Fast Food Workers Strikes = Win for better health

It's not so much that they shouldn't make minimum wage, it's more about fair working conditions and livable wage/hours. Minimum wage isn't a liveable wage in most states and then to top it off the fast food places only give their workers about 10 hours a week but they make their schedules sporadically making it very hard for them to get a second job.

I work for the state. I don't make a livable wage!

Here Here :drinker:

I get tired of hearing that minimum wages is not 'meant to' pay a living wage. The reality is people are forced to use these jobs to support themselves because they can't get anything else that pays better. It's a cycle that people cannot escape from. People should not have to live in poverty to line the pockets of executives and shareholders who contribute nothing. At least the guy flipping burgers is making someone lunch. A shareholder does zilch but take money from the company and yet it's somehow more important to make them happy than the people who's labor makes the company run.

Ummm... y'all are angry because fast food workers would like to be paid a fair wage?

My uncle worked in Wal-mart his entire life. He retired a millionaire because he used his money wisely, invested it and made something from that 'minimum wage' job.

I work in retail and many of my coworkers have held their job for 25 years or more. To them it IS a career. It is their ONLY career. SOMEBODY has to do these jobs so why shouldn't it be a career?

Somebody insinuated these jobs are meant to be stepping stones to REAL jobs? Really? And who is going to pay for that education for these people to acquire REAL careers if they're only barely making enough to make ends meet? Hmmmm?

Gosh guys. Check your privilege.
[/quo

Totally agree.

I can't wait til minimum wage hits the $13-14 mark here in NC. I will surely quit my job working on medical equipment to go mindlessly flip burgers and deep fry taters! Look out unskilled laborers, us semi skilled folks will be taking your $15 hr in no time flat.


What do you want after that?

Enjoy having a job where you DON'T get to play on the internet at work and you spend your entire time doing manual labor in a hot, sweaty, grease pit. Because I'm sure that's SO much easier than your job now.

As far as responsibilities are concerned...yes, the hot sweaty grease pit would be much easier. Accreditation of the organization could possibly land on me at some point. Also, since when is a fast food employee without internet?

It would seem rather difficult for a FF worker to use the internet *while they were actually working,* which was the commenter's point. LOL.

I see, they have to be working. I thought it was meant that they were just on the clock. I have seen plenty of internet use while on the clock in various settings ie. FF, grocery, retail etc. LOL.

The fact is the buying power of the minimum wage, and all other wages, has decreased over the years. The minimum wage in 1968 was the equivalent of $10.69 in today's dollars. So, if the minimum wage today were to have the same buying power as the minimum in 1968, it would have to be raised by at least $3.44 an hour to meet that level. There is no question that skilled workers should be paid more than unskilled, but at this point, most workers in our economy are underpaid. If you are to argue that unskilled workers don't "deserve" a living wage, then you could argue that in 1912, when factory workers in Lawrence, MA, went on the Bread and Roses strike, they didn't deserve a living wage either. Employers and big businesses can always argue that people don't "deserve" their wages; we can go back to the days where people did "piece work" and made less than $1.00 a day because after all these are only low skilled humans not worth paying enough to live on.

I'm in Massachusetts and we just passed an increased minimum wage. I'm involved in community organizing in urban areas, besides teaching in one, and there are people working 2 and 3 jobs to make ends meet at minimum or near minimum wage. It's very easy to say "oh, go out and get an education and better yourself," which is easier said than done if you are working 2 or more jobs and have a family to feed, or if you are a young person in a low income family. In some of the urban immigrant households, the young people are also working and giving some of their income to help support their families as well as saving for college. At the university where I teach, some of the commuter urban students are often working minimum or near minimum wage jobs to pay for their educations. I did that when I was a student 30+ years ago, when the minimum wage was about $4.00, but college tuition was $2500 a year then. Before the new law, in Mass., the minimum was $8.00, but tuition at a state university
is around $10,000 a year. These folks are like the proverbial Sisyphus, rolling the stone uphill that keeps rolling back downhill.

Also, social services, such as Medicaid and the SNAP program are actually subsidizing companies that don't pay a living wage because these employees end up at or near poverty level and applying for these programs. The MacDonald's and Wal-Marts of this world have perpetuated an entire underclass of working poor who need social services. Instead of hating these workers and labor unions, perhaps you should be redirecting your anger at the corporations who are making massive profits for themselves, but not paying their workers an adequate wage.

Here's an article about McDonald's trying (and failing hysterically) to demonstrate how easy it is to live on a minimum wage salary:

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/07/mcdonalds-cant-figure-out-how-its-workers-survive-on-minimum-wage/277845/

It's not so much that they shouldn't make minimum wage, it's more about fair working conditions and livable wage/hours. Minimum wage isn't a liveable wage in most states and then to top it off the fast food places only give their workers about 10 hours a week but they make their schedules sporadically making it very hard for them to get a second job.

Nor is it supposed to be. Aspire to be more. Minimum wage isn't meant to pay a mortgage and car payments. It's to supplement another income, or get you through school with some cash for spending money. But i guess if you can parlay it with welfare, you might do ok.

This^. I dropped out of highschool when I was 15 years old. A few months after leaving, I quickly realized that the only jobs I could ever find were minimum wage jobs and I also decided like 3 months after leaving highschool that I did not want to live my life that way.

