And there Cloak is the crux of your argument. Keep your peasant head down, shut up and be happy with the job that we, the corporate bosses have provided for you. If not, well you'll be on the street begging for yet another dead end job and be happy to have one. What you advocate is exactly what caused the formation of unions in the first place. the restaurant lobbyists would like nothing more than to completely gut any government program meant to aid skilled and nonskilled workers and return to the halcyon days of lassez faire economy wherein the worker may be turned into a legal slave working longer hours with lower pay and hey why not return to chid labor? It would increase profits and the kids would need to work in order for the family to survive. Couple that with the ending the requirement for a general education and you have millions of unskilled and ignorant workers Ripe for the sweat shops who are consistently being told that they will lose out if they even attempt to improve their lives by begging the bosses for a pittance of the profits. You don't get anywhere by being complacent and living a "by your leave" existence. And as I stated before, yes there were unions whose leaders mishandled the money and power but they don't in any way hold a candle to the other side with their multimillionaire benefactors who buy votes and influence government legislation and their powerful lobbies who at one time actually ran the government, local, state and national, e.g. The railroad lobby. Want to know what it's like to be poor and powerless, find a restaurant job. Cap't JackThe bottom line is you have people who are doing tasks that require little to no skill, but want to be paid at the same level of someone who is doing tasks that require more skills. When you are doing a job that the general population can do with little to no training at all, demanding more money could simply mean losing your job to someone who is not asking for so much, such as a high school or college student who just needs some cash on the side. Or it could be someone who's been out of work for a very long time, and willing to do whatever is necessary to bring a little more cash in. Do I believe that they have an unfair situation? Sure. Do I believe that they have a right to unionize on the issue? Yes, they sure do. However, the facts are that we are living in an situation where there are a LOT of people looking for work right now who are willing to get paid less than what these people are fighting for. All I am saying is that if they even get what they want (not likely), then it may not bring the intended outcomes that they were hoping for. If I own a business, and I need someone to flip burgers all day long, then I'm going to reason that this job doesn't require much skill, so I'm going to pay the minimum. However, if I'm needing someone to flip burgers, manage the accounting system, organize and manage the inventory systems while distributing tasks among the other workers, I'm going to need someone who has the necessary skills to do all of that, so I'm going to pay them more. Why? Because someone like that is more valuable. Why is he valuable? Because there are less people that can effectively do all of that and still be efficient. So, if the guy who does nothing more than flip burgers, and let's say he's not even that good at flipping burgers, comes to me and demands that I pay him as much as the guy who does all of those other tasks, what real incentive would I have to meet such a demand? Good will? Perhaps, but that's up to me and nobody else. We can call this "unfair" all day long and whine and complain about it, but this is reality. We can use emotionally charged terminology like "peasants" or "sweatshops", but at the end of the day this is how the world really works. To claim that fast food jobs or restaurant or catering requires no skills is wrong. Restaurant workers are at least as skilled as people in any retail operation, not the least of which is knowing how to deal with customers. Many retail operations are unionized. Restaurant workers are highly exploitable and exploited. I hope that with an attitude like yours you never go into food service. It's attitudes like yours that create the exploitation that goes on in the industry. Food service workers should be unionized because it's the only way for tgem to be treated fairly. Unfortunately, owners in the restaurant trade fight tooth and nail to be sure it doesn't happen. They apparently like treating their employees like chattel and claiming they have no skills. Not a lot different than the tactics business owners have used throughout history. I prefer having my food served by people who are treated well and who are paid fairly. Having people preparing and serving food who are barely making a living, who are working under intolerable conditions and who are being exploited and receiving the lowest pay possible, does nothing for the appetite. I am surprised that there isn't more food poisoning in restaurants than there appears to be. They should be unionized, for the sake of the employees and for the sake of the customers. Any business that can't make it with a unionized workforce should not be in business in the first place. LoisComparing fast food to nice restaurants and catering companies is way the hell off. The strikers are not trained chefs, bakers and maitre D's.
Comparing fast food to nice restaurants and catering companies is way the hell off. The strikers are not trained chefs, bakers and maitre D's.Thank you, for crying out loud.
