The 2015 Popularity Contest (aka UK General Election )

[Brennan]

Brennan thinks people who work in McDonald's don't deserve enough money to live on despite doing 35 hours a week because they're too stupid for a proper job.


Pass it on.

I used to work there mate.

 

[Seanjd]

So we just have millions of unemployed people earning £0 an hour instead?

Brilliant. Excellent logic.

Thanks.

No. Nationalise major services and turn dead communities into working communities again. Business simply cannot handle employing a nation alone.

 

[ilikecheese]

Let me give a real world example of minimum wage and the impact that it can have.

I used to be a retail district manager in the San Francisco Bay Area. My territory was the City of San Francisco and stretched East and North all the way to Sacramento.

Anyway, minimum wage in California is $9/hr...in the City of SF, it's now $11.05/hr. So, what did we do to counteract this higher wage problem in my stores in the city? We had one to two fewer full time employees in those stores so that we didn't have to do health benefits and vacation benefits. In the end, we still profited and the maths pretty much balanced out, but it killed about 5-7 full time jobs.

I know things are different with the NHS there, but something would have to give in order for companies to make their money.

 

[bring the ghost on]

I don't buy into all of this ''SMEs won't survive if they have to pay a few quid an hour more''.

Boo-hoo, if you can't afford to pay your employees a living wage then tough luck, you don't get their service.

Everyone is talking as if it's the business who is doing the employee a huge favour. Surely by giving up 35 hours a week to give their skills (whatever they may be) to help that company make money, that person deserves to paid a wage which they can live off?

And on another point, @Brennan what do you do for living now, if I may ask?

 

[Del]

I don't buy into all of this ''SMEs won't survive if they have to pay a few quid an hour more''.

Boo-hoo, if you can't afford to pay your employees a living wage then tough luck, you don't get their service.

Everyone is talking as if it's the business who is doing the employee a huge favour. Surely by giving up 35 hours a week to give their skills (whatever they may be) to help that company make money, that person deserves to paid a wage which they can live off?

And on another point, @Brennan what do you do for living now, if I may ask?

He works in the Twiglet factory, At least he smells like he does

 

[roydo]

On a different subject, apparently, these Uni fees that Clegg got such grief about U Turning on, and have been used by some to bash the Coalition/Tories, have actually worked out well. Insofar that a higher number of "poorer" students are at good universities, and the quality of the degrees coming out are much more valued by employers.

No pie charts or stuff I am afraid, just a discussion I heard today.

The premis being that lowering or removing the fees actually helps the middle/upper class kids, and harms the universities in terms of funding/quality.

Interesting I thought.

 

[Allezfan]

Let me give a real world example of minimum wage and the impact that it can have.

I used to be a retail district manager in the San Francisco Bay Area. My territory was the City of San Francisco and stretched East and North all the way to Sacramento.

Anyway, minimum wage in California is $9/hr...in the City of SF, it's now $11.05/hr. So, what did we do to counteract this higher wage problem in my stores in the city? We had one to two fewer full time employees in those stores so that we didn't have to do health benefits and vacation benefits. In the end, we still profited and the maths pretty much balanced out, but it killed about 5-7 full time jobs.

I know things are different with the NHS there, but something would have to give in order for companies to make their money.

The thing is people say the nhs isn't free because you pay it in tax, surely it's the same with badly paid workers? If someone is working full time and still getting food stamps then essentially mcdonalds and walmart's shareholders are goverment funded.

 

[Allezfan]

On a different subject, apparently, these Uni fees that Clegg got such grief about U Turning on, and have been used by some to bash the Coalition/Tories, have actually worked out well. Insofar that a higher number of "poorer" students are at good universities, and the quality of the degrees coming out are much more valued by employers.

No pie charts or stuff I am afraid, just a discussion I heard today.

The premis being that lowering or removing the fees actually helps the middle/upper class kids, and harms the universities in terms of funding/quality.

Interesting I thought.

Speaking as someone who works at a uni, I have a slightly different view on it.

 

[Brennan]

I don't buy into all of this ''SMEs won't survive if they have to pay a few quid an hour more''.

Boo-hoo, if you can't afford to pay your employees a living wage then tough luck, you don't get their service.

Everyone is talking as if it's the business who is doing the employee a huge favour. Surely by giving up 35 hours a week to give their skills (whatever they may be) to help that company make money, that person deserves to paid a wage which they can live off?

And on another point, @Brennan what do you do for living now, if I may ask?

No they're not, they're being pragmatic. Nobody is against people being paid more on principal. The discussion was about whether £10 an hour is a realistic figure.

As for me, i'm not really into talking about work with people on the internet that i don't know. I will say however that on my salary and the number of hours i work i wouldn't be on £10 an hour if it was divided out to an hourly rate.

 

[ilikecheese]

The thing is people say the nhs isn't free because you pay it in tax, surely it's the same with badly paid workers? If someone is working full time and still getting food stamps then essentially mcdonalds and walmart's shareholders are goverment funded.

My point was that we had to bin 5-7 full time workers to offset the higher wage we had to pay our entry level/part time staff.

People working for a publically traded company at the end of the day are working for their shareholders.

 

[Allezfan]

No they're not, they're being pragmatic. Nobody is against people being paid more on principal. The discussion was about whether £10 an hour is a realistic figure.

As for me, i'm not really into talking about work with people on the internet that i don't know. I will say however that on my salary and the number of hours i work i wouldn't be on £10 an hour if it was divided out to an hourly rate.

Tbf, i agree.

I'm 27, have been working as a skilled worker for 8 years and I'm not on 10 pound an hour.

 

[Allezfan]

People working for a publically traded company at the end of the day are working for their shareholders.

And if they choose to pay their staff rates that means they still get government help in terms of food stamps then every tax payer in the state is also working for those shareholders.

Isn't that communism?

 

[ilikecheese]

And if they choose to pay their staff rates that means they still get government help in terms of food stamps then every tax payer in the state is also working for those shareholders.

Isn't that communism?

More like those 5-7 people had to go on unemployment because they no longer had a job. But I see what you are getting at.

It's the cost of doing business in California unfortunately, which is by far the most employee friendly state in the country.

 

[roydo]

Speaking as someone who works at a uni, I have a slightly different view on it.

I dont really have a view on it to be honest, even though my eldest is at Uni. Interested in your view though.

Like I said, it was just a non political discussion I heard today about it. Kind of made a perverse sense. Like the idea that high tax rates get you more tax, when the opposite is truer.

 

[Del]

£11 an hour is fair I think