Although we've written recently about the numerous reasons for our policy change requiring all Good Food Jobs to pay minimum wage or better, last week we dove to the heart of it, and readers responded. The impact of overwhelming support for this policy shift was tangible for us, and we believe it was also tangible in the wider current of energy that is turning toward the many systemic problems with how labor is valued. In other words, we are not alone in this work, and there is much more work to be done. 

What keeps coming up for us each day is the clear awareness that while some see this shift as monumental, we can't help but feel we have so much further to go. It seems that this change, on our part, is literally the bare minimum.  

In the United States, federal minimum wage is currently $7.25 per hour. Each individual state has its own minimum wage threshold - 29 states higher than the federal minimum, 16 states equal to the federal minimum, 2 states lower than the federal minimum wage, and 5 states with no established minimum wage at all. Our policy requires that employers meet the highest minimum wage threshold of the federal or state requirements, which is also, incidentally, the legal requirement.

If you receive federal minimum wage, a 40-hour work week yields $290 before taxes, and just over $15,000 full the full year. 

In our research over the last several months, the living wage has been not only a reference for us, but a model for a different standard. (Much gratitude to Dr. Amy Glasmeier for creating the Living Wage Calculator in 2004.) The value of living wage helps us to account for some of the different circumstances affecting what a person might need to make a living in their given geographic location (including housing costs, how many children someone has, and how many people in the household are working). Equity, after all, aims to meet people where they are, rather than enforcing an equal standard across the board.

Yet the fact remains: we must set a threshold that acknowledges the human behind every hour of work. With many forces at play, we understand that more is not always better, as various farm owners have pointed out the surprising fact that even with a modest stipend, many farm apprentices are able to take home more money when housing, food, and other items of value are provided as part of their payment. Everything is relative, but the larger context cannot be ignored: farm work exists within the complicated layers of land access, job access, and the value of food itself. 

So many of us working in food can come together on the common interest in valuing things that are tangible - what you can see, taste, touch and smell. It is hard for all of us to exist in a system that is untethered, regardless of the work that you do (or wish to do). But one thing that equity means for us, as White business owners, is looking at how what is uncomfortable for some may be impossible for others. We resist the call that loving the work that we do - or knowing it has a meaningful impact on the world - means we are meant to struggle financially for life, as Sarah Jaffe so eloquently argues in her book Work Won't Love You Back. And based on the conversations we've had in recent months, we also know that beneath that discomfort, even for those privileged enough to access it, lies a more fundamental human issue of what it feels like when you can't make a living, no matter how hard you work.

We at GFJ will continue to elevate jobs that pay at least the minimum wage, and for that minimum wage to meet the standard cost of living. We look forward to diving further into the many issues surrounding farm labor, and otherwise, in the coming weeks. If there is something you'd like to hear more about, please get in touch. 

Yours in food, justice, and food justice,

Tay + Dor

photo by Christine Han for GFJ Stories