Discussions
Fair Minimum Wage?
Posted by scheduledoctor • 6/20/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Tags: employee scheduling, minimum wage, money, worker compensation, worker pay
Condsirdering ALL of the implications to both employees and employers, should there be a minimum wage and if so should it be higher or lower than it is today? States can set their own minimum wages, but they can't be lower than the federal madate. Don't forget the implications to farmers and other family businesses (as well as consumer prices) as the minimum wage goes up.
The Fair Labor Standards Act sets the federal minimum wage at $5.85 per hour. The Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007, signed into law on May 25, 2007,[5] will increase the minimum wage over two years:
$6.55 (July 24, 2008)
$7.25 (July 24, 2009)[6]
User Comments
-
The uk currently has a minimum wage of
£5.52 per hour for workers aged 22 years and older
A development rate of £4.60 per hour for workers aged 18-21 inclusive
£3.40 per hour for all workers under the age of 18, who are no longer of compulsory school age.-
If I converted correctly, 5.52 pounds is $10.87 in US dollars. That a fair minimum wage. -
Its going up later in the year if I remember right
-
Wow ... The Laborers in the UK are well taken care of -
That figure is meaningless without calculating the cost of living. It doesn't get much more expensive than London, for example. -
I just pointed out the uks minimum wage. But it doesnt mean a thing if a lot a of people cant get a job because the companies have taken on cheap labour or just target a certain section of the uk personel to hire.
-
By cheap labor I assume you mean illegal, and in the second part of that I assume you mean discrimination. Did you know Germany still doesn't have a minimum wage law? Or they didn't used to have, though I know it was being debated last month. (Haven't kept up recently.)
-
I didnt want to discriminate but I have a few mates who cant work at certain places due to it. My bad I guess
-
I'm sure.
-
-
I think it's $5.85 now and should be at least $7.25 then be automatically adjusted to match annual inflation rate every January.
-
See above for the exact rates and short term time table. Yeah, If I could get paid in the UK, but live in the US, I would be one step ahead of the game. The problem is that a coke costs 2 us dollars there, so prices match the wage.
-
a coke costs 50p here
-
But what's it cost to ride a bus or buy petrol?
-
That's kind of the deal I have going right now, and it makes a tremendous difference. I live in the Chicago suburbs but work in Manhattan (though I'm only physically present there for a few days every six weeks or so).
-
-
Here's my problem with the minimum wage: people who've stuck with their jobs long enough (and well enough) to get raises so that they are no longer making minimum wage get thrown right back to the bottom when that happens. New hires make exactly the same as they do. It's demoralizing. Even people who are a couple of bucks over minimum (or maybe 5 or more) can feel devalued when the wage that they've worked to earn is suddenly so much less than what someone who just walked in the door can make.
I completely see the other side of the equation. People need to make a living wage in order to stay out of social service programs but they have neither the money nor the ability (for whatever reason) to add to their education or training. I have family in the position of trying to keep things together while working minimum wage jobs. It's tough as hell. It's just hard to say that they need more money because of inflation without implying that no one else does, since they aren't getting it. They may not get raises that they deserve, either, since the money that could have paid them more is now going to meet the higher minimum wage.-
I see your point, legbamel, but I'd say "feeling devalued" weighs pretty lightly in the scales when it's measured against "able to feed your children or not"
-
I think it involves more than just money, though. If your workers don't give hang about doing a good job because their wage keeps getting knocked back down to starting, your turnover rate is going to be higher and quality and consistency will suffer. For fast food restaurants that's probably not a problem, but what about manufacturing jobs?
As I said, I definitely agree that a livable wage is crucial. I just hate to see people lose sight of the bigger picture involving not corporate bottom lines but other employees, which is what usually happens when this topic comes up. I think there's more to the equation than what people live on and company profits, although they all go hand in hand in hand. -
False choice, Tiffany. An employee might have to make it, but any employer who does is shooting herself in the foot in the long run.
