But through it all, Social Security is still paying full benefits and keeping millions of people out of poverty in retirement. And not only is it largely immune to the wild swings of the stock market and the economy, Social Security is also perhaps the most successful anti-poverty program in American history – particularly for women.

Why? Women tend to live longer than men, are paid less, and are more likely to take time away from work to care for children. As a result, they often have smaller retirement savings accounts. But while women do tend to have a lower Social Security benefit than men ($3,000 less per year, on average), it makes up a much bigger part of their total retirement income.

Of the more than 1 million Washington residents who receive Social Security benefits each month in Washington, 424,000 are women over age 65. Thanks to Social Security, just 10% of Washington women over 65 live in poverty. Without Social Security, that number would jump to 43%. Social Security is an essential economic support for all Americans, older women in particular. You can learn more about protecting and strengthening Social Security for Washington state at Social Security Works – Washington.

For example, when parents can’t take a paid sick day, children are less likely to go to the doctor and more likely to go to school sick. But a 2003-2004 study indicated that only 36% of American children in families below 200% of the federal poverty line had a parent with sick leave, compared with 81% of those above 200% of the poverty line.

At the other end of the age spectrum, this 2008 study shows nearly 1 in 5 American workers provided unpaid care to an elderly person that year, and more than 4 in 10 provided care in the previous five years. But low-income families living from paycheck-to-paycheck are the least likely to have paid sick days available on the job. In the U.S., just 2 in 10 of the lowest paid workers had access to paid sick leave in 2010, compared to 84% of the highest earners.

Given their importance to so many people, it’s no surprise to see so many people “raise their hands” for a minimum paid sick days standard. A 2008 poll from the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago found:

• 94 percent of self-identified liberals and 81 percent of self-identified conservatives believed that paid sick day should be a basic workplace right.
• 86 percent of people surveyed said they favor a basic paid sick day policy.
• 77 percent of respondents believed that paid sick days were very important.
• 63 percent of workers who did not have access to paid sick leave said they were concerned about not having paid sick days.
• 46 percent of respondents said they are more likely to vote for a candidate who supports paid sick days.

Part-time employment shot up during the recession, both for men and women.  In 2010, men’s part-time employment rates declined, probably because many of them returned to full-time work. Yet women’s rate of part-time employment remained high, peaking at almost 38%. More men than women worked part-time due to economic reasons, meaning they wanted full-time work but could not find it. Even so, the percentage of women working part-time for economic reasons nearly doubled from 2007 to 2010. 

Young workers and women of color have suffered the most in the job market. In Washington, white men age 25-64 experienced higher rates of unemployment in 2010 than white women, but among people of color in that age group, women were more likely to be unemployed.  Washingtonians aged 16-24 were more than twice as likely to be unemployed as any other age group.  Nearly one-third of African women in that age group were unemployed.

Long-term unemployment is a problem most evident among older workers.  In Washington, over half of workers age 55 or older were unemployed for at least 27 weeks in 2010. From 2009 to 2010, long term unemployment increased both for women (from 24%-32%) and for men (from 27% to 40%).  Many of the unemployed have exhausted their unemployment insurance, including 60,000 in Washington by August of 2011.

According to a recent survey, over three-quarters of those who exhausted their UI benefits still had not found jobs. Without a job or unemployment insurance, many resort to desperate measures such as spending retirement savings, falling behind on bills, rent, or mortgage, and sinking deep into debt.

While the recession caused unusual levels of male unemployment, men have started to regain jobs while women continue to lose them. One contributing factor: significant job loss in the public sector – including thousands of K-12 teachers – a majority female workforce. From December 2008 to July 2011 women lost 473,000 public sector jobs, while men lost only 109,000.

From February 2008 to February 2010, Washington lost 62,000 construction jobs, mostly worked by men. By October 2011, the private sector regained 63,000 jobs, many of them in manufacturing, wholesale trade, and software publishing, which are also predominantly male industries. Meanwhile, Washington lost 6,000 state and local government jobs as well as 6,000 public school jobs, 75% of which were held by women. While pundits declared a “mancession” in 2008, it is clear that women are facing high unemployment and female-dominated industries are not showing as much job growth as male-dominated sectors.

