The answer to $15.00 Hour fast food restaurant wages

[Gumbo4x4]

I don't think it is that difficult. The cities with the highest (and recently increased) minimum wages are among the national leaders in job growth. Meanwhile in the Rust Belt, where minimum wage remains low and stagnant, we're still not seeing recovery. Why? Because the only way employers hire is if they have a consumer for their product or service. And when people have no money to spend, they're not consuming.



That doesn't solve the issue that 40% (and growing) of American jobs pay less than $15. It isn't merely an individual issue at this point.



Exactly. And that should be more alarming than it is because we are not a manufacturing country any more. We can't look to foreign markets to solve our problems via exports. The only way we have a strong economy in this country is to have a strong middle class with money to spend, because it is spending - not making - that keeps things going.

Bit of a chicken & egg thing though. In cities with strong economies, the short supply of low-end workers was naturally pushing the starting wage toward $15 without having to mandate it. Saw the same thing here in the 90's FF workers were staring at $11/hour while minimum wage was $4.65. That's just a product of a strong economy.

On the flip side, is there any evidence to support the notion that a $15 minimum wage would automatically "help" a city like Detroit?

 

[mom2rtk]

The going rate for a babysitter here isn't even minimum wage, more like $5/hr. And full-time daycare workers average about $10-12 per hour, tops.

Same here. Just more proof why a nationalized approach to this sort of thing is not practical.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Same here. Just more proof why a nationalized approach to this sort of thing is not practical.

Even in the same locale, $15 doesn't always equal $15. Many years back, I left a job making $11.55/hour for one of $32,000 annual salary. But, the $11.55 job had lots of overtime & GREAT health insurance. It ended up being a much smaller "improvement" than it appeared on paper.

 

[mefordis]

The going rate for a babysitter here isn't even minimum wage, more like $5/hr. And full-time daycare workers average about $10-12 per hour, tops.

Here it's $20 an hour for a college age babysitter. Even in the 90's I remember getting $4.00 (in Michigan, small town). I cannot believe it has only gone up by $1 some places. That's just pathetic.

 

[anneboleyn]

If minimum wage goes to 15 for a fast food work what about people who are say dental assistants making 19$ an hour ? Should they go to 24$? Only fair. Hate to think a burger flipper makes almost as much as a worker who went to school for training.

Liberals want higher wages and higher corporate taxes. Then they will be the first to complain when businesses don't hire as much. Sorry to be political. Lol

Exactly! What about those who went to college and are making $14.60 or so an hour...are they getting bumped up to $20 or are only the fast food workers deserving of such a pay increase??

 

[TLSnell1981]

And those things started happening when minimum wage was $5.15, so I don't think it can be laid at the feet of increases that are, at this point, just talk. Heck, look at Chili's - they're using tablet-based ordering and payment systems to increase the number of tables they can assign to each server, even though the staff being reduced by that tech is paid the $2.15 tipped minimum wage. If the tech is available and affordable, companies will use it to reduce staffing regardless of the wage scale.



I don't think it is anyone's conscious motivation, but I do think it is human nature not to want to feel like "the bottom" and subconsciously that's a powerful force that causes those making just above minimum to denigrate efforts for minimum-wage workers to organize to push for better wages. And I think this is an area where a lot of people don't realize how influenced their opinions are by common narratives not rooted in fact, but which make compelling stories (ie "people on assistance will reduce their hours/quit their jobs if minimum wage goes up"). We're raised on the idea, in this country, that wealth = merit and poverty = moral/intellectual deficiency so it is hard to talk about why wages at the bottom of the scale need to rise at least quickly enough to keep pace with changes in the cost of living. Because we naturally shift the conversation to "If they want to eat/pay the rent, they need to better themselves." We have a very hard time stepping back to see it as a big-picture, whole economy issue.

And the evidence doesn't support the idea that it would be a wash. There's not a 1-to-1 relationship between labor costs and consumer pricing. Some of the higher cost of doing business is made up in higher business volumes, without need to increase prices, and yes, some of it does come out of profits because there's a limit to how much businesses can increase prices without upsetting consumers. Current and historical evidence shows that higher wages at the bottom of the scale boost spending, business activity, and job growth. Those benefits more than offset the smaller net effect on pricing.

Where to begin... my wish is for EVERYONE to be the very best, that they can be. So personally, not in my nature to keep ANYONE beneath me. Besides, I don't judge ANYONE by how much money they do or don't have.

More folks are depending on entry level positions and expecting mandatory pay hikes. Why is this? Perhaps, it's because more companies are reducing positions, bringing in foreign workers and/or sending jobs overseas? Is it because they are just mean and greedy? Personally, I don't believe that's the reason. We need JOBS..REAL jobs. So, how do we bring back lost capital and positions?