-
I just saw this for some reason. Mark, I disagree. The ease with which employers who pay badly and treat their employees like crap keep replacing them with nary an uncovered shift indicates that it isn't shooting themselves in the foot at all--it's economically efficient. If a company cared about things like quality of employee and commitment and that sort of thing it might be self-defeating to demean and underpay workers, but it seems that most do not at this point. Bodies who come cheap are plentiful.
-
-
I don't think that the word "fair" goes well with the words "minimum wage".
There are various reasons why someone gets paid more than others. Without going into those reasons - and just talking on the basic human level - I feel that the minimum wages, especially in the developing countries, is too low to be of any good. -
Whenever you set a minimum or maximum anything, you cause significant issues. It is a paradox where as minimum wages are increased, costs increase. The very people that you are looking to help get hurt. As do the rest of us. -
I can say with honesty that where i live, the minimum wage sets the standard for most of the regular jobs in the area - both salary and hourly. Employers seem to use it as a gauge, and aside from very high positions of managment/CEO typs jobs the wages here reflect the minimum wage standard - and it needs to be raised desperately.
The reason for that is the cost of living here has risen dramatically, but the wages have remained stagnant. Severely so. (As in, they haven't budged but 5 cents in ten years for the minimum wage, and any jobs above that haven't risen at all).
The latest consensus here is that a single, childless adult needs to make a minimum of $14.35 per hour in order to cover the basic cost of living (rent/mortgage, utilities) plus non basic cost of living (food, insurance, transportation etc) plus have enough left over for savings, investments, so that they aren't living had to mouth.
The average wage here is $10-$12 per hour for management positions, $8-$9 per hour for sales and retail, and a professional position (meaning you have tenure and time invested in the company) *could* earn you up to $19 per hour. That's about $40k per year. Those jobs are few and far between, however.
These wages have remained stagnant because our minimum wage has remained stagnant and employers see no need to raise wages unless they are forced to do so. (Our minimum wage here is now just under $8 per hour).
What's worse is that child care costs here, as of 2008 have risen to a staggering $1689 per month on average. That's more than some people's pay checks.
The rate of families living at or below the poverty level here has risen 19% from 2000 making basically a third of the state here at or below the poverty level. The nationwide average is 12%, rather than 29.7%
Yeah, minimum wages need to go up, and be enforced since the employers don't seem to want to take action on their own.-
Down with economic slavery!
-
-
I really like the thoughtful answers on this one. I have spent some time in London, BTW, and I coke was 1 pound last time I was there.
-
Thats London everything costs more there
-
And it wasn't even chilled.
-
-
Should be left alone. Raising it is a short term temporary fix at best. -
The origins of minimum wage was in the post industrial revolution, when there was social unrest due to the inequities between the owners and the laborers. So some minimum was put in. Can't get away from it, and it seems society has found some standard that does not upset the cart too much, in one direction or another. -
A fair minimum wage would be $9.50 per hour. $9.50 X 40 hours = $380.00 per week. Might as well make it an ever $10.00 which would be $400.00 per week and $20,800.00 per year.
At present it is $5.85 which is only $12,168.00 per year. Really hard to live on my first example.
Make it really fair.-
And yet, where I live, $20k year is below poverty.
For a single, childless adult.
Now imagine if you made that little and had kids -
well, Anok, something tells me that you wouldn't put yourself in that position to have that happen -
RT, we are technically at the poverty level for a couple with a dependent. Even if I wanted to work outside of my home, it would not be financially feasible to do so (A $30k a year job would just barely cover the cost of child care, rendering the net profit from that job as null and void)
Instead of working three jobs each though, we opt to live differently. We work for what we need, and barter for the rest.
Unfortunately however, many people have been thrown into this position living below the poverty level because of a major inflation bubble in everything but wages and employment. For a lot of people, it was like trying to outrun a tidal wave.
-
-
I really like Anok's answer a lot, it needs to be raised desperately.-
Great idea. Next discussion coming right up.
-
-
You do realize that when the minimum wage is raised, the unions hold out for an even higher percentage increase in their wages and the net effect is lower buying power for the minimum wage earners at the new "higher" rate?
Over and over again this pattern repeats.-
Not all unions do, and not all the time, nor do they always get what they ask for in negotiations.
