Page 44 - January2016Spectrum
P. 44
MEMBERS SPEAK OUT
QUESTION: On November 17th Cambridge City Council adopted a motion that makes Cambridge the only municipality in Ontario to be a
Certiied Living Wage Employer, and the 3rd in Canada. As of now, the minimum wage this City will pay is $16.05/hour. All of the full-time
employees of the City currently earn more than that, but there are annually 331 temporary, casual or seasonal workers, like summer students
who earn below that. The City estimates that this change will increase their budget in the salary and beneits line by $524,000, which alone will
increase taxes by just under 1%. Proponents say that it is good for the economy for people at the lower end of the income level to have more
money for discretional spending and it alone offsets the added costs employers would have to pay. Opponents say it would cost jobs in the
private sector as small retail businesses couldn’t afford the dramatic hike and would have to ind alternative measures to deal with the added
overhead like reducing staff through less people per shift or adjusting hours of operation. How do you feel about this initiative by our City Coun-
cil. (City Council doesn’t have the authority to legislate it for all businesses in the City, only for municipal employees)
When public ofices offer such high wages it does Employers have to ind better ways to operate Unfortunately, City Council like all levels of Govern-
damage in two forms. It forces private business their facilities more eficiently and reduce energy ment forget that they are spending Tax Payers
to suffer by having all the qualiied employees consumption and waste – not reduce staff. hard earned Dollars. The living wage number is an
seeking government positions vs looking for private Tony Khan arbitrary igure at best and has no basis in reality. I
positions irst. And sets a precedent for people Siemans also believe making the Living Wage Law will cost
expecting a higher wage and feeling they can get the City jobs. Its just another anti-business idea
it. With the added stress of the Ontario registered "Wow! This would seriously cripple my business from Liberal Politicians. I would like to ask Mayor
savings plan, the increase of hydro, the increase of and it would deiantly close my doors. Craig and his band of tax and spend colleagues,
EI premiums and the cost of CPP going up these I pay my team members a little higher than who is looking after tax payers in Cambridge.
are all additional costs to the employer before they minimum wage to avoid losing them to another Certainly not them.
can even offer a decent wage to compete with minimum wage job but it's in the range of $12 - Colin McGregor
government jobs $14.50 per hour. This business decision on my Taff Consulting Inc.
Adam Oldield part helps retain good staff but it goes against
President FPM3 franchise pricing structure of paying employees At this point the city pays full time at 16.00 per hour
already. The only staff that do not get this rate are
The motion passed by council is a good precedent minimum wage. The current fanchise target labour the part time, seasonal employees that will not be
rate is 18% but my average is 21-24% mainly due
to set. While it applies only in the public sector to the wage increases I have in place. I have one getting the increase next year.
here in the city it sends a strong signal that our city of the best retention rates out of 90 + locations in
leaders think a living wage is an important thing North America so I must be doing something right. The half million dollar increase needed to be added
to have here in Cambridge. I agree. What is the Because of this strong retention rate we are among to the budget does not go into effect until council
point of having work if the compensation for that the most eficient locations in the franchise. sees the report next September if and when it is
work isn't enough to pay the basic bills? All busi- accepted by them at that time.
nesses should aim for proitability that provides for I estimate that this would raise my labour rate to There are a number of factors that are wrong with
good employment for the people that work in those 30 - 32%. This plus a 42% food cost doesn't leave this proposal.
businesses. At my place of work, everyone is paid me a lot of money to pay for rent, utilities, mainte-
a living wage. I understand the competitive pres- nance, advertising etc. First, the living wage of 16.00 being proposed is
sures private sector businesses are in. However, If this $16.05 rate happened, I would have to raise calculated using the needs of a family 4, thus one
I am sure that my colleagues that run businesses my prices at the restaurant which is something student being given that rate under the guise of
would want - wherever possible, and whenever that I constantly ight against but I would have no needing a “ living wage” is inaccurate and mislead-
they can - to provide good paying jobs to help se- choice. Our number 1 complaint at the restaurant ing.
cure the futures of the families that represent their is how expensive we are already.
businesses in the community. The council motion Second, what has been requested by Councillor
signals 'real change'. It's about time. This is not feasible to stay in business and I wish Liggett but not provided by staff at this point, is the
Andrew Johnson politicians would realize that by raising minimum “ levelling up affect “ the increase will create.