Economists may have declared an end to the recession, but the jobless recovery continues to hurt average Americans. Nearly one-fifth of Washingtonians remain unemployed, underemployed, and/or discouraged through no fault of their own, and we need a strong safety net to keep people out of poverty and provide job training now more than ever. Washington’s economy can return stronger than it was before the recession began, but we’ll need a highly skilled and well-educated workforce to do so.

While the Washington State Constitution (Article IX) states that “It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex,” early childhood education has not been considered part of the definition of basic education.

According to the League of Education Voters, while as a state we spend about $500 million on average for each grade of K-12, we spend only $14 million dollars in state funds for each age group from birth to 5 years old on child care and early learning. When federal dollars are added, that increases to $39 million for each year. (link to LEV blog)

Fortunately for our youngest children, the federal government is making a push to support the improvement of early childhood care and education. Through the Race to the Top Early Learning Challenge Grant the federal government is making $500 million dollars available to nine winning states. Washington state was one of those nine.

This grant will provide Washington with around $60 million over four years, the primary purpose of which is to support the roll-out of a Tiered Quality Rating and Improvement System (TQRIS).

A TQRIS system contains several components under its umbrella. It is designed to clearly identify what quality looks like in licensed child care centers, licensed family homes and other early learning settings. Assessment tools are used to measure child outcomes, child care provider interactions with children, and the quality of the learning environment. Supports for training and coaching are provided. Additional supports and incentives are given to facilities. Ratings are established based on the assessment and made available to parents and communities.

The Department of Early Learning has shifted funding from many of the quality activities it has undertaken in previous years to supplement the roll-out of TQRIS. About $42 million of the federal grant will go towards quality improvement awards, training hub incentives, program evaluation, rating and monitoring, training, coaching and technical assistance.

Additional elements of the grant will support state-wide expansion of the kindergarten assessment by paying for teacher training elements and providing incentives for child care providers that already have or who gain specific levels of higher education.

Race to the top will give Washington state a much needed boost in creating an integrated system of early care and education. Perhaps that will provide some of the impetus for making a stronger commitment to funding high quality early learning programs and professionals.

Nine other states (AZ, CO, FL, MO, MT, NV, OH, OR, VT) followed suit, and more recently, some (at first blush) surprising advocates for stronger minimum wage laws have emerged. Among them: Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (Independent), who advocate indexing the federal minimum wage to inflation and increasing the minimum wage, respectively. (President Obama previously endorsed raising the federal minimum wage to $9.50, then indexing it based on the Consumer Price Index.)

Given that context, it’s more than a little surprising to see a group of Washington legislators file three different bills this year, each aimed at undercutting Washington state’s best-in-the-nation minimum wage in some fashion:

• The first would use a more obscure measure of inflation to reduce cost-of-living adjustments;
• The second would penalize employees who earn tips by lowering their minimum wage; and
• The third would outright prohibit a cost-of-living adjustment to the minimum wage when people need it most – when the economy takes a downturn.

What gives? There is no good public policy reason to give a pay cut to tens of thousands of working people trying to make ends meet on a meager hourly wage, especially when Washington state’s long experience makes it clear that a strong minimum wage law protects paychecks and boosts our local economies.

The measures are unlikely to be any too popular with voters, either. In fact, it is *increasing* the minimum wage that draws support from all income groups and political parties – including majorities of independent voters and Republicans. Recent polling found that two-thirds of Americans – a bipartisan majority – support raising the minimum wage to $10 and then indexing it to inflation to keep up with the rising cost of living.

Here’s one possible reason for the bills: The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) has long sought to overturn state minimum wage laws, and even provides model legislation for state lawmakers to use for that end. And according to SourceWatch, of the eight legislators sponsoring one or more of the three bills in Washington, four have close ties to ALEC:

• Rep. Jan Angel (R-26), ALEC State Chairman and Commerce, Insurance and Economic Development Task Force Member
• Rep. Gary C. Alexander (R-20), ALEC Tax and Fiscal Policy Task Force Member
• Rep. Charles R. Ross (R-14), ALEC Public Safety and Elections Task Force Member
• Rep. Matt Shea (R-4), ALEC Civil Justice Task Force Member

To be sure, correlation does not equal causation here. But it is certainly a compelling set of connections.