MidAtlantic-I wasn't being serious about Wal-Mart employees. But, some Wal-Mart employees are more skilled then almost all fast food employees.Ok, but what do skills have to do with any of this anyways? Assembly line workers are nominally skilled. Coal Miners are nominally skilled in some cases. Lot's of "unskilled workers" are the ones traditionally organized. I could argue that it takes just as much skill to work at KFC as it does in a coal mine. The primary skills are indubitably safety skills. We know safety plays a big role in coal mines and kitchens alike. Other than that it is just flippin' burgers or handling a jackhammer. I'm a Teamster. My main skills are safety skills. I make sure I don't cause horrible damage to life or property when I operate a truck. Other than that, I just point the truck around and put stuff in it and take stuff off of it. It's the unskilled workers who need unionization. Otherwise with people like you and Cloak around, the workers who actually make the World go 'round get sh*t on. Attitudes like screw them, they have no skills. The people who pick up garbage. The people who deliver every conceivable thing into towns on trucks and trains. The people who have your Egg McMuffin and coffee waiting for you at the drive-thru window, etc etc...Basically all the things that people take for granted. You might not like McDonald's, I sure as heck don't. But lot's of people do. Lot's of people take all of that unskilled labor for granted. Sorry I never detected the sarcasm in your Wal-Mart response.
Vyazma Now look at Wendy’s or McDonald’s, or Kentucky Fried Chicken. The employees want more of a stake in that business. There is something that not right here. There are some unions that deal with fast food and they are connected with the restaurant and bar unions that have been around a long time. This one is not. I would guess that this is a movement by a group of lawyers.That's a guess that is at least partly right. I'm sure there are lawyers involved. That goes without saying. The rest is pure speculation.
There are a fair percentage of fast food workers that would lose income by getting a raise. Many are on relief and minimum wage and less than forty hours lets them qualify for relief. They might make say $560.00 a month more and take home $450.00 of that after taxes, but they would lose $600.00 a month in food stamps. So I do not see this movement coming from all the workers.This is just conjecture and windbaggery. I bet if you polled 10,000 fast food workers and asked them if they wanted their salaries doubled and health benefits etc.. they would say yes. Probably on the order of say...99.99%. It's about raising people up. I would have thought you preferred them to make a living wage with some benefits and get off of food stamps. People don't want to be on food stamps. Why would I even have to emphasize this?!?!?
I started a union one time. And it’s not that hard. I did it for the reason that unions can get around most labor laws to a point. The state let injured workers go to these worker’s compensation medical clinics for treatment and spent six weeks before we could get them to a real doctor and heal the injury. These clinics were known as millionaire mills and were jointly run by the attorneys and doctors. When an employee is hurt the best thing you can do is get him to the best specialist and doctors you can find as quickly as possible. It will be cheaper in the long run and better for the employee.Ok, do you think is really fairly admissible in this discussion?
The whole union thing here could be to solve a similar problem and could be backed by the big fast food chains to be able to lower their insurance costs and be able give the workers a raise at the same time, but not a 100% plus raise. In the fast food industry injury fraud runs rapped and most insurance companies will not touch fast food business.I really doubt that. I would say those attorneys you mentioned are more of the Left Wing variety. This is more of the "living wage" issue that is continually cropping up in this country. It is being exacerbated by reports of 2% of the population owning 80% of the wealth. Or whatever the figure is.
Otherwise with people like you and Cloak around, the workers who actually make the World go 'round get sh*t on. Attitudes like screw them, they have no skills.So you're saying that the guy trying to trade you the bottled faucet water for your car has a legitimate case for calling you unfair when you decline the offer? if you refuse, aren't you, according to your logic, "sh*tting on the little guy"? Nobody is saying "screw him". I'm just saying that if he is asking to be paid the same amount as the dude that is 10 times as valuable as he is and doing ten times the work that he does, then he's going to be in for a rude awakening. And it's called reality.
