|
Our new party stands behind industry as the best arbiter of safety measures. Only those corporations in the field are properly capable of determining the necessary standards to provide workers with a safe work environment, it is not the place of government workers on the other side of the country to do so, and thus we will entirely deregulate all hazardous industries. Join us in the upcoming election, we're on your side! Vote for the Defoooooorm Party! 
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 21:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 14:04 |
|
|
Alctel posted:I've never heard of that 'hold two weeks pay' thing at all I've worked a few jobs that do this in Ontario and Quebec, although oddly my wife had never heard of such a thing and was scandalized when I told her.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 21:55
|
|
|
Alctel posted:I've never heard of that 'hold two weeks pay' thing at all Ironically enough, the only time I've ever run into it was when I was temping for a federal agency two years ago. (the first month was a pain but after that it's hardly the apocalypse.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 22:00
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:Really? You're not getting 2 weeks pay from the beginning into the end. You're getting paid at the present value if you were to leave the company today. Why would anyone ever do this though? I don't see why it should matter to either party.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 22:25
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
THC posted:I hope they call it Refooooooorm Love dat word. Failing that I'm pretty sure Canadian Reform Alliance Party is still available.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 22:33
|
|
|
.
Sassafras fucked around with this message at 08:12 on Nov 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 22:38
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:
What are you talking about? Time value concepts with money is a pretty important aspect of personal financing. The fact that that money is tied up upfront by the employer, not accruing interest or any benefits to the employee is important.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 23:06
|
|
|
Please call it Wild Rose and Friends.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 23:23
|
|
|
I don't see how it's not a pay cut. Regular salary for the year minus 2 weeks is a big deal. A fair way to implement this pay structure change would be to make it the norm for new hires right at the start. brucio fucked around with this message at 23:33 on Jun 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 23:31
|
|
|
They are.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 23:34
|
|
|
I have seen enough employers crash and burn that I would would be pretty hard pressed to accept "We'll pay you later" when I leave. Public service sure because they are good for the money. Private company hahahahaha.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 00:01
|
|
|
The private sector can get its act together and raise its pay scales to match those of the public sector, instead of having the government claw back the salaries of the public sector to match those of the private sector.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 00:07
|
|
|
Leofish posted:The private sector can get its act together and raise its pay scales to match those of the public sector, instead of having the government claw back the salaries of the public sector to match those of the private sector. But they can't possibly afford that, and we'll loose jobs because it cost's to much and more  from the private sector. We might as well fight for an national min wage first, with job rights the same across the board not province to province , before fighting for the private sector to pay the same as public.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 00:25
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Why would anyone ever do this though? I don't see why it should matter to either party. The thing is that it's a populist way of saying "if we take 2400$ from you now, you'll get 2700$ two weeks post-job", trying to sell a 300 dollar raise as a good thing despite that the first paycheck after getting that raise will still be paid at the old rate. Meaning you gain nothing, and you lose the value of those funds over time. Inflation would have to be below -4% (so above 4% deflation) before there is any merit to doing this from the employee POV. If the Government is willing to hold a check in arrears, then they should pay us weekly to keep the arrears time to 7 days, and then government employees can then more accurately plan for weekly accelerated mortgage payments so they can keep financing the housing bubble. But that will never happen... they have to pay for the CBAs they signed with most (but not all) of the unions somehow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 01:11
|
|
|
Kintarooooo posted:The thing is that it's a populist way of saying "if we take 2400$ from you now, you'll get 2700$ two weeks post-job", trying to sell a 300 dollar raise as a good thing despite that the first paycheck after getting that raise will still be paid at the old rate. Holy poo poo, this is not what I said but thanks for twisting it around; however, you are correct that the "first paycheck is old rate after raise" but that's a logical conclusion to make and should be expected with this proposed suggestion. Assuming people exercise some semblance of common sense and logic. Of course, it seems like it's in short supply. Another argument, from what I understand, is the "interest accrued is hurt." Not really. The impact is insignificant due to time length and potential contribution. Maybe if you're talking about credit debt and loans, then yeah I get what you're saying. But on the flip side, people should have emergency funds and minimal debt! Like responsible adults!
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:
This has nothing to do with the reason an employer can be allowed to basically take a security deposit out on someone's labour. Why shouldn't employees expect money up front in case the private company goes under? Why is the employers expectation valid, but not the employee if roles reversed?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 01:50
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:They are. Without affecting current hires. Gradually phase it out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 02:15
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:But on the flip side, people should have emergency funds and minimal debt! Like responsible adults! gently caress everyone that lives paycheck to paycheck I guess. Dirty poors.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 02:18
|
|
|
I guess responsible adults don't goto college then
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 02:22
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:But on the flip side, people should have emergency funds and minimal debt! Like responsible adults! You're right, no "responsible adult" has ever had extended periods of financial hardship that depleted their savings or forced them into debt to get by. What's your standard for "minimal debt?" Going to go out on a limb and say it's "equal to or less than the maximum amount of debt I ever personally carried."
