Proposition 1: Illusion and reality

In “The Menagerie,” a first season episode of the original “Star Trek” television series, Captain Pike believes that everything he has been confronted with on the planet Talos IV has been an illusion. He seizes one of his Talosian captors who is sneaking around and points his phaser weapon at his head, telling him “I'm willing to bet you've created an illusion this laser is empty. I think it just blasted a hole in that window and you're keeping us from seeing it. You want me to test my theory out on your head?” The Talosian agrees that this is not a good idea for him, and reveals that there is indeed a hole in the window that Pike can escape out of. 

The people behind SeaTac’s Proposition 1—already claiming victory in their effort to enforce a minimum wage of $15 an hour for airport employees and “support” services like hotels and restaurants—have also done a very good job of creating the illusion that their intention is to “help” non-union contract workers.  Unlike Captain Pike, opponents of the measure did not do a very good job of educating the public in regard to exposing the illusion.

Proposition 1’s proponents claim that the measure would add $54 million to the local economy while providing low-income workers a “living” wage—that is to say, make more money, spend more money, and businesses make money—everyone wins. The problem is that the first claim may be completely false, and the second would actually prove the opposite for many workers. The reality is that measure is designed to help those workers who are exempted from the law; more on that later.

The problem is that it is easy for people who live paycheck-to-paycheck to view the complexities of business in a simplistic manner. Money is just money, right? Tell the company to just cough it up, and that is the end of it. A few airlines are making money, and maybe this shouldn’t be too tough to do; but most are barely breaking even if not losing money. Proposition 1 does not take into account the state of the industry—or any industry, for that matter. We don’t live in a world where American manufacturing dominates both the domestic and the world market; that world is gone, perhaps forever. 

Proposition 1 doesn’t care about the state of industry because it knows that one way or the other, the affected airlines will make things “work out.” How will they do that? By hurting the workers that the measure allegedly “helps.” Why do you think that Proposition 1 exempts labor unions? Why would union representatives who crafted the measure all of a sudden want to “help” contract workers they have heaped scorn and contempt on for years? The answer, as I’ve mentioned before, is that they don’t. Their long term goal is to help themselves.

How about a reality check? First off, contract workers are paid out of a limited pool set by a contract—you know, the kind where the lowest bidder “wins.” Of course the bid can be “adjusted,” but only by so much. Another variable not accounted for by the measure is that many employees in a supervisory role already make the mandated minimum, perhaps less. How can it be justified that they merely accept the same pay as a new hire? Obviously their pay will have to go up significantly beyond the $15 an hour minimum, putting even more pressure on margins. 

Perhaps a few airlines are rolling in dough and can absorb this added cost, out of the alleged “idealism” and “fairness” that Proposition1’s proponents claim to possess. But it is pie-in-the-sky fantasia to assume that is a likely scenario, and the labor groups who crafted this measure no this full well. To absorb additional costs, affected airlines may raise fares and fees—which would have the effect of cutting into consumers’ take home pay and by itself negate any “addition” to the economy; consumers may also choose to fly less often or not at all in that case. Another scenario is that airlines barely on the margin may be forced to go out of business, or merge with a larger airline with its associated employee reductions.

The other, and more likely, scenario is that the affected airlines will re-tabulate the minimum number of employees it requires to function—obviously a lesser number than current. This means that there could be little change in the actual payroll, again negating the supposed economic "improvement."

It might surprise some of Proposition 1’s supporters, but workers who have been around the employment merry-go-round might think that $12 an hour is a “lot”—at least compared to $0 an hour.  That leads to the question: How many people will have to lose their jobs in order to make sure others make their $15? Yes, you can fool some people, especially newly-arrived immigrants, about how things “work” in this country—until some of them discover they are out of work. 

As stated before, any “addition” to the local economy is negated by certain factors, including the fact that since the measure only affects a relatively small targeted group of employees, the population at large that isn’t affected by it may not be able to absorb the additional costs associated with increased prices (if that is the route airlines choose to take). Since the current state minimum is $9.19, how is that supposed to be a “good” thing for those who lost their jobs and have to return to the workforce worse off?  For Proposition 1 to actually “work,” it would have to have statewide application and implemented gradually; even then it would require faster economic expansion that is being seen now—either that or millionaire and billionaire executives give themselves pay cuts and use the excess for additional employee pay. 

As it stands now, non-union contract airport workers are essentially being used as guinea pigs to test a “theory.”  Except that the “theory” is that union jobs can be “saved” by making the cost of non-union contract labor too high to make it “profitable”—or at least make union labor “competitive” enough with it that it makes no sense to contract out work.  That is what is really going on here. Who cares if some of those no-good, job-stealing contract employees lose their jobs? People who voted for Proposition 1 are the same people who voted for anti-affirmative action Initiative 200; they also “mistook” that initiative as being  about “rights”—accept it was really about someone else’s “privilege.”