Updates – Page 15 – Alliance for a Just Society

Working Families Need Good Jobs – Not Just Any Job

Today, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released its January jobs report, showing that 257,000 jobs were added last month. Increasing jobs is great news, but only if those jobs allow workers and their families to make ends meet.

The numbers have been praised, especially the average hourly wages that “soared 12 cents” to $24.75. While wages did increase in January, that “soaring” was compared to a decrease in wages in December, and was only 7 cents higher than wages reported in November. Additionally, 20 states increased their minimum wage in January, which would on its own increase average hourly wages.

In the latest installment of the Job Gap Economic Prosperity Series, “Low Wage Nation,” we show that most of the country’s job growth is in low wage jobs paying less than $15 per hour. Occupations like retail sales and food service top the list of jobs with the most new openings, yet these occupations have some of the lowest wages in the country.

Such jobs do not pay enough for a single adult to make ends meet, let alone a parent with children. Additionally, women and people of color are also overrepresented in these low-wage occupations, leaving them less likely to earn enough to provide for themselves and their families.

Nearly half of all new job openings are low wage, and nationally there are seven job seekers for every job opening that pays at least $15 per hour. That means that six of those seven job seekers must either take a lower-paying job, or go without work, as there aren’t enough jobs of any wage level for all of the nation’s job seekers.

“There are still too many people out of work, and too few living wage jobs to go around. We need to invest in good paying jobs and celebrate once our workers are able to make ends meet,” said LeeAnn Hall, executive director of the Alliance.

Increasing the minimum wage does help increase workers’ wages across the board – we saw some of that in January’s job growth, and we can see more if more cities and states increase their minimum wage.

However, we also need to increase the number of jobs available that actually pay a living wage by investing in good paying jobs, like those in the health care industry. Once our workers are able to make ends meet, it will truly be cause for celebration.

A Question for Lawmakers Who Backtrack on Expanded Health Coverage: Seriously?

With two weeks left in the second enrollment period for Affordable Care Act health coverage, marketplace enrollment is projected to reach between 9 million and 9.9 million people this year. That’s a net increase of between 2 and 3 million people gaining coverage through the marketplaces. Millions more will gain coverage through Medicaid expansion.

That’s something to celebrate – but the celebration could be short-lived for many people. Instead of figuring out how to get more people health coverage in 2015, many newly-elected and re-elected state legislators and governors are actually plotting how to take health care away from people who just received it for the first time.

It’s a real threat to people who’ve just gained coverage through Medicaid expansion – especially in states where incoming lawmakers are openly hostile to anything related to the Affordable Care Act. Those at greatest risk of losing coverage are women and people of color.

In Arkansas, where 211,000 people recently gained coverage, the state legislature must reapprove the Medicaid expansion plan by a three-quarters majority again in 2015. The incoming Republican governor is unenthusiastic about the plan – and expansion opponents won seats in the legislature. That doesn’t bode well.

In Ohio, where more than 400,000 people have coverage under Medicaid, the state legislature is also required to reauthorize the program in 2015. And in New Hampshire, where more than 20,000 people enrolled in just three months, the new Republican majority in the NH House of Representatives will also take a fresh vote on the program as well.

The continuing failure of more than 20 states to adopt any expansion plans at all, and the prospect of newly elected legislators revoking expanded coverage for hundreds of thousands of residents, represents a serious health threat to women.

A recent 50-state report card on women’s health by the Alliance for a Just Society clearly shows that most of the states that rejected Medicaid expansion have poor or failing records on women’s health. When it comes to ensuring that women have access to health care, the majority of legislators in these states have turned their backs on women.

The 2014 Women’s Health Report Card ranks and grades every state in the country on 30 distinct measures of women’s health. The results: 17 of the 21 states that rejected Medicaid expansion received final grades of C, D or F – and 13 of those states received a D or F.

Politicians in these states are failing women, but they are especially failing women of color who are more likely to be working low paying jobs, not covered by health insurance, and are least likely to have access to medical care.

The number of black women without health insurance is at least 20 percent higher than for women overall in 17 states. The uninsured rate for Latina women is at least 50 percent higher in 44 states. Black, Latina, and Native American women without access to health care have dramatically higher rates of hypertension, diabetes and infant mortality than other women.

While it’s encouraging news that Wyoming, Montana, and even Idaho seem to be moving toward Medicaid expansion, it will also leave our nation with a disturbing illustration of how alive and well racial segregation is in America. Take a look at the map of states that are refusing coverage to their most vulnerable residents: being denied access to health care is the latest Jim Crow.