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Here it's $20 an hour for a college age babysitter. Even in the 90's I remember getting $4.00 (in Michigan, small town). I cannot believe it has only gone up by $1 some places. That's just pathetic.

It's all relative. First, most babysitters here are in the 12-16 year old range, not college aged. Once you give 'em access to your food and have to drive them to & from home, sub minimum sounds about right.

And $20 is a very "grown up" wage here. My wife is 44 years old & has never made that. In fact, she's never made more than $14/hour.

 

[kamik86]

It's all relative. First, most babysitters here are in the 12-16 year old range, not college aged. Once you give 'em access to your food and have to drive them to & from home, sub minimum sounds about right.

And $20 is a very "grown up" wage here. My wife is 44 years old & has never made that. In fact, she's never made more than $14/hour.

My area is the same. Most babysitters are family friends that are old enough to be responsible with kids for a few hours but not old enough to have a real job that babysitting might conflict with.

The only ones that hire college age are ones that want part time nanny/mothers helpers during the day when the kids are in school (some that work from home for example will do this so there is someone to cook the kids lunch and take them to the park so that mom can get work done in peace and quiet).

When I was in high school I was paid about 20 bucks a night for around 3 hours. But their father picked me up sometimes and brought me home always (as it was after dark and he didn't want me to walk... don't know why its not like there was a single busy street between our houses). The dogs were more trouble to watch then the kids were honestly. The kids just played with their toys while I got my homework done, I would get them a drink or something if they needed it. REad to to them and put them to bed. Yes I made more when I got a job... but frankly I had to work much harder for it then I did babysitting.

 

[rajak73]

I never thought the $15 an hour for fast food workers movement would succeed. Surprising to me that it has in some areas. The push does come with unintended consequences.

You do not have to increase your price or reduce your labor costs. You reduce your profit

So here is the "unintended consequence" of the minimum wage argument, The DW and I were talking about this the other night, she is a cook at the local school, Makes $9+ a hour, (above our states minimum wage). So if minimum wage is increased to $15, how does the school "reduce their profits?" Also if the head cook now is making $15 a hour, which isn't a bad wage for our area of the country, does she get bumped up to $21 a hour? You know the only way to make it up is EXTRA taxes so who pays that? Some people need to stop and think that the $15 minimum wage would cover a lot more than McD's and Walmart.

 

[Patch'sD]

It is just not fast food workers or Babysitters when you talk about $15 per hour, you are talking about 42% of the current workforce of 143 Million. That is a considerable impact. There are about 11,000,000 in the Food Services Industry that could be effected. Retail Sales 16,000,000 and Hospitality 4,000,000 would be heavily effected also. You are talking about doubling some salaries, Increasing some 50%, and of course some raises would be smaller percentages. Your talking about giving 60,000,000 workers a raise. Where does that money come from and where does it go. Rather than grow the economy through job growth and the creation of good jobs in goods producing, they are increasing the costs of the Service side of the economy. With only 20,000,000 workers in goods producing jobs this economy is in for a world for hurt if the service side of the economy is given an artificial boost. I would tie Minimum wage to Inflation which would bring it to about $11.00 per hour which is a more reasonable approach and would end the fighting for raises in the future.

 

[TLSnell1981]

So here is the "unintended consequence" of the minimum wage argument, The DW and I were talking about this the other night, she is a cook at the local school, Makes $9+ a hour, (above our states minimum wage). So if minimum wage is increased to $15, how does the school "reduce their profits?" Also if the head cook now is making $15 a hour, which isn't a bad wage for our area of the country, does she get bumped up to $21 a hour? You know the only way to make it up is EXTRA taxes so who pays that? Some people need to stop and think that the $15 minimum wage would cover a lot more than McD's and Walmart.

Let's face it. The effect would be huge across the board, not just for small businesses and government employees. Many more small business owners would be forced to close up shop and taxes would increase (for those, who pay). Otherwise, more cost cutting...which could be disasterous for e.g. a school lunch program. EVERYONE would experience price increases. So again, a cost of living increase for all...not just some.

 

[Lilacs4Me]

Exactly! What about those who went to college and are making $14.60 or so an hour...are they getting bumped up to $20 or are only the fast food workers deserving of such a pay increase??

Exactly my point! The people who make $13-$25/hour are the ones who will feel it the most. I can't see employers giving these workers a comparable wage increase just because Wendy's starts paying $15.00/hour for shift work that changes every week when the other people work in a professional corporate setting M-F, 9 to 5 and don't want to work FF.