Sun Life Financial wage, it raises the cost of everything which makes This levelling up factor will affect the 550 plus full
it even more dificult for the people at the lower end time staff and cost a boat load more than the half
I have to agree with this decision. It is time that of the income scale. million plus required to be paid out to the tempo-
workers be paid according to the increases of “cost Because of our service (in store and catering), we rary/part time staff.
of living” in Canada as a whole. It is also time that have people driving to Cambridge from Kitchener Third, it is well known that many of these temporary
companies extend this beneit to all employees instead of going to the Kitchener locations. This staff are able to access work easier as relatives or
and share in this expense. If they cannot see the wouldn't happen anymore. Why would anyone a friend of full time staff that already work for the
beneit of this for the community, then it may be shop in Cambridge when they could go to same city. This gives them a huge advantage in both
time to re-assess their tax breaks. This will not store in Kitchener and buy the same thing for less. getting a summer job as well as earning more mon-
reduce jobs but attract more younger people to ey than they might working for the private sector.
move and live here in this area where we cannot A very humbling intention that will have extremely As far as I am concerned, temporary staff regard-
ind workers and also keep the ones going to other negative consequences on the city of Cambridge." less of where they work, whether it is the private
areas to pursue employment and good careers. David Kroeker or public sector should not be treated any different
These same people will be spending that extra, Owner/Operator simply because it’s easier to access the public
hard earned money inside this very community and purse.
increase jobs in other sectors indirectly - a win/win
situation for all concerned. In short, I don’t support the proposal.
Les Kadar
Garden Gate Ltd.
44 Winter 2016 www.cambridgechamber.com
QUESTION: On November 17th Cambridge City Council adopted a motion that makes Cambridge the only municipality in Ontario to be a
Certiied Living Wage Employer, and the 3rd in Canada. As of now, the minimum wage this City will pay is $16.05/hour. All of the full-time
employees of the City currently earn more than that, but there are annually 331 temporary, casual or seasonal workers, like summer students
who earn below that. The City estimates that this change will increase their budget in the salary and beneits line by $524,000, which alone will
increase taxes by just under 1%. Proponents say that it is good for the economy for people at the lower end of the income level to have more
money for discretional spending and it alone offsets the added costs employers would have to pay. Opponents say it would cost jobs in the
private sector as small retail businesses couldn’t afford the dramatic hike and would have to ind alternative measures to deal with the added
overhead like reducing staff through less people per shift or adjusting hours of operation. How do you feel about this initiative by our City Coun-
cil. (City Council doesn’t have the authority to legislate it for all businesses in the City, only for municipal employees)
When public ofices offer such high wages it does Employers have to ind better ways to operate Unfortunately, City Council like all levels of Govern-
damage in two forms. It forces private business their facilities more eficiently and reduce energy ment forget that they are spending Tax Payers
to suffer by having all the qualiied employees consumption and waste – not reduce staff. hard earned Dollars. The living wage number is an
seeking government positions vs looking for private Tony Khan arbitrary igure at best and has no basis in reality. I
positions irst. And sets a precedent for people Siemans also believe making the Living Wage Law will cost
expecting a higher wage and feeling they can get the City jobs. Its just another anti-business idea
it. With the added stress of the Ontario registered "Wow! This would seriously cripple my business from Liberal Politicians. I would like to ask Mayor
savings plan, the increase of hydro, the increase of and it would deiantly close my doors. Craig and his band of tax and spend colleagues,
EI premiums and the cost of CPP going up these I pay my team members a little higher than who is looking after tax payers in Cambridge.
are all additional costs to the employer before they minimum wage to avoid losing them to another Certainly not them.
can even offer a decent wage to compete with minimum wage job but it's in the range of $12 - Colin McGregor
government jobs $14.50 per hour. This business decision on my Taff Consulting Inc.