Eli Lanczos testifies at a Seattle City Council hearing in favor of paid sick days

Crossposted from the Washington Family Leave Coalition:

You helped pass paid sick days in Seattle – but the devil is in the details. As the city begins drafting the rules that will actually implement the new ordinance, your input is crucial!

By attending one of these meetings, you can help ensure Seattle’s Paid Sick Days ordinance is a success!:

• Tuesday, January 24, 2-3:30 p.m.
  Seattle City Hall, Bertha Landis Room

• Wednesday, February 1, 7-8:30 p.m.
  Meadowbrook Community Center, Room 22

• Thursday, February 9, 7-8:30 p.m.
  Jefferson Community Center, Hassselburg Hall

State lawmakers are studying paid sick and safe days bills - and they need to hear your stories!

UPDATED – 01/20/2012, 4:33 PM

Crossposted from the Washington Family Leave Coalition:

Washington lawmakers are studying two Paid Sick and Safe Days bills during this legislative session (House Bill 2508 and Senate Bill 6229) – and they need to hear from you!

Please contact your legislators now to tell them why Paid Sick and Safe Days are important for you and your family’s health and economic security.

And if you’re able, come down to Olympia to show your support for the legislation at these committee hearings:

• Tues, Jan 24, 1:30-3:30 pm, Cherburg Senate Hearing Room 4: Labor, Commerce & Consumer Protection Committee

• Wed, Jan 25, 1:30-3:30 pm, Joint Legislative Office Building, House Hearing Rm C: Labor and Workforce Development Committee

You can learn more about the proposed legislation in this handy overview.

In Washington, the gender wage gap has actually worsened in some respects since 1990. The inflation-adjusted gap in median hourly wages in Washington has barely improved in the last 20 years, and men still out-earn women by more than $5.00 per hour.

Washington women earn less than men in every industry, even those that are female-dominated. The median annual earnings of women in education, health care, and social assistance jobs are about two-thirds those of their male counterparts. In 2010, women’s monthly earnings were only 63% of men’s, a 2% decrease from 1991.

This is lower than the median monthly earnings ratio of 76%, both because women work part-time more often and because men are more likely to hold the highest paying jobs. A larger proportion of women make less than $35,000 per year because they are more likely to work at low-wage and part-time jobs, whereas men are twice as likely as women to earn $75,000-$99,999 and three times as likely to earn $100,000 or more.

When the economy peaked in 2000, men saw a 25% increase in their monthly earnings since the recession of 1991, while women’s monthly earnings only increased 11%. Just as the rich tend to reap most of the benefits of a booming economy, men enjoy a larger share of wage increases than do women.

Men also earn more than their female counterparts at every level of education; the higher the level of education, the larger the gap becomes. For example, the median annual income for men without a high school diploma is only $7,000 higher than for women, but the gap grows to $27,500 for those with graduate or professional degrees.

Men also earn more than women within every race, with the biggest gender gap occurring among Asians. Even so, Asian women’s median annual earnings are still higher than all other women of color. Hispanic women have the lowest earnings, making 62% of what white women earn.

Gender disparities in pay also increase as workers get older. This is largely because women are less likely to receive raises and promotions and more likely to devote time to raising children. Women in their early twenties average 77% of men’s monthly earnings, but by their mid-forties women earn, on average, only 60% of what men do.

Gender segregation in the labor force reinforces the wage gap, leaving women at an even bigger disadvantage.  Since 1990, the percentage of female workers in agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting has increased more than any other sector, but this shrinking sector offers mostly low-wage jobs.  In contrast, the information sector has become increasingly male-dominated, while it has experienced massive growth and soaring wages.

Women are earning less than men across the board, which is fundamentally unfair.  Worse yet, the wage gap is stagnant – and in some ways getting worse.  For decades women have demanded equal pay for equal work, but the data clearly show we have a long way to go.

John Burbank, EOI Executive Director

Years ago there was a comic strip named “Pogo.” One of the most insightful strips was a distilled discussion of human foibles, in which Pogo announced, “We have met the enemy and he is us!”

When it comes to the national debate over the 99 percent vs. the 1 percent, we may not like the growing chasm between corporate elites and the rest of us — but we’ve sure made it easy for them to keep it that way.

Take our own state. It will become $25 billion wealthier over the next two years. (That’s how much our economy will grow.) And yet for some reason, we can’t seem to find enough funding to keep up with public priorities. So we will likely see annual tuition at Everett Community College break the $4,000 mark, and the University of Washington will probably charge more than $12,000. Class sizes in elementary school will top 30 kids or more. More people will be kicked off of Basic Health, right at the time when even more low-wage working people need health insurance.

Because of our over-reliance on the sales tax, we are hurting the vast majority of middle class and low-income families, and we are leaving a lot of money on the wealthy’s already overflowing table of riches.

How did we get here? In 2010, the people approved Initiative 1053, written and sponsored by Snohomish County’s own Tim Eyman, and voted into place by nearly a two-thirds margin statewide. By requiring a two-thirds vote for revenue increases, voters ended majority rule in the Legislature, making it possible for a minority of legislators to block the closure of tax loopholes or the implementation of taxes on the wealthy to fund public services.

By tying the hands of the Legislature, we prevent them from even meeting the state’s paramount duty to fund basic education for all children. But it would be nice to see some leadership anyway. Why not attempt to close corporate tax loopholes, and in so doing ensure that at least some corporate profits stay here in Washington (rather than be stashed away overseas) and be put to good use educating our kids?

The attempt to move such a bill through the House and Senate would require our elected officials to show their true stripes. Are they willing to tax out-of-state banks to fund basic health? Are they willing to close the Microsoft royalty loophole to fund higher education?

Legislators might not succeed in mustering the mandated two-thirds majority to close these loopholes. They might not even get the simple majority necessary to put this question to the people in a referendum. But they would enable the people to judge for themselves: Who is working for the citizens of our state and who is working for the out-of-state banks and the wealthiest corporations in the world?

There’s a reason such legislative behavior would be atypical. Legislators are supposed to act in the best interests of the people. But they are faced every day with a bevy of lobbyists for these banks and corporations. They are friendly, sincere and determined. They hold a lot of sway in Olympia, with both Republicans and Democrats. And they hold a lot of sway in campaign financing. So they pack fear into legislative deliberations, fear that overcomes decision-making for the greater good.

The upshot: While we have a proliferation of wealth in our state — the Seattle metropolitan area alone has almost 1,000 individuals with at least $35 million each in wealth — we also have a proliferation of poverty and a cratering of middle class hopes and dreams.

We built a cage for our legislators that confounds our own expectations. We have met the enemy, and he is us. But unlike Pogo, we have the ability to re-think our previous decisions. Legislators may hide behind Initiative 1053, but we are hiding behind our legislators. It is time for us to come out from the shadows and rebuild our future. No one else will.

If we shirk from taxing the most privileged residents of our state — the wealthiest and most powerful corporations residing here — then we’ll have to content ourselves with patching and filling our way to a low-road economy and an unpromising future for our parents, our kids and ourselves.

Now is not the time for Washington state to scale back on providing a decent living wage.

You probably heard this one before: Having a job is the new raise.

True enough. In this desultory economy, few workers are likely to barge into the boss’s office demanding a raise and a company car. They’re just happy to have a boss. But some jobholders in Washington state actually got a sweet pay hike this month. On January 1, the state’s minimum wage went from $8.67 an hour to $9.04 an hour—the highest minimum wage among the 50 states.

Woo-hoo! For minimum-wage earners lucky enough to work a 40-hour schedule, that pencils out to an extra 15 bucks a week. Those keeping score at home will note that this latest increase takes the annual gross for a minimum-wage worker in Washington from $18,033 to $18,803 a year. A family of three is officially “poor” in this country if its income is $18,530 or less, so one way to look at the 37-cent pay raise is that it lifted at least some people out of “official” poverty and into, well, the outskirts of poverty.

As ridiculous as it sounds, that’s something to be proud of. Elsewhere in this issue, an academician suggests that forgoing this year’s increase in the minimum wage might create more jobs and help jump-start the economy. He may be right, but do we really need to rescue the economy on the backs of those who can least afford to carry out the offensive?

Read more from the Seattle Business Magazine: Keep the Minimum Wage High »