2007 House Bill 305 (State minimum wage increase)

Legislation watch

[Comments on this legislation] [Post new comment] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

Introduced by Rep. J.R. Gray (D) on February 6, 2007, to increase the state minimum hourly wage.
- Referred to the House Labor and Industry Committee on February 7, 2007.
- Substitute offered in the House on February 15, 2007, to increase the state minimum wage to $5.85 an hour on the effective date of this Act, to $6.55 an hour effective July 1, 2008, and to $7.25 an hour effective July 1, 2009; and increase to the federal minimum wage rate if such rate exceeds the state minimum wage rate.
- The substitute passed in the House by voice vote on February 21, 2007.
- Reported in the House on February 15, 2007, favorably, 1st reading, to Calendar.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Brad Montell (R) on February 16, 2007, to exempt individuals who work 25 hours or less in a work week.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Bill Farmer (R) on February 16, 2007, to delete minimum wage and overtime exemptions.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Bill Farmer (R) on February 16, 2007, to delete minimum wage and overtime exemptions.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Bill Farmer (R) on February 16, 2007, to prohibit local governments from establishing a minimum hourly wage different from the minimum wage established in the Kentucky Revised Statutes.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Bill Farmer (R) on February 16, 2007, to prohibit local governments from establishing a minimum hourly wage different from the minimum wage established in the Kentucky Revised Statutes.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Bill Farmer (R) on February 16, 2007, to delete the exemption provided for newspaper carriers.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Bill Farmer (R) on February 16, 2007, to delete the exemption provided for newspaper carriers.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Jim DeCesare (R) on February 16, 2007, to exempt construction of court facilities from prevailing wage.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Jim DeCesare (R) on February 16, 2007, to make title amendment.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Mike Harmon (R) on February 16, 2007, to attach tax credit provisions of HB 499.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Mike Harmon (R) on February 16, 2007, to attach the employer tax credit provisions of HB 499.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Mike Harmon (R) on February 16, 2007, to make title amendment.
- Amendment offered by Rep. David Floyd (R) on February 16, 2007, to delete the exemption provided for newspaper carriers.
Passed in the House (89 to 10) on February 21, 2007. [Vote Details and Comments]
Received in the Senate on February 22, 2007.
- Referred to the Senate Economic Development, Tourism & Labor Committee on February 26, 2007.
- Substitute offered in the Senate on March 6, 2007, to allow approved companies to use the current federal minimum wage, until July 1, 2008, as their base hourly wage calculation.
- The substitute passed in the Senate by voice vote on March 8, 2007.
- Amendment offered by Sen. Alice Kerr (R) on March 6, 2007, to make title amendment.
- The amendment passed in the Senate by voice vote on March 8, 2007.
- Reported in the Senate on March 6, 2007, favorably, to Rules.
- Amendment offered by Sen. Daniel Mongiardo (D) on March 7, 2007, to remove the provisions that allow approved companies within the KEDFA incentive program to use the current federal minimum wage through July 1, 2008 as their base hourly wage calculation.
  - Withdrawn in the Senate on March 8, 2007.
Passed in the Senate (33 to 1) on March 8, 2007, to increase the state minimum hourly wage. [Vote Details and Comments]
Received in the House on March 9, 2007.
Passed in the House (93 to 5) on March 12, 2007, to increase the state minimum hourly wage to $7.25 over the next two years. [Vote Details and Comments]
Signed by Gov. Ernie Fletcher on March 22, 2007, to increase the state minimum hourly wage to $7.25 over the next two years.

Most Recent Comments

1) it's common sense, not hate. [by newmark on April 9, 2007]
If you reference the article I gave in my previous message, you will see that the minimum wage increase has an immediate negative impact on those who are closest, but below the new minimum wage, just as I said was the case.

Those at minimum wage do not get assistance, except that products that are imported may temporarily be cheaper, as the economy works in a ripple-effect, and therefore it takes longer for the world market to adjust.