Lawmakers in states that haven’t expanded Medicaid yet should move quickly to adopt expansion plans this year. If they don’t, they will bear the responsibility for their states falling even further behind on women’s health, and worsening racial disparities in our health care system.

As for lawmakers considering a vote to take health care away from thousands of their constituents, all I can ask is: Seriously? Do you really want to do that?

It’s one thing to stand in the way of people gaining access to quality, affordable health care. But it’s something else when people have just experienced quality, affordable health care for the first time, and then you snatch it away from them.

I can’t imagine that many will take kindly to it. And just in case anybody’s forgotten, there’s another election just a couple years away.

LeeAnn Hall is the executive director of the Alliance for a Just Society, a national policy, research and organizing network focused on racial and economic justice. The Alliance has produced pivotal reports on state and national health issues including Medicaid, prescription drugs, and insurance industry practices for 20 years.

Low-Wage Job Growth a Major Factor in Income Inequality. Patience is Not the Answer.

In response to the New York Times’ Jan. 27 Upshot piece, “Gains From Economic Recovery Still Limited to Top One Percent,” we appreciate the effort to report on the historic, staggering and blatant income inequality that has taken hold of America. This piece made some excellent points around the continuing inequality crisis. However, we have an answer to the question about the recent employment growth that has occurred in middle-class occupations:

“The puzzle is why robust employment growth over recent years — much of it concentrated in middle-class occupations — has not translated into larger income gains for the broader population. Perhaps we need to be patient, and the recent pickup in employment is yielding more broadly shared growth that will become evident when the data for 2014 are released.”

Yes, the unemployment rate is down from its Great Recession peaks. But it is still significantly higher than pre-recession levels. And, importantly, that job growth we hear so much about is primarily coming in low-wage occupations.Continue reading “Low-Wage Job Growth a Major Factor in Income Inequality. Patience is Not the Answer.”

Low Wage Nation

Low Wage Nation: Nearly half of new jobs don’t pay enough to make ends meet

January 2015

By Ben Henry and Allyson Fredericksen

Click Here for the Full Report

Click Here for State Fact Sheets

A Full-Time Job Should Lead to Financial Stability, Not to Poverty

WASHINGTON – Half of all new jobs nationwide don’t pay enough for a full-time worker to live on – much less a single parent with a child. And there are long lines of job-seekers for the few jobs that do pay a living wage.

“Low Wage Nation,” released today, is the newest report in the Job Gap Economic Prosperity Series produced by the Alliance for a Just Society. The report paints a sobering picture of just how hard it is to find a living wage job.

“This new report clearly illustrates the low-wage crisis in our country,” said LeeAnn Hall, executive director of Alliance for a Just Society. “A full-time job should lead to financial stability, not to poverty.”

The top four occupations with the greatest number of projected job openings are in retail and food service. Those jobs pay between $8.81 and $10.16 an hour.

The Alliance was joined by executive directors from Good Jobs First and Washington Community Action Network for a live webinar today to discuss the findings of the report. A recorded version of the webinar is available here.

“The reality is that we are living in a low wage nation, a country of workers putting in long hours, but still failing to make ends meet. And this report is the evidence,” said Ben Henry, senior policy associate and one of the report authors.

Some of the report findings:

Nationwide, 48 percent of job openings pay less than $15 an hour. (That percent ranges from 35 percent in Massachusetts to 61 percent in South Dakota.)
Nationally, there are seven times more job seekers than jobs that pay enough for a worker to make ends meet.
Two of the top five occupations with the most projected job openings are also in the top five in lowest pay.

What Is a Living Wage?

A living wage is one that pays high enough for a full-time worker to cover basic living needs for herself and her family, without having to rely on public assistance to get by.

“A living wage is not a poverty wage, and it is not simply ‘scraping by.’ A living wage provides a modest living, with a little left to set aside for emergencies,” said Allyson Fredericksen, policy associate and co-author of the Alliance report.

It’s a Jobs Crisis, Not a Worker Crisis

“This is about workers who show up every day and put in a full day so that their employer can make a profit,” said Jill Reese, associate director of the Alliance. “These workers should not be living in poverty, they should be able to afford – at the very least – to cover their basic needs.”

Recommendations from the “Low Wage Nation” Report

Increase minimum wage to a living wage
Eliminate the tipped minimum wage (stuck at $2.13 an hour for 24 years)
Establish work supports, like paid sick days and paid maternity leave.
Strengthen federal and state safety net programs
Increase federal and state revenue
Invest in good paying jobs, like those in the health care industry

“Jobs that once were good family-wage jobs are becoming poverty-wage jobs, and economic development programs are too often indifferent,” said Greg LeRoy, executive director of Good Jobs First. “States giving out tax breaks usually fail to even disclose actual jobs created or actual wages paid.

