3 ms·

> There would be no cut in pay, and those who work more would be compensated at a rate of no less than 1.5 times the employee’s regular rate of pay.

• abduhl 4y ago
  The state of California cannot mandate “no cut in pay” by employers (although I'm sure they would like to, because a 20% cut to income tax would devastate the state's budget - which is why this idea is dead on arrival). Your pay will be reduced appropriately either based on an hourly rate or a cut to your salary.
  • dragonwriter 4y ago
    > The state of California cannot mandate “no cut in pay” by employers It can specify no cut in full-time pay for an employer for substantially similar work, on both an individual and overall basis (the current text only does this on an individual level, but that's not all the State could do. E.g., “The minimum hourly wage shall be the greater of $X/hr or the 5/4 the actual wage paid by the employer to the employee on date Y or the 5/4 the average wage paid by the employer to employees doing substantially similar work on date Y.”)
    • abduhl 4y ago
      This formulation presents a host of federal (and state) constitutional problems (i.e., contracts clause, takings, equal protection, etc.). You're certainly right that California "can" specify this. California would not be able to successfully defend this type of law in court. Pedantically, I guess you're right in the same way that you can "sue" anyone for anything, provided "sue" doesn't mean "win the lawsuit."