I’m am not defending the businessman for bad behavior, just saying that most businessmen started out as employees and went through all the stuff you are talking about and when they got their own business they were going to do thing right and not take advantage of the employees. But once they became a business the unforeseen pressures caused them to act out of character.I totally agree that there are legitimate businessmen out there who are struggling not only to create a life for themselves but to put out a quality product for public use and consumption. A friend and I formed two small businesses back in the day, invested in machinery and took losses. The first year we went in the hole big time but stuck with it. Fortunately we were the only employees and had volunteer family labor. We kept the businesses afloat for five years before giving it up. The problem arises when the business leaders become too impersonal as it grows and more personnel are added. Then the stock is sold and the corporation owns it and the bottom line is the profits derived from quantity, not quality. This is often seen, or tasted when restaurants become franchised chains, the quality of the food goes down. When corporate bosses see only profits, and benefits for themselves the workers suffer from low wages, etc. which is why they are firced to unionize to maintainthe balance between corporate greed and employee need. Without that balance you have people living on the margin. Cap't Jack
I don't know what it's like to work in a coal mine, but I think the risk, and the discomfort justify the higher pay. Fast food places are not that bad; and they have many more people willing to work there.MidAtlantic-I wasn't being serious about Wal-Mart employees. But, some Wal-Mart employees are more skilled then almost all fast food employees.Ok, but what do skills have to do with any of this anyways? Assembly line workers are nominally skilled. Coal Miners are nominally skilled in some cases. Lot's of "unskilled workers" are the ones traditionally organized. I could argue that it takes just as much skill to work at KFC as it does in a coal mine. The primary skills are indubitably safety skills.
If I own a business, and I need someone to flip burgers all day long, then I’m going to reason that this job doesn’t require much skill, so I’m going to pay the minimum. However, if I’m needing someone to flip burgers, manage the accounting system, organize and manage the inventory systems while distributing tasks among the other workers, I’m going to need someone who has the necessary skills to do all of that, so I’m going to pay them more. Why? Because someone like that is more valuable. Why is he valuable? Because there are less people that can effectively do all of that and still be efficient. So, if the guy who does nothing more than flip burgers, and let’s say he’s not even that good at flipping burgers, comes to me and demands that I pay him as much as the guy who does all of those other tasks, what real incentive would I have to meet such a demand? Good will? Perhaps, but that’s up to me and nobody else. We can call this “unfair" all day long and whine and complain about it, but this is reality. We can use emotionally charged terminology like “peasants" or “sweatshops", but at the end of the day this is how the world really works.That's a good point and I believe that a worker should be paid a wage commensurate with his/her skills and responsibilities, even in this instance merit pay should be a factor wherein a person really busting his ass should get a little extra in his pay envelope, no problem there. And no, I'm not in favor of raising the minimum wage to unrealistic levels, but that could be negotiated. What I am referring to is benefits, vacation, paid or otherwise, and sick leave. Even with the minimum wage these would be a boon to any restaurant worker, and the possibility of advancement in the business. And BTW the guy who isn't very good at flipping burgers is fired, unless he's the boss's son, nephew etc. So it's your view that working long hours, performing backbreaking labor, paid wages so low that you can barely survive, being treated like a throw away machine, denigrated by supervisors and customers comes with the territory and the workers just have to accept their lot in life? I don't think so. Cap't Jack
We know safety plays a big role in coal mines and kitchens alike. Other than that it is just flippin' burgers or handling a jackhammer. I'm a Teamster. My main skills are safety skills. I make sure I don't cause horrible damage to life or property when I operate a truck. Other than that, I just point the truck around and put stuff in it and take stuff off of it. It's the unskilled workers who need unionization. Otherwise with people like you and Cloak around, the workers who actually make the World go 'round get sh*t on. Attitudes like screw them, they have no skills.I don't know if I made this clear, but I'm not anti-unionization per se, trying to make a better career than fast food jockey is what I'm talking about. Yeah, I remember you posting several times before that you're a Teamster; but, as a Teamster truck driver, you have to pass a drug test, right? If you have an accident you can possibly be in deep s***? You probably have intense deadlines to meet? You have a reputation to uphold around the job? The opposite is true in the fast food field. I don't consider your job on the same level as fast food guy or girl. I know Cloak and me do sound like total snobs. However, better employment is not impossible. There's no harm in taking a fast food job to put cash in your pocket, but many people can do something else.
The people who pick up garbage. The people who deliver every conceivable thing into towns on trucks and trains. The people who have your Egg McMuffin and coffee waiting for you at the drive-thru window, etc etc...Basically all the things that people take for granted. You might not like McDonald's, I sure as heck don't. But lot's of people do. Lot's of people take all of that unskilled labor for granted.Hell yeah they take it for granted, I don't know what the solution is though. Make everybody work as a toilet scrubber for 2 years? :-) (FWIW, toilet scrubbing is a fairly big part of my job.) But, not all unskilled work is equal.