The following day after realizing this, I was back in school and went to class every day for the rest of my high school days, then went off to university.

I am very grateful that the minimum wage was so low - it was a good kick in the *kitten* of reality that I needed to be successful.

Anyone who thinks a minimum wage is a good idea doesn't understand basic economics.

Let's say minimum wage is raised by 10% - how do employers react? They either 1) cut jobs / reduce hours / reduce other benefits / reduce services or 2) raise product costs to offset as much of the 10%.

So a McDonald's worker gets paid 10% more, but when the market adjusts with everyone that employs minimum wage labor raising prices, he is either going to lose his job/accept less hours and/or will find that his cost of living has increased by the same amount, thereby negating the raise.

"We win, I got a raise!! We stuck it to the man - but hey, why hasn't my lifestyle improved?? Oh yeah, inflation."

The market will always react adversely to artificial price controls.

So, by your stellar logic, anyone getting a raise is bad for the economy.

When people, especially the lower and middle class are paid more, they increase their spending. Boosting the economy.

Of course this can be proven by looking at what's happened any time the minimum wage has been increased or in states where workers are paid more. They typically enjoy a better economy than states where workers are paid the minimum.

But you keep believing whatever your masters tell you. Shine their boots up real nice. You're lucky to be there after all.

No, getting raises are good - however, getting a government imposed raise is not good for the economy.

No, the lower and middle class do not increase their spending, because they either lose their jobs, have their hours reduced, or the goods and services they spend money on are more expensive because of the inflation caused by the minimum wage increase.

I do believe what my "masters tell me" - by masters, I'm sure you are referencing the master of science in management degree I have, which entailed completing several advanced economic courses.

For what its worth - I have an MSc (in an actual science) and scientists are some of the least politically informed people I have ever met.

Confusing politics with economics?

Anyone who thinks a minimum wage is a good idea doesn't understand basic economics.

Let's say minimum wage is raised by 10% - how do employers react? They either 1) cut jobs / reduce hours / reduce other benefits / reduce services or 2) raise product costs to offset as much of the 10%.

So a McDonald's worker gets paid 10% more, but when the market adjusts with everyone that employs minimum wage labor raising prices, he is either going to lose his job/accept less hours and/or will find that his cost of living has increased by the same amount, thereby negating the raise.

"We win, I got a raise!! We stuck it to the man - but hey, why hasn't my lifestyle improved?? Oh yeah, inflation."

The market will always react adversely to artificial price controls.

So, by your stellar logic, anyone getting a raise is bad for the economy.

When people, especially the lower and middle class are paid more, they increase their spending. Boosting the economy.

Of course this can be proven by looking at what's happened any time the minimum wage has been increased or in states where workers are paid more. They typically enjoy a better economy than states where workers are paid the minimum.

But you keep believing whatever your masters tell you. Shine their boots up real nice. You're lucky to be there after all.

No, getting raises are good - however, getting a government imposed raise is not good for the economy.

No, the lower and middle class do not increase their spending, because they either lose their jobs, have their hours reduced, or the goods and services they spend money on are more expensive because of the inflation caused by the minimum wage increase.

I do believe what my "masters tell me" - by masters, I'm sure you are referencing the master of science in management degree I have, which entailed completing several advanced economic courses.

For what its worth - I have an MSc (in an actual science) and scientists are some of the least politically informed people I have ever met.

The only political aspect of it is the initial government price control, the increase in minimum wage. An understanding of politics isn't required to understand the subsequent economic reaction to the wage increase - and honestly, only requires a minimal amount of economic literacy. What does a business do when it is squeezed for money - either it cuts costs or increases prices. There is no magic money tree to pay your minimum wage employees more money.

Anyone who thinks a minimum wage is a good idea doesn't understand basic economics.

Let's say minimum wage is raised by 10% - how do employers react? They either 1) cut jobs / reduce hours / reduce other benefits / reduce services or 2) raise product costs to offset as much of the 10%.

So a McDonald's worker gets paid 10% more, but when the market adjusts with everyone that employs minimum wage labor raising prices, he is either going to lose his job/accept less hours and/or will find that his cost of living has increased by the same amount, thereby negating the raise.

"We win, I got a raise!! We stuck it to the man - but hey, why hasn't my lifestyle improved?? Oh yeah, inflation."

The market will always react adversely to artificial price controls.

So, by your stellar logic, anyone getting a raise is bad for the economy.

When people, especially the lower and middle class are paid more, they increase their spending. Boosting the economy.

Of course this can be proven by looking at what's happened any time the minimum wage has been increased or in states where workers are paid more. They typically enjoy a better economy than states where workers are paid the minimum.

But you keep believing whatever your masters tell you. Shine their boots up real nice. You're lucky to be there after all.

No, getting raises are good - however, getting a government imposed raise is not good for the economy.

No, the lower and middle class do not increase their spending, because they either lose their jobs, have their hours reduced, or the goods and services they spend money on are more expensive because of the inflation caused by the minimum wage increase.

I do believe what my "masters tell me" - by masters, I'm sure you are referencing the master of science in management degree I have, which entailed completing several advanced economic courses.

For what its worth - I have an MSc (in an actual science) and scientists are some of the least politically informed people I have ever met.

Confusing politics with economics?

Confusing the two?

Are you seriously trying to suggest that strands of economics are somehow not aligned to a political ideology?