I hear what you're saying. As a means of "helping out the working class", it's stupid and simplistic: "workers aren't paid enough? Mandate they get paid more! Problem solved!"
The problem, of course, is that there are many ways to save money by screwing workers (eg worsen the working conditions) and if the market price is below the min you set, employers will just shift into those other ways.
A more robust solution -- as opposed to playing whack-a-mole over all dimensions of worker screwing -- would be to a) make their options more transparent and b) restrict supply somehow.
That's why -- counterintuitive as it may seem -- I actually think it's a step forward, what LA is considering: a system of "minimum wage OR be represented by a union" (which helps with a/b above). It gives a "release valve" for excessive minimums that allows for some market pricing while also proving a check against the things advocates really care about: worker mistreatment.
A minimum wage by itself is a clumsy fix for a more complex problem.
The problem, of course, is that there are many ways to save money by screwing workers (eg worsen the working conditions) and if the market price is below the min you set, employers will just shift into those other ways.
A more robust solution -- as opposed to playing whack-a-mole over all dimensions of worker screwing -- would be to a) make their options more transparent and b) restrict supply somehow.
That's why -- counterintuitive as it may seem -- I actually think it's a step forward, what LA is considering: a system of "minimum wage OR be represented by a union" (which helps with a/b above). It gives a "release valve" for excessive minimums that allows for some market pricing while also proving a check against the things advocates really care about: worker mistreatment.
A minimum wage by itself is a clumsy fix for a more complex problem.