Besides, Unions can and sometimes do ask for raises even when the minimum wage hasn't budged - so I'm not seeing the correlation here. (think budgetary needs for government positions, police, and firefighters - who are all union, they get regular raises via their union contracts). -
Governmental unions opperate on a completely seperate set of rules.
-
Erm, not really. Negotiations are pretty much the same, benefits are the same....the pay is great for most of the positions.
I regularly deal with or am party to union negotiations locally (government and firefighter/police unions) as well as other types of non governmental unions.
You pay your dues, your union rep does the negotiations, you get your raises when expected after long term negotiations have been ironed out. Budgetary needs are addressed regularly, or brought up separately if there is a problem. -
Ummmm.... Police, Firefighter etc.. are not legaly allowed to strike. I have run the campaigns for two seperate city police unions to get them raises, not by negotiation, but by ballot.
-
Yup, that is one small difference. Of course, most unions don't strike either, unless negotiations are going very badly.
But the police and firefighters and local politicians and city officials/employees have negotiations - it only goes to ballot or referendum if someone really has a stick up their whazoo.
They negotiate benefits, compensations and wages every year. They don't always get what they want, but the union reps are in there, every year. (Believe me, my father was his union's rep - and I got to hear every damn detail of the negotiations whether i wanted to or not - I still do!) -
You would category the threat of strike as a "small difference"? And the power to take the question to a ballot? I wouldn't consider either of these things a small distinction.
But then, I have never and would never work in a union job anyways. Too many bad experiences with union workers when I was running my biker gear business. -
I didn't think you would work in a union
But you stated that they work "on a completely different set of rules".
Which they don't. There are two differences.
Other than that, it all works the same way - and it has no correlation with minimum wage -
Sorry for the late response, but you are right (not that you need me to tell you). Short sightedness is what has gotten us into all this mess.
-
-
When I started working, minimum wage was $1.15 or so.
Don't see how things are any better today for the lowest wage earners despite the fact that wages have quintupled since then.-
DaneMorgan said it best. When we pay people more, we have to raise prices if we want to keep the same profit margin (or gain productivity and fire people that are no longer needed)
-
-
i can't remember, but it seems like the minimum wage is pretty darn low in real terms compared to what my $3.35 was worth back in the late 1970s. [Edited to add: Seems to me that minimum wage has been falling, just as union clout has taken a dive in the past couple decades too. Wage earners are surely not the bad guys in this economy.] [Also edited to add: Want a culprit? Try our messed up health care "system".]
-
Or even just 15 years ago!
I had my minimum wage job at $5.50 per hour and man, I could afford car payments, insurance, clothes, luxury items (I didn't have to pay rent or anything at that time, but still!).
$5.50 an hour now - might get you some "new" jeans at the local salvation army
-
-
I employ a couple of people and would never dream of insulting them or their work by paying minimum wage.-
If someone is scooping ice cream as a summer job, I don't think 5.50 is such an insult. Paying them 8-10 bucks means you had better sell a lot of ice cream to make a profit.
-
I think raising the minimum wage causes inflation. Think about it: A guy flipping burgers gets paid $5.00 an hour (just an arbitrary number to make calculation easier) So if he can make 50 hamburgers in an hour, the labor cost is $0.10 a burger. Now raise his wage to $10.00 an hour. The rate per hour increased without increasing production making the labor cost $0.20 per burger. They could hire less employees and expect more productivity out of them but if they could do that, they probably would have already done that. Either this will eat away at the restaurant's profit or the restaurant will have to raise prices to maintain its current profit. If the profit margin is thin enough (as are most companies that provide essential goods) then they either lose incentive to run their business or raise prices.
Shut down the business = loss of jobs
Higher prices to compensate = Inflation
Also, raising the minimum wage devalues all other employees reducing incentives for higher wage earners to seek jobs that deserve a higher wage.
Lets say Sams Club starts employees at $20 an hour. A construction worker that might consider working a nice job with regular hours in an air-conditioned building as opposed to working in the heat. Now construction companies would have to raise wages which means building new houses would cost more. Old houses would be vlaued more because of the comparable prices and then houses will no longer be affordable for those making less.
