3 ms·

To be clear, in California the tipped minimum wage is at least $13/hr state wide (and $14/hr for businesses with 25 employees or more). I believe in San Francis

by boulos 6y ago

To be clear, in California the tipped minimum wage is at least $13/hr state wide (and $14/hr for businesses with 25 employees or more). I believe in San Francisco, it’s also just strictly the same as minimum wage of $16.07/hr (and again for larger businesses, Healthy SF medical coverage is also mandatory [Edit: actually, providing coverage is, not Healthy SF, that’s just the cheapest coverage and so very common], and usually passed onto patrons as a 4% fee on their bill, though this isn’t dictated by statute). So your universe already exists: every restaurant in the state of California already ensures a minimum wage more than 6x the federal minimum.

etchalon 6y ago
And … California still has restaurants? I'm told that's impossible. Raising the minimum wage will cause all businesses to close.
- WillPostForFood 6y ago
  Only 50% of restaurant employees are out of work, not 100%.
- boulos 6y ago
  I didn’t know about this anecdote before, but apparently Alan Krueger of minimum wage study fame had an interesting follow up: shouldn’t the federal minimum wage be too high somewhere? What about Puerto Rico? Apparently, he didn’t find evidence to suggest a strong effect there. But it’s got me curious to follow up with other territory or county vs state differences in the data. My suspicion is that the current very low minimum wages are just too low to see effects anyway, but that a federal $15/hr would be enough of a jump to see many county-level area median wages suddenly tip over.
rahimnathwani 6y ago
"Healthy SF medical coverage is also mandatory" I don't think Healthy SF coverage is mandatory. From what I've read, businesses have two other options: provide a regular healthcare plan, or set aside a fund to reimburse employee healthcare costs as they arise. Restaurants usually go for that last option. "usually passed onto patrons as a 4% fee on their bill, though this isn’t dictated by statute" I find the last part of what you wrote interesting. It's true that this isn't dictated by statute. But it would be surprising and unusual for a statue to dictate that a business must make its customers pay a specific business cost. Of course, there are instances where businesses are responsible for collecting taxes from their customers (notably sales taxes and recycling fees) but these are explicitly taxes on consumers that the business is collecting for the government's convenience, not taxes on the business that the business is tricking consumers into paying, by making them believe they're responsible for them.
- boulos 6y ago
  Good point, I updated my comment with an edit: Healthy SF isn’t mandated, providing health care is (and the very limited Healthy SF coverage is basically the cheapest option, so most restaurants do that). On the “dictated by statute”, I actually mentioned that because so many people figured it was! Much like sales tax, it’s often on the bill as if it’s a thing that the city has specified and that it was a city program (rather than the city mandating that larger businesses provide coverage). Many restaurants are quite clear about it “we use this money to pay for healthcare for our workers”, but the biggest surprise for me was that the “market rate” ended up settling at about 4%. When some restaurants instead do an $X/patron or $Y/ticket add on, it catches people by surprise. Either way, I find it amusing what people are “willing” to pay for things, especially if we can get closer to living wages for everyone. (I’m all for more “taxes” on bills that somehow people prefer over menu items going up in price). tl;dr: good point, clarified my statements!
  - rahimnathwani 6y ago
    "and the very limited Healthy SF coverage is basically the cheapest option, so most restaurants do that" If someone works only a few hours per week, the 'Healthy SF' coverage can cost more than the minimum employer spend. So it's not always the cheapest option.
- thesimon 6y ago
  > Restaurants usually go for that last option. So restaurants basically run their own health insurance company?
  - rahimnathwani 6y ago
    No. They just have to spend at least a certain amount. They don't have to spend more than that, even if employees need more due to their specific health needs. More info here: https://sfgov.org/olse/sites/default/files/2021%20HCSO%20Poster%20Final.pdf https://sfgov.org/olse/sites/default/files/2021%20HCSO%20Pos...

by boulos 6y ago

etchalon 6y ago

And … California still has restaurants? I'm told that's impossible. Raising the minimum wage will cause all businesses to close.

WillPostForFood 6y ago
Only 50% of restaurant employees are out of work, not 100%.
boulos 6y ago
I didn’t know about this anecdote before, but apparently Alan Krueger of minimum wage study fame had an interesting follow up: shouldn’t the federal minimum wage be too high somewhere? What about Puerto Rico? Apparently, he didn’t find evidence to suggest a strong effect there. But it’s got me curious to follow up with other territory or county vs state differences in the data. My suspicion is that the current very low minimum wages are just too low to see effects anyway, but that a federal $15/hr would be enough of a jump to see many county-level area median wages suddenly tip over.

rahimnathwani 6y ago

"Healthy SF medical coverage is also mandatory" I don't think Healthy SF coverage is mandatory. From what I've read, businesses have two other options: provide a regular healthcare plan, or set aside a fund to reimburse employee healthcare costs as they arise. Restaurants usually go for that last option. "usually passed onto patrons as a 4% fee on their bill, though this isn’t dictated by statute" I find the last part of what you wrote interesting. It's true that this isn't dictated by statute. But it would be surprising and unusual for a statue to dictate that a business must make its customers pay a specific business cost. Of course, there are instances where businesses are responsible for collecting taxes from their customers (notably sales taxes and recycling fees) but these are explicitly taxes on consumers that the business is collecting for the government's convenience, not taxes on the business that the business is tricking consumers into paying, by making them believe they're responsible for them.

boulos 6y ago
Good point, I updated my comment with an edit: Healthy SF isn’t mandated, providing health care is (and the very limited Healthy SF coverage is basically the cheapest option, so most restaurants do that). On the “dictated by statute”, I actually mentioned that because so many people figured it was! Much like sales tax, it’s often on the bill as if it’s a thing that the city has specified and that it was a city program (rather than the city mandating that larger businesses provide coverage). Many restaurants are quite clear about it “we use this money to pay for healthcare for our workers”, but the biggest surprise for me was that the “market rate” ended up settling at about 4%. When some restaurants instead do an $X/patron or $Y/ticket add on, it catches people by surprise. Either way, I find it amusing what people are “willing” to pay for things, especially if we can get closer to living wages for everyone. (I’m all for more “taxes” on bills that somehow people prefer over menu items going up in price). tl;dr: good point, clarified my statements!
- rahimnathwani 6y ago
  "and the very limited Healthy SF coverage is basically the cheapest option, so most restaurants do that" If someone works only a few hours per week, the 'Healthy SF' coverage can cost more than the minimum employer spend. So it's not always the cheapest option.
thesimon 6y ago
> Restaurants usually go for that last option. So restaurants basically run their own health insurance company?
- rahimnathwani 6y ago
  No. They just have to spend at least a certain amount. They don't have to spend more than that, even if employees need more due to their specific health needs. More info here: https://sfgov.org/olse/sites/default/files/2021%20HCSO%20Poster%20Final.pdf https://sfgov.org/olse/sites/default/files/2021%20HCSO%20Pos...