Minimum Wage

[Amazon 7]

Rick

*********Your EMPLOYER is paying you what he feels is what the JOB is worth. Not you. The JOB.

not really if an employer decided that the JOB was only worth $10 an hour but the guy down the street is paying $16 for that JOB that employer would have a hard time filling the position

At which point the employer gets to make a decision; how much is it worth to ME to fill that JOB? If I don't fill that JOB will I go out of business?

If the answer is paying more to fill the JOB to stay in business, then it's worth it to the employer to fill the JOB.

Notice this has ZERO to do with how much training, or time the employee spent in his life preparing for the job. It ALL about how much the employer is willing to pay to fill it. If the employer doesn't feel it's worth paying the locally going rate for the job, then it's his decision to not fill it and risk going out of business. Nobody is holding a gun to his head.


I just think you are oversimplifying. Of course more training and experience transfer into more value for the employer(and higher salaries to employee).
You can get anybody to sweep a floor so lower value. Finding a certified welder or an electrician with years of experience is going to cost an employer more money.
The job and the market drive the value. It is not just an arbitrary number pulled out of an employers ass.

Until an employer decides to bail for a quick short term gain to a vulture capitalist group who also geso for a quick liquidation of the assets like the pensions of all those skilled workers and sends the jobs to Asia .

[billvon 2,416]

>At which point the employer gets to make a decision; how much is it worth to ME
>to fill that JOB? If I don't fill that JOB will I go out of business?

>If the answer is paying more to fill the JOB to stay in business, then it's worth it
>to the employer to fill the JOB.

>Notice this has ZERO to do with how much training, or time the employee spent in
>his life preparing for the job. It ALL about how much the employer is willing to pay
>to fill it.

Well, I am one of those employers, and I will definitely offer someone more if they have more training or more relevant experience. We list open jobs, but our policy is to hire good people, not fill jobs.

[Rick 67]

Amazon

Until an employer decides to bail for a quick short term gain to a vulture capitalist group who also geso for a quick liquidation of the assets like the pensions of all those skilled workers and sends the jobs to Asia .

I haven't had many vulture capitalist groups making me offers for my small sign company.

Maybe I am doing it wrong

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[Andy9o8 0]

Rick

***

Until an employer decides to bail for a quick short term gain to a vulture capitalist group who also geso for a quick liquidation of the assets like the pensions of all those skilled workers and sends the jobs to Asia .

I haven't had many vulture capitalist groups making me offers for my small sign company.

Maybe I am doing it wrong

Here's your sign.

[quade 3]

billvon

Well, I am one of those employers, and I will definitely offer someone more if they have more training or more relevant experience. We list open jobs, but our policy is to hire good people, not fill jobs.

That's what you say, but I can guarantee you that you will not hire a "good person" who can't DO the job. So, really, you aren't hiring the person, you ARE filling the job.

For instance, it doesn't matter a single bit how good of an actress Meryl Streep is, nobody in their right mind is going to hire her to play the part of Sammy Davis Jr. in a biopic.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[normiss 622]

But back to reality, we're talking non skilled labor, not Sammy Davis Jr.

[billvon 2,416]

>That's what you say, but I can guarantee you that you will not hire a "good
>person" who can't DO the job.

We've done that. We've had openings for antenna designers, interviewed them and decided to hire them for a customer engineering role. Again, getting four good people who don't exactly fit the job description is a lot more important to us than getting four mediocre people who fit exactly. We hire people rather than fill job slots.

>For instance, it doesn't matter a single bit how good of an actress Meryl Streep is,
>nobody in their right mind is going to hire her to play the part of Sammy Davis Jr.
>in a biopic.

Right. But you might well have her read and then hire her to portray May Britt.

[quade 3]

billvon

>That's what you say, but I can guarantee you that you will not hire a "good
>person" who can't DO the job.

We've done that. We've had openings for antenna designers, interviewed them and decided to hire them for a customer engineering role. Again, getting four good people who don't exactly fit the job description is a lot more important to us than getting four mediocre people who fit exactly. We hire people rather than fill job slots.

Then you are an exception. It is not generally what happens in the rest of the world.

BTW, I'm fairly certain you decided they could do the "customer engineering" before hiring them for that job. You almost certainly wouldn't have hired them if they couldn't.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

quade

Then you are an exception. It is not generally what happens in the rest of the world.

