Olympia council to vote on minimum wage increase proposal, but members still have questions
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Olympia council to vote July 22 on $20 minimum wage initiative for ballot
- Petition secured 14,000 signatures, surpassing 5,788-voter threshold
- New rules include fair scheduling, phased minimum wage by employer size
The proposal to adopt a Workers’ Bill of Rights and raise the minimum wage in Olympia to $20 per hour might show up on residents’ election ballots this November. But not before Olympia City Council members cast their own votes on the measure.
Two labor groups gathered nearly 14,000 signatures in Olympia to qualify the initiative for the fall ballot.
Assistant City Manager Stacey Ray said the Thurston County Auditor certified the petition as sufficient on July 14. Ray fielded questions from City Council during a study session on July 17 — ahead of the council’s July 22 meeting, where the council will vote on whether to adopt the initiative ordinance without alteration, or to send it to a vote of the people.
Mayor Dontae Payne encouraged people to come to the July 22 meeting to express their opinion on the initiative, because if it becomes a ballot measure, the public isn’t allowed to speak on election matters during public comment.
Ray said to be certified as sufficient, the petition needed to have been signed by at least 15% of the total number of registered voters in Olympia during the last general election. That number was 5,788.
The county elections office examined 12,118 signatures and verified 5,796 before stopping the verification process.
Ray said the county estimates the election would cost $66,800.
If the council approves a resolution sending the initiative to a vote of the people, the council would take action Aug. 4 to determine the committee members to develop for and against statements for voter pamphlets. Aug. 5 is the deadline to submit the resolution, an explanatory statement of the initiative and the for and against committee members.
Ray said Aug. 12 is the deadline the county has given the city for submitting the for or against statement content that would go in the voters pamphlet and general election.
Initiative language
Ray said the city currently is seeking a consultant to research what implementing the worker bill of rights and a higher minimum wage would look like. She said the initial window closed for consultant proposals to the city closed July 18, and questions gathered from the council will inform the scope of work.
Ray said the purpose language of the initiative outlines the intent that workers deserve fair and secure scheduling with sufficient advance notice of their work schedules. The initiative says workers deserve a fair opportunity to move into full-time work when those hours become available, and that they deserve a fair wage for their work.
It also states workers deserve a safe workplace, and that they deserve to know their rights and have tools to enforce them.
She said the initiative includes definitions for different types of employers, from small to large. Large employers have more than 500 employees, a medium employer has more than 15, and a small one has 15 or fewer employees.
Mayor Pro Tem Yến Huỳnh asked how many businesses of each type there are in the city. Ray said that’s a question included in the scope of the consultant’s work and likely won’t be known by July 22.
Ray said the next section of the initiative focuses on workers’ right to fair scheduling so they can plan their lives and family budgets. She said at the time of hire or during employment, employees would be allowed to identify any limitations or changes in work schedule availability. They also would have the right to request not to be scheduled for shifts during certain times or at certain locations.
Council member Clark Gilman said he was asked during a community meeting whether a small bar might have these requirements.
“In this section, it says that all employers are encouraged to accommodate employee requests to the greatest extent possible,” Gilman said. “That’s all the more that I see is offered for the small and medium employers, and then the rest of the predictive scheduling sort of language says it applies only to large employers, except that contractors, as defined under RCW Chapter 18.27, are exempt. That’s one of the things that was hanging me up.”
Payne said he’s also hearing inquiries about whether the initiative language would applygfv1q g 2ayc89 to state and tribal governments. He said his understanding is that it does, but there’s a lack of clarity around boundaries.
Ray said the initiative says large employers shall provide their employees with a written work schedule at least 14 calendar days before the first day of the work scheduling period. Large employers shall notify the employee of any employer-requested change to the work schedule as soon as possible.
An employee of a large employer may decline a work shift for which they receive less than 14 days advance notice, she said. If the employee consents to work such a shift, the employee shall be entitled to an unfair scheduling payment equal to one hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate of pay for each shift worked with less than 14 days notice.
As an example, Ray said if a person is making $22 an hour, they’re entitled to a payment equal to $22.
Council member Dani Madrone asked Ray if there’s an employee who calls in sick and another has to come in, if that person covering for them would be entitled to an unfair scheduling payment. Ray said if it’s less than 14 days advance notice, then they are entitled to the payment.
Ray said an employee of a large employer may decline a shift that begins less than 10 hours after the end of a previous work shift. If the employee consents to work such a shift, the employee shall be entitled to an unfair scheduling payment equal to one half of the employee’s regular rate of pay for each hour the employee works.
“So in this case, an employee that makes $22 an hour works a shift less than six hours after their prior shift ended, they’d receive a payment equal to one half their regular rate of pay for each hour,” Ray said. “So that would, in this example, be $11 times four hours, if it’s a four hour shift, which equals a payment of $44.”
Council member Jim Cooper raised concerns about the lack of a legal definition of a work shift in the initiative. Madrone said it’s also unclear if salaried employees would benefit from these allowances.
Wages
Ray said the petition states that large employers shall pay minimum wages comparable to other Puget Sound cities; upon the effective date, the minimum wage for every employee in the City of Olympia is increased from that set by the state minimum wage to the higher minimum wage established in this ordinance.
“Upon the effective date, every large employer must pay to each employee an hourly wage at least $20 per hour,” Ray said.
She said the new minimum wage would stay in effect until the end of the calendar year and would increase yearly by the annual rate of inflation.
Medium and small employers would have a multi-year phase-in period. Ray said starting upon the effective date and through the end of that calendar year, medium employers must pay their employees an hourly minimum wage rate of $20/hr minus $2, or $18. The reduction must decrease annually by $1 on Jan. 1 of each year thereafter.
Small employers must pay their employees $20 per hour minus $3, or $17 per hour. The $3 reduction must decrease annually by 50 cents on Jan. 1 of each year thereafter until hitting $20 per hour.
Ray said the initiative states that retaliation is prohibited. She said no employer or any other person can interfere with, restrain or deny the exercise or attempt to exercise any right protected by the initiative.
She said if the employer is found to have committed violations of the initiative, the city or court with jurisdiction on behalf of the city can impose fines.
Failure to pay an employee an unfair scheduling payment would be $500 per failure. Failure to offer additional hours of work to existing employees would also be $500 per failure.
Failure to provide employees with written notice of rights would be a $500 fine, and failure to provide employees with written notice of rights ranges from $1,000 to $5,000 per aggrieved party, according to the initiative.
Ray said she couldn’t answer how collecting fines would work and where that money would go, nor how the city would enforce these potential new rules on businesses.
Ray said within 120 days after the effective date, the city must adopt rules and procedures to implement to ensure compliance.
“The city must seek feedback from worker organizations and employers before finalizing the rules and procedures,” she said. “If this ordinance is enacted during a November general election, it shall take effect on Jan. 1 of the immediately following year.”
.jpg)