Connect with us

Opinions

Having D.C. bars pay workers won’t cause sky to fall

Initiative 77 is about raising wages, protecting workers

Published

on

Initiative 77, gay news, Washington Blade

Washington, D.C.’s gay bars would have you believe that passing Initiative 77, which would pay tipped workers the full minimum wage plus tips, is unnecessary and would destroy D.C.’s queer nightlife. In reality, Initiative 77 makes bars and restaurants play by the same rules as everyone else.

Tipping can be a wonderful way to thank someone for a job well done — a great extra perk. However, relying mostly on tips as the salary paid to an employee is problematic, especially if the worker is a woman and/or nonwhite. On March 11, the New York Times released a scathing report on how wait staff, especially women, frequently endure harassing behavior because they don’t want to risk losing tips. Vox’s food site Eater reported that the average white wait staffer receives more in tips than all other racial groups.

On June 19, D.C. voters will be asked to weigh in on Initiative 77 to eliminate the tipped minimum wage, and pay wait staff the same minimum wage that is applied to everyone else. The increases would be phased in by 2026. Restaurant owners’ reaction to the idea that they should be responsible for paying their workers hasn’t exactly been positive: The owners of Trade, Number Nine and Town formed an election committee No2DC77, and — being sure to avoid the dramatic — stated that if passed “jobs will be lost, consumer prices will skyrocket, venues won’t survive.” Yet, the truth is far less campy: ensuring a basic minimum wage is about raising wages, protecting workers, and creating a level playing field for all businesses in the District.

Forcing wait staff to rely on tips raises concerns about harassment and racism, and it also says something about how we want to do business. Restaurant and bar owners want to have one set of rules for themselves and another set of rules for the rest of us. Everything from cafes, gift shops, fast food chains, and grocery stores all seem to be able to survive paying at least the minimum wage, but somehow restaurants and bars cannot? Their rationale seems more farce than fact.

No2DC77’s dire predictions of job losses fall apart when looking at the numbers. Researchers at Cornell University looked at how restaurant employment was affected by increases to the minimum wage and found little to no change. They did look very hard to find a change — they looked at data from over a 20-year period at increases to tipped minimum wages and increases to the non-tip minimum wages across multiple states. They even looked at California, a state that does not have a different minimum wage for tipped workers. Still they didn’t find raising wages would kill jobs.

Findings that raising the minimum wage helps restaurant workers earn more would seem to be common sense, but that hasn’t been the case with opponents of Initiative 77. Mark Lee, a consultant for No2DC77, bemoaned the initiative in the Washington Blade on May 10, and claimed it would reduce the incomes of wait staff, who he asserted make “typically … $25, $35 or more an hour.”

Talking to people at gay bars and around town, I have noticed this idea that most wait staff make significantly more than the minimum wage is a common misconception. I can see why some would oppose the initiative if wait staff are already making $25 or $35 per hour, thinking it would not be needed. That idea isn’t illogical, except for fact that the Bureau of Labor Statistics actually reports the average waiter or waitress in Washington, D.C. makes $17.48-per-hour.

Some are doing very well, one bartender I talked to at Uproar even mentioned he has made up to $500 on busy nights. Yet, with an average of only a few dollars higher than the current minimum wage, for every person Lee asserts makes $35-per-hour, you would need four people making $13.10-per-hour to reach that average.

The saddest part of this is that the owners of Trade, Number Nine and Town are fighting this initiative claiming they are doing it to protect LGBTQ wait staff. Not only has research found raising minimum wages helps all wait staff see better wages, minimum wage increases have been found to dramatically reduce the poverty rate for LGBTQ families. The LGBTQ think tank the Williams Institute reported that when the full minimum wage is raised to $15-per-hour there would be a 46 percent drop in the poverty rate for lesbian couples, and for gay male couples it would be a decline of 35 percent. And while there’s no trans specific data, we know that transgender people are four times more likely to live on incomes below $10,000 a year.

If the owners of these bars truly want to support LGBTQ people then perhaps they should join the National LGBTQ Task Force Action Fund in support of Initiative 77. The Task Force came out to support the initiative because we want to ensure fair working standards and living wages for all LGBTQ people. You can learn more about the campaign at OneFairWageDC.com.