“Low Wage Nation reveals the tremendous cost of those policies to our workers and their families,” said LeRoy.

The full report is available at thejobgap.org

# # #

Alliance for a Just Society is a national policy, research and organizing network with 15 state affiliates that focuses on health, racial and economic justice. The Alliance has produced Job Gap studies since 1999.

“A Full-Time Job Should Lead to Financial Stability, Not to Poverty”

For Immediate Release January 27, 2015

“A Full-Time Job Should Lead to Financial Stability, Not to Poverty”

Most of America’s job growth is taking place in low-wage occupations

The top four occupations with the greatest number of projected job openings are in retail and food service. Those jobs pay between $8.81 and $10.16 an hour.

Some of the report findings:

Nationwide, 48 percent of job openings pay less than $15 an hour. (That percent ranges from 35 percent in Massachusetts to 61 percent in South Dakota.)
Nationally, there are seven times more job seekers than jobs that pay enough for a worker to make ends meet.
Two of the top five occupations with the most projected job openings are also in the top five in lowest pay.

What Is a Living Wage?

A living wage is one that pays high enough for a full-time worker to cover basic living needs for herself and her family, without having to rely on public assistance to get by.

It’s a Jobs Crisis, Not a Worker Crisis

Recommendations from the “Low Wage Nation” Report

Increase minimum wage to a living wage
Eliminate the tipped minimum wage (stuck at $2.13 an hour for 24 years)
Establish work supports, like paid sick days and paid maternity leave.
Strengthen federal and state safety net programs
Increase federal and state revenue
Invest in good paying jobs, like those in the health care industry

“Low Wage Nation reveals the tremendous cost of those policies to our workers and their families,” said LeRoy.

The full report is available at thejobgap.org

# # #

Minimum Wage Shouldn’t Force Workers to Live in Poverty

On New Year’s Day, 20 states raised their minimum wages. That leaves a lot of states that aren’t increasing the minimum wage — along with the federal government.

Even some of those employees who are getting increases don’t have much to celebrate. Workers in Florida might barely notice their 12-cents-an-hour raise. And the extra 15 cents an hour in Montana, Arizona, and Missouri will be wiped out with inflation and climbing costs before the first paycheck is deposited.

U.S. legislators have refused since 2009 to raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 an hour — not even close to enough for full-time workers to make ends meet.

To put it bluntly, minimum wage is a poverty wage. Yet only 29 states have minimum wage rates higher than the federal rate — and some just barely.

In last year’s State of the Union address, President Barack Obama called on Congress to increase the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour.

Although Congress turned a deaf ear, activists took up the challenge. “Fight for $15” movements across the country won among the most powerful progressive victories of 2014.

Cheers to cities like Seattle and San Francisco with minimum wage plans that will increase rates to $15 an hour in the next few years. Huge congratulations to voters in Oakland, California, as well in Arkansas, South Dakota, Nebraska, and others who voted for significant minimum wage increases.

But the truth is, while it’s a great start, none of these increases goes far enough, or lifts workers out of poverty fast enough. What’s needed is a living wage that allows full-time workers to cover their basic needs and have a little savings left over in case of an emergency.

The Job Gap Economic Prosperity series — a collection of research reports by theAlliance for a Just Society — shows that a living wage comes to over $15 an hour for a single adult in most states studied. A parent supporting a child needs to earn closer to $22 or $23 an hour.

Women and people of color are least likely to earn a living wage, with half or more working full-time and not making enough to make ends meet.

Poverty-level pay is taken for granted at restaurant chains like McDonald’s and Dunkin’ Donuts, and major retailers like Wal-Mart, that would rather invest in government lobbyists to keep wages low than in their employees.

“If you truly believe you could work full-time and support a family on less than $15,000 a year, go try it,” Obama implored Congress in his latest State of the Union address. “If not, vote to give millions of the hardest-working people in America a raise.”

The sub-minimum wage for tipped workers has been stuck at $2.13 an hour for 24 long years. Imagine going to work every day, hoping beyond hope that the tips will make up for the tiny hourly wage. No worker should be a second-class employee.

Refusing to pay employees a wage they can live on isn’t a business plan. Paying employees enough so they can shop or dine at your business or neighboring businesses and grow the local economy — now that’s smart.

