|
Popular Thug Drink posted:She still comes out ahead considering the Federal minimum is $2.13 As someone who used to work in the food service industry, I completely disagree. There are far more low tip jobs than there are high tip jobs. High tip jobs are usually filled by nepotism and cronyism and not by merit. Also, Tips should in no way be factored into how much your employer pays. a tip is a reward for good service that is completely independent of regular income. An employer who lowers wages due to tips "making up the difference" is engaging in wage theft. There is no excuse for that kind of immoral behavior.
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 21:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:09 |
|
|
Sword of Chomsky posted:Any restaurant that does this should be burned to the ground and the wait staff should piss on the ashes. It is on its face so loving evil that anyone who advocates for it is equally as evil. It's pretty much every single non super expensive restaurant that does this. Anywhere you go where you can get a meal for anything less than say 25 bucks a plate, I guarantee you they pay their waitstaff minimum wage. I'd be shocked if the didn't. I may be wrong, but I worked at a poo poo ton of different restaurants in college, and it was all the same. I still have friends who do that kind of work, and their experience seems the same. It's different for like a 5 star restaurant obviously, but your average Chili's or On the Border or whatever, it's all the same. Dirt fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Aug 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 21:18
|
|
|
Sword of Chomsky posted:As someone who used to work in the food service industry, I completely disagree. There are far more low tip jobs than there are high tip jobs. High tip jobs are usually filled by nepotism and cronyism and not by merit. As someone who currently works in food service and earned a high-tip position at a good restaurant, I have to note that your anecdotal experiences differ from mine. I'm personally satisfied with the status quo because I would not have the earning power I have otherwise. If I'm still in the industry in a decade, my personal preference will probably change. As I said earlier, I do support a living wage for servers and the reduction of tips to a non-mandatory status. It's horseshit to expect your customers to directly subsidize your labor cost, the number of lovely foodservice jobs vastly outweigh the number of good jobs, and not everyone in the industry is willing or able to hustle for their money - nor should they be expected to. It won't happen anytime soon, but I would like it to for the benefit of others beyond myself. Anyway this is a derail and I'm ending my part of it by saying that we agree 
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 21:23
|
|
|
I got pulled into the McDonald's thing.    
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 21:31
|
|
|
Erkenntnis posted:I got pulled into the McDonald's thing. quote:There's nothing wrong with holding that much wealth. They worked for it. Ask them if the Waltons have worked literally thousands of times harder than their lowest-level employees.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 21:47
|
|
|
CowHammer posted:Ask them if the Waltons have worked literally thousands of times harder than their lowest-level employees. When I posted a graph showing that since 1978 employees' average salaries went up 5.7 percent compared to CEO's nearly 800% rise I was told "they started the company and they're job providers, they deserve it." A lot of people who are middle-class believe that working hard = more money. I grew up lower-class and would consider myself barely middle-class, working hard doesn't mean more money. In fact one of my old jobs legitimately hated people with degrees and wouldn't promote them to higher positions because they were worried of degree-holders leaving the job for their "studied career". It ended up costing them more employees in the long run. It's quite funny to see people complaining about fast-food people making a living wage to be white, middle-class, well-offish and not understand that not everyone has the same experiences or opportunities.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
Just post this and be done with it. http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/retail/bigbox_livingwage_policies11.pdf "Sorry, inflation doesn't work the way your gut thinks it does. The tl;dr of that is summarized on page 3, if Wal-Mart or other big-box retailers raised their wages to $12 change an hour and passed 100% of all costs associated with it onto consumers, the average shopping trip to Wal-Mart would cost...................47 cents more. or you can pull the American exceptionalism card. "Why do workers in just about every other first world nation make more at McDonalds. Is American exceptionalism now just getting people to work the most for the least amount of money?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 22:13
|
|
|
Ringo Star Get posted:A lot of people who are middle-class believe that working hard = more money. I grew up lower-class and would consider myself barely middle-class, working hard doesn't mean more money. In fact one of my old jobs legitimately hated people with degrees and wouldn't promote them to higher positions because they were worried of degree-holders leaving the job for their "studied career". It ended up costing them more employees in the long run. In my experience with that sort of situation the people in charge of promotions are actually afraid the degree-holding employee will take their job.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 22:15
|
|
|
McDonald's isn't taking advantage of workers, it's providing experience of a lovely job so that you'll grow out of it!!! Just like the founding fathers intended.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 22:28
|
|
|
