Could you expand on this? He might deserve more having more resposibility, tasks assigned to him, etc. But better than who? A worker? Good bosses are only as good as their crew.
Wage reform does not exist in a vacuum, to be successful they are part and parcel of solid, sensible regulation.
So now you want the government to dictate wages and control the prices of pretty much every consumer product or service? There’s a word for that, and it ain’t Captialism…
Oakminister
you use the word CAPITALISM like its the system we have. Why would you do that since it has not been true for a long long time now?
Who said anything about price fixing?
You’re still not getting it. Major employee stock ownership doubles the risk - from being laid off and losing their investment if their company goes under. No one works risk free. If the company were not making a profit the employee can get no raise or even a cut, no bonus, and might lose the job. We’re talking here after he gambled and won - by being at a good company.
I look at this from the management side. Loyalty isn’t what it used to be, and every person is responsible for his own career. However, retention is still considered to be important by management, both since the best people find it easiest to leave and because of the disruption when someone leaves. You’ll never have zero turnover (even from the people you want to keep) but churning the workforce by screwing the employees is not very smart. Anyhow, you didn’t really answer my point about the effects of not sharing any part of a big profit with the people who were at least partially responsible for it. Studies have shown that people leave not for more money but primarily because they are fed up with their boss. We’re not talking about a worker demanding money for loyalty here, which I agree is not a great plan. We’re talking about the advisability of top management giving a hearty fuck you to the workers. That stuff went out with Dickens.
Well…what exactly did you mean when you suggested regulation to counter the increased cost of goods and services due to higher labor costs?
Nonsense. Most products have fairly small labor contents. If 90% of a product cost is commodity costs, raising someone’s salary by 10% will only add 1% to the cost of the product, and they win. Simple example - do you think doubling the salary of every person involved in the oil supply chain will double the cost of gas at the pump?
Acid Lamp said pretty much all jobs should pay a living wage. That probably means non-minimum wage earners demand raises, too. That means cost of production goes up for everything. As a result, prices go up for everything.
And I need a cite for the notion that 90% of product cost is commodity costs. Really don’t think that’s the case in fast food chains, for example.
Well would you rather have workers not earning living wages?
Workers should all make minimum wage. As a matter of fact workers should work for what ever is offered. There should be no laws restricting owners.
There are owners and the rest. The rest should all be minimum wage or less.
Skill is relative. The ability to maintain a robot or assembly line is worth minimum wage. The ability to run and office,answer phones, do computer work…minimum wage.
But minimum wage is way too high. When other countries will work for a dollar a day .thats what we should work for. If they are willing to work in dangerous and difficult conditions that becomes the norm. How can we compete if we are not willing to do the tough jobs for little money. Thats where we are headed anyway,so why fight it.
I’d rather see workers acquire the skills to be able to compete for higher paying jobs. If you plan on spending a career driving a mop, you ain’t gonna be able to support a family.
It obviously depends on the product. For fast food chains you also need to compute the labor costs for the supply chain. I’d say that less than 5% of an Intel microprocessor is labor cost, depending strongly on how much of the design cost can be amortized over volume. Relatively high wages don’t mean that a product with a high labor cost is unaffordable - software has very high labor content, for example.
Damn right. And when product sales plummet, make sure that it is clear that it is all the workers’ fault. And if they get in over their head trying to find a place to live, and default, that is their fault also.
It’s too bad it is too late for you to be a Bush financial adviser. Maybe you can get a job with Phil Gramm though - he’d like the cut of your jib.
And we’re talking about unskilled labor in this thread, so what’s your point?
The labor cost in the supply chain would be included in the commodity cost. MickeyD’s pays $X/pound of hamburger meat. They pay $Y for staff in the restaurant. A Quarter Pounder costs 1/4X + %Y + Z(incidentals & profit)
And now I want a cite for the proposition that 5% of an Intel microprocessor is labor cost.
Why exactly, should those making above the living wage get an increase in their salaries?
One group is getting adjusted up so that they can support themselves on a single full-time job. The other already has the means to do so.
If the guy that mops the floor gets more money, then I want more, too. That’s the American way.
You gonna answer my question about how you gonna regulate without price controls?
so then i believe you just unemployed almost everyone working in fast food restraunts.
They would either have to shut down or all go to the WaWa, Sheetz model of order taking.
Minimum wage is by its very nature ridiculous because the minimum wage is Zero when your unemployed.
Why do you feel that you deserve more money simply because the janitor got some more? Do you feel that you should get a pay raise every time your boss gets one? or your neighbor? or the CEO of your company? If the shareholders decide to pay themselves more this year, do you get a pay raise too? Sounds to me like you just want to keep those “not our sort of people” type folks in their places.
I don’t have to, this thread is about the pay rate of entry level and lowest tier employment, not a comprehensive fiscal plan. If you want to discuss it, open another thread. I fail to see how raising the minimum to a livable standard will cause the downfall of America, god, and apple pie, but if you want to debate it i’m game.
The landlord doesn’t care if you give him $300 if your Rent is $400 either. There are plenty of people out there struggling and having to decide whether to seek medical treatment or keep a roof over their head this month. If a $6.00/hr wage doesn’t make the bills, then it might as well be $0.00 in practical terms.