BTW, I'm fairly certain you decided they could do the "customer engineering" before hiring them for that job. You almost certainly wouldn't have hired them if they couldn't.

In his company (and mine), job positions are rarely so clearly defined. My scrum team and others in my company have a mixture of engineers that have titles of QE, NetEng,SysEng, or the more generic "developer." When we're looking to hire, we may have openings on 3 or 4 different teams and perhaps an immediate project we might look for a precise match, but in reality, we're looking for people that will contribute to team velocity. Being a good fit more broadly on skills and personality matter in the long run, and who's to say the precise match isn't a unicorn?

[kelpdiver 2]

quade

So, tell me where this $15 minimum wage actually is. I'm looking at the minimum wages across the country and I'm not seeing it anywhere. Yes, it's a great shoot for the moon point the people are fighting for, but they know damn well they'll be lucky to get a tiny fraction of it.

They're (SEIU in particular) are trying pretty hard to get that here in San Francisco, where the minimum is already $10.55. The problem with this shoot for the moon approach is the same with any gross overbid - the other party sees it is not a serious conversation.

What is the consequence of raising unskilled labor's floor price by 50%? Does it force up the wages of those who currently were making $15? Probably not, since I can't imaging working in McDonald's is more attractive. Less effort, but more grease. But it may clobber teenage job prospects.

[1969912 0]

JohnnyMarko

So why the fuck did I spend all that money all college and take an entry level position at an oil and gas company to make (possibly) less than a McDonalds worker?

And yea, I'm going to pull the "it's called 'minimum wage' not 'livable wage'" card, because I truly believe it.

My generation is fucked...truly fucked...

Oh well, guess I'll just get married and have kids and try and support them off my $15 an hour at McDonalds like everyone else.

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/05/15/the-fight-for-a-global-minimum-wage/

Good post. Another conservative in the making (?)
Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca8Z__o52sk

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[quade 3]

And to Uncle Miltie I would say . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c

Because the FACT is he offers zero in way of facts to support his argument.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 212]

Stumpy

***So why the fuck did I spend all that money all college and take an entry level position at an oil and gas company to make (possibly) less than a McDonalds worker?

The difference is that your job has a potential for progression. Work hard and minimum wage will soon be a distant memory. The Maccas worker - not so much.

Can you . . . rather, are you allowed to do your own home repair or addition?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Stumpy 256]

turtlespeed

******So why the fuck did I spend all that money all college and take an entry level position at an oil and gas company to make (possibly) less than a McDonalds worker?

The difference is that your job has a potential for progression. Work hard and minimum wage will soon be a distant memory. The Maccas worker - not so much.

Can you . . . rather, are you allowed to do your own home repair or addition?

huh? What you talking about willis?

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[jclalor 12]

kelpdiver

***
So, tell me where this $15 minimum wage actually is. I'm looking at the minimum wages across the country and I'm not seeing it anywhere. Yes, it's a great shoot for the moon point the people are fighting for, but they know damn well they'll be lucky to get a tiny fraction of it.

They're (SEIU in particular) are trying pretty hard to get that here in San Francisco, where the minimum is already $10.55. The problem with this shoot for the moon approach is the same with any gross overbid - the other party sees it is not a serious conversation.

What is the consequence of raising unskilled labor's floor price by 50%? Does it force up the wages of those who currently were making $15? Probably not, since I can't imaging working in McDonald's is more attractive. Less effort, but more grease. But it may clobber teenage job prospects.

I haven't seen a teen in California working MW fast food since the eighties, although In & out burger has a few, but they pay them $3 or $4 bucks above MW.

[Coreece 190]

From OP's Article:

Quote

Thursday’s strikes and protests mark more than international solidarity among fast-food workers. They are borne of the same set of circumstances — low pay, erratic scheduling, few benefits and persistent violations of rights.

I think Ronald could solve his low pay and benefits issue by addressing his erratic scheduling problem.

Part time employees are working about 10-25 hours a week. One day they might work mornings and the next day they work midnights. One day they might work 3 hours and the next day they might work 10 hours.

