Strike for $15.00 an hour, Sub shop fires everybody

[Mac1958]

A job is worth what the market will bear.

It really puzzles me that this is such a bizarre and foreign concept to so many people.

I would strongly support required fundamental economics courses in every year of high school. When a populace doesn't understand the painfully simple concept of "supply and demand", something has gone off the rails somewhere.

.

 

[Againsheila]

Actions have consequences. A sub shop in Chicago was the target of a recent protest of workers wanting $15.00 an hour. The shop fired everyone, three days before Christmas, en masse, everyone got the can.

That's the way to deal with these kinds of protests.

Chicago sandwich shop fires all its staff in an EMAIL just days before Christmas | Mail Online

A Chicago sandwich shop has fired all its employees over email just days before Christmas.
Staff at Snarf's Sub Shop in River North received the bad news on Sunday night in a group email notifying them that the drastic action was effective immediately.
The company blamed 'increased competition and losses' for the firings.
Director of operations Doug Besant said in the email the restaurant will likely close for a month as they remodel and reconcept the business into a burger joint.

The River North Snarf's shop was closed for four days, from December 5 until December 8, as employees went on striking for higher wages and better benefits.
They joined workers of fast-food chains like McDonald's, Subway, Potbelly and others in a broader strike orchestrated by the Worker's Organizing Committee of Chicago.

I hope nobody buys their sandwiches.

 

[Againsheila]

A job is worth what the market will bear.

It really puzzles me that this is such a bizarre and foreign concept to so many people.

I would strongly support required fundamental economics courses in every year of high school. When a populace doesn't understand the painfully simple concept of "supply and demand", something has gone off the rails somewhere.

.

We don't live in a capitalistic society. If we did, all those banks would have failed and our tax dollars wouldn't have bailed them out. Our tax dollars would not provide benefits to corporations either. And our immigration wouldn't have increased to make up for our lower birth rate which would have raised the low skilled wages to much more than they are today.

A good solution to this is for people to not go to their business. Support living wage jobs for low wage workers.

 

[Againsheila]

If they weren't getting paid enough why not just quit and find a better job?

What if our factory workers had said that and never formed unions? We'd still have 12 hour days and 6 days work weeks AND child labor.

 

[Mac1958]

A job is worth what the market will bear.

It really puzzles me that this is such a bizarre and foreign concept to so many people.

I would strongly support required fundamental economics courses in every year of high school. When a populace doesn't understand the painfully simple concept of "supply and demand", something has gone off the rails somewhere.

.

We don't live in a capitalistic society. If we did, all those banks would have failed and our tax dollars wouldn't have bailed them out. Our tax dollars would not provide benefits to corporations either. And our immigration wouldn't have increased to make up for our lower birth rate which would have raised the low skilled wages to much more than they are today.

A good solution to this is for people to not go to their business. Support living wage jobs for low wage workers.

Okay, I'm going to ask this question again - I've tried many times on many threads, and I never get an answer. One more shot, here's the (very typical) scenario:

We have a McDonald's in a city, county and state in which the cost of living is average for the country. At the low end of the pay scale, we have the following three people:

Mike, who is single and 18 and living with Mom & Dad. All his needs are paid for and he just wants some extra cash for the next four years of college.

John, who is 24 and never really gotten his act together. He is single but has run up credit card bills and online personal loans, he definitely likes to buy some weed now and then and needs to make quite a bit more than Mike.

Jeff, who is 32 with a wife and two kids to support. He just wants to take care of his family.

Each of them just got hired on at the low end of the totem pole. Their job is to put the salt on the french fries.

There's the scenario. What would you say the "living wage" should be? How much per hour should the government require that local, self-employed franchisee to pay?

$10? $12? $15? $20?

.

 

[Againsheila]

It really puzzles me that this is such a bizarre and foreign concept to so many people.

I would strongly support required fundamental economics courses in every year of high school. When a populace doesn't understand the painfully simple concept of "supply and demand", something has gone off the rails somewhere.

.

We don't live in a capitalistic society. If we did, all those banks would have failed and our tax dollars wouldn't have bailed them out. Our tax dollars would not provide benefits to corporations either. And our immigration wouldn't have increased to make up for our lower birth rate which would have raised the low skilled wages to much more than they are today.

A good solution to this is for people to not go to their business. Support living wage jobs for low wage workers.

