Skip Navigation

Minimum Wage?

Travel Forums Off Topic Minimum Wage?

Page ...

Last Post

31. Posted by mikeyBoab (Travel Guru 5077 posts) 9y

Quoting Q'

Quoting mikeyBoab

Quoting Q'

Unfortunately, I still don't see how that deals with my initial criticism of the system. If all one can do to support one's family is wash dishes then that's the job you need even if you make minimum wage.

Sorry Q, I think I've misunderstood your point. Are you meaning that older (ie 22+) might lose their jobs in favour of a younger (and cheaper) model?

Yes. As I wrote earlier " But that means the same jobs become unavailable to older people who may still need minimum wage work for some reason. "

OK, gotcha - the only thing I can really say to that is, as I pointed out earlier, what tends to happen in most organisations (and I can only speak from experience) is that people doing the same job will be paid the same minimum wage - for example, a 19 year old waiter will get the same wage as a 40 year old waiter because they are doing the same job, so the employer, wishing to be seen to be acting fairly, will pay them the same wage. There is therefore no need to "exchange" the older waiter as there would be no financial saving.

If the same employer were to decide to have only inexperienced, 19 year old waiters, he would a) have crap service in his restaurant and b)struggle to find enough staff.

As I say, I'm speaking from my own experience - I worked as a waiter at 17 and a bartender at 19 and received the same wage as the older staff members.

32. Posted by Q' (Travel Guru 1987 posts) 9y

Quoting mikeyBoab

OK, gotcha - the only thing I can really say to that is, as I pointed out earlier, what tends to happen in most organisations (and I can only speak from experience) is that people doing the same job will be paid the same minimum wage - for example, a 19 year old waiter will get the same wage as a 40 year old waiter because they are doing the same job, so the employer, wishing to be seen to be acting fairly, will pay them the same wage. There is therefore no need to "exchange" the older waiter as there would be no financial saving.

Seems like we're both editing at the same time. I've added one further thought to my previous post which you might want to comment on, or not.

Ok, but that's nothing to do with minimum wage the law. In actuality it might work out to the same thing, but that doesn't mean the legislators have done a good job in making the law. The way it's setup now, I see it as doing more harm to the general population than good.

33. Posted by Mel. (Travel Guru 4567 posts) 9y

Quoting mikeyBoab

OK, gotcha - the only thing I can really say to that is, as I pointed out earlier, what tends to happen in most organisations (and I can only speak from experience) is that people doing the same job will be paid the same minimum wage - for example, a 19 year old waiter will get the same wage as a 40 year old waiter because they are doing the same job, so the employer, wishing to be seen to be acting fairly, will pay them the same wage. There is therefore no need to "exchange" the older waiter as there would be no financial saving.

In most of the jobs I have had, what each employee earned was not common knowledge, in the company.
After receiving a pay rise, at one of my jobs, I was told to keep it secret. This secrecty makes it difficult for others to gage their worth and easier for employers to be unfair.

34. Posted by mikeyBoab (Travel Guru 5077 posts) 9y

Quoting Q'

Ok, but that's nothing to do with minimum wage the law. In actuality it might work out to the same thing, but that doesn't mean the legislators have done a good job in making the law. The way it's setup now, I see it as doing more harm to the general population than good.

I think that the law gives employers the flexibility to decide. I see what you're saying, but I've seen no evidence to suggest that any unemployment has been a result of employers getting rid of older staff to employ younger folk. Yes, you're correct, in theory this could happen, but I don't think it would - for one thing, employment law here makes it virtually impossible for an employer to just fire someone because the work wil be done more cheaply by a kid. Yes, there would be ways around it - but who would want to work for such an employer?

35. Posted by Q' (Travel Guru 1987 posts) 9y

Quoting mikeyBoab

I think that the law gives employers the flexibility to decide. I see what you're saying, but I've seen no evidence to suggest that any unemployment has been a result of employers getting rid of older staff to employ younger folk. Yes, you're correct, in theory this could happen, but I don't think it would - for one thing, employment law here makes it virtually impossible for an employer to just fire someone because the work wil be done more cheaply by a kid. Yes, there would be ways around it - but who would want to work for such an employer?

I would agree with Mel on this one. Salaries and HR issues are often kept secret.

A minimum wage job in most countries are the lowest paying jobs. If one's applying for such a job, your pretty desperate anyway. As the expression goes "beggers can't be choosers". Such a nasty employer WILL find people to work for them I think (btw, this occurs often in 3rd world countries). This is where the government should step in and give everyone a fair chance. As long as the salaries are kept above the minium and you know you can find better employment down the street it's fine, but that's sometimes not the case and there's nothing stopping people from being exploited. Which is bad in my view.

