Last week, the state House of Representatives voted to raise the minimum wage from $7.25 to $15 an hour over the next few years, a move that supports a major priority of Gov. Josh Shapiro.

It’s a plan that’s probably worth the effort, but only if it comes with a proposal that has some protections for small businesses, targeted tax relief and some flexibility for local governments.

It’s a practical, moral and long-lasting solution that would lift pay for low wage earners and could prevent harm to small, local employers.

If it advances, the plan would increase the minimum wage in increments, beginning at $11 in 2027 and $13 in 2028, followed by annual cost of living adjustments starting in 2030, The bill also allows counties to reach $15 sooner.

Morally, it’s clear that the current base wage has been around for a long time but doesn’t meet the cost of living today. Often, full-time workers juggle jobs and rely on public assistance to keep from falling behind on rents or childcare.

Easing into the higher wage maintains a worker’s dignity, at the same time giving them purchasing power. It also reduces the taxpayers’ burden when low earners are forced to seek Medicaid, SNAP or housing subsidies.

Phasing the increase and linking it to inflating prices gives small businesses and employers time to adapt.

Though it appears workable, a catchall solution isn’t enough, especially in rural counties and small towns where mom-and-pop operations work with thin profit margins in places where national chains don’t exist.

Targeting relief for those businesses would help keep them from raising prices, cutting hours, automating tasks or reducing staff.

Doing that sounds workable, but doing it responsibly is more important.

The increase in wages could be partnered with payroll subsidies or temporary tax credits for small employers. It could help keep restaurants open and allow seasonal businesses to adjust by not releasing workers.

Another possibility might be expanding credits on earned income taxes so that poorer households see more benefits from their pay increases.

Training programs might help businesses offer workers a chance to move into higher-paying jobs.

Whatever the final plan, it should be flexible, too.

Our area isn’t like the major markets in other parts of the state. Places like Philadelphia and Pittsburgh are better suited to dealing with the costs associated with higher wages.

A plan that would allow areas — possibly counties — to adjust wages or phase them in more slowly would get to the same goal and recognize the differences in local economies.

Realistically, a base wage increase would bring changes.

Some prices for services that are more labor intensive could increase.

Employers might consider automating some tasks or make changes in entry-level jobs.

But adopting the overall changes and attempting to limit any damage they might bring is better than doing nothing.

The status quo — stagnant wages that widen gaps in equality and push public assistance costs higher — has a price all its own.

As the wage increase plan moves forward, lawmakers need to agree on a common goal, not an us-versus-them confrontation.

Keeping families off public assistance, creating and maintaining local jobs and helping small businesses grow can all be achieved.

As the bill heads to the Senate, lawmakers need to set guardrails that support the plan and still allow some flexibility for local issues.

If they can do it, all their work will be worth their efforts.

ED SOCHA | tneditor@tnonline.com