Minimum wage debate continues

Status
Not open for further replies.
tekkychick said:
A friend worked at a company (software) that converted a bunch of IT people from salary to hourly. The IT people used to get annual bonuses as salaried people. As hourly, they weren't qualified for a bonus, but the company told them that overtime would make up for the money.

Friend was not impressed at having to work more hours for the same money.

And even less impressed when, right after the switch, it was announced that no one was allowed to work OT without jumping through approval hoops.

So basically, everyone got a pay cut.

This was 5 years ago or so, when companies were getting sued for classifying people as salary to avoid paying OT.
Click to expand...

The draw back to salary and OT is that unless your hourly wage falls below the minimum wage, most States will say you're not eligible for OT pay.
 
The Dude said:
Should you be able to pay them less than it would cost to keep a slave alive?
Click to expand...

should they not have to prove their worth to the company? problem is they expect to make union wages right off the bat, that does not, and should not happen. What if the employee doesn't pan out?
 
patriot66 said:
should they not have to prove their worth to the company? problem is they expect to make union wages right off the bat, that does not, and should not happen. What if the employee doesn't pan out?
Click to expand...

A) minimum wage ain't union wage

B) most companies have a 3 month probation period where they can fire someone if they don't work out. During that 3 months, the employee should not be paid less than someone else going that job

C) I've heard fast food companies take advantage of a govt program that pays part of a new employee's wages for a few months; the idea is get more youth and more unskilled people jobs, with the govt helping to foot the bill during the training period. But then what happens is the companies fire them once the govt money stops and hire someone new so that they get the subsidies back.

Sad. Maybe economically understandable, but sad and immoral.
 
tekkychick said:
A) minimum wage ain't union wage

B) most companies have a 3 month probation period where they can fire someone if they don't work out. During that 3 months, the employee should not be paid less than someone else going that job

C) I've heard fast food companies take advantage of a govt program that pays part of a new employee's wages for a few months; the idea is get more youth and more unskilled people jobs, with the govt helping to foot the bill during the training period. But then what happens is the companies fire them once the govt money stops and hire someone new so that they get the subsidies back.

Sad. Maybe economically understandable, but sad and immoral.
Click to expand...

So you are saying after 24 years with my company, a guy should walk in off the street and be payed the same?

The second part is sad, but look for more of it with more companies now that Obama care is kicking in, the days of full time employees is short, everyone will be part time to save the company from paying insurance benefits.
 
patriot66 said:
So you are saying after 24 years with my company, a guy should walk in off the street and be payed the same?

The second part is sad, but look for more of it with more companies now that Obama care is kicking in, the days of full time employees is short, everyone will be part time to save the company from paying insurance benefits.
Click to expand...

If someone working for you for 24 years is still making minimum wage, I'd really wonder. Hopefully they have gotten raises so they are now making more than the entry level wage for that position.
 
patriot66 said:
should they not have to prove their worth to the company? problem is they expect to make union wages right off the bat, that does not, and should not happen. What if the employee doesn't pan out?
Click to expand...
I have never seen a decent economist show where it's terrible.
I find poor working class love to be against a raise though
 
patriot66 said:
So you are saying after 24 years with my company, a guy should walk in off the street and be payed the same?

The second part is sad, but look for more of it with more companies now that Obama care is kicking in, the days of full time employees is short, everyone will be part time to save the company from paying insurance benefits.
Click to expand...
Educated people don't say, sou your saying ( insert hyperbole) when someone dissagrees
 
tekkychick said:
If someone working for you for 24 years is still making minimum wage, I'd really wonder. Hopefully they have gotten raises so they are now making more than the entry level wage for that position.
Click to expand...

No I am not making minimum wage, but the problem is young people think it's owed to them without proving their worth.
 
tekkychick said:
If someone working for you for 24 years is still making minimum wage, I'd really wonder. Hopefully they have gotten raises so they are now making more than the entry level wage for that position.
Click to expand...

So your statement of...:

B) most companies have a 3 month probation period where they can fire someone if they don't work out. During that 3 months, the employee should not be paid less than someone else going that job\

...was just hyperbole
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
So your statement of...:

B) most companies have a 3 month probation period where they can fire someone if they don't work out. During that 3 months, the employee should not be paid less than someone else going that job\

...was just hyperbole
Click to expand...

Really? are you that dense? People should be hired in at the entry level wage for a job. But if someone has been doing the job for 24 years, I certainly hope they are no longer at the entry level wage. And that entry level wage (in most fields) must be at least the minimum wage.

Really? I have to spell that all out? beginning to think you all are hikikomori
 
Superfreak said:
Quote Originally Posted by Don Quixote View Post
companies that restrict employee hours such as to prevent them from being classified as full time or use salaried people to work free overtime are part of our economy's problem.
Click to expand...

and you think raising the costs of labor is going to help that situation? Or provoke more of it?
Click to expand...

My but you are an insipidly stubborn little cuss, ain't ya?

Here folks, is how I dismantled the error ridden mantra that SuperFreak keeps parroting:

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...m-wage-debate-continues&p=1242616#post1242616
 
tekkychick said:
Really? are you that dense? People should be hired in at the entry level wage for a job. But if someone has been doing the job for 24 years, I certainly hope they are no longer at the entry level wage. And that entry level wage (in most fields) must be at least the minimum wage.

Really? I have to spell that all out? beginning to think you all are hikikomori
Click to expand...

Since the inclusion of the "24 years" was after you initial post; maybe you should be more exact in what you're trying to say, instead of just expecting readers to decipher what you're trying to get across.
 
The Dude said:
Most of Walmart managers started as part times!
Don't let facts get in the way of your rant, fat boy!
Click to expand...

Which is impressive, brother. Walmart employs roughly 2M employees and refuses to pay a living wage. So, as a Walmart employee, you have an X (which we can assume isn't very high) in 2,000,000 chance of feeding your kids, going to the doctor, and paying rent.

Economic opportunity. :thumbsup:
 
Taichiliberal said:
For the last 20 years, you've had the "eternal temp"....people hired on as "temporary" workers paid less than a full time worker and with NO benefits. The allure is that of going from a temp to permanent....but do a little research and you'll see that boon in temp workers.
Click to expand...

That happens a lot around here.
 
Rose said:
Which is impressive, brother. Walmart employs roughly 2M employees and refuses to pay a living wage. So, as a Walmart employee, you have an X (which we can assume isn't very high) in 2,000,000 chance of feeding your kids, going to the doctor, and paying rent.

Economic opportunity. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

you forgot to mention that most walmart employees qualify for food stamps
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top