Response-pol-05

Response one-pol-05

Note: Each response had three or four reference please.Ty

The federal minimum wage is a policy that receives a lot of attention and media coverage because of the controversy surrounding of what people think is an unfair wage. The minimum wage for United States employees stands at $7.25 and has been effective since 2009 (Minimum 2018). Many individual states pay a higher minimum wage to employees, but the amount is not much more and some states have a minimum wage that is lower than the federal minimum wage.

                Many people and policy makers believe the minimum wage should stay the same while many believe that it should rise.  The people that  support the minimum wage staying where it is believe the it would have a negative effect on the economy because restaurants for example pay many workers minimum wage and they would have to increase prices and jobs may be lost  if wages are increased (Albright and Brannon 2014). They also argue that many people who work minimum wage jobs are students and they do not have to support a family (Albright and Brannon 2014). People who are for the increase state that job lost would be minimal and the minimum wage increase could possibly help an economy that is struggling (Albright and Brannon 2014).  Many people who do work minimum wage jobs have families to support and that is one reason why minimum wage should be raised some, but people also do have to realize that some prices may rise. A raise for minimum has tried to be passes a few times, but the bill to raises the minimum wage has not gone through (Albright and Brannon 2014).

            A low minimum wage is associated with higher poverty. Advocates for the increase in minimum wage use high levels of poverty as one of their main reasons for an increased minimum wage (Romich and Hill 2018). The minimum wage is supposed to be a fair wage that is given to workers for these jobs, but if a lot of people who are in poverty work these jobs then it seems that the wage is not fair. Many members of the public and policy makers would like to see a minimum wage hike. It would most likely not work well if the minimum wage received a drastic increase right away, but if the wage is seen to gradually rise over time.  The public and policy makers will keep proposing that the federal minimum wage be increased and hopefully it will be soon.

            The federal minimum wage is not effective if people cannot meet their basis needs working their job. It is important for people to go to school or learn a trade, so they can obtain a higher paying job, but citizens should also be able to earn a living wage regardless. The minimum wage policy is accepted by some of the public, but is not accepted by all, so it does not meet the goals of social acceptability. The policy is also not accepted by all policy makers.

References

Albright, L; Brannon, I. (2014). A Federal Minimum Wage and the States. Regulation: Washington. 37(2).

https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docview/1546004628?pq-origsite=summon&accountid=8289

Minimum Wage. (2018). United States Department of Labor.

https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/wages/minimumwage

Romich, J; Hill, H. D. (2018) Coupling a Federal Minimum Wage Hike with Public Investments to Make Work Pay and Reduce Poverty. Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences. 4(3) 22-43.

Response Two-Pol-05

An economic topic that has been of great interest to me is the ongoing talks about a "trade war" with China. I was surprised that many Asian countries already pay high tariffs on the goods and products that come into our country, it seems that now that the U.S. and China are going back an forth adding tariffs on more of each country's goods, it is consumers and workers that will bear the brunt of the argument. Yet even more interesting is the fact that other Asian countries and not China already pay  very high tariffs.

Economic Policy

        The dispute over fair trade has resulted in each country ( the United States and China) announcing tariffs on certain goods and products, which will amount to billions of dollars if enacted. Last year more than 500 billion in Chinese goods entered the U.S., making China the largest single exporter to the U.S. (DeSilver, 2018).

          According to the Pew Research Center the import duties would not even affect China as much as it would affect several developing South Asian countries, that already pay high taxes on the goods that enter the U.S.  An example of this is Bangladesh, who exported goods such as apparel, footwear and headgear, some 5.7 billion worth of products, which was about 95 percent of the countries exports (DeSilver, 2018).

         In an analysis of of data collected from the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), Pew determined that nearly all Bangladeshi imports are subject to U.S. tariffs and end up amounting to about 15.2 percent of the total value of the country's U.S. shipments, this is a higher rate than any of the other 232 territories, jurisdictions or countries on the ITC database (DeSilver)

       In comparison, the tariff rates the U.S. requires that its other major trading partners pay are much lower than those on China. When looking at Mexico and Canada,  respectively the second- and third-highest producers of U.S. imports, the average duties last year were just 0.12% and 0.08% of the value of their imports (DeSilver, 2018).