Okay, I'm going to ask this question again - I've tried many times on many threads, and I never get an answer. One more shot, here's the (very typical) scenario:

We have a McDonald's in a city, county and state in which the cost of living is average for the country. At the low end of the pay scale, we have the following three people:

Mike, who is single and 18 and living with Mom & Dad. All his needs are paid for and he just wants some extra cash for the next four years of college.

John, who is 24 and never really gotten his act together. He is single but has run up credit card bills and online personal loans, he definitely likes to buy some weed now and then and needs to make quite a bit more than Mike.

Jeff, who is 32 with a wife and two kids to support. He just wants to take care of his family.

Each of them just got hired on at the low end of the totem pole. Their job is to put the salt on the french fries.

There's the scenario. What would you say the "living wage" should be? How much per hour?

$10? $12? $15? $20?

.

It's been answered before, you just don't listen. A living wage is enough for one person to pay rent on a crappy apartment, all their utilities, their clothes, transportation and medical. I don't think that's too much to ask for the lowest paid worker in the richest country in the world.

Back in 1968 when my brother worked a minimum wage job, he could pay for his own apartment, buy a brand new car and take college classes part time. That can't be done today. Why do you think the top 1% earn more than 200% increase in their income while the bottom workers deserved to lose spending power?

 

[Mac1958]

We don't live in a capitalistic society. If we did, all those banks would have failed and our tax dollars wouldn't have bailed them out. Our tax dollars would not provide benefits to corporations either. And our immigration wouldn't have increased to make up for our lower birth rate which would have raised the low skilled wages to much more than they are today.

A good solution to this is for people to not go to their business. Support living wage jobs for low wage workers.

Okay, I'm going to ask this question again - I've tried many times on many threads, and I never get an answer. One more shot, here's the (very typical) scenario:

We have a McDonald's in a city, county and state in which the cost of living is average for the country. At the low end of the pay scale, we have the following three people:

Mike, who is single and 18 and living with Mom & Dad. All his needs are paid for and he just wants some extra cash for the next four years of college.

John, who is 24 and never really gotten his act together. He is single but has run up credit card bills and online personal loans, he definitely likes to buy some weed now and then and needs to make quite a bit more than Mike.

Jeff, who is 32 with a wife and two kids to support. He just wants to take care of his family.

Each of them just got hired on at the low end of the totem pole. Their job is to put the salt on the french fries.

There's the scenario. What would you say the "living wage" should be? How much per hour?

$10? $12? $15? $20?

.

It's been answered before, you just don't listen. A living wage is enough for one person to pay rent on a crappy apartment, all their utilities, their clothes, transportation and medical. I don't think that's too much to ask for the lowest paid worker in the richest country in the world.

Back in 1968 when my brother worked a minimum wage job, he could pay for his own apartment, buy a brand new car and take college classes part time. That can't be done today. Why do you think the top 1% earn more than 200% increase in their income while the bottom workers deserved to lose spending power?

But Mike lives with Mom and Dad. He doesn't have all those expenses.


.

 

[JoeB131]

[


Point is those that make the minimum wage have BELOW the minimum smarts level on average. We know kids now that sell shoes at the mall and get commission averaging around $12 a hour.

Getting rid of all the Who cares, stuff, this is bullshit.

kids getting minimum wage get that because that's what managers think they can get away with.

The purpose of the minimum wage was to prevent managers from using a recession to fire all staff and hire a bunch of hungry waifs willing to work for less. Because the Minimum Wage has not kept up with inflation, it's original purpose has been defeated.

Maybe what we need is to link CEO Pay. No CEO can make more than 100 Times the minimum wage.

Betcha they push for a higher minimum wage after that.

 

[Spiderman]

We don't live in a capitalistic society. If we did, all those banks would have failed and our tax dollars wouldn't have bailed them out. Our tax dollars would not provide benefits to corporations either. And our immigration wouldn't have increased to make up for our lower birth rate which would have raised the low skilled wages to much more than they are today.

A good solution to this is for people to not go to their business. Support living wage jobs for low wage workers.

Okay, I'm going to ask this question again - I've tried many times on many threads, and I never get an answer. One more shot, here's the (very typical) scenario:

We have a McDonald's in a city, county and state in which the cost of living is average for the country. At the low end of the pay scale, we have the following three people:

Mike, who is single and 18 and living with Mom & Dad. All his needs are paid for and he just wants some extra cash for the next four years of college.

