The thing about the Santa Fe’s and San Francisco’s laws is that they do not accomplish what I understand most supporters hope this law will accomplish—prevent big boxes with bad labor records from coming into Chicago and taking over the market and pushing out smaller shops with good labor records.  The problem is, this law won’t do that either.

I have heard from my friends and allies that the big boxes are just bluffing—that they will eventually come into Chicago because it is economically profitable even with this ordinance. I believe that is the truth, at least in some parts of the city. Eventually they will come into the city. And nothing in this ordinance prevents Wal-Mart from pushing out the smaller unionized shops if they do so.

I also believe that in some areas of the city where it has been harder to create economic development and where some of these stores were looking to build and now say they won’t, the recovery will not be so quick because these areas are in fact close enough to an expressway or the skyway or a suburban town that these stores can and will locate outside of the city. And city residents will go there to shop.

In addition, because we have mandated a benefits package, without making it incentive based, I believe that it is pre-empted by ERISA. Consequently, I do not believe this law will ever be enforced. There is a way around this. Tie the benefits to incentives both from the city and structured within the ordinance. Combine what Santa Fe and San Francisco does, but increase the benefits by adding a tax credit for the City on the head tax. By making a benefits package optional, but economically desirable for the employer through incentives, means that federal law (ERISA) would not be pre-empted because it is not mandatory.

When I discuss these issues with my friends and allies, their response is, "Even if this is not perfect legislation, it will help workers and there is no guarantee that something better will ever come in the future."  I agree that the passage of the ordinance was a “political victory” for those fighting for labor rights. But I am concerned that that victory is illusionary. We have to look at the actual consequences of the law. It is not enough that this law might send a message across the city and nation that we are trying to protect workers.

This city and this City Council should be about passing non-arbitrary, enforceable legislation that does actually protect workers.