Policy

Priorities

Standards for Companies Receiving City Tax Dollars

Despite Houstons high employment rate, more than one in five Houstonians live in poverty. Working
mothers are 2.5 times more likely to be paid a poverty wage than their male counterparts. Three
hundred sixty-one thousand Texans are paid an hourly wage of $7.25 or less, more hourly minimum
wage workers than any other state.

Our next mayor has the opportunity to make our economy work for struggling families by setting high
standards and living wages for any company seeking public dollars or tax incentives. We want
assurances that taxpayers money is going to provide good jobs to Houstonians.

A sound and effective Good Jobs Ordinance will apply to all companies seeking public subsidies, tax
incentives or contracts, and should:

1. Establish procedures for evaluating a decision to contract out City services.

2. Create Pre-Screening Process to weed out irresponsible companies.

3. Set high standards for wages and benefits. Standards will include:
a. Raise the minimum wage to $15/hour or 150% of the federal poverty guidelines

b. Local hire requirement that: x% of work hours completed by workers living in high
poverty zip codes in the Greater Houston Metropolitan Area (or City of Houston)

c. Second Chances: x% of work hours completed by individuals with barriers to
employment such as a criminal record or lacking a high school diploma

d. Benefits and policies that accommodate families including:
i. A minimum of 5 paid sick days per year
ii. The right to decline work that exceeds over 55 hours or 6 days in a workweek
iii. A minimum number of hours (9 hours) between each shift
iv. Parity for part-time workers
v. Reliable scheduling with a minimum of 72 hours notice of any changes to allow
for childcare and transportation to be arranged, and the right to request
schedule accommodations
vi. Rest breaks of 15 minutes for every four hours worked

e. Required OSHA-10 training for all construction workers in language they are fluent in.

4. Create a quantitative assessment tool to evaluate bids and incentivize good practices
a. A point-based matrix tool will give additional weight to bidders who provide additional
benefits such as:
i. Living wages above the minimum required
ii. Apprenticeship or training programs
iii. Retirement plans (401K) and pension plans
iv. Healthcare plans with low employee contribution, dental and vision coverage
v. Opportunities for career advancement and education

b. The matrix will also consider: the number of jobs projected to be created and in the
case of a public subsidy request, consideration given if the project is in one of the Citys
targeted development zones

5. Allocate resources for effective enforcement and transparency.


Cities with Similar Provisions:

Austin, TX Passed a resolution1 in October 2013 that requires all companies entering into 380
agreements provide employees with $11/hr or prevailing wage, OSHA training, health
insurance, and workers comp. It also established a Firm Based Incentive Matrix.2

San Jose, CA Evaluates a host of bidders labor practices in its evaluation from living wages, to
paid leave, to labor peace agreements.3

More than 140 cities have adopted living wage requirements for public contractors, including
many cities in the U.S. South such as Saint Louis, MO.

Madison, WI Passed Best Value Contracting Ordinance in 2008 that requires evaluations of
bids include consideration of wages, diversity of employees, and apprenticeships programs.4

Los Angeles, CA Strong example of post-award enforcement

Over 27 cities and counties in the U.S. have implemented Second Chance (sometimes referred
to as Ban the Box) policies.

Financial Factors to Consider:

National studies have shown that for cities that have implemented living wage ordinances,
actual costs tended to be less that one-tenth of 1% of the overall budget and often improved
the competitiveness of the biding process giving high-road employers confidence they will not
be undercut by low-road, low-quality contractors.5 6

Fee and fine collection for violations will create a new revenue stream to offset the initial up-
front increased funding for publicity and enforcement to ensure standards are applied.

Studies have shown that cities and states that have implemented wage and benefit standards
for public contractors have found resulting reduced employee turnover, increased
productivity, and improved quality and reliability of contracted services.7

Pre-screening of contractors will save the City from potential lawsuits, issues of poor
workmanship, and ensure only serious and upstanding companies move through to the
procurement process. This will save OBO staff time and city dollars.

Second Chance provisions have been shown to strengthen the local economy, advance
economic equality for communities of color, and decrease the recidivism rates.8

1 http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=199366
2 http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=205680

3http://www.nelp.org/content/uploads/2015/03/ContractingThatWorks2010.pdf
4 https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/COW_04RaiseWageBenefit.pdf
5 National Municipal Policy Network. Policy Brief: Living Wage Ordinances (http://localprogress.org/wp-

content/uploads/2013/09/livingwage-ID-31658.pdf)
6 http://www.epi.org/publication/bp170/
7 Sonn and Gebreselassie, The Road to Responsible Contracting, p. 14 (compiling studies)
8 Ex-offenders who were employed and earning higher wages after release were less likely to return to prison the first year
out. The more wages earned two months after release, the lower a respondents likelihood of re-incarceration. Predicted
probabilities of re-incarceration were 8 percent for those earning more than $10 per hour; 12 percent for those earning $7 to
$10 per hour; and 16 percent for those earning less than $7 per hourcompared with 23 percent for those who were
unemployed. (http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/411778-Employment-after-Prison-A-
Longitudinal-Study-of-Releasees-in-Three-States.PDF)