Search form

Arizona’s Voter-Approved Minimum Wage, Paid Sick Leave Law Constitutional, State High Court Affirms

By Jeffrey W. Toppel and Stephanie M. Cerasano
  • March 16, 2017

In a much-anticipated decision, the Arizona Supreme Court has unanimously ruled to uphold Proposition 206, the November 2016 ballot initiative that increases the Arizona minimum wage and requires employers in the state to offer paid sick leave to employees.

Chief Justice Scott Bales stated in the March 14 order that the seven-member court unanimously rejected the plaintiffs’ arguments on the law’s constitutionality. He further stated that a detailed explanation of the Arizona Supreme Court’s reasoning will be provided later.

Prop 206 raised the minimum wage for Arizona employees to $10.00 per hour beginning January 1, 2017, and provides for incremental increases to a minimum wage of $12.00 per hour by 2020. Additionally, effective July 1, 2017, the law requires employers to provide paid sick leave to Arizona employees.

In December 2016, a group of business organizations led by the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry filed a lawsuit challenging the law’s constitutionality under two separate theories. First, they pointed to the “Separate Amendment Rule,” which mandates that any proposed amendment to the Arizona constitution be limited to related matters of substance. They argued that Prop 206 addressed the two distinctly unrelated subjects of minimum wage and paid sick leave. Additionally, they claimed Prop 206 created new costs to the state’s general fund without providing a new revenue source, in contravention of the Arizona Constitution’s requirement that bills increasing state expenditures identify a specific revenue source. Principally, the plaintiffs argued that while the state was exempt from the minimum wage requirement, vendors providing goods and services to the state were required to pay the higher wage, thereby increasing costs to the state.

In December, a judge on the Maricopa County Superior Court denied the plaintiffs’ request to enjoin the minimum wage requirements from taking effect on January 1, 2017. Following the court’s denial, the plaintiffs filed a special action with the Arizona Supreme Court, which quickly agreed to hear the appeal. On March 14, the Arizona Supreme Court rejected the plaintiffs’ claims without issuing an opinion.

Many Arizona employers were waiting patiently for the Supreme Court’s decision before developing policies to comply with the Prop 206’s new paid sick leave requirements. Following the Court’s decision, employers should begin to prepare for the upcoming July 1, 2017, date for implementation of these new requirements.

While the Industrial Commission of Arizona has issued a series of updated Frequently Asked Questions (“FAQs”) regarding Prop 206’s requirements, questions remain. In the coming months, the Industrial Commission may promulgate regulations and additional guidance.

Jackson Lewis will continue to provide updates on these significant new requirements for Arizona employers.

©2017 Jackson Lewis P.C. This material is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create a client-lawyer relationship between Jackson Lewis and any recipient. Recipients should consult with counsel before taking any actions based on the information contained within this material. This material may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Reproduction of this material in whole or in part is prohibited without the express prior written consent of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm with more than 900 attorneys in major cities nationwide serving clients across a wide range of practices and industries. Having built its reputation on providing premier workplace law representation to management, the firm has grown to include leading practices in the areas of government relations, healthcare and sports law. For more information, visit www.jacksonlewis.com.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

March 21, 2019

Rethinking Pay Equity: Who is ‘Comparable’ for Pay Equity Purposes?

March 21, 2019

This is the second article in our four-part series titled “Rethinking Pay Equity,” designed to provide practical guidance to help employers understand and address the many new rules, regulations, and best practices around pay equity in preparation for Equal Pay Day 2019. This article focuses on identifying “who” will be compared for... Read More

March 19, 2019

Contractors, Your Subcontractors’ Wage and Hour Practices are Your Business

March 19, 2019

A prime or general contractor may be held jointly and severally liable for any violations, including wage and hour violations, by its subcontractors if the contractor is found to be a joint employer with the subcontractor under applicable federal or state law. As most contractors who work on construction projects covered by the federal... Read More

March 19, 2019

Pay Equity for Women Filling Labor Shortage in Construction Industry

March 19, 2019

While the country’s construction industry is booming, with around $1 trillion in new projects, 79 percent of construction companies nationwide reported the need to hire more employees to meet the demand. With high demand and low supply, it is a prime time for women to fill that labor gap. CNBC reported that women make up only 9.1... Read More