Adam Oldield part helps retain good staff but it goes against
President FPM3 franchise pricing structure of paying employees At this point the city pays full time at 16.00 per hour
already. The only staff that do not get this rate are
The motion passed by council is a good precedent minimum wage. The current fanchise target labour the part time, seasonal employees that will not be
rate is 18% but my average is 21-24% mainly due
to set. While it applies only in the public sector to the wage increases I have in place. I have one getting the increase next year.
here in the city it sends a strong signal that our city of the best retention rates out of 90 + locations in
leaders think a living wage is an important thing North America so I must be doing something right. The half million dollar increase needed to be added
to have here in Cambridge. I agree. What is the Because of this strong retention rate we are among to the budget does not go into effect until council
point of having work if the compensation for that the most eficient locations in the franchise. sees the report next September if and when it is
work isn't enough to pay the basic bills? All busi- accepted by them at that time.
nesses should aim for proitability that provides for I estimate that this would raise my labour rate to There are a number of factors that are wrong with
good employment for the people that work in those 30 - 32%. This plus a 42% food cost doesn't leave this proposal.
businesses. At my place of work, everyone is paid me a lot of money to pay for rent, utilities, mainte-
a living wage. I understand the competitive pres- nance, advertising etc. First, the living wage of 16.00 being proposed is
sures private sector businesses are in. However, If this $16.05 rate happened, I would have to raise calculated using the needs of a family 4, thus one
I am sure that my colleagues that run businesses my prices at the restaurant which is something student being given that rate under the guise of
would want - wherever possible, and whenever that I constantly ight against but I would have no needing a “ living wage” is inaccurate and mislead-
they can - to provide good paying jobs to help se- choice. Our number 1 complaint at the restaurant ing.
cure the futures of the families that represent their is how expensive we are already.
businesses in the community. The council motion Second, what has been requested by Councillor
signals 'real change'. It's about time. This is not feasible to stay in business and I wish Liggett but not provided by staff at this point, is the
Andrew Johnson politicians would realize that by raising minimum “ levelling up affect “ the increase will create.
Sun Life Financial wage, it raises the cost of everything which makes This levelling up factor will affect the 550 plus full
it even more dificult for the people at the lower end time staff and cost a boat load more than the half
I have to agree with this decision. It is time that of the income scale. million plus required to be paid out to the tempo-
workers be paid according to the increases of “cost Because of our service (in store and catering), we rary/part time staff.
of living” in Canada as a whole. It is also time that have people driving to Cambridge from Kitchener Third, it is well known that many of these temporary
companies extend this beneit to all employees instead of going to the Kitchener locations. This staff are able to access work easier as relatives or
and share in this expense. If they cannot see the wouldn't happen anymore. Why would anyone a friend of full time staff that already work for the
beneit of this for the community, then it may be shop in Cambridge when they could go to same city. This gives them a huge advantage in both
time to re-assess their tax breaks. This will not store in Kitchener and buy the same thing for less. getting a summer job as well as earning more mon-
reduce jobs but attract more younger people to ey than they might working for the private sector.
move and live here in this area where we cannot A very humbling intention that will have extremely As far as I am concerned, temporary staff regard-
ind workers and also keep the ones going to other negative consequences on the city of Cambridge." less of where they work, whether it is the private
areas to pursue employment and good careers. David Kroeker or public sector should not be treated any different
These same people will be spending that extra, Owner/Operator simply because it’s easier to access the public
hard earned money inside this very community and purse.
increase jobs in other sectors indirectly - a win/win
situation for all concerned. In short, I don’t support the proposal.
Les Kadar
Garden Gate Ltd.
44 Winter 2016 www.cambridgechamber.com
