The answer to $15.00 Hour fast food restaurant wages

[kamik86]

But someone living on Long Island lives in an area where pay is higher than other areas of the country where cost of living is lower. You can see that in this thread talking about police and medic pay levels. You see it in threads here that come up about teacher pay.

Yes but someone that is barely middle class where I live looks fairly poor against country averages and gets college assistance. Someone that is barely middle class on long island looks like they make alot compared to country averages and does not.

Off topic a bit but...
I have found two main differences in having a high salary in high cost of living area vs low salary in low cost of living: One is taxes and government aid as described here, the other is travel (because besides the flight going to disneyworld costs the same for the same product no matter where you live, and higher cost of living areas tend to have more flight options and more direct flights to sometimes actually have cheaper airfare)

 

[Christine]

But someone living on Long Island lives in an area where pay is higher than other areas of the country where cost of living is lower. You can see that in this thread talking about police and medic pay levels. You see it in threads here that come up about teacher pay.

That's true, but as a person who lives in the DC area can tell you, that while you make more and then you pay more for your housing and every other little thing, you lose out to quite a few tax credits and deductions that are subject to income levels. You also have to look at the relative difference between pay and expenses. Often you make more in Long Island, let's say 30% more than a person in a rural part of the state, but your housing is often 50 percent more. So it's never a dollar for dollar exchange. So while you might be making more, due to those income levels, you're probably paying a higher tax rate, higher housing costs, and you don't get various education credits, child care credits, etc that someone else does. You often net less money. Why work in Long Island then? Or Washington DC? Because it might be the only place to get the job your trained in.

 

[Goofy_Disney_Dad]

There is also a push all across the country to move to a $15 per hour minimum wage as well as a guaranteed income for everyone.

I certainly don't agree with the $15 per hour minimum across the board, but I do think there is some merit to the jurisdictional approach. At least you guys are much closer to that $15 than we are at this point. I think it would be interesting to see what our national average might be after each state established a minimum.

 

[declansdad]

I certainly don't agree with the $15 per hour minimum across the board, but I do think there is some merit to the jurisdictional approach. At least you guys are much closer to that $15 than we are at this point. I think it would be interesting to see what our national average might be after each state established a minimum.

We are closer but many people don't agree with it here either.

 

[Colleen27]

Still haven't seen an answer to this:

If you currently work in a skilled position at $15 per hour and the minimum wage is increased to $15 per hour would you be happy that your wage was the same as the person working in the unskilled position?

No one is answering because the job market doesn't work that way. Employers of just-above-minimum-wage workers would have to increase wages to continue to attract workers with higher-than-minimum training and skills. This isn't just about fast food workers. It is about giving the whole lower end of the wage scale a jolt to jump-start wage growth that has been stagnant for two generations.

 

[declansdad]

No one is answering because the job market doesn't work that way. Employers of just-above-minimum-wage workers would have to increase wages to continue to attract workers with higher-than-minimum training and skills. This isn't just about fast food workers. It is about giving the whole lower end of the wage scale a jolt to jump-start wage growth that has been stagnant for two generations.

You are making my point. Pay scales are created with the value of the job in mind and if all of a sudden the unskilled position is being paid at the same rate as a skilled position, that second group of workers would demand an increase to reflect the new value of that job. That will trigger a push for wage increases all through the pay scales, not just at the lower levels.

 

[Colleen27]

No matter what the minimum wage is, there are always going to be people at the bottom that feel that they deserve more. And as we've seen people can't agree on what is livable. I really think there should Be no federal minimum wage. Let states set their own.

If there were no federal minimum wage, pay would be in the same race to the bottom within our borders as it is in the global economy. You know perfectly well that states dominated by leaders of a certain ideology would eliminate the minimum entirely in the name of "attracting business", and since relocating would not bring any of the risks or costs of sending operations overseas it could be a very attractive proposition to business even if it does result in a true underclass.

Part of the problem is that the minimum wage was not changed in accordance with inflation. The minimum wage of $1.60 in 1968 would buy the same amount of goods as $10.90 now.

http://www.raisetheminimumwage.com/facts/entry/amount-with-inflation/

That, of course, is on average.

Exactly. And I don't think that would actually be a bad target, rather than $15. But there's too much politics around this issue for logic to prevail. The smart thing would be to index it to inflation so future increases don't become a political battleground amid a flurry of high-dollar lobbying. But that won't happen because both sides of the aisle want it as leverage in the future.

 

[Colleen27]

You are making my point. Pay scales are created with the value of the job in mind and if all of a sudden the unskilled position is being paid at the same rate as a skilled position, that second group of workers would demand an increase to reflect the new value of that job. That will trigger a push for wage increases all through the pay scales, not just at the lower levels.

Yeah, I guess the debate is whether or not that's a bad thing. I don't think it is. We're reaching absurd, dangerous levels of inequality. Pretty much every job that doesn't require college and a growing share of those that do are deemed "not for raising a family on", and more and more essential positions like teaching and health care aren't worth the cost of the education they require. Something needs to change. We can't have a consumer economy when only the top chunk of earners can afford more than a subsistence living.

 

[kamik86]

One other thing that needs to be addressed for fast food and retail... Hours.

In my area that salaries my husband and his coworkers make are normally fine. Except the times of the year where the hours are severely cut. There has been one of those for a while. Partially because of Target trying to recuperate some from the Target Canada fiasco and partial just normal yearly dips. Now we are fine. Since his salary is only 20% of our household income his income being cut in half for a few months isn't hurting us too badly.

I think something that would do more to stabilize employee hours and not let stores give you 45 hours some weeks and 15 on others would do more to make the wages liveable then an increase in hourly pay.