Analysis

       When placing this policy in the context of  the evaluative criteria that we have been using when analyzing policy, it is not difficult to conclude that this policy has not been very effective because this is an ongoing situation, as far as efficiency goes we can see that there will be a high cost to society if the Chinese tariffs do go into effect, this policy decision is not equitable or ethical because this decision can impact many industries in a negative manner with no benefit and though we have seen support in favor of these actions there is also unease in both the public and private sectors, leading me to question the political feasibility and social acceptance of such a policy.

 

Bouchet, M., & Parilla, J. (2018). How Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs could affect state economies. Washington: Brookings Institution Press. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docview/2012656703?accountid=8289

DeSilver, D. (2018, April 05). Despite talk of 'trade war' with China, highest U.S. tariffs are on imports from other Asian countries. Retrieved May 2, 2018, from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/04/05/despite-talk-of-trade-war-with-china-highest-u-s-tariffs-are-on-imports-from-other-asian-countries/

 

REP. CULBERSON ISSUES STATEMENT REGARDING PROSPECT OF TARRIFS ON ALUMINUM AND STEEL IMPORTS. (2018, Mar 09). US Fed News Service, Including US State News Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docview/2011941602?accountid=8289

 

 Response three-Pol-03

Being an active duty military member, who serves in the Air Force, for the Department of Defense, the economic policy I choose directly affect me and my all of my family members, especially being married to another military member.  Each year, the Department of Defense employees who are active duty service members typically gets an increase.  Last year, fiscal year 2018, it was 2.4%.  For fiscal year 2019, the intended pay increase if 2.6% which is a slight increase from the previous fiscal year.

The link provided below is a great tool to see the difference in pay from 1949 to the current fiscal year.  For example, an E6, with 10 years in 2008, when I joined made around $3,000 per month.  Today, that an E6 with 10 years is around $3,500.  This shows a distinct difference that has occurred over time.   

https://www.dfas.mil/militarymembers/payentitlements/military-pay-charts.html

Again, the link below is provided to show us the purposed fiscal year 2019 pay chart for DOD employees who serve in specific grades that correlate with Time in Service.  Please look for reference and background on the topic.  This list above only takes us until 2018, the current fiscal year.   

https://militarybenefits.info/2019-military-pay-charts/

The European Commission, (2018, p 1) defines framework as "a basic structure underlying a system, concept, or text.”  This week we were looking at the effectiveness, efficiency, ethics, equity, and different feasibilities of these policies.  Specifically, how these different factors are involved in public policy. When it comes to the equity, it is steady compared to our civilian counterparts.  Generally, as people ‘move up the ladder’ or so to speak, more income is earned due to the nature of the work being more difficult and longer hours. 

When I think of ethics, I think that ethics goes hand in hand with equity.  If you are ethical, you are equitable, fair, and honesty.  You have integrity…if you are going to avoid doing something that is unethical.  However, I would venture to stay that it could potential be for a personal gain if the ethics are not there.  This is dishonesty. 

Economic feasibility is a consideration.  The pay increase, while not great, does all for more economic growth in the sense that there is a little more money to put back into the community, or the economy.  During my research this week, I learned the entire Department of Defense has around one million personnel on Active Duty.  While a two percent increase may not seem like, when it is spread across that many people, who are spread though out the world, it has a global impact.    

However to support alternatives, or play devils advocate, there are always people who believe we as Active Duty members are overpaid or do not deserve pay increases. 

