Fast food workers strike

[SteadyMercury]

I said it once before but it didn't sink in to some of you knuckle draggers. When they ask for 15 dollars per hour it doesn't mean that they expect to get it.

It's called negotiating. I can't believe some of you went to school.

So are you thinking the manager of one of the protesters will see them out front yelling and holding a sign saying $15/hour and proceed to make them a counter offer of $12?

 

[Snookie]

I said it once before but it didn't sink in to some of you knuckle draggers. When they ask for 15 dollars per hour it doesn't mean that they expect to get it.

It's called negotiating. I can't believe some of you went to school.

You probably pay sticker price for a new car, lol.

Apparently negotiation is something you don't understand. The following would be an example of negotiation:

McDonalds Employer: "This job pays $8/hr. When would you like to start?"
Prospective McDonald's Employee: "Oh, I would rather you pay me $15.00/hr because that's what I need to make ends meet"
McDonald's Employer: "First, we don't compensate employees based on their needs as that would be unfair. Two I can find plenty of other people that will do the job for $8/hr, so I think we'll go that route. Thank you for applying and good luck in your job hunting."

End negotiation.

See in a negotiation you need leverage to get what you want. There in lies the problem of the unskilled McDonald's employee. They have no leverage in the negotiation because of the many people the employer still has to choose from that will do the job at the wage they are offering. Your car shopping comparison is bogus as well. Apparently you are the one that didn't go to school as you clearly don't understand the role of supply and demand in said negotiation. I see no other reason why you would consider negotiating the value of a car the same as negotiating a wage as a McDonald's cashier.

You are right in lock step with the republican method of negotiating, "my way or the highway".

 

[Pop23]

I said it once before but it didn't sink in to some of you knuckle draggers. When they ask for 15 dollars per hour it doesn't mean that they expect to get it.

It's called negotiating. I can't believe some of you went to school.

You probably pay sticker price for a new car, lol.

You don't know the difference between negotiation and resignation.

No surprise here.

 

[Bern80]

I said it once before but it didn't sink in to some of you knuckle draggers. When they ask for 15 dollars per hour it doesn't mean that they expect to get it.

It's called negotiating. I can't believe some of you went to school.

You probably pay sticker price for a new car, lol.

Apparently negotiation is something you don't understand. The following would be an example of negotiation:

McDonalds Employer: "This job pays $8/hr. When would you like to start?"
Prospective McDonald's Employee: "Oh, I would rather you pay me $15.00/hr because that's what I need to make ends meet"
McDonald's Employer: "First, we don't compensate employees based on their needs as that would be unfair. Two I can find plenty of other people that will do the job for $8/hr, so I think we'll go that route. Thank you for applying and good luck in your job hunting."

End negotiation.

See in a negotiation you need leverage to get what you want. There in lies the problem of the unskilled McDonald's employee. They have no leverage in the negotiation because of the many people the employer still has to choose from that will do the job at the wage they are offering. Your car shopping comparison is bogus as well. Apparently you are the one that didn't go to school as you clearly don't understand the role of supply and demand in said negotiation. I see no other reason why you would consider negotiating the value of a car the same as negotiating a wage as a McDonald's cashier.

You are right in lock step with the republican method of negotiating, "my way or the highway".

No. I simply recognize what a negotiation is where you apparently do not. Earlier you said something about 'I bet you pay sticker price for a car too.' As if that and negotiating wages at McDonalds is comparble. Can you have a negotiation in both instances? Sure. But who is going to come out the best in the negotiation depends on who has the most leverage. Who has more reason to move from their valuation of the commodity? Look at it from the side of the individual sellers of the commodity in both cases; the car dealership and prospective employee. What would make the sellers in either case move from from their stated price. In economic terms one mechanism is substitutes. That is the difference between the two scenarios and why you comparing them is rather stupid. There aren't many substitutable buyers for a particular car at any given time which makes the car dealership more willing drop their price in a negotiation. The person trying to sell their labor to McDonalds for $15/hr has a problem getting that because their are a lot of substitute people out there willing to sell their labor to McDonalds for what they are offering. As such McDonalds has no reason to move from their asking price of $8.25/hr

 

[Snookie]

I said it once before but it didn't sink in to some of you knuckle draggers. When they ask for 15 dollars per hour it doesn't mean that they expect to get it.

It's called negotiating. I can't believe some of you went to school.

You probably pay sticker price for a new car, lol.

You don't know the difference between negotiation and resignation.

No surprise here.