Sorry I never detected the sarcasm in your Wal-Mart response.No sweat, that's the price we pay for using forums.
Having to "accept their lot in life" does not necessarily follow. That's the choice of the individual. But it does, however, have to start with accepting the way that the world works, and working within those same paradigms to make ends meet. Many of the wealthiest people I know could give you a sad sob story, because many of them started out poor and uneducated, have lost everything at least once or twice, or at least came from broken homes. Right now, there are tons of fast food workers who are way more valuable (have college educations, have a long list of acquired skills, or just do all of the basic tasks better than the rest) than most of these people asking for more money, but are not demanding higher pay. You know why? Because they know that such a demand is silly. These are people who paid attention in economics class and understand why what is being asked is not going to work. And quite frankly, many of those same people, who are having to settle for jobs that are far below their skillsets, feel insulted when the guy who is ten times less valuable (marketwise) asks to be paid more than him.If I own a business, and I need someone to flip burgers all day long, then I’m going to reason that this job doesn’t require much skill, so I’m going to pay the minimum. However, if I’m needing someone to flip burgers, manage the accounting system, organize and manage the inventory systems while distributing tasks among the other workers, I’m going to need someone who has the necessary skills to do all of that, so I’m going to pay them more. Why? Because someone like that is more valuable. Why is he valuable? Because there are less people that can effectively do all of that and still be efficient. So, if the guy who does nothing more than flip burgers, and let’s say he’s not even that good at flipping burgers, comes to me and demands that I pay him as much as the guy who does all of those other tasks, what real incentive would I have to meet such a demand? Good will? Perhaps, but that’s up to me and nobody else. We can call this “unfair" all day long and whine and complain about it, but this is reality. We can use emotionally charged terminology like “peasants" or “sweatshops", but at the end of the day this is how the world really works.That's a good point and I believe that a worker should be paid a wage commensurate with his/her skills and responsibilities, even in this instance merit pay should be a factor wherein a person really busting his ass should get a little extra in his pay envelope, no problem there. And no, I'm not in favor of raising the minimum wage to unrealistic levels, but that could be negotiated. What I am referring to is benefits, vacation, paid or otherwise, and sick leave. Even with the minimum wage these would be a boon to any restaurant worker, and the possibility of advancement in the business. And BTW the guy who isn't very good at flipping burgers is fired, unless he's the boss's son, nephew etc. So it's your view that working long hours, performing backbreaking labor, paid wages so low that you can barely survive, being treated like a throw away machine, denigrated by supervisors and customers comes with the territory and the workers just have to accept their lot in life? I don't think so. Cap't Jack
Cloak-So you're saying that the guy trying to trade you the bottled faucet water for your car has a legitimate case for calling you unfair when you decline the offer? if you refuse, aren't you, according to your logic, "sh*tting on the little guy"?I don't even know what this means. Why would someone want to trade me a bottle of water for my car? I can easily tell that this statement is one gigantic "straw-herring" or whatever.
Nobody is saying "screw him". I'm just saying that if he is asking to be paid the same amount as the dude that is 10 times as valuable as he is and doing ten times the work that he does, then he's going to be in for a rude awakening. And it's called reality.Well you guys basically have said "Screw 'em". You have. I don't think anyone is asking to be paid as much as anyone else is? What gives you that impression? They are trying to agitate, and collectivize to possibly unionize. If that happens, they will get a raise and some perks perhaps. I'm sure the pay scale they agree on with McDonald's for example will be something that all parties agree is commensurate with their skills, abilities and time. You need to stop looking at anyone who is looking for a raise and better work environment as greedy and wanting to be paid like Donald Trump. This ain't hard dude. People have rights to collective bargain. It doesn't matter what you think they deserve.
I don't know what it's like to work in a coal mine, but I think the risk, and the discomfort justify the higher pay. Fast food places are not that bad; and they have many more people willing to work there. I think a good way to understand it is that the laborer, skill set and all, is still a market commodity. The laws of supply and demand apply to him just as much as they apply to anything else. If there was a much higher demand than supply, then his work would be much more valuable, and he could bargain for more money. That is why people with a higher, more rare set of skills tend to be more valuable, especially if there is a high demand for those particular skills in the current market. The bottom line is that, while the burger flipper skillset is in high demand, there is a massive supply, which is what drives down its costs. When businessmen (and women!) or people who at least paid attention in economics class, see what is going on right now, they can't help but feel like it's just a bunch of people who are just asking for free stuff, whether wrong or right.MidAtlantic-I wasn't being serious about Wal-Mart employees. But, some Wal-Mart employees are more skilled then almost all fast food employees.Ok, but what do skills have to do with any of this anyways? Assembly line workers are nominally skilled. Coal Miners are nominally skilled in some cases. Lot's of "unskilled workers" are the ones traditionally organized. I could argue that it takes just as much skill to work at KFC as it does in a coal mine. The primary skills are indubitably safety skills.