A full-time job should lead to financial stability, not poverty. We must continue to push Congress to raise the federal minimum wage and abolish the separate tipped minimum wage.

In the meantime, keep up the “Fight for $15.” We know that we can motivate our mayors, city councils, and state legislators by speaking out, sharing our stories, and presenting the facts. Most importantly, we have to vote.

Let’s make 2015 the year for $15 — and really have something to celebrate next New Year.

LeeAnn Hall is the executive director of Alliance for a Just Society, a national research, policy, and organizing network striving for economic and social equity. AllianceforaJustSociety.org
Distributed via OtherWords.org

Making Ends Meet: Unaffordable Housing

Last month, we showed just how difficult it is for working parents to afford to pay for child care and cover other living expenses. One of those other major living expenses that all workers must account for is the cost of housing and utilities.

Housing is considered affordable if it costs no more than 30 percent of a family’s income. For workers earning minimum wage, though, finding housing at 30 percent or less of their income can be impossible.

The cost of housing and utilities (including basic home phone service) for a one-bedroom apartment takes more than 50 percent of a full-time worker’s income at minimum wage in 6 of the 10 states studied in the Alliance’s 2014-2015 Job Gap Economic Prosperity Series. Housing and utilities take more than 40 percent of their income in the other 4 states. In New York City, those expenses can easily top 100 percent of a single minimum wage earner’s income.

For a working parent who needs a two-bedroom apartment, the cost of rent and utilities is more than two-thirds of a single minimum wage earner’s income in 6 of the 10 states studied, and is more than half of that earner’s income in the remaining 4 states.

In the 10 states studied, annualized fair market rents (which include utilities) plus basic phone service for a one-bedroom apartment range from $6,672 in Montana to $15,192 in New York City. Annual costs for a two-bedroom apartment range from $8,504 in Montana to $17,964 in New York City. Additionally, because fair market rent is based at the 40th percentile, 60 percent of units actually cost more than that amount.

As the National Low-Income Housing Coalition notes, “A family with one full-time worker earning the minimum wage cannot afford the local fair-market rent for a two-bedroom apartment anywhere in the United States.” That is, there is no place in the United States where the fair market rent for a two-bedroom apartment costs less than 30 percent of minimum wage earnings.

In fact, in 2012 there were only 16 available affordable units per 100 deeply low-income households who earn 15 percent or less of area median income. For these households, which include minimum wage earners, finding housing that is affordable is nearly impossible.

When rent is unaffordable, workers have few choices. Some families squeeze multiple people into a studio apartment or share a larger apartment with another family; some forego other necessities like health care or nutritious meals; and some must rely on affordable housing or other supports, if they can get in.

In our recent report, Equity in the Balance, Gaisha Velazquez, a working mom in Connecticut describes her struggle to find housing for herself and her young daughter on a low income.

“Our rent takes up almost half of our income, and we live in a pretty violent neighborhood with lower rent than some other areas,” said Velazquez. ” But it’s the best we can do right now.”

Like childcare, the high cost of housing can be an insurmountable obstacle to making ends meet for low-wage workers. Increasing wages through a higher minimum wage and investing in higher-wage industries will help more workers afford the cost of housing. Additionally, though, addressing the lack of affordable housing and overall high housing costs will help all workers be better able to make ends meet.

Over the next few months, the Alliance for a Just Society will look at some of the components that go into calculating a living wage, and show why it’s impossible to make ends meet working full-time at minimum wage.

Default on Student Debt and You Could Lose Your License

This guest blog post was contributed by Chris Hicks, campaign organizer for Jobs With Justice.

Did you know that in two states not paying your student loans could mean your driver’s license can be revoked?

That’s the harsh reality for those who have had to borrow to pay for college in both Montana and Iowa, where there are laws that allow the state to take away your driver’s license for failure to pay back your student loans.

For many working class families, losing the ability to drive can have dire consequences on employment, child care and other core pieces of their daily lives. Both states have had these laws on the books for years, with hundreds of workers who have lost their ability to drive and earn a living, but they’ve largely gone unnoticed.

The Montana Department of Justice defines the sanction for borrowers who default on their student loans as an “indefinite suspension until student loan association notifies Motor Vehicle Division of compliance.” Iowa’s Department of Motor Vehicles says much the same, requiring the state “to suspend a person’s driver’s license upon receiving a certificate of noncompliance from the College Student Aid Commission in regard to the person’s default on an obligation owed to or collected by the commission.”

