Why a living wage ?
The national minimum wage does not allow many workers to escape poverty. The Low Pay Commission do not take into account peoples actual needs in setting the NMW. In the UK 4¼ million adults aged 22 to retirement were paid less than £6.50 per hour in 2006. Two thirds of these were women and a half were part-time workers. A living wage could ensure that no workers receive poverty pay or have to rely on benefits, and could allow contract workers to lay claim to the same pay and conditions as staff directly employed by government and local councils.
Why now ?
Following pressure from campaigners, London mayor Ken Livingstone has given his backing to a living wage in London. Figures for the London living wage are set and published by the GLA, and a living wage implementation unit has been set up in City Hall. My petition calls for living wage figures to be established in other parts of the country following the initiative in London. This will be a huge boost to millions of low paid workers.
What would the living wage be ?
The London figure is reviewed annually by the GLA. In 2006 it was increased to £7.05. This isn't massively high, and some anti-poverty campaigners argue that it should be calculated differently, or set at a higher level. We shouldn't get too hung up on the exact level. To get local councils and employers to accept the principle that all employees should be paid a living wage would represent a massive victory, and result in very real improvements for some of the lowest paid workers.
Does the GLA actually pay the living wage to all workers that they employ directly or indirectly ?
No. To be fair, some real steps have been taken. This press release
http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_release.jsp?releaseid=10181 mentions that the GLA have agreed to pay cleaning staff at City Hall the living wage figure, and that "the living wage policy will be applied" to London’s new 5 year contract for cleaning of bus stations and garages. As I understand it, the GLA sees its role as to set a positive example and gently encourage a few other big employers and contracters to follow suit. If you support the living wage, you can take one of two views on this : either that Livingstone and the GLA have taken a bold and positive initiative, or that they have taken few practical steps to work with trade unions and actually get a living wage introduced in specific workplaces.
Most London workers who have benefited from the living wage have done so as a result of trade union led campaigns : contracted out cleaners working in east London hospitals who were organised by Unison; cleaners working for city firms who were organised by the T&G. So for many, setting a living wage figure is just the first step.
But won't the living wage just raise unemployment ?
This is the same argument that was used prior to 1997 against the introduction of a minimum wage. I'm not aware of any evidence that the NMW has increased unemployment - it's my understanding that the numbers in employment has increased since 1997.
In the USA where the minimum wage is set at an extremely low level, many cities have established Living Wage ordinances over the past decade. The studies that have been carried out into the effects of the living wage in the USA have shown (according to this article
http://www.epinet.org/briefingpapers/170/bp170.pdf ) that low pay workers have genuinely benefited and that there has been no discernable rise in unemployment.
This should not be so surprising. There are many benefits to business of having a stable workforce who are able to support their own family and the economy without continual struggle to survive.
Facts about poverty in the UK :
http://www.poverty.org.uk/summary/key facts.shtml .