I don't know what it's like to work in a coal mine, but I think the risk, and the discomfort justify the higher pay. Fast food places are not that bad; and they have many more people willing to work there. I agree with you. However coal mines used to be the McDonald's of today. Those coal miners wouldn't get the pay and benefits they do today if it weren't for the unions. Coal mines paid horrible pay, no benefits, no nothing! Kids working in the mine. But they needed lot's of coal miners. They need lot's of fast food workers today. Lot's of them. That means demand. If they want the supply to meet the demand, they need to pay more. Nobody can live off of $7, $8, $9 bucks an hour. You pay those workers enough with benefits maybe here's what happens.... Turnover rate declines. Food and service quality increase. Cleanliness increases etc...MidAtlantic-I wasn't being serious about Wal-Mart employees. But, some Wal-Mart employees are more skilled then almost all fast food employees.Ok, but what do skills have to do with any of this anyways? Assembly line workers are nominally skilled. Coal Miners are nominally skilled in some cases. Lot's of "unskilled workers" are the ones traditionally organized. I could argue that it takes just as much skill to work at KFC as it does in a coal mine. The primary skills are indubitably safety skills.
I don't know if I made this clear, but I'm not anti-unionization per se, trying to make a better career than fast food jockey is what I'm talking about.I know you're not. But what does upward mobility have to do with the fast food workers wanting to organize? I would argue that that is upward mobility. That is making a better career. From the inside. With more dignity. It's a win-win. The fast food industry is just stuck in an old 1950s-60s model. It isn't going to be sustainable. The weak jobs numbers out of DC show a good percentage of the new jobs added were service related jobs. Good jobs have been hard to find for awhile now. I predict that isn't going to change anytime soon. Flipping burgers is the new manufacturing job.
Yeah, I remember you posting several times before that you're a Teamster;Yes because I'm proud. I love being a Teamster. I pass non-union drivers on the street or see them on the dock somewhere and I know that they know that they are getting competitive pay with me because of what our Union has done. Their non-union companies wouldn't be able to keep drivers or dock workers if they didn't come close to matching what the Union guys get. And most of those guys know it. By most I mean...85-90% of them. It would be the same with McDonald's. If McDonald's unionized, every one would want to work there. Burger King would have to adjust their scales to keep workers. Suddenly McDonald's and Burger King have higher standards for employment. Because they could start picking their workers. Retention would improve. Quality would skyrocket. Prices would not go up by any serious amount. Because BK and McD would still have to compete. But then they could also compete on more than just prices. They could compete on reputation, quality, performance. BK and McD's are not currently competing on reputation, quality or performance. Not even a little! Not even on price. The food is practically free to begin with. Like I said..it's a win-win. Retention and reputation cost any business greatly. Hugely! And what do these workers want? No they aren't asking for the moon! How about $14-15 bucks an hour. Some healthcare. Some job security. Some perks. Like I said, McD's isn't the place where kids go to get a summer job anymore. It's increasingly becoming the place where people go because there are no other jobs.
You probably have intense deadlines to meet? You have a reputation to uphold around the job? The opposite is true in the fast food field. I don't consider your job on the same level as fast food guy or girl.I do.(think they are equal to me.) On an ideological level. I'm not saying a Fast Food worker is going to be able to bargain the same pay and benefits I do. But there is room for improvement. Lot's of room. They're in the streets. That indicates a problem. When people go in the streets that usually indicates a problem.
Fast food workers and restaurant workers in general don’t have health insurance, besides getting low pay. Think about that the next time you go out to eat. What do they do when they’re sick, besides passing illness on to the customers? Most don’t have insurance and they also don’t have money to pay for decent health care. Emergency room care is usually too little, too late and requires long waits for which they have to miss work with no sick pay and they are already living on a shoestring.