Another red herring trying to divert the thread.^

 

[Snookie]

Apparently negotiation is something you don't understand. The following would be an example of negotiation:

McDonalds Employer: "This job pays $8/hr. When would you like to start?"
Prospective McDonald's Employee: "Oh, I would rather you pay me $15.00/hr because that's what I need to make ends meet"
McDonald's Employer: "First, we don't compensate employees based on their needs as that would be unfair. Two I can find plenty of other people that will do the job for $8/hr, so I think we'll go that route. Thank you for applying and good luck in your job hunting."

End negotiation.

See in a negotiation you need leverage to get what you want. There in lies the problem of the unskilled McDonald's employee. They have no leverage in the negotiation because of the many people the employer still has to choose from that will do the job at the wage they are offering. Your car shopping comparison is bogus as well. Apparently you are the one that didn't go to school as you clearly don't understand the role of supply and demand in said negotiation. I see no other reason why you would consider negotiating the value of a car the same as negotiating a wage as a McDonald's cashier.

You are right in lock step with the republican method of negotiating, "my way or the highway".

No. I simply recognize what a negotiation is where you apparently do not. Earlier you said something about 'I bet you pay sticker price for a car too.' As if that and negotiating wages at McDonalds is comparble. Can you have a negotiation in both instances? Sure. But who is going to come out the best in the negotiation depends on who has the most leverage. Who has more reason to move from their valuation of the commodity? Look at it from the side of the individual sellers of the commodity in both cases; the car dealership and prospective employee. What would make the sellers in either case move from from their stated price. In economic terms one mechanism is substitutes. That is the difference between the two scenarios and why you comparing them is rather stupid. There aren't many substitutable buyers for a particular car at any given time which makes the car dealership more willing drop their price in a negotiation. The person trying to sell their labor to McDonalds for $15/hr has a problem getting that because their are a lot of substitute people out there willing to sell their labor to McDonalds for what they are offering. As such McDonalds has no reason to move from their asking price of $8.25/hr

Leverage, very good word for this debate. I commend you for it. As it stands now, mcdonalds has the most leverage. The economy is bad, and low paid workers can ill afford to strike, right now.

However, that is subject to change some time in the future as the fast food workers become better organized and educated.

BTW, as we speak the workers at walmart are starting to raise a little hell, too.

 

[Bern80]

You are right in lock step with the republican method of negotiating, "my way or the highway".

No. I simply recognize what a negotiation is where you apparently do not. Earlier you said something about 'I bet you pay sticker price for a car too.' As if that and negotiating wages at McDonalds is comparble. Can you have a negotiation in both instances? Sure. But who is going to come out the best in the negotiation depends on who has the most leverage. Who has more reason to move from their valuation of the commodity? Look at it from the side of the individual sellers of the commodity in both cases; the car dealership and prospective employee. What would make the sellers in either case move from from their stated price. In economic terms one mechanism is substitutes. That is the difference between the two scenarios and why you comparing them is rather stupid. There aren't many substitutable buyers for a particular car at any given time which makes the car dealership more willing drop their price in a negotiation. The person trying to sell their labor to McDonalds for $15/hr has a problem getting that because their are a lot of substitute people out there willing to sell their labor to McDonalds for what they are offering. As such McDonalds has no reason to move from their asking price of $8.25/hr

Leverage, very good word for this debate. I commend you for it. As it stands now, mcdonalds has the most leverage. The economy is bad, and low paid workers can ill afford to strike, right now.

However, that is subject to change some time in the future as the fast food workers become better organized and educated.

BTW, as we speak the workers at walmart are starting to raise a little hell, too.

If they can get their pay raised, good for them. They just have an aweful lot going against them. Again the people that are willing to work for what they're offering and another, public sentiment eventually. You know neither of those corporations will let anything cut into their profit margins. So the higher labor costs will be passed on to consumers.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You are right in lock step with the republican method of negotiating, "my way or the highway".

Where you would more prefer:

Manager: Welcome to McDonalds, we offer $8.50 an hour to start.

Applicant: I want $15 an hour, and if you don't gimme, the Teamsters will stop any trucks for delivering food to you. Maria Consuella Rosita Rodriguez Peron will smear your name all over her nightly newscast, Tyrone will rape your wife, and Rufus will break both your legs.

Manager: Wow, you Mafia guys are evil.

Applicant: Mafia? I'm from SEIU.

 

[boedicca]

What the strikers don't realize is that their threats benefit the robotics industry most of all.

 

[Mr Natural]

What the strikers don't realize is that their threats benefit the robotics industry most of all.

Which is more than likely coming anyway.

But in the meantime, you can't fault the workers for wanting more.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Which is more than likely coming anyway.

But in the meantime, you can't fault the workers for wanting more.

Workers my ass.

This is the sleazy, greedy, corrupt unions, as we all know it.

 

[Bern80]

What the strikers don't realize is that their threats benefit the robotics industry most of all.

Which is more than likely coming anyway.

