Reply With Quote
LOL...
There will be whiners no matter what someone does.
No good deed goes unpunished!
LOL...
There will be whiners no matter what someone does.
No good deed goes unpunished!
Admirable tactic, stick with it, but he didn't do his homework. The senior, key people shouldn't also be making his "minimum" wage.
Why spead the wealth
CEOs,owners making too much
Spread the wealth
Happens all the time brother worked job 13 years guy started yesterday paid what he is getting
I didn't read the whole thing, but isn't the point that if you pay some well above their market value then you may not be able to foot the bill for other necessary expenses (such as higher market value wages for key employees with high-demand/specialized skill sets)?
are doubting the impeccable precision and perfection of the "market" (for labor)?
There's a point where somebody's pay isn't just about cost to the employer but fairness to, humanity of the worker.
If y'all's ing "free market" says " workers' pay down as low as possible (which is EXACTLY what it says)" then that's sociopathic capitalist "market" system.
Any social system organized to ignore the plight, the hardships, the inhumanities it creates for, forces onto its members is one ed up social system, and obviously hasn't been organized by its all its members but only by the members which benefit from the system.
iow, America is ed and un able as long as the political class is owned by, doing the dirty work of the 1%, BigCorp.
If you pay too low, you may ignore the humanity of workers. However, if you pay too high, you may ignore the simple economics and sustainability of your business. There is a middle ground. As far as big retailers go, I hear Costco does a pretty good job of paying reasonable wages that they can also afford to pay. The key is successfully finding the middle ground.
Executive level (primarily CEO) wages also stand out as an issue. They have been going up and continue to go up at high rates even when the businesses they run don't always even generate positive results. I suppose a war for executive talent has really come at the expense of ordinary workers. Though there are other problems too.
"may ignore the simple economics and sustainability of your business"
if your business success depends on paying your employees poverty wages (but sustaining the costs of high turnover and disengaged employees), then you don't have a business.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 08-01-2015 at 09:31 AM.
if your business success depends on paying your employees poverty wages (but sustaining the costs high turnover and disengaged employees), then you don't have a business.
This isn't coherent.
those are two costs of paying ty wages, check with Walmart.
Nobody economist believes the labor market has impeccable precision or perfection. Nobody believes the product market has that, but the labor market is even worse. For one the labor market is very inelastic. It also has far less than perfect information...ever try getting a companies salary data? Why is it taboo to ask what another employee makes? Also, with the advent of online applications companies force applicants to be the first mover in salary negotiations.
No, its not. It is always about cost and should always be that way. A company that ignores costs because of "humanity" is going to be a failed company, and all of a sudden these poor people that you care about so much are going to be out of a job. Higher than market wages are called efficiency wages. Henry Ford was one of the first people to use them.There's a point where somebody's pay isn't just about cost to the employer but fairness to, humanity of the worker.
I don't know what to say other than NO. You are wrong. Of course they want to pay as low as possible, but the free market says that they cant if their is compe ion for a persons skill set.If y'all's ing "free market" says " workers' pay down as low as possible (which is EXACTLY what it says)" then that's sociopathic capitalist "market" system.
Better than a social system that attempts to address those issues and fails far worse than any market economy. Venezuela anyone?Any social system organized to ignore the plight, the hardships, the inhumanities it creates for, forces onto its members is one ed up social system, and obviously hasn't been organized by its all its members but only by the members which benefit from the system.
Stupid liberal without a point.iow, America is ed and un able as long as the political class is owned by, doing the dirty work of the 1%, BigCorp.
ter McGee
Actually you do if the marginal expense of hiring new workers is less than your marginal revenue. But to understand how this works you would have to educate yourself.
And if the business fails, then the employees no longer have a job.
I agree with raising the base pay for each position, but the base pay shouldn't be equal for all jobs at the company, hence why people left.
everybody, listen up:
If your business success depends on paying your employees poverty wages (but sustaining the costs of high turnover and disengaged employees), then you don't have a business. You're a poverty-wage-slave driver.
Federal minimum wage must be set to $15/hour for the low-cost regions, then adjusted upward for the high-cost regions, and all indexed to the regional increase in inflation, some kind of regional PPP which would include food, housing, etc.
Fed minimum wage applies to every employee,no matter how few hours worked.
pay 1.5 x minimum for 40 - 50 hours, and 2 x minimum above 50 hours.
Supply and demand should dictate the pay of all who are above minimum pay levels.
You are a model authoritarian.
Yup and those with specialized degrees tend to be in demand more. Hence, software engineering salaries flying through the roof. They are extremely in demand in Silicon Valley.
that's why BigTech created a cartel to suppress salaries by agreeing not to poach employees, and import cheap programmers from India.
Which they settled for half a billion dollars for.
Nevermind.. Hey boutons look up Sherman and Clayton. Cartels are illegal.
Pretty much.
Not really shocking. That was the first thing that occurred to me.
Better would have been to simply raise everybody's pay 10%
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