Does anyone think these things through?
-
-
The whole minimum wage thing is a political tool anyway. Less than 3 percent of workers in the US are paid at the minimum wage and 58% of those who do are 16 to 24. Only 17 percent of those teens and young adults live below the poverty level. Most of the younger workers are part timers still living with their families. (Families with an average income of over 50,000).-
Last census I could find quote 1.6 million. Not sure what that equates to - but there are many more who are working "low wage" jobs. Meaning, they make just slightly more than minimum wage.
Wages are often guided by what the minimum is set at. Raise the minimum, raise the other wages too. If the cost of living goes up and up and up - the wages MUST follow. Otherwise you get what we now have here.
High crime, lots of drug use, high poverty rates, and loads of empty apartments, homes, and businesses. -
Sure, that's probably about the right base number. My argument is that Government requirements never lead to prosperity. For example: the number of black families that were above the poverty level in the early 60's was much greater as a percentage than today and had been getting better since the 20's. What changed? The War on Poverty, which essentially rewarded the breakup of the Black Family Unit.
Increasing the minimum wage drives all wages up. Which drives production cost up and therefore product costs. And it limits small businesses (about 80 percent of US employment) in hiring unskilled workers (those young folk from above, many of whom still live at home) and training them. An interesting fact is that about 80 percent of people who start at minimum wage are earning better than that one year later. That's because their skill level causes them to be of greater value to their current employer (or to his competitors) -
"The War on Poverty, which essentially rewarded the breakup of the Black Family Unit."
Rewarded how?
"An interesting fact is that about 80 percent of people who start at minimum wage are earning better than that one year later. That's because their skill level causes them to be of greater value to their current employer (or to his competitors)"
What does "better" mean? That they've moved into a different income category, or that they've received the standard twenty-five cent raise at the six month mark and are now receiving a whopping $40 additional each month?
And do you have any data to support the "that's because..." as the actual cause, rather than just the fact that most large employers have a standard schedule which makes small increases in low-level employees' wages at pre-determined intervals? -
Opps, "resulted". Sorry, it was getting late and I was tired.
Addendum: "Thats Because" Only the history of the world as evidence. The Master begins as an apprentice, and experience is worth money. That kind of thing. I started as a youngster making little and with training was more valuable. I left a couple of jobs for better ones when my previous boss made the error of not offering me more. That's the way it works. -
Don, while 80 percent of businesses may be small and locally owned, a great vast amount of the employment base actually works for large companies - not self employed and mom and pop businesses. Even if those large companies only take up 20 percent of the number of businesses running. Furthermore, the large companies are more likely to hire employees at minimum, or just above minimum wage more so that local owned businesses. And by sheer volume, that means that far more people working for large companies would be affected by a minimum wage increase then for small businesses.
So let's talk about operating costs with that in mind. Large corporations can indeed cover the cost of wage increases across the board. They just have to reevaluate some of their spending habits.
Such as paying CEO's and upper management folks upwards of 300% more than the average employee. I mean, really, I think a person could live quite nicely in a million dollar a year salary - they can take a hit on the multiple millions they earn in salary and liquidized benefits they earn annually.
All of a sudden they've let loose quite a bit of money that could go towards a raise for their employees - and even opening up new positions in the company. Even then, the companies honestly - they can take a small hit in their profit margins too. Every year they forecast bigger and better profits - when in reality then can do just fine with a regular old profit. I'm pretty tired of hearing that companies can't afford higher wages because it might hurt their ever increasing bottom line. That's greed - and it is hurting the economy.
That said, My argument is that Government requirements never lead to prosperity.
I don't expect it to lead to prosperity at all. In fact I would prefer that everyone had enough common decency that minimum wages didn't have to exist, period. But the fact remains is that it was put into place to make sure Big Business didn't stoop to a slavery standard - which they were and still would (and often times the ones who hire illegal immigrants still do) - and as the costs of living rises, so to, do the wages.
