolated the impact on small
employers (fewer than 10 employees and 10 to 24 employees).
We
consistently found that the minimum-increased boosted wages, but had no
discernible impact on employment. Wages rose significantly in fast
food, broader food services, and in low-wage establishments (regardless
of industry). Because wages in San Francisco were already relatively
high in retail trade, the law had no significant impact on wages in that
sector. At the same time, the new, higher minimum wage had no
measurable impact --one way or the other-- on employment in these same
industries and establishments.
READ MORE
No comments:
Post a Comment