On Sept. 11, Chicago mayor Richard Daley vetoed an ordinance that would have required large “big box” retailers like Wal-Mart, Target and Home Depot to pay employees at least $13 an hour in wages and benefits by 2010. Two days later, the city council failed to override his veto.
Daley’s veto went against the prevailing sentiment among people in Chicago. According to a Lake Research Poll, 84
 |
The city council originally passed the “living wage” ordinance by a strong margin of 35 to 14 on July 26. Some ordinance supporters thought this would be enough to secure a lasting victory. At that point, the vote margin was wide enough to override a threatened veto by the mayor.
But this did not stop Daley, who convinced three city aldermen to switch their votes on Sept. 13. Alderman Shirley Coleman said that she changed her vote to align with the mayor because Wal-Mart, a company that would have been affected by the ordinance, verbally promised her to build a store in her ward if she helped out.
Wal-Mart and Target pressured the city to reverse the law as soon as it was passed. Both mega-chains threatened to halt plans for opening stores within Chicago’s city limits. The Illinois Retail Merchants Association joined with them and threatened to fight the ordinance in court if it was not vetoed.
The mayor’s office launched a huge media assault on the law the day after it passed. Daley, a Democrat, has shown himself to be a willing agent for large corporations.
Fighting back
Chicago is a city of three million people. Wal-Mart and Target would like to dominate the city’s retail market and increase their already enormous profits. Wal-Mart makes over $285 billion in revenue and $10.3 billion in net profits each year.
Giving workers in Chicago a wage increase, like the one enshrined in the now-moribund “living wage” law, would be a simple task. But increasing wages and benefits is something that these companies resist at all costs because doing so cuts into their profit margins.
Mounting coordinated opposition to pro-worker campaigns, legislative or otherwise, is nothing new for Wal-Mart, Target, Home Depot or any other “big box” retailer.
Of the retail giants, Wal-Mart is the most notoriously anti-worker.
According to Walmartwatch.com, the company pays its associates $1,000 below the federal poverty level for a family of three. Wal-Mart fails to provide health insurance for more than half of its employees. Wal-Mart workers top the Medicaid roles in at least 16 states.
Wal-Mart is also sexist and racist. Because of its discriminatory practices against women, Wal-Mart is currently defending a large class action lawsuit by current and former women employees who were routinely refused promotions and paid much less than men. There are also two pending lawsuits filed by employees and customers that charge Wal-Mart with racial discrimination.
Mayor Daley’s veto of the “living wage” law is an unwelcome development for workers. Wage increases and other victories against Wal-Mart and similar retailers are important advances.
The veto demonstrates the limits of traditional lobbying. Under capitalism, the government and corporations work together to protect and forward the interests of their class. Keeping the struggle within the confines of lobbying for small reforms is not enough. What can make a difference is the class struggle.
A militant drive to organize Wal-Mart’s 1.8 million workers would be a good first step to revive the class struggle against increasingly brazen and emboldened U.S. corporations.