Ringo Star Get posted:When I posted a graph showing that since 1978 employees' average salaries went up 5.7 percent compared to CEO's nearly 800% rise I was told "they started the company and they're job providers, they deserve it." I wish we could spread an alternative frame against "Job providers.' Because honestly, employers don't create jobs, they rent labor. Employers are customers in the job market. Regular workers like you and me are the supply side. Sure, you do need to treat customers with care, without customers there'd be no one to rent our labor, but if you've ever worked in retail, you know that the customer is not always right and sometimes the price has to go up on products. Here's the problem though: Let's say that it costs me $2000 a month to be able to provide 160 hours of good quality labor. I'm having to spend money for shelter so that the body of the person doing the work doesn't get sick, I've got to feed the body, I've got to provide medical care to this body and I'm the one responsible for making sure the body is transported to the workplace. In order to just break even, I've got to charge 12.50 an hour, and that means I get zero profit which means I can't do any investments to bring my own costs down or increase productivity. One big disadvantage is that it's hard to set up a rental agreement, there are a lot of other labor providers out there who can provide a similar product, and a lot who claim they can provide a similar product but actually can't. My customers have to work hard to figure out if I can actually provide what they want. Another problem is that there are people out there who, because they DO NOT want to go out of business (i.e. die), will charge less than the full cost of their labor and skimp on maintenance. They won't perform quarterly checkups on their body and they use cheap food that causes buildup over time. I can't blame them but it's hard to compete against people who are willing to play Russian Roulette to stay in business. So why am I mad at Wal-Mart? They know what it costs their labor providers in order to provide that labor, but they won't pay that. Instead, they have gotten the government to subsidize those labor providers so that they can get a discount. How is it fair for Walmart to pay me only $9.50 an hour and then get the government to pay the other $3.00. If Wal-Mart can't afford to pay the whole cost, they shouldn't get the product. It's as simple as that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 22:39
|
|
|
Erkenntnis posted:I got pulled into the McDonald's thing. You have the patience of a saint; I would've shifted to calling the suggestion that 'retail and fast food employees don't work hard enough to earn anything but a poverty level wage' loving barbaric and immoral halfway through that. I originally took this quote from Sarion and put it to an image; I've updated it for McDonald's profits given the protest and Labor Day being around the corner, so maybe folks can generate some positive discussion.  e: Dr. Arbitrary posted:I wish we could spread an alternative frame against "Job providers.' I remember you mentioning this earlier but I love the concept of a strategic labor reserve way more than I should.  I'm curious if anyone has done actual scholarly research into the concept.
Mo_Steel fucked around with this message at 22:58 on Aug 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 22:50
|
|
|
The Tea Party was started by bankers comparing themselves to Holocaust victims because people suggested that it was uncool that they spend their bailout money on hookers, blow, and bribes. The infamous Rick Santelli rant actually uses the word "losers" to describe people upset at the bailout. I cannot believe those people got sympathy while the poor didn't.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 22:57
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:The Tea Party was started by bankers comparing themselves to Holocaust victims because people suggested that it was uncool that they spend their bailout money on hookers, blow, and bribes. The infamous Rick Santelli rant actually uses the word "losers" to describe people upset at the bailout. Don't force Atlas to shrug. Could you live with that on your conscious?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 23:33
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:You have the patience of a saint; I would've shifted to calling the suggestion that 'retail and fast food employees don't work hard enough to earn anything but a poverty level wage' loving barbaric and immoral halfway through that. The answer to this is the same as it ever was. THE FREE MARKET DECIDED TO PAY THE MCDONALDS CEO THAT MUCH, THEY EARNED THOSE PROFITS, START YOUR OWN BUSINESS IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT!!! e: not my answer, but I can see that one coming from a mile away
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 23:49
|
|
|
An argument about welfare. Dude is a 50 year old Libertarian.quote:Welfare is criminal activity writ large. It is the state confiscating wealth from on group and doling it out to another. The idea that this is done to quell riots is just bogus. Medicare, Medicaid, and SS were not thrown out as bones to get people to put down their torches and pitch forks. I don't remember riots preceding the passage of Obamacare or Bushs prescription drug policy. But it is good to see a liberal admit the true motive behind their policies. You aren't trying to help the poor, you are just trying to keep them pacified. You give them just enough to keep them from violence. Such compassion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 00:07
|
|
|
Lord Girlyman posted:Don't force Atlas to shrug. Could you live with that on your conscious? The common man is Atlas. They just do not know it. AShamefulDisplay posted:An argument about welfare. Dude is a 50 year old Libertarian. Oh wow. The tragic thing about these guys is that they scrape so close to the actual problem and then veer wildly off course.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
quote:Oh wow. He speaks very highly of the period of American history between 1789 to 1931, declaring, without irony, that working conditions back then are what allowed industry in America to flourish and that we should change our laws to reflect the ones that exist back then. I dont think the dude has ever actually read a history book. Or hes just a callous peace of poo poo. Heres the quote: quote:Which explains the mass rioting and revolution that plagued this country for its first 150 years when no such social welfare state existed. But your argument amounts to nothing more than economic blackmail. AShamefulDisplay fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Aug 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 00:30
