$15/hr Min Wage - We told you so

[Jedidiah]

Eventually we you will all be the fast food guy begging for the last scraps of labour as the Tech Lords and their machine armada have eliminated the need for 99.9999% of human labor.

Fortunately we retired folks will not be in the labour market (I love that extra "u).

[Sparko]

watch this video... The myth of the Living Wage

https://vid.me/Sz6k

[Jedidiah]

Military is probably one of the least thankless jobs in the United States. It's hard to think of an institution that gathers as much widespread respect.

And so little pay.

[Cow Poke]

And so little pay.

But ya get free clothes and meals and sleeping quarters!!!

[Teallaura]

Yes, the ENTRY-LEVEL job that was never intended to be a full-time gig.

Except that for some people, it is - and that's because it's really what they do best - or the only job available.

Also, 'entry level' doesn't necessarily mean 'part time'.

What's NOT okay is slurring 'burger flippers' as if they don't deserve to be paid fairly just because it's not a high skill position.

BOTH guardsmen and cashiers deserve to be paid fairly for the work they do.

[Teallaura]

But ya get free clothes and meals and sleeping quarters!!!

Which the guy who works for Mickey D's doesn't get.

Which means the military are compensated better - living quarters and clothing are forms of compensation.

Still don't see why we can't treat both with respect until proven otherwise.

[Teallaura]

Okay, going through the last couple years have changed my perspective.

I'm still very much for a minimum wage - it's a necessary bulwark against unscrupulous employers. That said, 'minimum' doesn't mean 'bare minimum' and it doesn't mean 'let's stick it to employers' either.

It should allow a person to live independently without assistance above CoI but at or below median (depending on what the area labor market looks like) w/i three months of full time employment (or immediately in the case of temporary employment). It should not be set at the Federal level - although the mandate must be Federal.

Yes, that's a complex way to do it - it's also a dang site fairer than 'one size fits all'.

The truth is, most 'minimum wage' or 'low skill' employers are on welfare - the state picks up where the employer is leaving off. Walmart does better than minimum - but many of its employees are on public assistance - so who is really paying these people? If not for public assistance and/or family the service sector (stores, restaurants etc) wouldn't be able to get enough employees to carry on business - they simply could not afford the jobs. There would be a massive, unsustainable push for increases in welfare benefits across the board - because no one can work their backsides off daily and face living in a cardboard box. Trust me, I know.

And let's explode the 'entry level' myth - you've all spoken to cashiers who have 20 years or more with Walmart on the floor. They don't become supervisors or managers - they do get better pay and benefits - and they never have a 'sit down' job. But they DO work for a living - and shouldn't be begrudged that living because they aren't something else. No, they shouldn't make what a CEO makes - their contribution doesn't justify that (arguably, neither does the CEO's) - but they should make enough to live on and to better themselves somewhat.

"The worker is worthy of his hire." - for all its attempts to go self serve, Walmart still hires cashiers for a reason - they will LOSE money if they don't. That 'low skill' job is an asset - one that helps keep customers and money flowing through the doors. Walmart doesn't compensate accordingly - and it's better than a lot of other companies out there. But an asset they are - and will be for the foreseeable future (some of us prefer a friendly cashier to a really stupid computer - the card's in the reader, you dumb thing! ) - and they deserve to be paid decently. As Christians, we should strive to treat people fairly.

I'm not a fan of the $15 minimum - short term, it'll do more harm than good to those that can least afford it. Long term, depending on the economy, it could be okay or very bad. Frankly, if they are gonna do it, now, while you've got a pro-economy president, is the time. Not sure that we should - set figures are inherently unfair. CoI varies too widely - in some areas it wouldn't be enough; in others it's an unnecessary burden on employers.


Whatever - I don't know if I've got a good enough answer. I DO know it's NOT okay to malign people that work hard to serve you - even if their servicet does have fries with it.

[Trout]

The $15 minimum wage is part of a long con to rid our nation of mom and pop businesses and only allow for huge conglomerates to operate.

I currently have 8 employees 2 part time and six full. I pay well above minimum. But someone's hourly wage is roughly only 75% off what their total payroll cost is. So if you have three people working 40 hrs/ week @ $15/hr adjusted +30% = $19.50/hr * 120 hrs/week = $2,340 / 6 days/ week operating hours is $390/ day those employees have to generate just to cover their own cost. Not to mention rent, utilities, insurances, maintenance, etc.

What small businesses can you think of that employ relatively unskilled labour that can generate this kind of numbers?

[Teallaura]

The $15 minimum wage is part of a long con to rid our nation of mom and pop businesses and only allow for huge conglomerates to operate.

I currently have 8 employees 2 part time and six full. I pay well above minimum. But someone's hourly wage is roughly only 75% off what their total payroll cost is. So if you have three people working 40 hrs/ week @ $15/hr adjusted +30% = $19.50/hr * 120 hrs/week = $2,340 / 6 days/ week operating hours is $390/ day those employees have to generate just to cover their own cost. Not to mention rent, utilities, insurances, maintenance, etc.

What small businesses can you think of that employ relatively unskilled labour that can generate this kind of numbers?

I already said I don't favor the set minimum. But my first job was $2/hr when minimum was $5.95 - I don't want to 'soak employers' but let's find a way to be fair to both - and realize that some small businesses shouldn't hire until their income actually allows.