I think it might help if they give their employees 35-40 hours/wk with a consistent shift. This may not help the unemployment problem in this country but at least McDonald employees would be happier and less likely to strike/protest.

I haven't heard first hand about any problems with violation of rights, but I have heard problems with how managers treat their employees. Specifically how female managers treat female workers. There seems to be a cattiness between them along with managers using shame and ridicule in an attempt to boost productivity. I hear a lot, but one story that stuck in my mind was how this old woman got frustrated and threatened to quit. The Manager told her that she "was a 55 year-old woman with absolutely no skills, who the hell is gonna hire you?" This woman went to the new supermarket in town at lunch and told the owner the story. He told her to go back and tell your manager you found a new job and quit...

So again, if they find better shift managers qualified for the position, perhaps the employees will be happier and less likely to throw a fit.

Another point...If a company is making ridiculous profits and not paying their employees accordingly, why should the government have to offset the companies greediness with housing supplements and food assistance programs?

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[Stumpy 256]

Isn't Macdonalds generally a franchise?

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[normiss 622]

Only more than 80%

[weekender 0]

"Another point...If a company is making ridiculous profits and not paying their employees accordingly, why should the government have to offset the companies greediness with housing supplements and food assistance programs?"

the purpose of a company is to make a profit for its shareholders not to provide pay for its employee. people agree to provide labor for a wage. how much the company makes is not relevant to the employees wages. many people feel their pay should be connected to the companies profits, obviously you are one, but its not how it works. when you accept a job you agree to work for a particular wage. unless your employee agree's to share the profits with you then its not a factor. do you feel an employee should share in the companies loses? im sure you do not but it would only be fair if they feel obligated to share the profits.

If MCD's employees do not want to work for their wage, they are free to leave. pretty simple. if you deserve 15 bucks an hour then certainly you can earn it elsewhere.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[billvon 2,416]

>Another point...If a company is making ridiculous profits and not paying their
>employees accordingly, why should the government have to offset the companies
>greediness with housing supplements and food assistance programs?

Practical answer? Because such companies train their employees to get every possible benefit out of the government.

[Coreece 190]

Stumpy

Isn't Macdonalds generally a franchise?

Ya, about 80%

A typical franchise will bring in about a $500,000 profit.

$10 bucks an hour could cut that almost in half.

$15 bucks an hour would defeat the purpose.

Neither is practical...

I think they'd be better off managing their employees/schedules more appropriately, as I stated in my previous post.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[Coreece 190]

Quote

do you feel an employee should share in the companies loses?

They typically do after they lose their job.

I don't disagree with your points.

I guess my question is how do you determine what the employees are worth? Is it by how much profit they bring to the company or is it through more tangible factors like how much it would cost for a machine to flip burgers?

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[quade 3]

Quote

I guess my question is how do you determine what the employees are worth?

You're driving down the street and see two hamburger stands within a block of each other. How do you decide which one to go to?

Which is worth more to you as a consumer. Which do you value more;

A "McDouble" at McDondald's for $1.19

A "Double Double" at In-N-Out for $3.05

If the company can't make a product as good as their competitor for the same price, then they sometimes determine the "best" way to address that is to fuck with their employees and get their profits that way.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 2,416]

>I guess my question is how do you determine what the employees are worth?

The empirical way is to put an ad in the paper for $1 an hour and keep increasing it until you get enough employees. At that point you are paying them what they are worth (as decided by employers.) If you were underpaying them they would leave and go to better jobs.

[weekender 0]

Coreece

Quote

do you feel an employee should share in the companies loses?

They typically do after they lose their job.

I don't disagree with your points.

I guess my question is how do you determine what the employees are worth? Is it by how much profit they bring to the company or is it through more tangible factors like how much it would cost for a machine to flip burgers?

IMO, people are no different than anything. they are worth what others are willing to pay. how does Kim Kardashian make more money than the head of the E network she works for? pretty simple to me. they are willing to pay her more than the head. to them, she is worth more.

no one likes to admit they might not be worth much to their employer but its a fact of life. my boss always reminds me when i get uppity that the graveyard is full of indispensable people. it reminds me that im probably not as important as i think.

again, i feel if they really believe they are worth 15 bucks an hour than they should quit. certainly, if they are worth it, someone else will pay it.

(edited non material but annoying typos)

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante