On February 1, 2017, United States District Court Judge David Proctor rejected an attempt to force businesses to comply with Birmingham’s minimum wage ordinance. In February 2015, the Birmingham City Council passed an ordinance requiring all businesses to pay a minimum wage of at least $10.10 per hour. The federally-required minimum wage is $7.25 per hour, and Alabama does not have a state-mandated minimum wage.
In response to Birmingham’s ordinance, in 2016 the Alabama Legislature enacted the Alabama Uniform Minimum Wage and Right-to-Work Act. That Act establishes the Legislature’s “complete control” over minimum wage policy in the State. After passage of that Act, Birmingham declined to enforce the minimum wage ordinance, and Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange advised Birmingham businesses on the enforcement of the ordinance.
The NAACP, Greater Birmingham Ministries and several individuals sued the State of Alabama, the City of Birmingham, Attorney General Strange and Birmingham Mayor William Bell. Primarily, this was a race-based challenge to the Alabama Act. The plaintiffs claimed that the purpose and effect of the Act was to transfer control over minimum wages and all matters involving private sector employment in the City of Birmingham from municipal officials elected by a majority-black local electorate to legislators elected by a statewide majority-white electorate.
Judge Proctor dismissed the law suit primarily under the legal doctrine of standing. Essentially, Judge Proctor found that the City and State officials were not responsible for any damages that the individual plaintiffs might suffer. Instead, local employers who refuse to comply with the Birmingham minimum wage ordinance would cause the damage: “[N]othing this court could order Attorney General Strange or the City Defendants to do will affect Plaintiffs’ wages. Plaintiffs’ employers set those wages and it is the courts who will determine whether there is any violation of law with respect to the setting of those wages.”
Judge Proctor’s decision provides some reassurance to Birmingham employers that they are only subject to the federally-mandated minimum wage. Nevertheless, his decision leaves open the possibility that individual employees might sue their employers for violating the Birmingham minimum-wage ordinance. Undoubtedly, any employers sued under the ordinance will raise the Alabama Uniform Minimum Wage and Right-to-Work Act as a defense.