But in the meantime, you can't fault the workers for wanting more.

Wanting more? No. Thinking they're entitled to it? Yes.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Wanting more? No. Thinking they're entitled to it? Yes.

This was nothing more than a few SEIU plants, in conjunction with Communist news outlet MSNBC, trying to spark a movement.

They failed, miserably.

 

[Bern80]

Which is more than likely coming anyway.

But in the meantime, you can't fault the workers for wanting more.

Workers my ass.

This is the sleazy, greedy, corrupt unions, as we all know it.

It was indeed the SEIU that attempted to organize this. I say attempted becuase I have found almost no one who actually saw anyone striking.

 

[Samson]

Leverage, very good word for this debate. I commend you for it. As it stands now, mcdonalds has the most leverage. The economy is bad, and low paid workers can ill afford to strike, right now.

However, that is subject to change some time in the future as the fast food workers become better organized and educated.

BTW, as we speak the workers at walmart are starting to raise a little hell, too.

Snookie, I did not realise you were a Macroeconomic expert:

Name three reasons to support your statement that, "The Economy is Bad."

 

[Samson]

Yeah I've been hearing that one since Reagan.

Guess you haven't heard it enough yet. Doesn't seem to be sinking in.

Because I have a built in bull shit detector in my brain.

Explains the Inner Conflict reflected in your posts.

 

[Pop23]

You are right in lock step with the republican method of negotiating, "my way or the highway".

No. I simply recognize what a negotiation is where you apparently do not. Earlier you said something about 'I bet you pay sticker price for a car too.' As if that and negotiating wages at McDonalds is comparble. Can you have a negotiation in both instances? Sure. But who is going to come out the best in the negotiation depends on who has the most leverage. Who has more reason to move from their valuation of the commodity? Look at it from the side of the individual sellers of the commodity in both cases; the car dealership and prospective employee. What would make the sellers in either case move from from their stated price. In economic terms one mechanism is substitutes. That is the difference between the two scenarios and why you comparing them is rather stupid. There aren't many substitutable buyers for a particular car at any given time which makes the car dealership more willing drop their price in a negotiation. The person trying to sell their labor to McDonalds for $15/hr has a problem getting that because their are a lot of substitute people out there willing to sell their labor to McDonalds for what they are offering. As such McDonalds has no reason to move from their asking price of $8.25/hr

Leverage, very good word for this debate. I commend you for it. As it stands now, mcdonalds has the most leverage. The economy is bad, and low paid workers can ill afford to strike, right now.

However, that is subject to change some time in the future as the fast food workers become better organized and educated.

BTW, as we speak the workers at walmart are starting to raise a little hell, too.

And for each that walks out, there will be twenty wanting their jobs.

You don't know the difference between negotiation and resignation.

 

[Snookie]

Leverage, very good word for this debate. I commend you for it. As it stands now, mcdonalds has the most leverage. The economy is bad, and low paid workers can ill afford to strike, right now.

However, that is subject to change some time in the future as the fast food workers become better organized and educated.

BTW, as we speak the workers at walmart are starting to raise a little hell, too.

Snookie, I did not realise you were a Macroeconomic expert:

Name three reasons to support your statement that, "The Economy is Bad."

Meh. United States Economy: Population, GDP, Unemployment, Inflation, Spending

 

[Samson]

Leverage, very good word for this debate. I commend you for it. As it stands now, mcdonalds has the most leverage. The economy is bad, and low paid workers can ill afford to strike, right now.

However, that is subject to change some time in the future as the fast food workers become better organized and educated.

BTW, as we speak the workers at walmart are starting to raise a little hell, too.

Snookie, I did not realise you were a Macroeconomic expert:

Name three reasons to support your statement that, "The Economy is Bad."

Meh. United States Economy: Population, GDP, Unemployment, Inflation, Spending

Interesting quote from your Heritage Foundation in Partnership with the WSJ Source:

Registering a loss of economic freedom for the fifth consecutive year, the U.S. has recorded its lowest Index score since 2000. Dynamic entrepreneurial growth is stifled by ever-more-bloated government and a trend toward cronyism that erodes the rule of law. More than three years after the end of recession in June 2009, the U.S. continues to suffer from policy choices that have led to the slowest recovery in 70 years. Businesses remain in a holding pattern, and unemployment is close to 8 percent. Prospects for greater fiscal freedom are uncertain due to the scheduled expiration of previous cuts in income and payroll taxes and the imposition of new taxes associated with the 2010 health care law.

Sounds like workers effected by your "BAD ECONOMY" need to blame "policy choices" associated with the expiration of "cuts in income taxes and payroll taxes and the imposition of new taxes."



Nice choice to prove your point.

 

[PredFan]

What FF worker's strike. There isn't one.