Living Wage For All Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Murphy, Christopher [D-CT]
- Committees
- Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 14, 2026
Bottom line
The bill aims to establish a federal minimum wage that functions as a living wage, significantly boosting income for millions of low-wage workers, but would impose substantial new labor costs on businesses, particularly large corporations in the short term and all employers over the long term.
What it actually does
This bill significantly increases the federal minimum wage to $25 per hour over a period of 5 to 12 years, depending on employer size, and then indexes it to two-thirds of the national median hourly wage. It also phases out and eventually eliminates all subminimum wages for tipped employees, youth workers, and individuals with disabilities, while prohibiting the issuance of new special certificates for employing disabled individuals at subminimum wages.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill is a critical step to address income inequality, ensure that full-time work provides a living wage, and reduce reliance on public assistance programs. They contend that raising the minimum wage will boost worker morale, increase consumer purchasing power, and stimulate broad-based economic growth, especially by requiring large, profitable corporations to lead the transition.
Opponents contend
Opponents contend that such a substantial increase in the minimum wage, coupled with its indexing, would lead to significant job losses, particularly among entry-level workers and in industries with thin profit margins. They argue it would disproportionately harm small businesses, drive up consumer prices, and could accelerate automation, ultimately stifling economic growth and making the U.S. less competitive.
The bill is relatively short and clearly structured, making it accessible for an informed reader to understand its core provisions and implications within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 3
Definition of 'Large Employer'
This section defines a 'large employer' as any employer with an annual gross revenue of $1,000,000,000 or more, or one that employs 500 or more employees throughout the United States. This distinction is crucial because the bill establishes different, accelerated minimum wage increase schedules for these large employers compared to smaller businesses.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that large, highly profitable corporations have the greatest capacity to absorb wage increases and should therefore lead the transition to higher wage standards. This approach aims to minimize immediate economic shock to smaller businesses while still achieving the goal of a living wage.
Critics contend
Opponents might argue that even large employers face competitive pressures and that an accelerated wage hike could force them to reduce staff, slow expansion, or increase prices, ultimately harming consumers and the broader economy. They may also contend that the definition of 'large employer' could be arbitrary or create perverse incentives.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the goal of rapidly increasing wages with concerns about the economic impact on businesses. It creates a tension between the desire for immediate wage gains for workers and the potential for differential competitive impacts between large and small firms.
Section 4
Federal Minimum Wage Increases and Indexing
This section establishes a new federal minimum wage schedule. For large employers, the minimum wage rises from $12.00 to $25.00 per hour over five years. For other employers, it increases from $12.00 to $25.00 per hour over twelve years. After reaching $25.00, the minimum wage for all employers will be annually adjusted to be the greater of the previous year's rate or two-thirds of the national median hourly wage.
Section 5
National Median Hourly Wage Determination
This section specifies how the federal minimum wage will be adjusted annually after it reaches $25.00 per hour. Beginning six years after the effective date, the Secretary of Labor will publish an amount equal to two-thirds of the median hourly wage for all employees, as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Current Population Survey. The minimum wage will then be set at the greater of the previous year's rate or this newly calculated indexed amount.
Section 6
Elimination of Subminimum Wage for Tipped Employees
This section phases out the subminimum wage for tipped employees. For large employers, the tipped minimum wage increases from $6.00 to the full minimum wage over five years. For other employers, it increases from $4.75 until it reaches the full minimum wage over a longer, unspecified period (tied to when the subminimum wage equals the general minimum wage). Once the tipped minimum wage equals the full minimum wage, the separate tipped wage provision is repealed, meaning all tipped employees will earn the full federal minimum wage before tips.
Section 7
Elimination of Subminimum Wage for Youth Workers
This section phases out the subminimum wage for newly hired employees under 20 years old. The youth wage increases from $6.00 per hour for the first year, then increases by $1.75 annually until it equals the full federal minimum wage for both large and other employers. Once the youth minimum wage equals the general minimum wage, the separate youth wage provision is repealed.
Section 9
Elimination of Subminimum Wage for Employees with Disabilities and Prohibition on New Certificates
This section phases out the subminimum wage for individuals with disabilities. The wage increases from $5.00 per hour for the first year, then by $1.75 annually until it equals the full federal minimum wage for both large and other employers. The bill also prohibits the Secretary of Labor from issuing new special certificates that allow employers to pay disabled individuals less than the minimum wage after the bill's enactment. It provides transition assistance to help employers comply and ensure continued employment opportunities, and eventually repeals the authority for special certificates entirely.
The minimum wage, once it reaches $25.00 per hour and is indexed to the national median wage, will always be the 'greater of' the previous year's rate or the newly calculated indexed amount.
Section 4(a)(1)(A)(vii) and (B)(xiv)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to ensure that a minimum wage, once established, does not decrease due to fluctuations in the indexing metric, providing a floor. It's a technical detail rather than an evasive one.
Case for: Proponents argue this 'greater of' clause provides crucial stability and predictability for workers, ensuring their wages will never be cut even if economic conditions temporarily cause the median wage to decline. It guarantees a floor that only moves upwards or remains constant.
Case against: Opponents might argue that this provision removes flexibility from the wage adjustment mechanism, preventing the minimum wage from naturally adjusting downwards during severe economic downturns. They contend this could exacerbate job losses in recessions if businesses are unable to reduce labor costs.
Estimated impact: Ensures that the federal minimum wage will only ever increase or remain static, never decreasing, providing long-term wage security for workers.
The actual repeal of the separate subminimum wage provisions for tipped employees, youth workers, and individuals with disabilities does not occur immediately after the phase-in period. Instead, it takes effect '1 day after the date on which the minimum cash wage rate required... first equals the minimum wage in effect under section 6(a)(1)'.
Section 6(c)(1)(B), Section 7(b)(3), Section 9(a)(3)
Why it matters:This is a technical legislative mechanism to ensure a smooth transition and avoid any gaps or ambiguities in wage requirements. It ensures that the subminimum wage provisions remain legally active until they are functionally superseded by the general minimum wage, rather than being repealed prematurely.
Case for: Proponents argue that this conditional repeal ensures a seamless transition, preventing any legal ambiguity or unintended consequences during the phase-out period. It guarantees that the subminimum wage provisions remain in effect until they are no longer necessary.
Case against: Opponents might argue that this conditional repeal adds unnecessary complexity and makes it harder for employers to plan for the definitive end of subminimum wage categories. They could contend that a fixed repeal date would offer more clarity.
Estimated impact: Ensures that the subminimum wage categories for tipped, youth, and disabled workers are legally eliminated only after their respective minimum wages have fully converged with the general federal minimum wage, providing a clear legal transition.