But Big Business will not raise the wages of it's work force - only those at that top. So if the minimum wage is to set the standard base for salary and employment wages - then it needs to reflect the increasing cost to live - and subsequently buy the products that make all that profit in the first place.
The entire reason the Great Depression started in the first place was because of this type of wage disparity and large income gaps. All of a sudden industries lost their ability to sell because poor people didn't make enough to buy products, and the rich could only buy so much.
If you want to prevent that from happening in this system, you have to enforce a wage standard.
If we don't who will force Big Business to pay fair wages? As citizens here under this government, we have no authority over what businesses do. We can't change it because the laws are designed to prevent such change (Unless you plan to unionize everything, which would be fine by me).
Otherwise - I dread to think of the wage slavery that would result from no wage standards and no minimum wages set. -
Anok,
If you believe that all it takes is getting rid of the bad big Government and replacing it with the good big Government, then perhaps you should re-evaluate your belief in anarchy. We've seen that before too many times to believe it works. "Workers of the World Unite..." comes to mind. That's when "wage-slavery" becomes "state slavery"
addendum: About 52 percent of workers in the US work for firms with 500 employees of less. (I suppose that defines small business) Probably some of those don't like their jobs. But there are also lots of firms with more than 500 firms that pay quite well and have reasonably well-satisfied employees.
The minimum wage is a political construct for the acquisition of political power by envy. If it is so necessary, then why are only 2.5 percent of the population (almost all unskilled and first-time young employees) being paid at that level? Surely that number should be 99 percent? After all, why would a business pay more than that required by law?
Competition causes pay increases. Competition by skilled labor who take their skills with them to competing businesses who pay better. The only thing that can damage or destroy this quite natural system in government. -
Don - you know as well as I do that I do not believe we can replace one government with another.
You also know that we live under a government no matter what our beliefs are.
And since I am forced to live under someone else's control - I will be damned if I don't have some stipulations in place to protect me and mine. I believe in Anarchy - but I'm not delusional, and I live in this world, right now, and have to make do with what I've got.
Minimum wage is one of those stipulations.
Because minimum wage sets the tone for the other wages being paid.
By the way, if competition sets pay raises, then why are median wages stagnant throughout much of the country? Oh yeah, because "competition" in a
capitalist society is all smoke and mirrors. There is no real competition. Only marginal highs and lows. You know that as well as I do.
And, you keep stating that 52% number - but there are more people today working at *just above* minimum wage - so while they don't figure into the neat statistic - it is disingenuous to say that most employees make fair decent, or high wages.
You say government interference will hinder wages and competition, but I say corporations are the new government and they are running amok. If we must have a government - let's work to make the government control the corporations - who are NOT citizen entities, by the way and deserve no inalienable rights - so they can interfere less with individuals.
Besides that - history tells us that your assertion that competition actually drives the market with regards to wages is dead wrong. Prior to the government establishing a minimum wage standard - people were paid mere pennies because corporations could get away with it. Hell, they had slaves too.
Maybe we should go back to that -
That's the way it works for some people, in some industries, certainly. It is NOT universally true, and the "automatic 25 cent raise after 180 days" sort of thing is a clearly documentable staple of many large corporations employing large numbers of low-level workers. That alone could easily account for a significant portion of the statistic you cited, so without more information (amount/percentage of increase, promotion or job change, etc.) to support the idea that it's because workers are becoming more marketable (or that it's a meaningful increase), it's a fairly meaningless number.
-
We all have different opinions about the economy, but in the long term history has proven that DonMorgan is right. Although some minor government regulation is helpful, mostly the public votes with their money on what survives and what doesn't. I think that if the American public really had issues with lost jobs to China, we wouldn't buy the products. But, we are unwilling to pay the higher cost of American made goods. Americans have voted, and many don't care about keeping jobs here. Maybe that will change as things get worse...