On a smaller scale, I know that a friend of mine who has a small business has let go of two of his employees. They were likely going to have to let go of one of them anyway, due to Kentucky's AMT. With the increase in minimum wage, they let a second go.

On a larger scale, it becomes more and more attractive to move jobs overseas and over the border. If I can pay a US citizen $5.25/hr to make a widget, or I can pay a Mexican worker $3/hr to make a widget, with the hassle of transporting the goods across the border, maybe the hassle makes it worth keeping the jobs in the US. At $5.25/hr, the company spends $5,460,000 in payroll alone. In Mexico, that is only 3,120,000

Generally speaking, goods made in Mexico are of lesser quality than those made in the US -- or that's what my experience tells me. International contracts are more expensive. Cultural differences cause production delays. So maybe it's not worth the $2,340,000 per year to make the goods in Mexico. Or maybe other factors all but wipe out that savings.

But move minimum wage up to $7.25/hr, and now it's going to cost $7,540,000/yr for your labor in the Unites States. Mexico remains at $3/hr, or $3,120,000/yr. Now, the labor cost is more than double, the difference being $4,420,000. Moving the workforce to Mexico would now save an additional $2,080,000. Now maybe it's worth moving to Mexico.

Meanwhile, companies that cannot move overseas -- such as janitorial, landscaping, construction -- use illegal immigrants who also work for $3/hr in the US. Maybe the $2.25/hr wasn't worth the risk of being busted by INS. Maybe $4.25/hr is.

So minimum wage workers now have to compete for a shrinking number of minimum wage jobs.

To deny that jobs are moving overseas, and that illegal immigrants are taking jobs paying under minimum wage, is to deny reality.

Meanwhile, anyone who currently has a minimum wage job only needs to do enough not to get fired, and they will get an automatic raise over the course of the next few years. Why work really hard and try to get ahead, when your deserved-raise will get wiped out by minimum wage increases?

The only people who are helped by minimum wage increases are labor unions, who have contracts that increase their pay as a percentage of any minimum wage increases. They stay at the same level of buying power, while others drop as a result of a minimum wage increase.

However, this is only a short-term advantage. As the cost of labor goes up, many jobs which were formerly labor union shops have been moving overseas as well.

So you can say that it's hateful, or you can say that it's immoral, but resisting increases in the minimum wage is economically healthy for the state and for the country.

And again, I will reiterate that I am neither Republican, nor Democrat. I would suggest that perhaps you put down the Kool-Aid, and really examine the economic impact of minimum wage increases.

Reply

Line

2) MININUM WAGE [by KENTUCKYCOUNTRY on April 7, 2007]
People are always complaining about raising the mininum wages.It always the republicans in office that are always and i mean always against raising the mininum wage on either the state or federal level.Anyone that says that raising the mininum hurts workers has no idea of what they are talking about , maybe they should try to live on the mininum wage and see how they like it.Raising the mininum wage helps the people who need it the most , the poor / low-income / less-fortunate / homeless.People need to use some good common sense when they say and make statements that raising the mininum wage hurts the people who need it the most , that is nothing but fear and hate talk usually coming from the republicans in office.
Reply

Line

3) not rocket science [by newmark on April 1, 2007]
And this comes out after the increase, to prove my points about minimum wage:
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070331/BIZ01/703310334/-1/all

Pay special attention to the last part, entitled "Taking it away."

Note that the guy who's a computer consultant doesn't care about paying a bit more for his food. He makes good money, he can afford it. It doesn't hurt him as much.

But the guy who was making just under the new minimum wage is actually hurt by the minimum wage increase. He makes an extra $20 per week, but the costs of a single meal have increased as a result, and he's now actually worse-off than he was before the increase.

People need to think long and hard about minimum wage, and realize that it only hurts workers. And now for the next 3 years we'll be a continuous cycle of people not having to work hard, or not wanting to work hard, to get ahead, because they're just going to get set to the next minimum wage level in a year anyway.

Think people. Think.
Reply

Line

View Full Conversation