Editorial: The year of living wage’rously

Adam Smith supported the living-wage model.|

Adam Smith supported the living-wage model.

That’s right, the Scottish free-market philosopher essentially laid out the concept in his 1776 economic tome, “The Wealth of Nations,” when he wrote this about what could be described as the service-industry workers of the 18th century:

“They who feed, cloath and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labor as to be themselves tolerably well fed, clothed, and lodged.”

Now, the scene has changed somewhat since Smith penned his renowned treatise on the division of labor and market control; very few counties these days grapple with the working plights of pregnant “coal hurries” or 10-year-old chimney sweeps (the preponderance of spare-the-air days notwithstanding).

But if Smith were, for the sake of comparison, a 21st century economist from Glen Ellen, he’d basically be suggesting that, hey, it’d be great if all these folks who work in our restaurants, clean up after our infirmed and patch our drywall could actually afford to raise their families here.

The social-justice concept of a “living wage” has been around for decades, but the actual legislation of a set dollars-and-cents number by governing bodies is a more recent trend, cropping up in the last 10 or 15 years, for the most part. Sacramento, San Francisco, Santa Cruz and Marin counties have all adopted living wage ordinances of varying rates-typically reflecting the area cost of living. The City of Sonoma, for instance, has a living-wage rate of $15.76, for non-benefited workers.

To that end, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors on Nov. 24 gave a preliminary endorsement to a proposal that would set a living wage for companies and nonprofits that contract work with the county-requiring them to pay a $13 minimum to employees. It would cost the county $286,000 a year, boosting the pay of about 560 county-affiliated workers. Left out of the proposal are in-home caregivers-about 4,000 individual county contractors-who, county officials said, if included in the proposal would cost $12 million-a pricey stash the county simply doesn’t have.

While no official action will likely take place until the spring, the Supes should be applauded for keeping the wheels in motion toward a modest raise for some of Sonoma County’s hardest workers. Still, labor proponents’ holiday spirits were dampened when those who currently care for our disabled and elderly for $11.65 an hour were left out of the deal. It’s a difficult situation, no doubt: Sonoma County has a preponderance of in-home caregivers-and few California counties have an extra $12 million to spend each year. By comparison, Marin County last week unanimously approved a $13 living wage, which included healthcare workers, but it only applies to about 1,650 folks total, costing our neighbor to the south $1.1 million a year. It’s definitely a different beast in Sonoma County.

However, one hopes the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors won’t summarily dismiss the goal of putting in-home caregivers-that’s nearly 88 percent of the county’s lowest paid workers--on an equal wage footing with the rest, or at least move toward the goal of trending in that direction.

Adam Smith, it’s worth noting, never had a family and died from a painful illness in 1790 in a country house in Edinburgh, under the care of servants of the estate. It’s lost to history what their “living wage” was.-Jason Walsh

UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy:
  • This is a family newspaper, please use a kind and respectful tone.
  • No profanity, hate speech or personal attacks. No off-topic remarks.
  • No disinformation about current events.
  • We will remove any comments — or commenters — that do not follow this commenting policy.