Recently, tens of thousands of protestors took to the streets in the United States, demanding a $15 minimum wage for fast food workers. Right now, US workers are attempting to survive on a meager $7.25 per hour. Consequently, activists from around the country have been pushing for an increase for many years. Now, however, a groundswell of political support has grown to unprecedented levels. Indeed, the prospect of their demands becoming political reality is growing.
However, the “Fight for $15” campaign poses many interesting questions for activists in the US and around the world. Whenever political discourse presents us with a clear choice—yes or no to the increase—we should always step back and ask, “What’s not being discussed?”
Here, I think we find the starting point for a much more interesting discussion surrounding values, vision and program. In other words, how does the current campaign and fight for a $15 minimum wage fit into a larger political strategy aimed at drastically changing society’s institutions?
Without doubt, any progressive, liberal or leftist should wholeheartedly support a living wage increase. In fact, some have argued that a living salary should be implemented, so no one endures the curse of poverty, whether they’re working, or not. For now, we’re light-years away from achieving such a proposal. Yet, more radical suggestions should be considered in order to further educate activists and force organizers to think about these issues in more nuanced and radical ways.
First of all, it should be noted that $15 an hour isn’t enough. Anyone who works for a living, and particularly those who are trying to raise families, will tell you straight-up that $7.25 an hour is criminal, but that $15 an hour is still inadequate. At $15 per hour, workers who fulfill a traditional 40 hour work week will take in around $2,400 per month, before taxes.
For a single person living in the South, or in certain Midwestern states, $15 an hour would provide a very basic living: apartment, used car, insurance, food, and a cell phone. Any additional items would either be purchased with a credit card, or not at all. For a single person living in East or West Coast states, $15 an hour is still about $10 short of what is needed to live decently as a single person, as the cost of living increases dramatically depending on geographical location.
In short, one of the first problems is that the demand for $15 an hour is too low. Even if Congress and the Senate pass legislation for a minimum wage increase, the vast majority of US citizens will continue to suffer in poverty. To be brutally honest, a $15 minimum wage campaign was needed in 1995, not 2015. Without doubt, there is no way a family of four can live appropriately on $15 an hour in 2015. It’s that simple.
For cities like Seattle and San Francisco, two places that have already passed minimum wage increase ordinances, the proposals are limited in scope, untimely and inadequate. As the saying goes, ‘too little, too late.’ How can we expect people living in San Francisco to survive on $15 an hour? We can’t. And we shouldn’t. People living in these cities will need to make at the very least $25 an hour to raise a family.
That’s not to say these efforts shouldn’t be supported or encouraged, it’s simply a recognition that what seems radical today, and what activists are fighting for, was needed several decades ago. That being said, now that activists and communities are indeed fighting back, how can we inject some criticism and nuance into a debate that has become very dichotomous?
As mentioned above, of course activists and decent-minded people will back a minimum wage increase. Namely, to make sure working-class and poor people have an easier time raising their families and surviving. On the other hand, it would be wise for organizers and activists working on this campaign to further challenge protestors and workers by asking them, “What are you going to do with more money?”
To put differently, my friends who are steelworkers, ironworkers, carpenters, etc., make really good money. Some of these folks make $48 an hour; others take in around $22 an hour; no less, most of them are living quite well when compared to large swaths of US citizens. On a global scale, they’re making more money than at least 85% of the world.
But have these workers expanded their struggles to other segments of US society? Not really. Occasionally, the longshoreman will hold strikes in solidarity with Palestinian activists, but those actions are limited to the Bay Area. Overall, most unions in the US are very self-interested entities, or, what labor scholars and activists call “Business Unions.” Indeed, unions in the US are utterly beholden to business interests and operate much like Fortune 500 companies.
In the US, unions represent a relatively privileged class of workers. To be clear, the vast majority of US citizens do not have reliable or affordable healthcare, retirement benefits, dental benefits, living wage jobs or job security. Further, many US citizens work in substandard facilities, unsafe working conditions and with absolutely no job security. Accordingly, fast food workers have more in common with their third-world counterparts than they do union members in the US.
Back to the question: “What are workers going to do with more money?” The answer, unfortunately, has been answered by our union brothers and sisters in the US, as they spend their paychecks on new cars, houses, motorcycles, boats, electronics, swimming pools, lawn mowers, remodeling projects, vacations and various other consumer products. Remember, these very same goods are produced with slave labor, in terrible conditions, and with dire environmental consequences. Surely, activists shouldn’t be organizing to replicate the structures and culture of a failed union movement.
In a world that has become increasingly connected, at least through communication and entertainment mediums, activists should be promoting a vision of global solidarity. Fortunately, fast food workers around the globe, including those striking in Italy, are now working together with the Fight for $15 movement in the US. Could this struggle be used to build global solidarity? Of course.
Yet, activists must move beyond simplistic slogans like, “fast food workers deserve their fair share” or “stop the corporate greed,” for example. To be clear, humanity is under the thumb of global capitalism, not individuals who are too greedy or selfish. Fast food workers organizing for change must develop a language to articulate this basic truth, because we don’t need a psychologized critique of the global economic system. We’re not fighting greed, we’re fighting systems of power and oppression.
As Noam Chomsky reminds us, corporations are simply fulfilling their legal obligation: maximizing profits for their shareholders. In doing so, if workers are left to the waste-side, so be it. Workers should know that their bosses understand exactly what they’re doing. They’re not “mistaken” or “greedy.” They’re smart, diabolical and vapid.
It would be wise for workers to ask, “How can we simultaneously fight for a living wage and also significantly alter economic relations and structures?” To put differently, what sort of movement would it take to abolish McDonald’s? Without doubt, no one should be eating that sort of trash. However, many people are unable to afford anything else, so they’re stuck with terrible dietary choices. How do activists change this dynamic? How can they reconstruct or abolish fast food restaurants around the world?
Can these workers connect with the farmers and workers who are growing and picking the food used in such establishments? Can they connect with fast food workers around the world? Can activists reconstruct these restaurants and create cooperatives? What sort of movement would it take to do so? How can organizers connect the fast food workers movement to environmental movements struggling for changes in our food production processes? Indeed, people fighting against Monsanto are inherently connected to workers who are serving and eating food grown by Monsanto.
To conclude, I will say that there are plenty of other dynamics to mention, such as the environmental aspects of fast food production and consumption, the amount of money the fast food industry gets from the military industrial complex, the cultural stains these entities leave on society, and so on. For now, the struggle continues, albeit limited in scope. As interested and decent humans, we must always stand in solidarity with our brothers and sisters who are struggling for positive political changes, yet we must also remain constructively critical while doing so.
As a global movement, it’s not in our interest to idly stand on the sidelines, chanting slogans and catch-phrases while avoiding larger questions and concerns. We owe it to ourselves and the world to ask bigger questions than whether or not we think fast food workers should make $15 an hour.
Without developing a serious long-term vision, activists are left with single-issue political campaigns that are totally incapable of connecting global struggles to local struggles and vice versa. Undoubtedly, we must continue to support our brothers and sisters as they fight for $15, but we should also remain critical when discussing how these campaigns fit into a broader vision for the future.
Vincent Emanuele is a writer, activist and radio journalist who lives and works in the Rust Belt. He can be reached at [email protected]
ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.
Donate