-
-
In the United Kingdom, we have had a minimum wage for some years (set at about five pounds sterling, at the moment). There were many fears that it would stoke inflation and decrease the number of available jobs, but this has proven not to be the case. A minimum wage is vital to decreasing the poverty gap and differential pay based upon gender (particularly important in the government's target to lift more children out of poverty - something which is greatly influenced by women's wages). A journalist, Polly Toynbee, wrote an excellent book called Hard Work about her experiences of attempting to live on the minimum wage. I am in favour of much more radical policy making - a Citizen's Income set at a high enough level to enable people to choose to opt out of meaningless, poorly paid or dangerous work. -
If you are in Canada, you can check out this site: srv116.services.gc.ca/wid-dimt/mwa/menu.aspx
Fair Minimum wage amounts are legislated amongs various employment activities, (e.g. if you are a fisherman, if you are a new inexperienced employee, if you are caretaker, if you are a student, if you work in construction, or if you work in a liquor establishment etc etc etc) It's also different among the Canadian Provinces, although there is a minimum federal amount overall
Current And Forthcoming Minimum Hourly Wage Rates For Experienced Adult Workers in CANADA are listed here ($8.50 in Manitoba)
srv116.services.gc.ca/wid-dimt/mwa/index.aspx?report=report2&dec=5
Ontario is one of the highest with a minumum of $8.75 and actually mandated laws up to March 2010 to increase it to $10.25/hr! -
$1200 a week
For something to be fair, it must be able to cover a persons basic needs each week, the figure I have quoted is barely enough to live on.-
I can't see that 56k a year is a minimum. People live on 20k and are fine. The question is what is a need and what is a want.
-
-
i double posted ..woops
only if you live in the hills and eat berries :-)-
or nothing? -
I grow my berries ~ and hunt ~ ahhh the simple life
-
-
The affects of NAFTA ~ I am not even going to bring up where we are headed
www.epi.org/content.cfm/briefingpapers_bp147-
Gosh, someone else that maybe sees what I see
-
-
This is in relation to the living standard and political stability of the region instead of a fixed figure-
Well, if that is the case ~ move to WV ~ housing and cost of living is very affordable and we aren't likely to be hit nearly as hard by the current slump of the housing market
-
-
I have always thought minimum wage was fair but then I have also just presumed it's for high school kids or summer help.-
Roughly 25% of minimum wage workers are aged 20-24, and another 22% aged 25-34.
-
That’s beyond my comprehension - I couldn’t imagine. It would be impossible
-
-
I think it kind of depends on where you live and what the cost of living is around there. -
Here in Ontario, CAN, the minimum wage for above 16 is $8 I think. Below that about $7.50. Good enough, anyways.
-
You know what your employer is saying when he pays you minimum wage? He's saying "I would pay you less, but its illegal!"
That's an old Chris Rock joke, but with that in mind you can really tell that your employer is looking out for your well being
Sorry to bounce this topic, but minimum wage just increased and figured it worth the comment. -
Minimum $35 an hour for unskilled, which to me means other skilled
-
You think that should be the minimum wage?! In US dollars?! That's more than I make after ten years on the job.
-
Are you serious. I'm in Australia and although that's more than what shop workers get, I think that is fair.
I consider $100 + an hour a fair wage for my skills
I thought Australians earn less thn the US. ???? -
If minimum wage were 35 dollars an hour, it would just inflate everything else. A loaf of bread would cost around 10 dollars at the least and a meal at mcdonalds would be around 40 bucks. Just multiply by about 5, theres no trick behind the estimates. Homeless people would probably ignore picking up 20 dollar bills on the street.
You want to know something interesting though? Zimbabwe started printing 100 billion dollar bills..Which are essentially worth between 1-5 dollars to us. They're worth more as a novelty item on ebay, one sold for nearly 100 dollars. -
Maybe you are right River, but people need to eata nd pay the bills
My friend is from Zimbabwe, his family lives there, it's a disaster.
-
-
I can't believe those wages at the top.
If my 14 year old got a job like that, I'd be getting him out of there ;as fast as possible-
It's not like that in half of the country...Don't sweat it. The states have their own minimum wage laws, ours is $8.00 an hour I think.
I know someone will disagree, but raising the minimum will help things in the long run. Sorta. The word around the campfire is that this increase is both helping and/or hurting 2 million people who ARE affected by the lack of state minimum wage law. -
What do people pay for food, rent, electricity?
-
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