 

[Lilacs4Me]

It's all relative. First, most babysitters here are in the 12-16 year old range, not college aged. Once you give 'em access to your food and have to drive them to & from home, sub minimum sounds about right.

And $20 is a very "grown up" wage here. My wife is 44 years old & has never made that. In fact, she's never made more than $14/hour.

Yes, I agree, and I would NEVER pay someone $20 to babysit my kids. I didn't make that much money until well after earning a college degree!

 

[dadtoagirl03]

I work in my company's finance dept. We have many workers making under $15.00 per hour, but it's unskilled labor and in no way justifies that wage rate. A mandated $15.00 minimum wage would result in one of two things happening instantly in our company. We would cut headcount or we would have to raise prices on the product we sale. Companies have to make some profit or they close. Unemployment isn't good and neither is a rate increase offset by increased prices of products purchased.

The answer is to find a way to train people to move out of the minimum wage job into skilled labor jobs that employers are begging for people to fill. Sadly too many people don't want to put forth the effort to make that move and want it given to them.

 

[mom2rtk]

I run my companies finance department. We have many workers making under $15.00 per hour, but it's unskilled labor. A mandated $15.00 minimum wage would result in one of two things happening instantly. We would cut headcount or we would have to raise prices. Unemployment isn't good and neither is a rate increase offset by increased prices of products purchased. Some jobs don't support $15.00 per hour wages they just don't. I'm sorry if someone tries to make a career out of a minimum wage job, but a large minimum wage hike hurts everyone. The answer is to find a way to train people to move out of the minimum wage job into skilled labor jobs that employers are begging for people to fill. Sadly too many people don't want to put forth the effort to make that move and want it given to them.

You mean your company wouldn't just absorb that cost out of profits?

 

[rajak73]

You mean your company wouldn't just absorb that cost out of profits?

Of course they are going to absorb that cost out of profits! Didn't you know all companies make as much as McD's, Walmart and Disney? I'm sure the CEO/owner of our local lawn care center got a bonus last year in the 6 figures above what he paid for the employees and the expenses to keep the business running.

 

[Colleen27]

That sounds precariously close to "well, they have one......."

Really? You don't see a difference between acknowledging the physical distance between affordable housing and job centers, or understanding that in a competitive job market an applicant that can't be reached by phone is the same as "keeping up with the Joneses"?

Bit of a chicken & egg thing though. In cities with strong economies, the short supply of low-end workers was naturally pushing the starting wage toward $15 without having to mandate it. Saw the same thing here in the 90's FF workers were staring at $11/hour while minimum wage was $4.65. That's just a product of a strong economy.

On the flip side, is there any evidence to support the notion that a $15 minimum wage would automatically "help" a city like Detroit?

I can see that argument for Cali and NY, but I don't think Seattle had such a strong economy before the wage hike that wage inflation was happening naturally. And yet, that's the city that makes the strongest case for a higher minimum wage (partly, I think, because the wage increase is less "needed" to keep pace with impossibly high housing costs, so more of it is being spent in the consumer sector).

And no, there isn't evidence of how a higher wage would work in a city like. Its never been tried, so how could there be? But we do know a lot of things about what isn't working... and a low minimum wage is one of those things. Austerity politics/budgeting are another. The parts of Detroit that are booming now are places where there are people willing to spend money. It stands to reason that more people with more money to spend would result in more economic growth.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Really? You don't see a difference between acknowledging the physical distance between affordable housing and job centers, or understanding that in a competitive job market an applicant that can't be reached by phone is the same as "keeping up with the Joneses"?



I can see that argument for Cali and NY, but I don't think Seattle had such a strong economy before the wage hike that wage inflation was happening naturally. And yet, that's the city that makes the strongest case for a higher minimum wage (partly, I think, because the wage increase is less "needed" to keep pace with impossibly high housing costs, so more of it is being spent in the consumer sector).

And no, there isn't evidence of how a higher wage would work in a city like. Its never been tried, so how could there be? But we do know a lot of things about what isn't working... and a low minimum wage is one of those things. Austerity politics/budgeting are another. The parts of Detroit that are booming now are places where there are people willing to spend money. It stands to reason that more people with more money to spend would result in more economic growth.

Seattle has been in growth mode for quite some time. Lots of tech & skilled labor jobs.

And yes, it does stand to reason that an influx of $ would help the economy, but where will that money originate? So, now it becomes a catch-22.

Nobody can afford to eat in my restaurant because wages are so low.

I can't afford to pay my staff better because my business is so slow.

Without some new source of revenue, major wage increases for the bottom will just result in higher unemployment.

