Attorney General Dana Nessel has joined Republican lawmakers in expressing concerns over Michigan’s minimum wage changes. In a motion filed with the state’s Supreme Court, Nessel seeks guidance on the implementation of inflation adjustments.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel highlighted the potential implications of the court’s extensive language in its July ruling. She emphasized that this ruling presents five potential options for adjusting the minimum wage over time. Moreover, she pointed out the conflicting approaches of the state Department of Treasury and the Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity.
In a respectful manner, the Michigan Department of Treasury has carefully reviewed this Court’s opinion and acknowledges the existence of ambiguities in interpreting and implementing the Court’s directives regarding accounting for inflation for the years 2025 through 2028. Nessel, the representative of the department, expressed the need for clarification on several key points. First, there is a need to understand how to accurately calculate the inflation rate for the specified time period. Second, the meaning of the term “credit” requires clarification. Additionally, it is necessary to determine whether the Court intended to exclude the 90% graduated increase for tipped wages. Finally, clarification is sought regarding the effective dates for each year’s wage increases, commencing in 2026.
The minimum wage in Michigan is presently $10.33 per hour for non-tipped workers and $3.93 per hour for tipped workers. However, as a result of the Michigan Supreme Court’s recent ruling, the minimum wage will increase to a minimum of $12 per hour starting on February 21. Additionally, employers will be required to provide their employees with one hour of earned sick leave for every 30 hours worked by 2025. Furthermore, tipped workers will be entitled to the same minimum wage as non-tipped workers by 2029.
Republicans objected to the changes, asserting that small businesses would be compelled to increase prices and terminate employees.
State Representative Matthew Bierlein, a Republican from Vassar, drew attention on Wednesday to the findings of a recent survey conducted among approximately 450 small and medium-sized business owners. These results were used by Bierlein to support his argument that the proposed changes will have dire economic consequences.
“Numerous local employers in our region and across the state are already embracing this approach and providing support to their dedicated workforce without being compelled by the court. However, come February, everything changes as onerous directives will be imposed, creating chaos for small business owners and artificially inflating costs. These directives will compel some businesses to resort to employee layoffs, reduced working hours, or even complete closure. I have had conversations with several business owners and employees who are genuinely concerned about the adverse impact of these new measures.”
According to the latest survey, business owners’ optimism regarding short and long-term prospects has decreased by 13 points since February.
However, almost half of the respondents (48%) stated that they anticipate no significant change in their staffing levels in the upcoming year. On the other hand, 43% of respondents expressed optimism and expect an increase in their workforce in the coming year.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has requested the court to make a decision on the motion by September 15th.