|
|
|
myron cope posted:The answer to this is the same as it ever was. THE FREE MARKET DECIDED TO PAY THE MCDONALDS CEO THAT MUCH, THEY EARNED THOSE PROFITS, START YOUR OWN BUSINESS IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT!!! I've heard it said that CEO pay in America isn't about performance any more, it's a status symbol for the companies involved. In that context it makes sense to pay your CEOs thousands of times what their average employee makes, and for their pay to continue to spiral upwards. It's not about attracting and retaining top talent, it's indicating the company's strength (and pilfering whatever "top talent" they can afford). It's conspicuous consumption writ large.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 00:40
|
|
|
forgive my ignorance, but day to day, what does a loving CEO even do?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 00:42
|
|
|
Branis posted:forgive my ignorance, but day to day, what does a loving CEO even do? Signs off on big decisions that have been made by other people, most of the time. Sometimes they're involved in the process, sometimes they're not. Also lots of coke.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 00:46
|
|
|
Gourd of Taste posted:Signs off on big decisions that have been made by other people, most of the time. Sometimes they're involved in the process, sometimes they're not. Sometimes they also meet with a board who makes a lot of absurdly high level decisions, 90% of which, will have no hope of being implemented down the chain because nobody wants to be fired for misinterpreting such nebulous directives. Also, nobody on the board feels they need to clarify because the people below them should "just do it, what do I pay you for, anyway?" VP positions, CEO positions, and board seats are basically the modern US version of marrying your daughter off to the neighboring lord in order to join your houses. Also, once you're involved in a few organizations, chances are one of them will be successful. At that point you can say, "Under my leadership, XYZ company prospered and..." This will allow you to go around shaking down smaller companies in search of a guru that don't pay as much but only require 2 conference calls a month.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 01:04
|
|
|
Anybody who thinks fast food workers aren't hard-worker is a piece of poo poo. Fast food is nasty, physically draining, and sometimes dangerous work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 01:20
|
|
|
Not to mention, even at $15/hour, working at mcdonalds will still be a lovely job, you'll just be able to pay for rent, heat, food, and diapers while doing it. Surely the knowledge that the peasants are at least having bad days 40 hours a week should be some consolation prize? The "gently caress you, get a better job if you want more money, you have no business begging the holy Job Creators for more" attitude people have towards the strikers absolutely baffles and infuriates me. Against my better judgment, I got in a FB argument with the person I mentioned earlier, and pointed out that fast food workers aren't solely shiftless teenagers working summer jobs and living with their parents, that a substantial and growing percentage of them are adults trying to make a living, some of them trying to raise kids. Her response was "If you're raising a child you need to do better than be a fast food worker. At least look into management training, community college at night. Something. I changed diapers on elderly patients in the private care sector many hours per week to make enough money to raise my child, while going to college then on to law school. I was a teenage, single mother with a GED and I knew, even then, that flipping burgers wasn't going to support us. It's called personal responsibility, hard work and motivation. But high school kids are lazy and workers of any age should not need food stamps to survive. It's interesting that many military families also need food stamps to survive. They aren't going on strike though. Ok. I'm off the soapbox. Sorry." It's an attitude I keep seeing: "If you think that minimum wage isn't enough for you, then you have no business working at McDonalds, as long as you choose to stay there, you have no right to complain." Hilariously, these are the same people who will tumescently look down at the unemployed and say "they need to get over themselves and work at McDonalds" I saw another gruesome tirade about this on facebook, to the effect of "America can't sustain paying unskilled workers a skilled workers wage, if they raised their pay then the price of their food would skyrocket and they'd go out of business and nobody would have jobs." As though: A) that were true, and B) the only possible way to come up with the money to pay workers higher wages is to take it out on the customer. It's ruthless and disgusting socialism to even think that this money could come out of multi-million dollar executive pay, or, God help me for saying this, the shareholders would be just fine in life if they made a little less profit. I hate this country today, I really do. I wanna push a CEO down the stairs or something man
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 01:33
|
|
|
Yeah, I tried. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 03:01
|
|
|
Erkenntnis posted:Yeah, I tried.  I don't even know. Is this someone you know even vaguely well? Because the fact that they resort to what is essentially name calling is pretty embarrassing. Generally what I do when someone makes unequivocally racist comments is ask why I hear dogs barking and move on. But that's probably not something that should be emulated. (And thinking that acknowledging privilege = white guilt seems pretty racist to me.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 03:32
|
|
|
Erkenntnis posted:Yeah, I tried. My response would be "better than sounding like a racist hillbilly with no idea of how the world works." Then again, I get really pissy when people say communist like it's an insult.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 03:47
|
|
|
Anniversary posted:
If you have to connect the dots to demonstrate that something is racist, chances are they're never going to acknowledge it, even to themselves. And connecting dots to find racism where there isn't any (in the eyes of the racist) is a symptom of white guilt.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 03:52
