Can Cities Set a Local Minimum Wage? Florida Supreme Court Says No
A growing number of jurisdictions have overturned local minimum wage ordinances and the state of Florida has now waded into the minimum wage waters.
February 27, 2019 at 09:26 AM
3 minute read
A growing number of jurisdictions have overturned local minimum wage ordinances and the state of Florida has now waded into the minimum wage waters.
Florida has a long-standing state statute that expressly prohibits municipalities from enacting local wage ordinances. Section 218.007 provides that “a political subdivision may not establish, mandate, or otherwise require an employer to pay a minimum wage, other than a state or federal minimum wage.” While the statute does permit local wage ordinances for local government employees, a Florida municipality cannot pass legislation that seeks to impose a higher wage upon private employers operating within the city/county.
In 2004, Florida voters approved a state constitutional amendment that established a higher, statewide minimum hourly wage. The constitutional amendment authorized the state of Florida to increase Florida's minimum wage above the federal minimum wage established by the Fair Labor Standards Act. However, the amendment did not supersede (or even address) Section 218.077 with regard to whether local municipalities could establish their own minimum wage scales. Pursuant to this constitutional amendment, the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity is charged with adjusting the state's minimum wage rate annually based on the consumer price index. Effective Jan. 1, the current Florida minimum wage is $8.46/hour.
In June 2016, the city of Miami Beach enacted a local ordinance establishing a minimum hourly wage significantly exceeding the current Florida minimum wage. Attempting to rely on Florida's constitutional amendment, the city of Miami Beach approved a local minimum wage ordinance for all employers operating with the city. The ordinance, which was scheduled to take effect on Jan. 1, 2018, established both a local minimum wage of $10.31/hour and annual increases to $13.31/hour effective January 2021.
The Florida Retail Federation, Florida Restaurant & Lodging Association and Florida Chamber of Commerce promptly filed a lawsuit on the grounds that the Miami Beach ordinance was pre-empted by state statute. Judges in both the Miami-Dade Circuit Court and Florida's Third District Court of Appeals agreed and struck down Miami Beach's local wage ordinance.
Even more interesting is that the Florida Supreme Court initially agreed in August 2018 to exercise jurisdiction and hear the city of Miami Beach's appeal. However, last month three of the justices who had voted in favor of hearing the case retired. On Feb. 5, 2019, the Florida Supreme Court issued a perfunctory order that stated simply: “Upon further consideration, we exercise our discretion and discharge jurisdiction. Accordingly, we hereby dismiss this review proceeding.” As a result, the Florida appellate court's decision invalidating Miami Beach's local wage ordinance stands.
The Florida Supreme Court's decision does not bar other Florida municipalities from establishing their own respective minimum wages. However, the ruling certainly establishes that any such ordinances very likely would be struck down on pre-emption grounds just like the city of Miami Beach.
Jennifer T. Williams is a labor and employment attorney with Cozen O'Connor's Miami office where she focuses on representing management in all facets of labor and employment law. She represents employers in labor and employment litigation before federal and state courts as well as administrative agencies, including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Labor.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllNavigating Claims Under the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act and Florida Telemarketing Act
4 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Haynes Boone, Hicks Thomas Get Dismissal of $1.3B Claims in 2022 Freeport LNG Terminal Explosion
- 2Immigration Under the Trump Administration: Five Things to Expect in the First 90 Days
- 3'Radical Left Judges'?: Trump Demands GOP Unity Against Biden's Judicial Picks
- 4NY District Attorneys Are Still No Fans of Revamped Misconduct Watchdog
- 5ICC Issues Arrest Warrants for Israel's Prime Minister Over Alleged War Crimes in Gaza
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250