 

[declansdad]

One other thing that needs to be addressed for fast food and retail... Hours.

In my area that salaries my husband and his coworkers make are normally fine. Except the times of the year where the hours are severely cut. There has been one of those for a while. Partially because of Target trying to recuperate some from the Target Canada fiasco and partial just normal yearly dips. Now we are fine. Since his salary is only 20% of our household income his income being cut in half for a few months isn't hurting us too badly.

I think something that would do more to stabilize employee hours and not let stores give you 45 hours some weeks and 15 on others would do more to make the wages liveable then an increase in hourly pay.

Wouldn't that be more of a function of consumer demand? There isn't much sense of having too many workers in slow periods.

 

[declansdad]

Yeah, I guess the debate is whether or not that's a bad thing. I don't think it is. We're reaching absurd, dangerous levels of inequality. Pretty much every job that doesn't require college and a growing share of those that do are deemed "not for raising a family on", and more and more essential positions like teaching and health care aren't worth the cost of the education they require. Something needs to change. We can't have a consumer economy when only the top chunk of earners can afford more than a subsistence living.

Good point and I think this is where we disagree. I think it is more than simply the top earners who are earning enough to live on.

 

[mom2rtk]

One other thing that needs to be addressed for fast food and retail... Hours.

In my area that salaries my husband and his coworkers make are normally fine. Except the times of the year where the hours are severely cut. There has been one of those for a while. Partially because of Target trying to recuperate some from the Target Canada fiasco and partial just normal yearly dips. Now we are fine. Since his salary is only 20% of our household income his income being cut in half for a few months isn't hurting us too badly.

I think something that would do more to stabilize employee hours and not let stores give you 45 hours some weeks and 15 on others would do more to make the wages liveable then an increase in hourly pay.

How do you propose that a company with peak sales seasons deal with staffing?

 

[kamik86]

How do you propose that a company with peak sales seasons deal with staffing?

True I guess I"m just frustrated with my husband's managers that clearly use it as a punitive measure to those that do things they don't like (such as take a vacation).

However no matter what you make the minimum wage if stores are free to drop employees to very low hours you can never really say they have a living wage. Which really makes this entire debate pointless.

 

[wvjules]

Exactly, I'll pay you $15 per hour but imonly going to work you 20HPW

 

[mom2rtk]

Exactly, I'll pay you $15 per hour but imonly going to work you 20HPW

And that's likely where a lot of employers would go with it.

A classic example of the law of unintended consequences.

 

[Bianca and Bernard]

Exactly, I'll pay you $15 per hour but imonly going to work you 20HPW

Or less.
At McD's, back in the day, no one except management and maintenance worked above 30 hours a week. Maintenance worked 30-35 for both F/T guys and 20-25 for the P/T guy (two stores shared the three, same owner ran both). Managers worked 35-38 if hourly, 45-50 if salary. No O/T, no insurance except for management and F.T maintenance.

ETA
Weird. a whole paragraph went missing

Anyone else got either 5 short shifts (5 hours or less) or 3-4 8 hour shifts, or some sort of combination. One teen only worked 2 hours 5 days a week during dinner rush. No regular crew got above 25 hours. Bossman was not going to pay O/T or any insurance costs for someone who would disappear within 6 months. (Obviously, there were circumstances where someone might get extra hours, like if someone called off and they were called in, but regularly, nope.)

 

[Hikergirl]

Not only the employers cutting hours but those people on assistance will reduce their hours because if they work more and make more they will lose some of their benefits. They are still not going to be earning a "living wage".

 

[rajak73]

Exactly, I'll pay you $15 per hour but imonly going to work you 20HPW

So I'll jump in here quick, so do you think then the workers will be standing outside demanding they get $20 hour because they can't live on that 20HPW at $15 hour? As to the FF workers wanting a living wage, not once when I was in high school did I every hear anyone say, "when I graduate, I want to work at McDs serving hamburgers!" And for the ones that think it's easy for the business, just open up your own FF or restaurant, pay your workers $25 hour with $1 hamburgers and show McD's how it done because you know, if your price of goods goes up or labor goes up, it's only cut into your profit margin anyway.

 

[Colleen27]

I think something that would do more to stabilize employee hours and not let stores give you 45 hours some weeks and 15 on others would do more to make the wages liveable then an increase in hourly pay.

I'd settle for seeing a "bill of rights" that specifies what kind of notice an employer should give on scheduling and what sort of demands they can make as to availability. Too many of the people I know trying to make ends meet on low-wage jobs are essentially unable to get the second job they desperately need because "normal" around here in retail/fast food/restaurant work is to get your schedule a day or two in advance, not having predictable shifts or days off, and potentially facing unofficial disciplinary consequences if you aren't able to come in when called at the last minute. I understand that variable hours are the nature of the business - retailers need a lot more people in Nov. than in Feb. and on Saturday afternoon than on Tuesday morning - but that's no reason to treat workers as poorly as many employers and their just-in-time scheduling systems do these days.

 

[mefordis]

Part of determining fair compensation is looking at what other positions are paid. If the lowest pay scale received a bump that put them at the same level as the next group up, human nature would make most people think they now deserve more pay as they are no longer being fairly compensated.

Yes, but you have to look at positions that are comparable to yours. My husband makes more than most doctors and people would probably think that is unfair since doctors (supposedly) save lives. However, his industry makes a lot of money and his skills are in short supply. The comparison has to be based on other positions within the same field doing the same thing. If a welder only makes $10 / hour and thinks they should make more, they need to negotiate for more then leave the field if necessary. Once there are no more welders willing to work for that wage, I'll bet it goes up.

I think a $15/hour min wage will get the wages in the country closer to the level needed for survival.