|
|
|
They didn't say "friend of the family"; therefore, NOT RACIST~~~ Followed up by chrisrock.flv I wish I was joking. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 04:13
|
|
|
What's been showing up on my facebook feed lately are people questioning if the chemical weapon attacks in Syria were just faked by the rebels. When I link them the videos from Brown Moses, the response is "so they aren't just pictures, but they could still have been produced by the rebels" EDIT:  Magres posted:Then again, I get really pissy when people say communist like it's an insult. This doesn't really help the message any, but I usually respond by thanking them for paying me a compliment. gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 05:02 on Aug 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 04:24
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:What's been showing up on my facebook feed lately are people questioning if the chemical weapon attacks in Syria were just faked by the rebels. When I link them the videos from Brown Moses, the response is "so they aren't just pictures, but they could still have been produced by the rebels" Yet another lovely side-effect of the Iraq debacle. Well done, Dubya! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 04:35
|
|
|
AShamefulDisplay posted:He speaks very highly of the period of American history between 1789 to 1931, declaring, without irony, that working conditions back then are what allowed industry in America to flourish and that we should change our laws to reflect the ones that exist back then. I dont think the dude has ever actually read a history book. Or hes just a callous peace of poo poo. I know he's being sarcastic here, but the thing is, that's actually what happened. America has an extremely violent labor history, especially relative to other first-world countries; we don't talk about all of those little conflicts, but many of them could accurately be described as rebellions or even low-intensity wars. There actually was a lot of rioting and rebellion during that era - the laissez-faire capitalist system was so aggressively lovely that people were literally willing to risk their lives to change it, and a lot of them died.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 05:10
|
|
|
Mister Bates posted:I know he's being sarcastic here, but the thing is, that's actually what happened. America has an extremely violent labor history, especially relative to other first-world countries; we don't talk about all of those little conflicts, but many of them could accurately be described as rebellions or even low-intensity wars. There actually was a lot of rioting and rebellion during that era - the laissez-faire capitalist system was so aggressively lovely that people were literally willing to risk their lives to change it, and a lot of them died. All for nothing 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 05:12
|
|
|
Gen. Ripper posted:All for nothing I wouldn't go that far. We don't get paid in company script or fired as soon as we're maimed in the machines, and nobody get their first job at 5 anymore. Though, long way to go still.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 05:31
|
|
|
With all the minimum wage talk, I have been wondering if it might be an effective argument to point out that some of these workers must actually work at the most profitable businesses in their geographic area. I could imagine said kid saying "I wanted a good job so I went to work at the most profitable business around, but they paid me like they were barely breaking even." Not to mention that that if fast food workers were paid a living wage then maybe it would make sense for people to respect their choice to work in a restaurant istead of self-righteously making GBS threads on people they have never met and know gently caress-all about. 
Infomaniac fucked around with this message at 05:52 on Aug 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 05:42
|
|
|
Gen. Ripper posted:All for nothing There's a shitton of fast food workers, of all occupations, striking right now. There might still be hope for labor in America.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 05:52
|
|
|
1stGear posted:There's a shitton of fast food workers, of all occupations, striking right now. There might still be hope for labor in America. I'm fairly sure that a striking worker can be replaced (although the NLRA says they can't be fired--when you're replaced and have no job to come back to, how is that not firing?). They could all be replaced and there would be no shortage of Americans cheering because of it. "THEY GOT WHAT THEY DESERVED!" or the like. There is no hope for labor in America. e: And I say that as both a union member and an employee of a labor union. And both of my parents were/are union members, and my maternal grandfather and paternal grandmother as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 06:03
|
|
|
Pessimism is the biggest killer of any great movement.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 06:03
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:Pessimism is the biggest killer of any great movement. Second only to a populace that hates you after being won over by decades of propaganda and efforts to destroy your movement.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 06:07
|
|
|
No I'm pretty sure people have thwarted that stuff many times. That's sort of the point of a revolution.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 06:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:09 |
|
|
AShamefulDisplay posted:He speaks very highly of the period of American history between 1789 to 1931, declaring, without irony, that working conditions back then are what allowed industry in America to flourish and that we should change our laws to reflect the ones that exist back then. I dont think the dude has ever actually read a history book. Or hes just a callous peace of poo poo. Well he's not necessarily wrong. Industry DID flourish, at the expense of the workers. You could make the same argument about antebellum southern aristocracy. It flourished until we had to pay the workers!
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 06:27
|
|
