This is why you shouldn't pay burger flippers 15 an hour

[Rustic]

All additional money any minimum worker makes will get spent, going back into the economy. The health of any economy depends on continued circulation of money, just as the health of water depends on circulation. The more it stagnates the sicker it gets.

I think the increase to $15/hr is too much, it should go to $12/hr then after another 4 years to $15/hr. But this, like every increase in the minimum wage will over time be absorbed into the economy.

You don't understand profit loss do you? shithead

 

[candycorn]

I'll tell you "people" something. I don't work in fast food, but people who do, do a lot more then "flip burgers". That's a term used by those who are clueless

Its the 3rd thread on this one topic...you wonder what kind of "kick" conservative shit bags get out of attacking the poor. I mean, I understand they were never loved as kids but surely even people as dense as this can see they are repeating the cycle.

Tissue?

Tampon?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

 

[EverCurious]

Ok with all that said, then how much should a company CEO and his shareholders make in relation to the employee's that help them make their profits ? Are all these factors you mention the real problem between Ownership/Management and the employee base or is their other things going on (like a total disrespect for the employee's, and then not having a structural pay system in which to go by) ? Are corporations of the world moving towards making the most they can, but using the citizens of the world as pawns in their game by confusing them with things like world affairs in which they can't understand totally ?

The bottom line is what the corporations make in profits, how much the CEO and shareholders make, and then how much is paid to the employees in respect to their service.

Now if you can explain those ratios or numbers to the citizens or workers of this nation or the world for that matter, then everyone will have wide open ears for sure.

You cannot quantify employee pay rates based upon some percentage of the companies net worth, it doesn't work that way no matter how much you wish it did - and it never will pay that way, ever.

Every single job's salary is, and always will be, based on three things; availability, which the employment market sets, bidding worth, which the employee sets for themselves, and the individual employees retention worth, which the company sets (comes into play after they've been hired/have experience and/or a special skill set.)

Availability is based on how many people that have the skill required are looking for a job, the more people in the pool, the lower the pay rate is going to be; because said employee is easily replaced and thus has a lower retention value with the company. MW jobs are MW because the pool of people with no skills available to work the position is huge. This is why we call these "starter jobs" - anyone can do them, there isn't really any special education or skill required to do the job, there isn't any "retention value" in the employee who fills said job - one MW'er is just as able to do the job as another MW'er so there is absolutely no incentive to "retain" these employees. That's why we say these are not career jobs - because they are expendable positions, basically temp jobs, you are supposed to use these jobs to get some experience on your resume and get a reference for your 'career' - whatever career path that is (accounting, teaching, tech, w/e it is.) Having a MW job on your resume is like having a little gold star that sets your resume above other applicants who didn't.

Bidding worth is one of the most under-utilized pay factors out there. Lets say there are 15 people competing for a position, the market has a set "average" of pay rate with a high and low end, each of those 15 people are going to "bid" for the job - this is when they ask at the interview how much you were wanting to make - if you go to high then you might get out bid, if you go to low then they think you lack confidence to do the job; so most folks, or the smart ones who get jobs anyway, go with the median unless they have some "thing" that makes them stand out as being worth more. Now myself personally, I've never accepted a position at the posted rate, ever. I tell them exactly what I want regardless of what number they wrote down, but I'll admit I have an... air about me that exudes I'm worth it, which a lot of folks don't have.

So maybe they gotta take the job at base pay, which is almost always going to be the absolute least amount the company feels they can pay for the services needed. This is where "retention worth" comes into play. If you've been there for 6mos to a year and you're doing more than the other employees, damn straight you deserve to make more than the your fellow bottom rung'ers, BUT if you don't say anything, then you're not getting a raise, period. If you continue to accept MW, then that is 100% your damn fault, no excuses. 9 times out of 10 a company will give a raise to a deserving employee, because it is ultimately cheaper for them /not/ to retrain someone new for a position. One still has to respect the availability factor - the low and high rates for the position, but getting to the higher end, especially in MW bottom rung positions, is very easy as long as that employee has shown that they can get to work on time and do their job competently.

If an employee wants to get to the next rung, then they have to take on some more responsibility - and in high availability jobs you gotta do the "extra" work and not get paid for it at the beginning, say 3mos. Then you go to the boss and say hey, I've been handling x for the past 3mos, am I doing everything right? and put it in his head that your pulling extra for nothing. Then 3mos later, you go back again and say hey, as you know I've been handling x and we agree I'm doing it right, I'd like to discuss my future with this company. At this point your boss, if he's worth his salt, is going to go hmmm this person is willing to put themselves into this company, and if there's upward movement they are very likely to move you up. Now admittedly there's not a hell of a lot of upward movement in say McD's, but fast food is a shitty job even at the top of a franchise, so seriously, do yourself a favor and get the **** out after you get your year of experience lol You can look for jobs while working there, JS.

Then you get what I call stupid job rungs; that's just my term cause they're tedious crap like data entry and BS. When applying for these jobs you can play both availability and bidding right off the bat; tout your typing speed any random skill that might help you do the job etc. It's a bit less competitive a field, less availability (aka peeps with the skills/experience needed) = higher pay rate. Depending on the field in question you might have to dick around in this phase for a while; say 5-15 years before you've got "tenure" of a sorts with the company to move up.

Then you start getting into the top rungs, management. Now management you play it all off the bat, there's not a lot of random unemployed managers roaming around so you can play quite a bit harder ball with the employer on the pay rate. Like I said, I've never accepted a position at it's stated pay rate; I know damn well they've put down the least amount they think they can get away with paying, because I've done it a thousand times myself and I capitalize on the availability factor and ply my retention worth - even if I've not worked for them before. You play in your retention worth by selling your previous experiences, and even odd ball skills you've learned at various jobs (this shows ability and willingness to learn new shit so the wider and off the wall crap you put down the happier employers are to have you. Back in the day I'd put in a few carefully selected random skills like "packing shot" or "correlation" down on my resume - its an ice breaker, because they end up wanting to know what the hell I'm talking about; which opens the door wide for me to "teach" them something - and someone who can teach their boss nifty new shit is a shoe-in as long as they've got a good personality.) Little known fact is that peeps get stagnant in these rungs, just like the bottom rung'ers. Which is why the /next/ rung jumps up in pay so much; CEO's.

So, what is the global average salary for a CEO? In the US it's $800k. How much does a company /have/ to pay in order to get a competent CEO? In the US the low end of the scale is $200k. How many CEO's able to handle a multi-national company are there in the entire world? I figure 1 million total on the planet, maybe 50k with non-failure experience - most folks disagree and believe it's far, far less than that.

So you tell me what should a multi-national, billion dollar net worth company pay to ensure their continued success and/or existence? Is it better to just hope and pray that some random dip shit off the street who says they're a CEO can handle the job, or do you pay what a good CEO could earn from another business? Should you risk losing said CEO, along with w/e trade secrets and business strategies to a rival company by paying them less, or do you protect your capital that you put into said R&D and the company itself by paying the CEO at a rate that retains his service to your company?

A CEO is not just some random employee, they are a integral part of the company itself. Most CEO's are paid on some percentage basis of how well the company does - it's part of why they earn so much. The average global salary for a CEO is like $750k/y.

Side discussion - the rest of their pay, which liberals like to put "effective" monetary values on and portray they actually make that in "spendable dollars" to come up with amounts like $25m a year and shit, are retention benefits - profit sharing, shares, stock options, and the fringes (use of company cars, planes, homes w/e), medical insurance, retirement, etc. Check w/e source you find these $25m a year figures on and you'll most likely find some note somewhere along these lines - "CEO annual compensation is computed using the "options realized" compensation series, which includes salary, bonus, restricted stock grants, options exercised, and long-term incentive payouts" This clause means they are adding a calculated value of the CEO's benefits into the figure - this is opposed to the way they discuss other workers pay; when's the last time you saw a non-1%'ers wages reported with matched retirement (usually 401k's), profit sharing, stock options, and medical insurance calculated monetary values added into it? And don't even play the "they don't have those options" game - even McD's offers this stuff.

When a CEO starts at a company it is almost guaranteed that one of the first things they're going to do is buy into the companies stocks, first off it shows their new employer that they are dedicated to the companies success, secondly it pretty much doubles down their potential rewards - and the more confident the CEO is, the more they are going to invest into their own ability to increase the success of the company - and thus the higher their reflected salary is going to be when adding in said stock option values. It is not the companies fault that a low end employee chooses /not/ to invest in the company, and thus doesn't get the added benefits /and/ pay increase potentials the CEOs do. That's called employee choice. All of those things are optional, and while they often cost money to get into, it's actually not all that much if you're talking about a proven company. Employee's usually get a discounted rate on the company stocks so even if you're planning to only work there a few years, it's a good investment if the company is sound/proven - I own stock in just about every traded company I've consulted/worked for, there's been a few that flopped, but most of the places I worked for are, in effect, /still/ paying me today heh)

 

[IsaacNewton]

Yes minimum wage workers are a threat to companies, but CEO's and their board of cronies voting themselves 10-20 million dollar bonuses because they get to do the voting, well that money is just excess profit that has to line someone's pocket.

It is disgusting how lowlifes try to demonize minimum wage workers as if they are being selfish! It is a huge steaming t-rex size pile of bullshit. And no matter what you do you can't make that pile smell better.

 

[EverCurious]

The CEO's are the ones who made the choices that earned the company the profits, why /shouldn't/ they get a bonus off it? You think a MW'er should be paid more based on simply showing up, yet a person who actually causes the companies success /doesn't/ deserve anything?

You're not even being rational son.

 

[flacaltenn]

Yes minimum wage workers are a threat to companies, but CEO's and their board of cronies voting themselves 10-20 million dollar bonuses because they get to do the voting, well that money is just excess profit that has to line someone's pocket.

It is disgusting how lowlifes try to demonize minimum wage workers as if they are being selfish! It is a huge steaming t-rex size pile of bullshit. And no matter what you do you can't make that pile smell better.

Leftists don't ever seem to know how things actually work. They believe that CEO pay is actually salary. MOSTLY ----- in the majority of cases ---- it's NOT cash. It's EQUITY in the company. Which they SHOULD have because they RUN IT. Caterpillar has TWELVE different businesses and manufacturing plants in at least 8 countries. They have 10s of THOUSANDS of employees. CEO work very hard. They have no life. And the compensations are largely timed transfers of OWNERSHIP --- not cash..

 

[Manonthestreet]

Too bad theres no video...cant believe someone didnt have a cell phone to record this epic display....wonder if they could have been goaded further ....oh oh its in the walls now...gotta knock some holes in em

 

[Againsheila]

Gee I wonder if they opened the doors before they went outside. A bell shoulda gone off right then. sheesh
The reporter was about equally dumb. I guess air is technically a gas

Burger King employees smash windows following prank call

Okay, so who's responsible? The prank caller? Or the idiots that believed him and broke the windows, no questions asked?

 

[flacaltenn]

Gee I wonder if they opened the doors before they went outside. A bell shoulda gone off right then. sheesh
The reporter was about equally dumb. I guess air is technically a gas

Burger King employees smash windows following prank call

Prank call came from the employees at the Wendy's across the street making $18/hour.. The future rocket scientists of Coon Rapids, Iowa..

 

[beagle9]

The problem is these are not career jobs, but starter jobs, once held primarily by high-school youth to learn business practices and make a few bucks.

Now we have American youth employment at an all-time high because the unskilled invaders have glommed onto these jobs as permanent positions, forced out the kids and now want to make a career salary for work that requires absolutely none but rudimentary skills.

Sorry, but it's just monkey work, undeserving of any real money.

. And why has an older work force taken over alot of job positions that were once held by the youth in this nation ? It's because of the ressesion/depression that these things have happened. When corporations began making their shifts to the world markets, and moving into the world next their manufactures/industries, it left hundreds of thousands of workers out in the cold. So for those misplaced workers who were still at a healthy working age, it became slim pickings. So here you have these service industries making millions here (I.e. Mcdonalds, Burger King, Staples, and you name it), in which became the targeted jobs for those who had been misplaced to early from their careers. Once occupied these jobs, and once learned the profits of these corporations, the misplaced began a quest to upgrade the job from a student held position to a job that could possibly sustain a small family or a single older adults needs after being up ended in life from a system that had changed so fast that it left thousands behind... Now the balance will return, but it's taking time to absorb what happened through the late 80's all the way to the current.Then you have the poor who came into direct competition with the misplaced middle class labor force, and that has been a disaster for the youth and/or the poor who are trying to start out and/or to get out of a bad situation.

 

[IsaacNewton]

You can't make the huge pile of shite smell better. It is what it is.

 

[beagle9]

The CEO's are the ones who made the choices that earned the company the profits, why /shouldn't/ they get a bonus off it? You think a MW'er should be paid more based on simply showing up, yet a person who actually causes the companies success /doesn't/ deserve anything?

You're not even being rational son.

. The problem of wealth sharing doesn't end with a MW employee. There has been a long trend towards creating a communist socialist system in a lot of companies where it comes to not paying employee's with a proper structural pay system anymore, and also offering them a progressive benefit package that grows with the employee's as they grow with the companies... How many employee's have lost pay and benefits since the 80's, and then their jobs because of the so called downsizing, cutbacks, and their jobs moving over seas or illegals taking over their jobs in which politicians said were only working the jobs Americans won't do ? Sick situation.

 

[bucs90]

Just remember.....

Democrats pushed for free trade that sent jobs out of America
Democrats pushed for mass immigration that took jobs from a shrinking job market

 

[beagle9]

Just remember.....

Democrats pushed for free trade that sent jobs out of America
Democrats pushed for mass immigration that took jobs from a shrinking job market

. Might have been democrats, but where was the huge push back and cries to get it under control before Obama had to ride in on his white horse to save the day ? That's what his voters figured he was doing, and now we have the same situation happening once again.

 

[Manonthestreet]

 

[beagle9]

. I wonder who was it that was laughing in the video ?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

80% of the jobs in this country are all service industry jobs, just about....and that includes the burger flippers that I hope spit on your shit when you come in, moron.

I've heard about this.. That's why I won't order food served by blacks in the ghetto areas of town.

 

[EverCurious]

The CEO's are the ones who made the choices that earned the company the profits, why /shouldn't/ they get a bonus off it? You think a MW'er should be paid more based on simply showing up, yet a person who actually causes the companies success /doesn't/ deserve anything?

You're not even being rational son.

. The problem of wealth sharing doesn't end with a MW employee. There has been a long trend towards creating a communist socialist system in a lot of companies where it comes to not paying employee's with a proper structural pay system anymore, and also offering them a progressive benefit package that grows with the employee's as they grow with the companies... How many employee's have lost pay and benefits since the 80's, and then their jobs because of the so called downsizing, cutbacks, and their jobs moving over seas or illegals taking over their jobs in which politicians said were only working the jobs Americans won't do ? Sick situation.

Businesses are not built to "wealth share" that's a liberal idea. In the capitalist mind, those are called "charities," not "businesses." Businesses have one purpose, to make money, because if you're not making money then it's not worth the risk and hassle of running the business, period. You cannot change the ideological "point" of an entity to be what you "want" and expect everyone on the planet to just play along with the fantasy.

 

[beagle9]

The CEO's are the ones who made the choices that earned the company the profits, why /shouldn't/ they get a bonus off it? You think a MW'er should be paid more based on simply showing up, yet a person who actually causes the companies success /doesn't/ deserve anything?

You're not even being rational son.

. The problem of wealth sharing doesn't end with a MW employee. There has been a long trend towards creating a communist socialist system in a lot of companies where it comes to not paying employee's with a proper structural pay system anymore, and also offering them a progressive benefit package that grows with the employee's as they grow with the companies... How many employee's have lost pay and benefits since the 80's, and then their jobs because of the so called downsizing, cutbacks, and their jobs moving over seas or illegals taking over their jobs in which politicians said were only working the jobs Americans won't do ? Sick situation.

Businesses are not built to "wealth share" that's a liberal idea. In the capitalist mind, those are called "charities," not "businesses." Businesses have one purpose, to make money, because if you're not making money then it's not worth the risk and hassle of running the business, period. You cannot change the ideological "point" of an entity to be what you "want" and expect everyone on the planet to just play along with the fantasy.

. So sharing the wealth at all, is something CEO's and their staffs wish they didn't have to do at all ? So no matter how hard the workers work to help a company be successful, they are to be looked down upon by the upper levels as if they are slaves glad to be living on the plantation ? No one is saying to pay anyone more than their worth, but just be fair and everyone is happy.