I do.
To complicate matters, jobs that are not connected to interstate commerce (broadly interpreted) are not covered by the federal minimum wage (and there at least used to be states whose minimum wage was lower than the federal). I don’t know whether people with such jobs are included in the numbers cited, or how many of them there are.
My first job, as a telephone surveyor (calling people, annoying them, and trying to get them to do surveys), started at minimum wage, which at the time was $4.25 an hour. You could get more if you were really good at getting surveys, but I sucked, so I got $4.25 an hour about half the time.
My job pays only minimum wage. I work in a museum, cleaning artifacts, setting up exhibits, cataloging, and leading tours.
I don’t work for the money-- I work there because I love it. I’m one of the lucky few who actually look forward to going to work in the morning.
However, I recognize that it’s a luxury. If it weren’t for my husband’s paycheck, I couldn’t work there. Without his income, there’s no way in hell I could support myself on what I earn.
Cutting grass on a landscaping crew brought in $1.15 hour
Pumping gas (and wiping windshields and checking oil) was $1.35 hour
Photolab helper was worth $1.45 hour
Auto body shop worker got me to $1.65 hour
In '77 I earned $2/hr + 2% commission selling electronics
Never was a burger flipper. Hell-I’d need training. 
Also, many jobs that don’t pay minimum wage are set at a specific multiple of minimum wage.
For an example that’s relevant right now, Election Judges here are paid 150% of minimum wage.
There are subsidized apartments in this city where the rent is set at x% of a monthly minimum-wage job.
I believe there are economic statistics that measure the cost-of-living as a relationship between the cost of a specific list of consumer goods vs. the number of hours at minimum wage required to purchase it.
I’ve even seen a proposed law that set State Park daily admission fees at “the hourly minimum wage rounded to the nearest dollar for individuals, and 2.5 hours of the minimum wage rounded to the nearest dollar for families”.
This Minimum Wage figure is used for lots of thing in our economy.
Incidentally, since you’re asking about current minimum wage jobs, I should point out that, as of a few years ago, my old company was starting this job at $8.00 an hour, up to $15.00 an hour depending on performance.
Thanks for that link. I backed up the “tree” and found some relevant additional information. Warning: it’s a PDF. :smack: Of course, I imagine you could google for it and find one of their helpful (but ugly, awkward, etc.) HTMLs of it, if you hate dealing with PDFs badly enough. 
I suspect it’s set up that way so that employers can print it out for posting.
If you look (or even if you don’t), a bulleted point at the very beginning states that
Some employers try - and some succeed - at cheating the employees out of the difference, I guarantee, especially those waitstaff who aren’t good at arithmetic. As one who worked in restaurants for two years after HS, I know at least a couple of ways to do it. 
I won’t even go into agricultural work law. Suffice it to say that it’s got more loopholes than (showing my age) Carter’s got pills. :dubious:
A related issue which some posters have, ISTM, danced around without actually being so crass as to mention is addressed by one of Jonathan Woodall’s links: where it also says
The next sub-head is titled: Does the minimum wage cause job loss?, and goes on to state
and goes on to explode that myth with the results of several large studies.
{BTW, Jonathan, putting an actual link into a post isn’t hard. You just click on the blue ball (which is, I think, intended to represent the planet) and insert the information at the prompts.}
In the interest of full disclosure, the other link of Jonathan’s is from the Ludwig von Mises Institute, which is a libertarian organization. I admit to a few libertarian leanings myself, but Mises.org is not an organization with great sympathy for poor people. The other source, the Economic Policy Institute, OTOH, tries to be neutral in its research.
One of the things which would help the economy most is to increase the buying power of those earing the lowest wages. These people almost invariably spend every penny they get, and not usually because they’d rather do that than have savings, but because it takes every penny to maintain themselves and their families.
“Well, what were they doing before?” They were eating both more cheaply and less, buying shoes and clothes less often for themselves and their families, etc. It’s easily seen, if you care to actually examine the living conditions and expenditures of people in these circumstances.
Of course, very few who are doing well bother to recognize the existence of such people, much less bother to know any of them and learn about their lives.
And many jobs that aren’t officially set that way are effectively set that way. If company A is at minimum wage, and company B wants to get better people, it may set it’s wage at minimum + $.20.
Huh? The wizards at work recently forced us into the UAW. I hope that when we get our stupid contract it’s based on the minimum wage so everyone gets pissed and we can win a decertification election as soon as humanly possible. Dreams being what they be, though, I don’t see this happening. We’re so far removed from the minimum wage that you’d think we wouldn’t need an interloper in the first place. Hell, even the exempt work force makes way to much to be related to minimum wage.
The thing about unions is they’re not based on a minimum wage. It’s about how much the union can extort from a company, and about how much a company is willing to give just to try to survive.