The solution is simple, hire and train new employees!

It cannot be stated often enough: the tip credit exists in Seattle's minimum wage because Sawant put it there, and she put it there to get her name on the law. Washington State's minimum wage has no tip credit, and SeaTac's minimum wage, enacted by voters there in 2013, also has no tip credit. There was no reason for Seattle to accept a tip credit, unless one believes Seattle's voters were far less liberal than voters in SeaTac. These workers should blame Sawant for their wage issues.

@1 A business that does not pay its workers a livable wage does not deserve to exist.
@2 A better solution, Guillotines for exploitive bosses!

@4 labor can only be paid what it’s worth and in the case of many unskilled jobs they are not worth a “living wage” in Seattle. The net result will be business closing and loss of jobs.

This situation can only end in two ways. The workers receive concessions and increased pay but some of their colleagues will be let go or the business will close. In either case there will be less jobs so I'm not sure what the win really is here.

@5: Economic circumstances may change, so we can't know for sure. Even though Seattle wound up with the weakest of the state's local minimum wages (Thanks, Kshama!!), voters both in Seattle and statewide have been very clear, outlawing poverty wages every time they acted. Supporting failed businesses (and failed business models) with poverty wages does not fit Seattle's plans, and the City Council should respect that, and end Sawant's Sellout of Workers to the bosses, by closing this 'tip credit' loophole.

Somehow, I doubt Seattle will soon find itself without coffeeshops.

@6 I'm not sure I'd characterize what these employees are earning as poverty wages. At min wage they are earning over $40K a year to pour coffee. If they are assuming tips will stay static as prices adjust they may be in for a shock. Many consumers are already exhausted from the endless tip requests and will end up tipping less or not at all since they now know the employees are not dependent on tips. At most I think this ends up being a small rise in overall pay for the employees that are left. I don't doubt Seattle will still have coffee stands but what you will see is more Starbucks type chains who can afford to subsidize the higher costs / lower profits of Seattle with locations that have higher profit margins. Small chains like this one who only operate in Seattle will struggle. Most of the progressives on here seem to think that is a good thing so I won't belabor that point but continue to point out that this will be the result. There just isn't endless profit margins in these businesses to pay low skilled labor a "living wage".

@7 how do you figure 40K a year?

These are not full time jobs. Assuming they work an average 30 hours, and if they were making the full min wage of even a larger company (500+) your math makes no sense

19.97 x 30 x 52 is just barely over 31K before taxes.

The low end of the avg median rent for a 1BD apt in Seattle is about 2000 a month. That ends up being 77% of their income before tax.

@8 if you’re going to compare this to a living wage you have to calculate it as full time. Assuming you are going to make a living wage working part time is delusional. If you do that they are making 41k. I won’t argue that’s still not enough to afford an apt alone but it’s not poverty either.

@9 Living wage covering basic necessities for seattle-Tacoma area is estimated to be ~$60k per year for a single adult w/o child
https://livingwage.mit.edu/metros/42660

@8, @10: Anyone who thinks they'll have their own apartment in Seattle whilst working a minimum-wage job really needs a serious lesson on Life In The Big City. (When I moved to Seattle, I already had an engineering degree, and still lived in a rooming house for my first half-decade.)

@10 exactly. Thinking you deserve to make that working a low skilled job is not realistic much less thinking you should get that working part time.

Robots to the rescue! Beep boop!

@9 even at 41K, rent of an average apt is still going to consume close to 60% of that income, and that’s still before taxes.

@tenny nobody asked you nor do they want your discourse because you are just overall a bad person. The lifeblood of a city are service workers.

@15 so you get a roommate. In what city on earth can you have your own place working a min wage job? My point is Seattle is expensive and min wage will never be a “living wage” however our min wage is hardly poverty either.

So let me try and understand. At this place you make less than minimum wage + tips with a side of sexual harassment thrown in to pull espresso shots.

Serious question: Dick’s. Drive In pays a min of 21/hr, free employer paid healthcare, a matching 401k plan and free food while you are on shift.

Why wouldn’t any rational person do that instead?

@15: "even at 41K, rent of an average apt is still going to consume close to 60% of that income, and that’s still before taxes."

Yep. That's Life In The Big City. I've never had a minimum-wage job, and even with an engineering degree, I still could not afford a place of my own for years. Thanks for helping to make my point.