 

[Lilacs4Me]

Really? You don't see a difference between acknowledging the physical distance between affordable housing and job centers, or understanding that in a competitive job market an applicant that can't be reached by phone is the same as "keeping up with the Joneses"?



I can see that argument for Cali and NY, but I don't think Seattle had such a strong economy before the wage hike that wage inflation was happening naturally. And yet, that's the city that makes the strongest case for a higher minimum wage (partly, I think, because the wage increase is less "needed" to keep pace with impossibly high housing costs, so more of it is being spent in the consumer sector).

And no, there isn't evidence of how a higher wage would work in a city like. Its never been tried, so how could there be? But we do know a lot of things about what isn't working... and a low minimum wage is one of those things. Austerity politics/budgeting are another. The parts of Detroit that are booming now are places where there are people willing to spend money. It stands to reason that more people with more money to spend would result in more economic growth.

But Colleen, (and out of the utmost respect from a fellow Michigan girl):

I know Detroit very well having lived most of my first 35 years there and all my family lives in the area (my father still lives in the city limits in the house I grew up in) and I know that even at $15.00/hr, there is still going to be very little disposable income left at the month for a family of 4. They will basically be replacing their food stamp, medicaid, and SNAP benefits with the increase in pay, leaving them no better or worse off than before. (the taxpayers might be a little better off, but that is a different topic in this debate so I won't get into that on this post).

There is not going to be such a significant difference in consumer spending in Mr. $15.00/hr Min Wage Earner's newfound "weath", but there will be a BIG decrease in spending for those families who make between $15-$25.00 when costs rise due to all of the known factors that go into a min wage-induced cost of living increase because no matter how I look at it, I don't see those mid-level earners getting enough of a raise to compensate.

It is almost always the lower-to-middle middle class, which makes up a huge demographic in every area of the country, who loses out. They make too much to qualify for any govt or PELL Grants/FASFA help, or for medical or other assistance, but certainly not enough to sleep easy at night knowing their electricity and gas bills are going to be paid, much less being able to take a vacation or send their kid to college.

And it is these very earners who put the most cash back into the local economy. They often work, shop and spend money on entertainment at a very local level - they are the ones who eat at the local FF or casual dining establishment, shop at the local Meijer or Kroger, and stay-cation at the Detroit Zoo or Greenfield Village or Frankenmuth because it is a cheaper alternative to flying down to Florida. THEY are the ones keeping the local economy flowing, but if their small bit of disposable income is eaten up by the "$8.00 big Mac" or an increase in rent, that local cash flow is going to stop very quickly.

And honestly, IMO, the reason certain areas of Detroit are doing better is not because of low-income FF workers getting raises, it's because the rich people from Oakland county are willing to spend their money downtown again.

 

[rickybobby]

But Colleen, (and out of the utmost respect from a fellow Michigan girl):

I know Detroit very well having lived most of my first 35 years there and all my family lives in the area (my father still lives in the city limits in the house I grew up in) and I know that even at $15.00/hr, there is still going to be very little disposable income left at the month for a family of 4. They will basically be replacing their food stamp, medicaid, and SNAP benefits with the increase in pay, leaving them no better or worse off than before. (the taxpayers might be a little better off, but that is a different topic in this debate so I won't get into that on this post).

There is not going to be such a significant difference in consumer spending in Mr. $15.00/hr Min Wage Earner's newfound "weath", but there will be a BIG decrease in spending for those families who make between $15-$25.00 when costs rise due to all of the known factors that go into a min wage-induced cost of living increase because no matter how I look at it, I don't see those mid-level earners getting enough of a raise to compensate.

It is almost always the lower-to-middle middle class, which makes up a huge demographic in every area of the country, who loses out. They make too much to qualify for any govt or PELL Grants/FASFA help, or for medical or other assistance, but certainly not enough to sleep easy at night knowing their electricity and gas bills are going to be paid, much less being able to take a vacation or send their kid to college.

And it is these very earners who put the most cash back into the local economy. They often work, shop and spend money on entertainment at a very local level - they are the ones who eat at the local FF or casual dining establishment, shop at the local Meijer or Kroger, and stay-cation at the Detroit Zoo or Greenfield Village or Frankenmuth because it is a cheaper alternative to flying down to Florida. THEY are the ones keeping the local economy flowing, but if their small bit of disposable income is eaten up by the "$8.00 big Mac" or an increase in rent, that local cash flow is going to stop very quickly.

And honestly, IMO, the reason certain areas of Detroit are doing better is not because of low-income FF workers getting raises, it's because the rich people from Oakland county are willing to spend their money downtown again.

As said before, a large portion of the employees making the new higher minimum wage are working fewer hours so as to not go above the welfare limits. Not an intended consequence, but a reality.