Parkland Health & Hospital System in Dallas[1] will raise its own minimum wage to $10.25 an hour next month...
The wage increase will cost the hospital about $350,000 a year. The expense will be covered with money from the upcoming quarter's bonus pool for the hospital's 60 vice presidents and top executives.
After this, every worker employed by Dallas County will make at least $10.25 an hour (still not a living wage by many measures).
Note also that this will barely put a dent in that pool, expected to be at least $3M for the year.
[1] People who have memories of November 22, 1963 will remember that as a historic location
(Score: 3, Informative) by RaffArundel on Tuesday June 17 2014, @02:22PM
If you are going to use the numbers from 2011, keep in mind the average rent was $794 according to http://www.city-data.com/city/Dallas-Texas.html [city-data.com] but I don't have a quick source for median income for 2014, but you are welcome to post it.
Median household income is obviously by household, so simply dividing by 2 is not a fair representation. The per capita income in 2011 was $25k. The question was: is it a living wage? I am fortunate, so I don't know how hard the budgeting that amount is, but as I asked in the title - Perspective? I think $25k in the Dallas area is probably better than $30-35k in many other areas where I lived.
They do? I can't recall seeing one in recent memory which didn't have a company logo on the side. I suspect there is some stereotyping going on - the highways around here are awash with Prius not Hummers. Transportation prices are lower because fuel costs are lower.
We are probably not the best demographic to discuss this, but people don't get their toilet paper from Amazon. As previously mentioned, neither gas nor food is "about the same" according to CNN. I am mildly surprised that utilities run higher, but that just encourages people to use less, which I am all for. I don't live there, so I don't use public transportation but the DART has some very good coverage. I don't know how utilized it is, so I won't speculate.
You won't get an argument from me regarding the state of the middle class - but throwing around those numbers without accounting for cost of living skews the real issue. My point wasn't that at all regardless, it was putting things in perspective. So, instead of a $50k bonus, these executives get ~45k and the 5k drop in their bonus goes to the workers, who now get ~1.5k more a year. You may think it is not enough, but this is a good thing. The summary makes it look like they should not have bothered or worse, that this is a bad thing.