John, who is 24 and never really gotten his act together. He is single but has run up credit card bills and online personal loans, he definitely likes to buy some weed now and then and needs to make quite a bit more than Mike.

Jeff, who is 32 with a wife and two kids to support. He just wants to take care of his family.

Each of them just got hired on at the low end of the totem pole. Their job is to put the salt on the french fries.

There's the scenario. What would you say the "living wage" should be? How much per hour?

$10? $12? $15? $20?

.

It's been answered before, you just don't listen. A living wage is enough for one person to pay rent on a crappy apartment, all their utilities, their clothes, transportation and medical. I don't think that's too much to ask for the lowest paid worker in the richest country in the world.

Back in 1968 when my brother worked a minimum wage job, he could pay for his own apartment, buy a brand new car and take college classes part time. That can't be done today. Why do you think the top 1% earn more than 200% increase in their income while the bottom workers deserved to lose spending power?

Why should one person rent an entire apartment? Why not a room in a boarding house or why not share an apartment with 3 or 4 people?

The problem as I see it it is that people want to only work 40 hours a week and they think that should make them enough to buy a house a car and put their kids through college.

I guarantee you that anyone who has had any success at all worked a hell of a lot more than 40 hours a week.

 

[JoeB131]

Hey you know what.

When someone is preparing something that I am going to put inside my body, I really, really want them to be well compensated and happy with their jobs.

Not sure why you don't. I guess you all like living dangerously.

 

[Mac1958]

Okay, I'm going to ask this question again - I've tried many times on many threads, and I never get an answer. One more shot, here's the (very typical) scenario:

We have a McDonald's in a city, county and state in which the cost of living is average for the country. At the low end of the pay scale, we have the following three people:

Mike, who is single and 18 and living with Mom & Dad. All his needs are paid for and he just wants some extra cash for the next four years of college.

John, who is 24 and never really gotten his act together. He is single but has run up credit card bills and online personal loans, he definitely likes to buy some weed now and then and needs to make quite a bit more than Mike.

Jeff, who is 32 with a wife and two kids to support. He just wants to take care of his family.

Each of them just got hired on at the low end of the totem pole. Their job is to put the salt on the french fries.

There's the scenario. What would you say the "living wage" should be? How much per hour?

$10? $12? $15? $20?

.

It's been answered before, you just don't listen. A living wage is enough for one person to pay rent on a crappy apartment, all their utilities, their clothes, transportation and medical. I don't think that's too much to ask for the lowest paid worker in the richest country in the world.

Back in 1968 when my brother worked a minimum wage job, he could pay for his own apartment, buy a brand new car and take college classes part time. That can't be done today. Why do you think the top 1% earn more than 200% increase in their income while the bottom workers deserved to lose spending power?

But Mike lives with Mom and Dad. He doesn't have all those expenses.


.

Anyone?


.

 

[JoeB131]

Mike is probably a college student trying to make ends meet.

When I was in college, I worked two minimum wage jobs and was in the National Guard (through which I got a scholarship to a State University.)

But that was when the Minimum wage was worth something.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Actions have consequences. A sub shop in Chicago was the target of a recent protest of workers wanting $15.00 an hour. The shop fired everyone, three days before Christmas, en masse, everyone got the can.

That's the way to deal with these kinds of protests.

Chicago sandwich shop fires all its staff in an EMAIL just days before Christmas | Mail Online

A Chicago sandwich shop has fired all its employees over email just days before Christmas.
Staff at Snarf's Sub Shop in River North received the bad news on Sunday night in a group email notifying them that the drastic action was effective immediately.
The company blamed 'increased competition and losses' for the firings.
Director of operations Doug Besant said in the email the restaurant will likely close for a month as they remodel and reconcept the business into a burger joint.

The River North Snarf's shop was closed for four days, from December 5 until December 8, as employees went on striking for higher wages and better benefits.
They joined workers of fast-food chains like McDonald's, Subway, Potbelly and others in a broader strike orchestrated by the Worker's Organizing Committee of Chicago.

Obviously, if employees don't report for work, their job doesn't mean much to them. Companies that are subject to collective bargaining are called 'union shops' and no business is required to be a union shop. It is a choice the owner gets to make.

The people who are on the bottom rung of the pay scale are there for a reason. This certainly illustrates that salient point.

Actually, the employees decide to become union. The employer has little choice in the matter other than closing the doors, reestablish the business later.

 

[Spiderman]

Hey you know what.

When someone is preparing something that I am going to put inside my body, I really, really want them to be well compensated and happy with their jobs.

Not sure why you don't. I guess you all like living dangerously.

Then why don't you just go to the most expensive places to eat instead of a sub shop?

In all honesty it's cheaper to make your own sandwiches than it is to order out.

That's another of my pet peeves. How many people whining that they don't make enough buy coffee every day at 2-5 dollars a cup when they could fill a thermos up at home for a few cents?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The problem today is the 1980's.
IMO - the 1980's generation (those in their teens - 30 years old in this decade) were the most spoiled generation in American history to date. The "I breathe therefore I deserve" mentality was at epidemic proportions. This generation wanted instant gratification. Newlywed couples expected to buy a 3-4 bdrm home with half an acre in a great neighborhood, complete with two new cars in the paved driveway.
They expected to earn what their parents did (or preferably more) in their first year of employment.
When none of this was possible...this didn't stop them. They racked up $10k's in credit card debt, 2nd and even 3rd mortgages and bought cars without a down payment where the payment structure was increased to 5 years to get the payments down.
Fast forward to today.
Young adults are the children of my generation. The instant gratification has not went away. Only now - you can't borrow yourself into bankruptcy anymore. You can't earn enough to feed your desire for everything in a terrible economy with little opportunities.
So what do you do?
You complain and elect a President who you thought was going to give you free healthcare, increase your wages and pay for your college tuition.
Oops.

 

[JoeB131]

Hey you know what.

When someone is preparing something that I am going to put inside my body, I really, really want them to be well compensated and happy with their jobs.

Not sure why you don't. I guess you all like living dangerously.

Then why don't you just go to the most expensive places to eat instead of a sub shop?

In all honesty it's cheaper to make your own sandwiches than it is to order out.

That's another of my pet peeves. How many people whining that they don't make enough buy coffee every day at 2-5 dollars a cup when they could fill a thermos up at home for a few cents?

Usually, I do prepare most of my own food, and the only time I go to a Starbucks is when I am meeting a c lient. (It's really not the coffee I'm paying for, it's the WiFi.)

Of course, the fallacy here is that paying a decent wage would really increase prices all that much. A nickel a sandwich? Can't see that being that big of a deal.

 

[zeke]

This was great news eh? How many got fired? 15?

Now we got 15 more people for food stamps and welfare.

And you asshole rethugs applaud this.

Weird.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

This was great news eh? How many got fired? 15?

Now we got 15 more people for food stamps and welfare.

And you asshole rethugs applaud this.

Weird.

This is another problem...see this post?
This is a perfect example of the "low information" American.
Obviously did not read the link (let's hope not)
Must have read the headline and already made up his/her mind that the evil business owner fires everyone for no good reason and we all laugh in the background with a big bwhaaaaahahahahaha.
Jesus....THIS is how a person with zero experience, who never held a job outside of academia, has never ran a business or even worked in one BECAME PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

 

[JoeB131]

This was great news eh? How many got fired? 15?

Now we got 15 more people for food stamps and welfare.

And you asshole rethugs applaud this.

Weird.

This is another problem...see this post?
This is a perfect example of the "low information" American.
Obviously did not read the link (let's hope not)
Must have read the headline and already made up his/her mind that the evil business owner fires everyone for no good reason and we all laugh in the background with a big bwhaaaaahahahahaha.
Jesus....THIS is how a person with zero experience, who never held a job outside of academia, has never ran a business or even worked in one BECAME PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

Actually, we did read the link.

A guy who owns a shop in downtown Chicago (where the cost of rent is ridiculously high) isn't paying his employees a decent wage.

Now, if you have ever been to downtown Chicago, it's usually a madhouse down there at lunch.

But this guy isn't paying his employees a decent wage in a place where parking for the day costs $30.00 or more.

That's why they went on strike.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

(1) Actually, we did read the link.

(2) A guy who owns a shop in downtown Chicago (where the cost of rent is ridiculously high) isn't paying his employees a decent wage.

(3) Now, if you have ever been to downtown Chicago, it's usually a madhouse down there at lunch.

(4) But this guy isn't paying his employees a decent wage in a place where parking for the day costs $30.00 or more.

(5) That's why they went on strike.

1..."we"?
2...according to you, you do understand he was losing money...right?
3...Yes it is...but that is no guarantee any restaurant will be successful
4...Three letters...bus.
5...They went on strike because they joined up with other stores in the area that also striked.