[ Edit: Edited on Aug 7, 2007, at 7:36 AM by Q' ]

36. Posted by mikeyBoab (Travel Guru 5077 posts) 9y

Quoting Q'

A minimum wage job in most countries are the lowest paying jobs. If one's applying for such a job, your pretty desperate anyway.

I would disagree with you there - a full time minimum wage job can provide a comfortable living, certainly in this country. Further, people receiving state benefits are limited in how much they are permitted to earn so they may actively seek such work.

I would certainly agree that exploitation takes place in third world countries but I'm referring to the contemporary UK - very different.

37. Posted by lagered (Budding Member 230 posts) 9y

Quoting Mel.

Quoting lagered

Mel, since you are closer to this you can correct me if I am wrong. Aren’t the German citizens required to do a year of service in the military around the age of 18? If that is the case, it would most certainly account for a large degree of overturn in your local grocery stores...etc.

Would it not be better to ask a German member, to correct u, if u are wrong, on this issue at least?

I assumed that with all of your posts of where to buy school supplies in Munich Center that you may in fact be a resident of.... Germany.

Are you a German resident or just a uniformed foreigner?

38. Posted by lagered (Budding Member 230 posts) 9y

Quoting Mel.

Quoting mikeyBoab

OK, gotcha - the only thing I can really say to that is, as I pointed out earlier, what tends to happen in most organisations (and I can only speak from experience) is that people doing the same job will be paid the same minimum wage - for example, a 19 year old waiter will get the same wage as a 40 year old waiter because they are doing the same job, so the employer, wishing to be seen to be acting fairly, will pay them the same wage. There is therefore no need to "exchange" the older waiter as there would be no financial saving.

In most of the jobs I have had, what each employee earned was not common knowledge, in the company.
After receiving a pay rise, at one of my jobs, I was told to keep it secret. This secrecty makes it difficult for others to gage their worth and easier for employers to be unfair.

It is not anyone's business what their fellow workers make.

No two employees contribute exactly the same effort and/or time resulting in an exact net benefit to a company. Therefore they shouldn’t be paid exactly the same and that detail of their payment is not information that others need to have. Go around telling people what you make and see how long it takes them to either hate you or laugh at you.

Everyone has a perceived value that is either satisfied or not, the fact of the matter is sharing personal financial benefits will only increase jealousy in the workplace as well as increasing the likelihood of disseminating a core team of quality employees. Any employer willing to share your financial information with your co-workers is ethically questionable at best.

39. Posted by Isadora (Travel Guru 13926 posts) 9y

Quoting Mel.

In most of the jobs I have had, what each employee earned was not common knowledge, in the company.
After receiving a pay rise, at one of my jobs, I was told to keep it secret. This secrecty makes it difficult for others to gage their worth and easier for employers to be unfair.

The amount of earnings one receives should not be common knowledge as it is a personal issue. If you choose to announce it, that is your choice but doing so does play against the people to which you report (your boss). Yes, everyone is aware that unfair practices do happen - that's a given in business. But, other employees are not to gauge their worth on what another employee makes even when doing identical jobs. Raises and compensation are based on the behavior and work each employee does individually. They earn that increase on their own merit - not because Suzy at the next desk makes that amount. Again, what would be the incentive to work more diligently and improve one's abilities if everyone made the same amount across the board? Basically, no one would work to attain a higher status, promotion or any other perk. If salary information was common knowledge, someone who doesn't necessarily deserve the raise will still expect it. Those in charge of doling out those raises will spend more time trying to handle grousing employees than actually doing their job. I have seen it happen and had it happen as a manager. A supervisor's job is not wasting time explaining to Tom why Suzy got the raise but rather explaining to Tom what he personally needs to do to receive the same compensation without Suzy entering into the discussion. What one earns is no one's business other than their own.

40. Posted by Q' (Travel Guru 1987 posts) 9y

Quoting mikeyBoab

I would disagree with you there - a full time minimum wage job can provide a comfortable living, certainly in this country. Further, people receiving state benefits are limited in how much they are permitted to earn so they may actively seek such work.

I would certainly agree that exploitation takes place in third world countries but I'm referring to the contemporary UK - very different.

Which makes sense since the UK is a first world country, and it's good to know that at least that minimum standard is kept.

Page ...

Last Post