 

Alex Morash is a writer based in D.C. He used to write about economic issues for Media Matters; currently, he is the media director for the National LGBTQ Task Force Action Fund.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Opinions

Rosenstein: Vote for Angela Alsobrooks and April McClain-Delaney

Two strong, accomplished women for Maryland

Published

on

I am endorsing two strong accomplished women for Maryland. The first is Angela Alsobrooks, for United States Senate. Second is April McClain-Delaney for Congress in Maryland’s 6th District. Both women are superbly qualified, and will fight hard for, and be a credit to, the people of Maryland.

Angela Alsobrooks is county executive of Prince George’s County. She was born and raised in Maryland. She is a graduate of Duke University, and the University of Maryland, School of Law. She was the first full-time Assistant State’s Attorney to handle domestic violence cases in Prince George’s County. She made history as the youngest, and first woman, to be elected Prince George’s County State’s Attorney where she stood up for families, taking on some of Maryland’s worst criminals, while treating victims and the accused with dignity and respect. Under her tenure, violent crime dropped by 50 percent.  

Alsobrooks has said, “This year we know the rights of women to control their own bodies and healthcare, is at the top of the list of concerns for so many Marylanders, and decent people across the country, both men and women.” Because of this Maryland must elect a strong woman to ensure we win the fight on this issue. There are many reasons to support Alsobrooks. One is if we look at the United States Senate, what is clearly missing, is an African-American woman. That is a disgrace. Marylanders have the ability to make that right by voting for Angela Alsobrooks. 

But there are other reasons to vote for Angela. She understands how federal policy impacts states and counties, directly impacting her constituents, because she has dealt with the issues that arise from the bills Congress passes. Angela is a pragmatic progressive, and will work across the aisle to get things done. Nothing prepares you more for negotiating with Republicans in Congress, than negotiating with a county council and community activists, and she has done both successfully for many years. She will continue to fight for LGBTQ equality having named the first LGBTQ liaison in PG County. She supports legislation to fight climate change, and supports student loan forgiveness. Maryland leaders know Alsobrooks is the right candidate. She has been endorsed by Gov. Wes Moore, Lt. Gov. Aruna Miller, Sen. Chris Van Hollen and former Sen. Barbara Mikulski, Congressmen Jaimie Raskin, Steny Hoyer and Glenn Ivey; and an overwhelming number of local legislators and leaders in PG County. They all know how good she is, and how much she will do for Maryland, and the nation. I urge a vote for Angela Alsobrooks in the Democratic Senate primary.

I also join a hero of mine, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Congressmen Steny Hoyer and Dutch Ruppersberger, along with a host of Maryland legislators and office holders, who have endorsed April McClain-Delaney. She has more than 30 years’ experience in communications law, regulatory affairs, and advocacy, across a broad spectrum of government, private sector, and non-profit engagements. She has served as the Washington director and a board member of Common-Sense Media, a leading non-profit dedicated to how media impacts kids health and wellbeing. Her policy and advocacy efforts have spanned digital citizenship, bridging the digital divide, and tech equity issues, privacy matters, spectrum, and internet governance. She has served as assistant general counsel and regulatory affairs director at Orion Satellite where she oversaw domestic and international regulatory efforts in approximately 20 countries, and served as one the founding board members of the International Satellite Association.

In addition to her professional endeavors, she has served on numerous boards and councils. These include the Meridian Women’s Leadership Council; Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security; Georgetown Law Center (past chair); Northwestern University Board of Trustees; the International Center for Research on Women; Innocents at Risk; and the Sun Valley Community School. She is a graduate of Northwestern University and has her JD from Georgetown Law Center.  Delaney is the best candidate to win the 6th District for Democrats. Delaney understands rural Maryland having grown up on a farm in Iowa. She understands government today, serving as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information, U.S. Department of Commerce, in the Biden administration. 

When it comes to the issue of protecting a woman’s right to control her own body and healthcare, no one will match April in her vigilance. She is a mother fighting for the rights for her four daughters. She is a strong supporter of LGBTQ rights, and will support policies to fight climate change, support debt relief for students, and will work to protect our national security. She understands what it means to work across the aisle without giving up any of her principles. She is the kind of person we need in Congress. I urge a vote for April McClain-Delaney in Maryland’s 6th Congressional District, Democratic primary. 

Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist. He writes regularly for the Blade.

Continue Reading

Opinions

Unique financial planning challenges for trans community

Overcoming roadblocks in journey to living an authentic life

Published

on

Approximately 2.6 million Americans identify as transgender, according to the U.S. Census Bureau Household Pulse Survey in 2023. This community faces many financial, legal, and estate planning challenges, resulting in higher rates of financial instability compared to the general population. However, these challenges are not generally understood or even discussed. 

At JPMorgan Chase, we’re dedicated to providing awareness and education to help all communities — including members of the LGBTQ+ community — reach their financial goals. Our team at J.P. Morgan Wealth Management recently published a new white paper to offer actionable tips for transgender adults to help them overcome some of the specific obstacles they face with planning.

Here are some key takeaways:

Inaccurate identity documents create a foundational problem

Hundreds of thousands of transgender people in the U.S. do not have a single piece of identification that correctly identifies their gender or chosen name. Many people, including those in the broader LGBTQ+ population, have never thought about what their lives would be like if they lacked accurate identity documents. 

Having accurate identity documents is essential for so many aspects of everyday life – applying for school or a job, finding a place to live, exercising the right to vote and boarding a plane. Presenting inaccurate identification in these situations can subject transgender individuals to unfair discrimination and harassment. But correcting name and gender markers on identity documents can be complicated, expensive, time-consuming, and in some cases, impossible.

The U.S. State Department has adopted one of the most simple and progressive policies for correcting gender markers in the world. Since June 2021, medical certification is not required to change the gender marker in one’s passport. Transgender people should consider updating their U.S. Passport book or card immediately and use that document as primary identification. Passport books and cards are valid for 10 years, even if policies change during that time.

Credit issues are common for trans community 

Transgender individuals who are able to successfully obtain new identity documents still frequently face credit issues. Unlike changes to one’s last name after a marriage or divorce, informing banks or other creditors of a change to one’s first name on accounts does not automatically cause credit reporting agencies to update that person’s credit file. The credit reporting system can often be problematic for transgender people after a name change, with many reporting that credit files are never updated or that their credit scores decline.

This can create a cascading effect in numerous areas of one’s financial life, and it goes beyond borrowing. Credit files are frequently checked in employment decisions, pricing insurance, establishing utility and phone service and applying to rent a home. 

Until policies change, transgender individuals should directly contact each creditor and credit reporting agency and follow each organization’s specific procedures and documentation requests. And they should carefully monitor that the changes are actually made and do not result in a credit score change.

Emergency and end-of-life documents should be carefully reviewed

Transgender people often have special health care needs and face unique forms of disparate treatment in accessing care, and cannot speak for themselves in these circumstances. End-of-life planning is often difficult to think about, but it’s especially critical that this community works with their attorneys and trusted advisors to create customized emergency and end-of-life legal documents. 

The people named in these documents who could become decision-makers – typically trusted friends or supportive family members – should be empowered to direct health care providers to meet the patient’s wishes and preserve their chosen name and gender identity, as well as service providers, such as funeral home employees, to honor the deceased’s wishes about their appearance during memorial services.

The laws for these documents are complicated, and they vary depending on the state or territory. If possible, these documents should be prepared by experienced attorneys who routinely work with members of the LGBTQ+ community. 

The bottom line

Transgender individuals in the United States face unique financial, legal and estate planning challenges that create roadblocks in their journey to living an authentic life. Careful planning can help mitigate some, but not all, of these obstacles.

JPMorgan Chase & Co., its affiliates, and employees do not provide tax, legal or accounting advice. You should consult your own tax, legal and accounting advisors before engaging in any financial transaction. J.P. Morgan Wealth Management is a business of JPMorgan Chase & Co., which offers investment products and services through J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (JPMS), a registered broker-dealer and investment adviser, member FINRA and SIPC.

Joseph Hahn is executive director of Wealth Planning & Advice at J.P. Morgan Wealth Management.

Continue Reading

Opinions

University students have a right to protest

But they must not threaten Jewish students on campus

Published

on

Students at Columbia University have set up a tent city to protest the war in Israel. (Screen capture via CBS News New York YouTube)

I support the right of students at Columbia University, and other colleges, to protest. They must understand they are protesting on private space. What I also find interesting is how many of them see their right to protest, and right to free speech. 

