Stubbornly persistent poverty and rising income inequality is a challenge across Canada.
In Greater Victoria, 18,000 people are living in core-housing need (spending more than a third of their income on housing costs). Employment seems the obvious answer, yet 45 per cent of Canadians in poverty are actually working full time.
Many communities are taking action on poverty in collaborative ways, involving governments, the social services sector, residents and businesses. Greater Victoria’s Community Action Plan on Poverty is one example of the more than 40 poverty-reduction plans that exist from Saint John, N.B., to Whitehorse, Yukon. Many of these plans include a strategy to calculate a living wage, raise awareness and promote adoption by employers for whom it is feasible.
The living wage is a benchmark measurement of the cost of living for two-parent, two-child families in Greater Victoria. It serves two purposes: first, to provide a target for employers to pay workers to directly reduce family poverty in our community; second, to illustrate how public policy decisions by government directly affect the cost of living and put pressure on employers to shoulder the burden of fighting poverty.
Both of these are topics worthy of discussion at municipal tables around the region, as our local governments provide employment for many residents and are concerned about the health of the local economy.
Recent coverage of the living wage proposal put forward by Victoria Coun. Marianne Alto has suggested that the city’s workers are all paid above the living wage benchmark of $18.93 an hour. However, that overlooks the employees whose positions fall under Schedule B of the CUPE Local 50 collective agreement, which lays out wage rates for seven positions that are often filled on a part-time basis, or as auxiliary staff. Five of these positions do not reach the living-wage benchmark.
Ushers, child-minders, concession workers, bartenders and day-camp leaders are the positions below the living-wage benchmark in the City of Victoria’s workforce. These are likely to be people beyond high-school age, who may be supporting children or elders from their income while working multiple jobs. Child-minders and day-camp leaders are not paid sufficient income from their jobs to pay for their own children’s care. These are the workers who stand to be helped by the city adopting a living-wage policy.
A living-wage policy for municipal workers would be a meaningful step to reducing working poverty, at a relatively low cost compared to other interventions. The City of New Westminster discovered in 2010 that the cost of becoming a living-wage employer was about $150,000, out of a $106-million operating budget. As of Jan. 1, 2011, New Westminster became a living-wage employer.
In researching the costs and benefits of a living-wage employer program for its own workers, a municipal government would not imply that all businesses should follow suit. A living-wage policy is voluntary for any employer, and will have different impacts on employers based on their industry, size and workforce dynamics. This is not about mandating a pay rate or setting a new minimum wage; it’s about one employer making decisions about how to support its own workforce and ensure none of its valued employees are struggling with poverty.
There are benefits in this for the municipal taxpayer, as well. Adopting a living-wage policy has been shown to reduce employee turnover and absenteeism, and increase productivity. Furthermore, as low-wage earners tend to spend nearly all of their incomes on basic needs in the local economy, adopting a living-wage policy is a way for the municipal government to support local businesses.
The living wage also illustrates the impacts of provincial and federal government policies on our local economy. Low-wage workers struggle to afford MSP premiums, transportation, child care and extended health coverage, while covering the basics of housing, food, clothing and utilities. These expenses increase the living-wage amount, putting pressure on employers to pay higher wages. For example, MSP premiums make up 98 cents of the $18.93 living wage, and a person earning the living wage is ineligible for subsidies.
The business community has a strong voice with the provincial and federal governments, which could be used to advocate for policies that combat poverty. Although small businesses might not be able to commit to a living-wage policy for their own staff, they can advocate for better social policies as a strategy to support the growth and well-being of B.C. businesses.
In Victoria, the Community Social Planning Council, itself a living-wage employer, runs an advice and certification program for interested employers, and welcomes inquiries on the program.
Rupert Downing is executive director of the Community Social Planning Council.