This isn’t the first time in recent history that the inability to pay off a student loan has haunted borrowers long after finishing school. In October 2010, 42 nurses in Tennessee had their licenses suspended for falling behind on their student loans. The Tennessee Department of Health claimed the suspensions marked a renewed effort to uphold a statute passed in 1999, which states that license penalties can be implemented in the event of defaults on loans.

A troubling number of states, more than 15, have similar laws that allow states to suspend, revoke or refuse to certify professional or vocational licenses and, in some cases, impose a fine, when a worker defaults on student loans. These state laws can impact a wide range of workers, from teachers to attorneys.

These state laws are especially troubling in light of the December 2014 report by the Department of Education’s Inspector General, which found that the agency doesn’t have a comprehensive plan to prevent student loan defaults. In fact, they might be punishing debtors who otherwise didn’t know about loan repayment alternatives. The report indicated that the department “may have missed opportunities to identify risks, communicate with servicers, streamline activities and be more transparent,” among other shortcomings.

The irony, of course, is that punishing borrowers who get behind on their payments by revoking their ability to drive or preform their job just makes it harder for them to find full-time work or explore other debt solution options. The punishment actually makes it more difficult for borrowers to pay back their loans, perpetuating a cycle of poverty that could become impossible to escape.

If more states were to adopt laws like these, millions of student debtors could find themselves trapped. There are currently more than 40 million student loan borrowers, and more than 7 million of them are in default on their student loans (or 17.5 percent of all student debtors). It is now more imperative than ever that the Department of Education, and its servicers, find a way to curb student loan defaults as student debtors pay the price for their inaction.

This type of punishment is essentially creating modern debtors’ prisons for those who simply borrowed money to afford an education. Instead of offering retribution, our federal and state governments should be helping student debtors who are struggling with their debt burden find repayment options that prevent defaults that could cost them their livelihoods.

Making Ends Meet: The High Cost of Child Care

What does it take to make ends meet?

For workers making less than $15 an hour – which is about 40 percent of all workers in the United States – housing, food, and transportation are all major expenses. But for a working parent with young children, one of the biggest expenses is likely to be child care.

For minimum wage workers, the cost of child care is an impossible burden.

The cost of child care for a school age child and a toddler is equal to more than 65 percent of a full-time minimum wage worker’s earnings in the 10 states included in the Alliance’s November 2014 report, “Equity in the Balance,” and is over 100 percent of their earnings in Colorado, Virginia, Connecticut, and New York.

When working parents don’t have a family member or friend who can look after their children for free or low cost, they have to pay for reliable child care. Although child care workers are among the lowest paid workers, earning a median wage of only $9.38 per hour in 2012, the cost of child care for parents is significant.

In the 10 states included in the Alliance’s 2014-2015 Job Gap Economic Prosperity Series, child care costs make up a large portion of the cost of living. In states we studied, paying for before-and-after- school and summer care for a 6-8 year old ranges from $3,440 per year in Idaho to $8,347 per year in Connecticut.

For a toddler, the cost of full-time child care ranges from $6,430 per year in Idaho to $13,844 in Connecticut. When parents have two children, nearly every state studied has a cost of over $10,000 per year, with New York (not including New York City) and Connecticut costing over $20,000 per year. (See chart at end of article).

While it’s true that many minimum wage workers are eligible for subsidized child care, a 2012 brief by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services estimated that only 18 percent of children from eligible families actually received subsidies.

Further, only one state in the country currently has child care subsidy rates set at the recommended 75 percentile of market rates in 2014. Only three more have their rates set to the 75 percentile of 2013 market rates.

Because the most states allow providers to charge parents the difference between the subsidy rate and their standard rate, many parents who receive subsidies still must pay more than the subsidy co-pay, cutting deep into the already meager budgets of minimum wage workers.

In addition to the struggle minimum wage workers have affording child care, many states have restrictions on receiving subsidies when a worker loses their job or when they are unemployed and looking for work.

As the National Women’s Law Center shows, five states cut off subsidies after a parent loses their job, and another seven provide less than one month of subsidy after job loss. Further, 35 states and the District of Columbia do not provide any subsidies when a parent is unemployed, but actively searching for work.

When parents lose a job or only earn minimum wage, the cost of child care can be an insurmountable obstacle to making ends meet. A higher minimum wage can help workers across the country better afford the cost of child care. At the same time, addressing the high cost of care – while also ensuring that child care workers earn enough to support themselves and their families – would help families across the country.

Over the next few months, the Alliance for a Just Society will be taking a look at some of the components that go into calculating a living wage, and show why it’s impossible to make ends meet working full-time at minimum wage.