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 02:47
|
|
Waaaah the Christians are out to get me
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:gently caress everyone that lives paycheck to paycheck I guess. Dirty poors. The financial caste system must be preserved. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 02:50
|
|
|
The only moral debt is my debt.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 02:51
|
|
|
But wait, all the conservative propaganda has taught me that private individuals know better than the government what to spend their money on. Why should we trust the government to spend that two weeks' pay for all the public servants better than each of those individuals making their own rational economic decisions? This is basically just a one year 4% tax on tens of thousands of hardworking Canadians! The beleaguered public servants need tax relief!
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 03:08
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:Ignoring anecdote evidence. From what I've understand, companies have started adopting this practice about a few years ago. My company is not one of them but I'm not against the idea of going through it of necessary. Your reference of one major corporation is just as much anecdotal evidence as mine was. In fact, I referenced more than one company (though not by name) in the private sector, which is what the government is claiming they're trying to bring the public sector in line with. If anything, my anecdote is more relevant than yours! Also, how you're paid (frequency, amount, when they pay you relative to when you work) is almost certainly spelled out in your contract. If you're living paycheck to paycheck, the company withholding your pay for the first two weeks could prevent you from taking a new job if you couldn't afford to miss a paycheck. It only benefits an employee if the company they're currently working for follows the same pay schedule as the new company. Never mind the fact that it's money you've earned that you can't access after you've earned it, and they're not paying you interest on it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 03:14
|
|
it's just a lot of noise looking for a fight on a non-issue.
|
vyelkin posted:But wait, all the conservative propaganda has taught me that private individuals know better than the government what to spend their money on. Why should we trust the government to spend that two weeks' pay for all the public servants better than each of those individuals making their own rational economic decisions? This is basically just a one year 4% tax on tens of thousands of hardworking Canadians! The beleaguered public servants need tax relief! Public servants are not individuals. They are all one large, homogenous hivemind of wasteful spending and greed. They are called Legion, for they are many.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 03:28
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:Holy poo poo, this is not what I said but thanks for twisting it around; however, you are correct that the "first paycheck is old rate after raise" but that's a logical conclusion to make and should be expected with this proposed suggestion. The example seemed disingenuous because of the raise involved in the example, which had nothing to do with the monetary seizure of employee funds by an employer, government or otherwise. Other than that, assloads of people are in mortgage debt to pay for homes, whether above or under water. Every dollar-day lost can easily remove purchasing/repayment power from cash-strapped homes that could have accelerated paying their principal rather than delay or pay slower. Deferring 100$ of payments will cost a homeowner anywhere from 250$ to 600$ at the start of a mortgage. Deferring 26 times that is a non-negligeable shitload. But hey, we both agree that people should have a gently caress-you fund (6-12 months' expenses) and minimal/no debt. If you can't afford to lose your job, you can't afford a house.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 03:29
|
|
|
.
Sassafras fucked around with this message at 08:12 on Nov 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 03:34
|
|
|
Quantum Mechanic posted:What's your standard for "minimal debt?" Going to go out on a limb and say it's "equal to or less than the maximum amount of debt I ever personally carried." Mortgage and student loans are considered "good debts." Line of credit for the strict use of emergency in the process of building an emergency fund is pretty borderline but acceptable. Credit card debt is bad, obviously. Car loans are an unnecessary luxury that one should be cautious in undertaking unless you absolutely have no choice but take loan from a bank/broker. Loans/credit from retails are unnecessary. It's called living within your means. TrueChaos posted:I'm not sure you understand how anecdotal evidence works. If you want another company, I'm pretty drat sure the Canadian Force is also doing this practice as well but I need to double check. If an individual is not willing to take the risk or sacrifice for that coveted job because of the pay being withheld, then they don't get that job. I'm not sure what else to tell you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 03:38
|
|
|
Speaking of gently caress poors, BC residents making $30k must pay the same monthly MSP premium as millionaires, because that makes total loving sense and is not ridiculously unjust or unfair in any way whatsoever.  STRONG ECONOMY SECURE TOMORROW Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 03:51 on Jun 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 03:39
|
|
|
THC posted:Speaking of gently caress poors, BC residents making $30k must pay the same monthly MSP premium as millionaires, because that makes total loving sense and is not ridiculously unjust or unfair in any way whatsoever. Don't worry. You can now add a $25/month additional fee if you use a wheelchair. Have to pay for those post-election raises somehow!  (But not really. They said the raises would be paid for by cutting lower level positions. Nothing like sending a bunch of civil servants to the unemployment line to give your buddies a pat on the back post-election!)This province deserves everything it gets over the next 4 years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 03:49