Oh, and that some are just flat out going to cheat people if they can - those would be the bad ones and not representative. But I worked my backside off and was really proud of doing a good job. Eventually, the fact that I was working 16 hours each weekend and not making more than gas money soured me. The promised increase never materialized and frankly, I regret that it was my first job. It damaged me as an employee - I never fully trusted an employer again.

[Trout]

If small business is forced out, there's a larger market share of goods/ services available for mega business to take advantage of. It's already happened to a large extent in small town America with the expansion of Wal-Mart.

[Trout]

Okay, going through the last couple years have changed my perspective.

I'm still very much for a minimum wage - it's a necessary bulwark against unscrupulous employers. That said, 'minimum' doesn't mean 'bare minimum' and it doesn't mean 'let's stick it to employers' either.

It should allow a person to live independently without assistance above CoI but at or below median (depending on what the area labor market looks like) w/i three months of full time employment (or immediately in the case of temporary employment). It should not be set at the Federal level - although the mandate must be Federal.

Yes, that's a complex way to do it - it's also a dang site fairer than 'one size fits all'.

The truth is, most 'minimum wage' or 'low skill' employers are on welfare - the state picks up where the employer is leaving off. Walmart does better than minimum - but many of its employees are on public assistance - so who is really paying these people? If not for public assistance and/or family the service sector (stores, restaurants etc) wouldn't be able to get enough employees to carry on business - they simply could not afford the jobs. There would be a massive, unsustainable push for increases in welfare benefits across the board - because no one can work their backsides off daily and face living in a cardboard box. Trust me, I know.

And let's explode the 'entry level' myth - you've all spoken to cashiers who have 20 years or more with Walmart on the floor. They don't become supervisors or managers - they do get better pay and benefits - and they never have a 'sit down' job. But they DO work for a living - and shouldn't be begrudged that living because they aren't something else. No, they shouldn't make what a CEO makes - their contribution doesn't justify that (arguably, neither does the CEO's) - but they should make enough to live on and to better themselves somewhat.

"The worker is worthy of his hire." - for all its attempts to go self serve, Walmart still hires cashiers for a reason - they will LOSE money if they don't. That 'low skill' job is an asset - one that helps keep customers and money flowing through the doors. Walmart doesn't compensate accordingly - and it's better than a lot of other companies out there. But an asset they are - and will be for the foreseeable future (some of us prefer a friendly cashier to a really stupid computer - the card's in the reader, you dumb thing! ) - and they deserve to be paid decently. As Christians, we should strive to treat people fairly.

I'm not a fan of the $15 minimum - short term, it'll do more harm than good to those that can least afford it. Long term, depending on the economy, it could be okay or very bad. Frankly, if they are gonna do it, now, while you've got a pro-economy president, is the time. Not sure that we should - set figures are inherently unfair. CoI varies too widely - in some areas it wouldn't be enough; in others it's an unnecessary burden on employers.


Whatever - I don't know if I've got a good enough answer. I DO know it's NOT okay to malign people that work hard to serve you - even if their servicet does have fries with it.

Wal-Mart cheats people. Do you shop there?

[Teallaura]

Wal-Mart cheats people. Do you shop there?

Walmart has power carts and I don't like starving.

But in truth, if I hadn't worked for them I wouldn't shop there at all. No, Wal-mart didn't cheat me - nor did I see them cheat anyone else.

Do you believe service level employees should be cheated?

[Trout]

Walmart has power carts and I don't like starving.

But in truth, if I hadn't worked for them I wouldn't shop there at all. No, Wal-mart didn't cheat me - nor did I see them cheat anyone else.

Do you believe service level employees should be cheated?

I have seen them cheat people in my town for decades.

Firstly, they ran all the mom and pop pharmacies, shoe stores, sporting goods stores, clothing stores, electronics stores etc all of which were staffed with well paid professionals who had and maintained a sense of community. Wal-Mart of course offered them positions in their store for a fraction of their worth.

I for one think if you shop at Wal-Mart, you aren't allowed a seat at the table in the minimum wage discussion.

[Teallaura]

I have seen them cheat people in my town for decades.

Firstly, they ran all the mom and pop pharmacies, shoe stores, sporting goods stores, clothing stores, electronics stores etc all of which were staffed with well paid professionals who had and maintained a sense of community. Wal-Mart of course offered them positions in their store for a fraction of their worth.

I for one think if you shop at Wal-Mart, you aren't allowed a seat at the table in the minimum wage discussion.

I didn't set foot in Wal-mart for five years - and 'shop' is an over statement for what little I buy from them now - so that can be close enough or not. I think it's as stupid as 'you can't argue against abortion unless you adopt kids'. I've had to live on less than Wal-mart pays for the last year and a half while working 40 hours a week. So, from my perspective, if we're going to disqualify people, it should be those who make well above minimum.

Which. Is. Still. Stupid.

Regardless, are you now arguing that Wal-mart shouldn't have to pay better than they do?

[Trout]

I didn't set foot in Wal-mart for five years - and 'shop' is an over statement for what little I buy from them now - so that can be close enough or not. I think it's as stupid as 'you can't argue against abortion unless you adopt kids'. I've had to live on less than Wal-mart pays for the last year and a half while working 40 hours a week. So, from my perspective, if we're going to disqualify people, it should be those who make well above minimum.

Which. Is. Still. Stupid.

Regardless, are you now arguing that Wal-mart shouldn't have to pay better than they do?

You're not reading what I'm saying. Good talk.