Reference,

Military Benefits.  (2018).  2019 Military Pay Charts (proposed).  [Data file].  Retrieved from  https://militarybenefits.info/2019-military-pay-charts/

University of Michigan.  (2018).  Conditions for adequacy for alternatives.  [Data file].  Retrieved from http://www-personal.umd.umich.edu/~delittle/ch6.htm

European Commission.  (2018).  Understanding and measuring policy effectiveness:  first reflections discussion paper.  [Date file].  Retrieved fromhttp://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regexpert/index.cfm?do=groupDetail.groupDetailDoc&id=21691&no=8

Response Four-pol-04

Tipped and untipped wage earners, reversal of the 2011 policy.

United States Department of Labor (2018):

2011 policy:

Tip Credit: Section 3(m) of the FLSA permits an employer to take a tip credit toward its minimum wage obligation for tipped employees equal to the difference between the required cash wage (which must be at least $2.13) and the federal minimum wage. Thus, the maximum tip credit that an employer can currently claim under the FLSA section 3(m) is $5.12 per hour (the minimum wage of $7.25 minus the minimum required cash wage of $2.13). Under certain circumstances, an employer may be able to claim an additional overtime tip credit against its overtime obligations.

Tip Pool: The requirement that an employee must retain all tips does not preclude a valid tip pooling or sharing arrangement among employees who customarily and regularly receive tips, such as waiters, waitresses, bellhops, counter personnel (who serve customers), bussers, and service bartenders. A valid tip pool may not include employees who do not customarily and regularly received tips, such as dishwashers, cooks, chefs, and janitors.

Under the FLSA, tipped employees like waiters and waitresses are entitled to an employer-paid wage of at least $2.13 per hour, more if tips received do not total $5.12 an hour (based on the current minimum wage of $7.25).

 

United States Department of Labor (WHD) (2017):

 

The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposes to remove the portions of the regulations at 29 CFR §§ 531.52, 531.54, and 531.59 that impose restrictions on employers that pay a direct cash wage of least the full Federal minimum wage and do not claim a tip credit under the FLSA. (U.S. Department of Labor (WHD), 2017).  United States Department of Labor (WHD) (2017), while the information as written as a proposal, it was signed into law with the National Budget in 2018

 

The expected outcomes include:

        A greater number of employee benefiting from the extended coverage of tips. 

        Increase earnings of those who were not originally allowed to gain tips, increasing their level of commitment to quality service.

        Reduction in wage disparities, allowing the businesses to decide how the staff should receive compensation and from what sources,

 

Effectiveness

The policy appears to be of sound basis and increases the likelihood of non-tipped employees staying in their current positions longer, and employers benefitfrom the use of tips as an incentive for non-tipped workers.  There is a downside to tip sharing as the servers will receive less benefit for their work on low productivity days, as they must share the tips with non-tipped workers who may then make more money than the tipped workers, based on minimum wage guidelines.  However, this can be moderated based on a percentage of work hours or productivity factors that influence the percentage each section receives. According to Even and MacPherson, a “10% increase in the tipped minimum wage (those set by individual states) reduces employment at restaurants by 1.5%” (2014). The use of tip pooling in lower-wage states increases the number of employees a business can hire (Even and Macpherson, 2014) they will be able to claim greater tax-tip credit for the lessen of overall compensation for the tipped workers if the tips do not meet minimum wage thresholds.  The ability to hire more staff will lower the unemployment rates due to their ability to utilize tax incentives to offset operational costs and hire more personnel.  Sauders (2015), indicates tipping creates both positive and negative emotional responses, based on the expectation and receipt of a good tip which can affect productivity. As a side effect of the policy of tip sharing, the singular impact of a bad tip is disbursed and minimized by a collective of tips for a given shift limited productivity loss.

Efficiency

Current systems are in place in the tax code to accept the use of service industry tipping, the change may increase the use of the tax credit in wage and tax codes, but the calculations are in place. The restaurant industry currently works with tax coding with tipped employees; the changes would be supported by the current systems in place.  Tip sharing percentages would need to be implemented to ensure the correct accounting of such and to whom tipped/non-tipped employees the tips were disbursed.  However, current systems in accounting at most service-oriented businesses are created to assist with such.

Equity

The service industry is largely a female-dominated field, those working in the industry are likely generally educated and who are likely to have children and earning the wages to support a family unit.  Working at the minimum rate, the server relies on tips to supplement their wages above the set minimum wage to create a livable wage income.  People tip a waitstaff for the service they provide at the table and rarely base the amount of the tip with consideration of the back of the house staff or other waitstaff working on a particular shift that does not assist them.  However, equalizing the income of both tipped and non-tipped employees who are working together to create one dining experience creates equity of compensation. 

Political Feasibility

The restaurant industry was the main group of individuals who created great litigation when the 2011 tipped employee rule became law, reversal of such creates political gains and acceptability for the practice.  Restaurant lobbyists have significant political influence.  Data and expectations for outcomes, when deferred to the industry leaders (such as the Chevron ruling) can create influence and policies not based in evidence (Hyde, J. K., Mackie, T. I., Palinkas, L. A., Niemi, E., & Leslie, L. K. (2016).  Workers in the industry do not carry the clout of the businesses who employ them and must rely on external actors to fight for employment causes.

The policy could garner greater acceptance if the Labor Department, under Congressional action increases the minimum tipped wage of 2.13, (which hasbeen frozen in place since 1990).  A minimal amount of increase of 10 percent would increase the wages of the staff by .4 percent overall (Allegretto and Nadler, 2015).  As there are tax credit considerations, the increase of .4 percent could be offset by the credit, and the employer could couple the increase with tip sharing. 

One could argue a tipping pool would not be known to the patron of the service, and therefore the ideation of a tip remains at the table service received, andtherefore, tip pools would be unknown and therefore accepted, even if through involuntary acceptance.

Administratively Operative

One criterion to examine and be administratively operative, is whether there is a capability or authority to implement the policy (APUS Lesson 4 Policy Alternatives, 2018). The 2018 reversal of the ban on tip pooling for non-tipped employees, Meyer (2017), indicates the Department of Labor did not havelegal standing to implement the ruling in 2011, and under the Chevron rule, the Supreme Court cannot uphold the statues. Therefore, they must be reversed. Therefore, the actions they are taking meet the Chevron test but the 2011 stripping of shared tipping did not.

Each state would be impacted differently based on the level of difference in minimum wages.  Those who supersede the Federal minimum wage and control the manner in which tips are allocated may be required to change current programs or policy compliance.

 

Current event links:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/04/business/economy/tips-rule.html   

https://www.eater.com/2017/12/5/16708374/tipping-laws-trump-department-of-labor-changes

 

 

Allegretto, S., & Nadler, C. (2015). Tipped Wage Effects on Earnings and Employment in Full-Service Restaurants. Industrial Relations, 54(4), 622-647.doi:10.1111/irel.12108

APUS. (2018). LESSON 4: EVALUATING PUBLIC POLICY. Retrieved April 26, 2018, from https://edge.apus.edu/portal/site/385194/tool/b0818c03-7a9d-4b7e-b85e-2cc64b1d89dc

Even, W. E., & MacPherson, D. A. (2014). The effect of the tipped minimum wage on employees in the U.S. restaurant industry. Southern Economic Journal, 80(3), 633-655. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy1.apus.edu/10.4284/0038-4038-2012.283

Hyde, J. K., Mackie, T. I., Palinkas, L. A., Niemi, E., & Leslie, L. K. (2016). Evidence use in mental health policy making for children in foster care. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 43(1), 52-66. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy1.apus.edu/10.1007/s10488-015-0633-1

Meyer, B. (2017). Mrs. Orville isn't trying to steal tips: An FLSA story. The University of Chicago Law Review, 84(4), 1971-2016.

Saunders, S. G. (2015). Service employee evaluations of customer tips: An expectations-disconfirmation tip gap approach. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 25(6), 796-812. Retrieved from  https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docview/1768594268?accountid=8289

United States Department of Labor. (2018). Tips. Retrieved from  https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/wages/wagestips

United States Department of Labor. (2017). Wage and Hour Division (WHD). Retrieved from https://www.dol.gov/WHD/flsa/tipcredit-fs.htm