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:If you want another company, I'm pretty drat sure the Canadian Force is also doing this practice as well but I need to double check. What are you even talking about do you actually not understand how anecdotes work? The plural of anecdote is not data.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 04:04
|
|
|
It's anecdotes I hope that helps.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 04:45
|
|
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:
I really like that line. I am going to have to use it soon. I understand what you are saying but I think his example of the CF would be indicative of a larger trend in government generally given the massive size of the military and it's employment power as a governmental actor. Then again, maybe not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 05:57
|
|
|
quaint bucket posted:Mortgage and student loans are considered "good debts." Until, of course, the housing market collapses (poors shouldn't have bought houses!) or the student loan debt is for a degree with poor job prospects (should have gotten a STEM degree/poors don't need education!) quaint bucket posted:Line of credit for the strict use of emergency in the process of building an emergency fund is pretty borderline but acceptable. How do these two go together? From where do you get a line of credit? quaint bucket posted:Car loans are an unnecessary luxury that one should be cautious in undertaking unless you absolutely have no choice but take loan from a bank/broker. You've literally never had a job where you needed to drive and didn't have a car, have you? quaint bucket posted:It's called living within your means. It's also literally never occurred to you that sometimes people can be in a financial position where eating and maintaining shelter is "living outside your means" have you, you smug, privileged piece of poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 13:26
|
|
|
Quantum Mechanic posted:Until, of course, the housing market collapses (poors shouldn't have bought houses!) or the student loan debt is for a degree with poor job prospects (should have gotten a STEM degree/poors don't need education!) Quantum Mechanic posted:You've literally never had a job where you needed to drive and didn't have a car, have you? I'm not gonna jump into the next part.. C... fucked around with this message at 13:45 on Jun 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 13:42
|
|
|
Good to see that the NP is now simply handing the mic over to the Government I do encourage all to read this vitriol. Here's a choice sample: "[s posted:National Media[/s] The Harper Government"]But we cannot afford to limp along any longer. Paying employees a voluntary severance – in addition to a healthy pension – when they quit or retire, is not sustainable or frankly, fair. That is why Stephen Harper’s government eliminated this perk last year. We introduced 50-50 cost-sharing for public sector pensions for the same reasons. Savings to taxpayers? More than $5-billion by 2017. $5 billion over 5 years? All our financial problems are solved! How silly were we to think that decent pay and benefits are simply good perks. No no, you see, they are, frankly, unfair! Why should government employees enjoy a single thing not available to every single employee in the private sector? Spoiler: Well, unless you're very rich, in which case you deserve every penny and perk. You earned that! Want a stable country? Wage and benefit race to the bottom! Also, I once knew an anecdote about a guy who didn't understand anecdotes but used them in argument regardless. That was a funny anecdote. E: since we're into anecdotes, the Financial Post ran an interesting one today under the headline Some of the shrewdest business maneuvers of all time Here's the second on the list: quote:Henry Ford did something unheard of and doubled worker salaries, while cutting their day down an hour. It massively boosted production. But as we learned above, anecdotes are dumb unless they come from the right person. I heard that he could have quadrupled productivity if he had halved wages and increased hours. Cocaine Bear fucked around with this message at 14:15 on Jun 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 14:04
|
|
|
Some small paper in Barrie of all places just revealed that the PMO sent them details about another JT speech that lost money for the organizers, and requested that the paper not mention that it had come from them.  http://www.simcoe.com/news-story/3843643-pm-s-office-sends-details-of-trudeau-s-talk-at-georgian/ quote:The Prime Minister’s office sent information yesterday to The Advance regarding a money-losing speech Liberal leader Justin Trudeau made in Barrie in 2007.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 14:17
|
|
|
Sassafras posted:Why draw the line here? How dare these employers make us wait for paycheques instead of paying us in cash at the end of every day! Lets take this to the other logical extreme shall we? How dare these employees demand we pay them more than once a month (or year!) with credit that is only good at the company store!
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 14:20
|
|
|
colonel_korn posted:In an email from Ottawa, Brown said Trudeau shouldn’t be let off the hook for the Georgian loss, even if it occurred before he entered politics. Seriously?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 14:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 14:04 |
|
|
I've never actually worked a job where I didn't get 2 weeks withheld. This includes jobs for local school boards, crown corporations and the provincial government. So it's been done since the 90's at least.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 14:37
|
|