by Jon Hurst, RAM President

As Massachusetts voters head to the polls next week, they will be voting on five ballot questions which seek to pass new laws in the Commonwealth. As voted by our Board of Directors, two of those questions—Questions 2 and 5—are being opposed by the Retailers Association of Massachusetts (RAM). RAM urges our members, their employees, families, friends and neighbors to vote NO on 2 and 5.

The common denominator of these two questions is that they are both counterproductive for the future of those residents most directly affected—our high school students and tipped service workers. The other interesting connection between the two questions is that they are being pushed by the deep pockets of special interest groups, one from here in Massachusetts, and the other an out of state national lobbying interest group.

Question 2 is sponsored by the statewide teachers’ union, which is seeking to take away accountability in our public schools by repealing the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) testing requirement for high school graduation. A centerpiece of state education reform for over 20 years, those seeking to repeal the graduation requirement would replace it with nothing, instead leaving decisions on accountability standards to 351 cities and towns across the state. Such a framework would mean quality and accountability abandonment in too many school systems, particularly for our most vulnerable students.

Year after year, Massachusetts is regularly ranked as having the best public education systems in the nation. At a time of heightened focus on competitiveness between the states for attracting families, workforces, employers and investment, it is vital to retain our leadership in the area of education. We must continue to put the future of our students first, and support a strong, consistent and accountable public-school systems for everyone across the state.

Question 5 is sponsored by an out of state labor interest group, which has been seeking to repeal tip wage laws across the country. Approximately 40 states have such tip wage laws, which in Massachusetts means that an employer may utilize a wage that is approximately 45% of the minimum wage for service employees. The remaining portion of the minimum wage rate must then be made up by either tips, or directly by the employer. In reality, tipped employees typically make far more than the state minimum wage in tips, and that is why servers are nearly universally opposed to this measure. In practice, to eliminate the tipped wage means servers may receive more from their employer, but far less in tips from customers. Small employers will see their payroll costs skyrocket, and as a result, customers will see menu prices go up dramatically.

For RAM, approximately 25% of our 4,000 members are full-service restaurants, and passage of this measure would put many on the edge of failure due to high operating costs, and unaffordable menu prices. Important jobs will be lost and our Main Streets will see more dark storefronts as a result. And this mandate would be just the first shoe to drop given the fact that in-state special interests are already gearing up for another legislative and ballot fight to raise the state minimum wage to $20 per hour.

Defeating Question 5 is not only important to our restaurant members, it is important for all small employers. We must collectively fight new state payroll mandates at a time when Main Streets are dealing with very high operating cost challenges, and while our customers are dealing with family spending constraints due to the very high cost of living in the Commonwealth.

Recognizing the small business viability issues we are seeing across the state, the RAM Board of Directors voted to contribute $100,000 to the Committee to Protect Tips, which is seeking a NO vote on Question 5.

The future competitiveness of the Commonwealth depends upon high quality education, and the affordability for our families, workforces, and small businesses to remain here as residents and employers. RAM respectfully urges you to Vote NO on Questions 2 and 5 to meet those competitiveness challenges. Thank you for your consideration!