A controversial law that requires hotels near Los Angeles International Airport to pay a so-called living wage was upheld by a state appeals court panel Thursday, providing a significant victory for elected officials and the labor interests that have long sought the ordinance.
The 3-0 ruling by a panel of the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles means that the city can now implement a law that would provide salary and benefits equal to $10.64 an hour to workers at a dozen LAX-area hotels. The law had been struck down in May by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge David P. Yaffe, who sided with business interests and ruled that the city had not made sufficient changes from an earlier version of the ordinance.
The law is groundbreaking because living wage laws in the United States are usually applied to government contractors. The law in Los Angeles went a step further, targeting the hotels because they generate so much business from the city-owned airport.
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa hailed the decision as a victory.
"I have always supported the alternative ordinance, which the court upheld today, because it balances the right of workers to receive a living wage with the concerns and needs of business," he said in a statement issued by his press office.
The law will most immediately affect about half of the 3,500 hotel workers, with the other half already making more than $10.64 an hour. But periodic cost-of-living adjustments to the living wage probably will result in a raise for most of the 3,500 workers.
It remained far from clear whether the appeals court ruling would end the dispute. Harvey Englander, a lobbyist for the LAX hotels, said his clients were still reviewing the ruling. He also said the case was being followed closely by business interests across the state who were unhappy with its precedent.
"We're considering a lot of options, including referendums, initiatives and appeals," Englander said.
Brendan Huffman, president of the Valley Industry and Commerce Assn., also criticized the ruling.
"This ruling legalizes political bait-and-switch tactics," he said. "Over 100,000 voters signed petitions to qualify a referendum" against the ordinance, "and the City Council found a way to quash the referendum and keep the wage ordinance."