The First Amendment gives us a right to free speech, but it doesn’t specify what exactly is meant by freedom of speech. Defining what types of speech should and shouldn’t be protected by law, has been left to the courts. Clearly free speech has its limits. Obscene material such as child pornography, plagiarism of copyrighted material, defamation, or threats, aren’t allowed. Also not protected under the First Amendment is speech inciting illegal actions, or soliciting others to commit crimes. Private employers, and universities, are allowed to set their own guidelines as to what speech is allowed for their employees, and on their campuses. 

The debate over student protests at Columbia University is not a new one. I remember when the Student Afro Society (SAS) and the basically all-white Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), demonstrated and took over buildings at Columbia in 1968. Some were protesting the Vietnam War, others what they deemed would be a segregated gym in Morningside Heights, and Columbia’s infringement on a minority community. Both legitimate causes. Those demonstrations took a nasty turn when students took over buildings and cut off water and electricity to them. They held a sit-in, in the president’s office, and took a dean hostage. Police were called and in some cases it got violent. We are not at the 1968 stage yet in the current demonstrations, and if outside agitators don’t get involved, it may not get to that. 

I agree with some of what the demonstrators are calling for, including having Israel rethink how it is conducting this war, protection for the Palestinian people, and immediately providing them with food and medicine. I don’t agree with their call to support BDS, which is the disinvestment in Israel. BDS is a Palestinian non-violent movement begun in 2005. I also see hypocrisy in what some of the protesters are saying. While they claim Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, which many disagree with, the same people are calling for genocide against Israel by supporting Hamas. It is Hamas’s stated goal to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, “from the river to the sea.”

Calling out Israel for its tactics, is not anti-Semitic. But attacking, and calling out Jewish students on campus, telling them to go back to Poland, which we have seen on video, and making them feel unsafe, is. Then there is the totally outrageous statement, “Zionists don’t deserve to live.” made by Khymani James, one of the student leaders of the Columbia, pro-Palestinian student protest encampment. He made the comments during and after a disciplinary hearing with Columbia administrators that he recorded and then posted on Instagram. I hope the president of Columbia University will be able to negotiate an agreement with the peaceful student demonstrators, including amnesty for some of those students who were arrested, if the students agree to certain parameters for continuing demonstrations. One being they cannot make other students feel unsafe on campus. 

I find it abhorrent that House Speaker Mike Johnson has inserted himself at Columbia University, calling for President Shafik to quit. It is a totally inappropriate political stunt. The same goes for Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) who called for the Biden administration to revoke the student visas of all foreign students who are demonstrating. Those students came to the United States for an education, because we are a free country. If they agree to the guidelines of the university, and what is recognized as acceptable free speech, we should continue to welcome them, and allow them to voice their feelings. Again, as long as they don’t threaten others while they do so. 

I am Jewish, and a strong supporter of the State of Israel. That support has not stopped me from calling on the Israeli people to rid themselves of Netanyahu, and his right-wing government. I oppose the settlements, and support a real two-state solution. But for that to happen not only will the Netanyahu government have to go, but the Palestinian people will have to reject Hamas. I have not heard the call for Hamas to release the hostages they took, whether those hostages are alive or dead at this time. 

I strongly believe in the right to protest, and for Americans, and those here legally, to speak out. In 1969, I came to D.C. to protest the Vietnam War in front of the Justice Department and was tear-gassed. I had a right to protest in a public space. Since that time, I have participated in many demonstrations. Some around the White House supporting rights for the disabled community, LGBTQ rights, women’s rights, and in the ‘80s, demanding the government recognize, and do something about HIV/AIDS. The difference was in these demonstrations, those who disagreed were not threatened. The demonstrations I participated in, took place in public space, not the quad at Columbia University, or other university campuses, which is private space. Students who protest there must understand that. 

My hope is none of the peaceful student demonstrators at Columbia, and other institutions, those who do not threaten fellow students, are thrown out, losing the chance to earn a degree. Those students chose to go to their schools because they thought they would get a good education, and believed graduating from those schools would be good for their futures. 

Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist. He writes regularly for the Blade.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular