Funny how WWJD never actually answers questions like this instead throws out a "the market adjusts" blanket statement. P&L expert that he is, you'd think he'd have some more insight.
Unions: Let's Exempt Union Employees from Minimum Wage Laws
- Thread starter dandh
- Start date
Ok, P&L manager.
If your labor as a percent of sales increases by 2x, what are some of the options you have available to you to off-set loss of margin?
MN is losing $1500 in margin a week(78k) annual. Assuming that comes directly from his pocket, or the pockets of his investors, what are some of the other fixed and variable levers he should pull?
The "markets adjust", macro-economic brush-off you gave makes no sense in the micro economic world of a individual businesses' P&L statements.
But, you would know that. Being the P&L manager you are.
I'm always in favor of using HYVee. If all of the baggers, checkers, etc start getting $15 an hour, what do the supervisors get paid, and what does it do to the cost of a gallon of milk
The concept that makes sense to me is a carefully circumscribed "apprenticeship" arrangement. I doubt that would apply to your situation, MN, but it could for some.
For others, I would support a phase-in that would allow us to spot problems that need addressing. But all the MW increase proposals I've seen ARE being phased in.
Beyond that, businesses that are not exploiting their labor force may need some temporary assistance. I would favor that, as well. My recollection from our previous conversation is that I don't think you would need help - or not for very long - because your competitors are facing the same adjustments that you are, and I don't agree that you will kill your business if you raise prices a little. But if some support is necessary while your customers adapt, I'm good with that.
The idea is to have workers earn a living wage. The idea is NOT to drive honest businesses out of business.
Unfortunately - as my attempts to talk with 22* and some others quickly reveals - the "other side" mostly doesn't want workers to have a living wage. That's not how they would say it, of course, and it isn't true of all, but what we get from them is "that would cause these problem so NO!" - as opposed to "that would cause these problems; how can we solve these problems?"
You seem willing to get to that next level, which is refreshing.
Perhaps I have misunderstood what you meant by P&L. I have successfully managed 9 stores for 3 different corporations and all turned profits based on my decision-making. If you are just talking about being a bean counter instead of being the person who makes the decisions that determine the profitability of businesses then, no, I'm not a bean counter - although I did churn out profit and loss analyses as part of actually running businesses.
You really don't seem to know what you are talking about here because you are posing questions that either don't make sense or only make sense to someone who is in the position I was in and therefore was intimately acquainted with the variables. To dumb that down for you, I don't know what levers MN has to pull. But in a previous comment I did outline some general approaches that might help people in MN's shoes.
Next time lead with that.
There's no shame in being unconsciously incompetent.
Now you're just being petulant. I realize I have to explain these things to 22* but I shouldn't have to tell you that I don't have access to your costs and revenues and such. Nor will I invest time finding solutions for you if you send me those data - unless, of course, you are paying me. Are you offering to pay me to "fix" your profitability problems? I've done that for several companies, and might get interested enough to come out of retirement for the right compensation.
The question posed can be answers without intimate knowledge of MN's expenditures, sales, price strategy, or any figures whatsoever.
I don't participate in engineering, legal, or medical discussions because it s outside my pool of knowledge. You apparently are not stifled by you own lack of knowledge.
You seem to have a quota of words you must type in a day and damn it, whose going to stop you.
I meant for you. What would you, in your store, start wages at for completely entry-level positions?
Good grief.
Answer your own question without knowing MN's business and show us all how it's done. Seriously. You bluster a lot. Put up or shut up.
As for the topic of this thread - has anyone actually addressed it? The more I think about the union position, the more I like it.
It seems to me the question boils down to this:
Do you favor a MW wage by government fiat or do you favor a wage negotiated between equals?
To elaborate for anti-union types, the argument would be that individual low-level workers will generally lack the skills or the courage to negotiate effectively with the owner who holds all the cards. Hence the desirability of a decent wage established by law. But when you have a union and engage in collective bargaining, the worker has enough clout to negotiate effectively, so a fiat wage isn't needed.
It seems to me the question boils down to this:
Do you favor a MW wage by government fiat or do you favor a wage negotiated between equals?
To elaborate for anti-union types, the argument would be that individual low-level workers will generally lack the skills or the courage to negotiate effectively with the owner who holds all the cards. Hence the desirability of a decent wage established by law. But when you have a union and engage in collective bargaining, the worker has enough clout to negotiate effectively, so a fiat wage isn't needed.
Where would freedom be if two people became criminals for contractually agreeing to work 1 cent below the MW?
Only one of them would be a "criminal". Even then they would just pay damages. Weird analogy.
Please elaborate. Where would you like to go with this?
We recently put a person in jail for 35 years for telling the truth to America about America's criminal war and other abuses of authority. So, without a better statement of your question to chew on, what do you think about freedom in that case? Or justice?
Not weird at all. Why is/are a person(s) a criminal for paying money to someone who voluntarily agreed to perform said service? You can't just call it weird because you cannot answer it w/o blowing up your punitive philosophy. It's NO flipping business to an elected official what someone is getting paid. They have no authority...moral or otherwise.
This is government's answer to combat the inflation that they help to create with a compliant FedRes. People have trouble getting by with the Fed's zero % interest rate policy. Congress needs more revenue. So, they push the MW up and Joe the Plumber is happy...until he finds out his take home is not any better because he was just pushed into a higher tax bracket. It's an old shell game and you people never learn from history.
We draw lines, arbitrary lines all. the. f******. time.
Let's do this, let's follow your analogy, because yes, I can answer your idiotic, short-sighted "gotcha":
"Why is/are a person(s) a criminal for paying money to someone who voluntarily agreed to perform said service? "
Why is prostitution criminal? Why is methamphetamine sales illegal? Why is child porn illegal? Why is having sex with a (insert stage age of consent here) criminal? Why is it illegal to get paid for murdering and eating someone? This list is endless. Unless you are a pure libertarian, you draw the line on "agreed upon services" somewhere.
None of that is "any flipping business to an elected official"! Right? Oh wait, an ELECTED OFFICIAL is to represent its constituents, who apparently agree with a minimum wage. Therefore elected officials get together, listening to their constituents, pass a law. Sometimes that law makes things illegal.
And then you claim they don't have authority? Did you take a simple civics course? How does the legislature, state or otherwise, not have "authority" to pass a law mandating a minimum wage?
.
It wiuld deoend on experience. No previous job, 6, for a training wage, move from there BUT, the market would dictate that. For all I know I wouldn't get an employee to last a week for 6 and I'd have to come up.
It wiuld deoend on experience. No previous job, 6, for a training wage, move from there BUT, the market would dictate that. For all I know I wouldn't get an employee to last a week for 6 and I'd have to come up.
When would you give them a raise? Say, same job, exact same duties. Same pay throughout? Depends on how attractive they are?
It would depend on performance. I'm sure you're in favor of socialism but I prefer people who work hard, show up on time, do their job and show a desire to learn and do more, be rewarded.
I thought we were having a discussion, but I see we've turned to stereotyping the other side in order to burn a straw man.
So, as a business owner, owning your business for a long period of time, you appear to not really know what you should, or would, pay your employees.
I'm giving you as easy of hypotheticals as there are. If minimum wage were repealed, where would you hire entry-level, no experience at? You seem to say, $6. Ok, so when would you be likely to give them a raise?
Let's say they work hard, show up on time, do their job exactly was expected....at what point do you give them a raise, and how much?
Similar threads