Lois
I don't even know what this means. Why would someone want to trade me a bottle of water for my car? I can easily tell that this statement is one gigantic "straw-herring" or whatever.It's an analogy, and it's based on very basic economic principles. The guy with the bottle has something of a certain value, and wants to trade for something of another value. The guy with the bottle can beg and plead all day long that the guy with the car is being unfair for not trading with him, but the guy with the car will only see it as a stupid trade, in which he is basically just giving his stuff away to another guy for essentially nothing. This is a very basic analogy and is fairly straightforward. Both Jack and mid atlantic understand what I'm saying here. Why are you not able to make the connection?
Well you guys basically have said "Screw 'em". You have.Call it what you want. I call it reality. Once you try to understand the above analogy, you'll understand what I'm saying.
I don't think anyone is asking to be paid as much as anyone else is? What gives you that impression?Sure, they may not directly ask for that, but that's essentially what they are doing. Fact is, there are people getting paid $15 for doing way more than merely flipping a burger or sweeping a floor. Their pay is based on the value of their labor, which is tied to the supply and demand of that particular skillset. The demand for the skillset is still high, but the supply is even higher, thus reducing the market value of their labor. Basically, there are a lot of people that are willing to do the job for the same pay or less, so there is not much of an incentive to just give the guy extra money unless one was doing it strictly out of goodwill. That's up to the individual, though.
They are trying to agitate, and collectivize to possibly unionize. If that happens, they will get a raise and some perks perhaps. I'm sure the pay scale they agree on with McDonald's for example will be something that all parties agree is commensurate with their skills, abilities and time...........This ain't hard dude. People have rights to collective bargain. It doesn't matter what you think they deserve......Nope, it doesn't matter what I think. It also doesn't matter what you think either. If it works out, all power to them. Good luck with it. I'm not sure how many times I have to say this to you people, but if they want to unionize, and are able to pull it off, then that is their right. I can assure you that I won't be losing any sleep over the issue. I'm just saying that those who want to make this out as if all employers are just a bunch of evil pricks who want to do nothing more than fleece you (like Lois apparently thinks) need to understand that the reason that they don't make more than what they do now is fairly basic. Just get ready for the value of such labor to go down even further, because the supply will increase dramatically beyond the demand. More and more people will realize that you can now be paid $15 dollars just for flipping burgers. Why take a job that requires more skills than that? This will make the whole thing seem even sillier and more arbitrary.
You need to stop looking at anyone who is looking for a raise and better work environment as greedy and wanting to be paid like Donald Trump.Exaggeration.
Cloak: Many of the wealthiest people I know could give you a sad sob story, because many of them started out poor and uneducated, have lost everything at least once or twice, or at least came from broken homes.Either you know an atypical group of wealthy people or you're just making that up. It is less likely a poor worker in the United States will do better than their parent than workers in Europe. http://www.economist.com/node/15908469, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-steven-friedman/class-mobility_b_1676931.html
Right now, there are tons of fast food workers who are way more valuable (have college educations, have a long list of acquired skills, or just do all of the basic tasks better than the rest) than most of these people asking for more money, but are not demanding higher pay. You know why? Because they know that such a demand is silly. These are people who paid attention in economics class and understand why what is being asked is not going to work. And quite frankly, many of those same people, who are having to settle for jobs that are far below their skillsets, feel insulted when the guy who is ten times less valuable (marketwise) asks to be paid more than him.I'd really like to meet tons of college educated fast food workers who would turn down a living wage because they felt they were being amply rewarded for their unskilled work and and their integrity wouldn't allow them to accept a raise. Actually, I'd like to meet just one. I can't believe that anyone in this discussion believes that fast food workers are going to ever be paid some ridiculously high wage. But a person who works an honest 40 hours should be making a living. If they're not, and so, must be supported by the government, than both the business owners and the customers are passing some of the true cost of their product or service to the taxpayer. It is a subtle, but very real form of corporate welfare. http://money.msn.com/now/post.aspx?post=96788602-ad1c-46a7-b7f5-23416977b75e.
MikeYohe
Now look at Wendy’s or McDonald’s, or Kentucky Fried Chicken.
The employees want more of a stake in that business.
There is something that not right here.
There are some unions that deal with fast food and they are connected with the restaurant and bar unions that have been around a long time. This one is not. I would guess that this is a movement by a group of lawyers.
Vyazma
That’s a guess that is at least partly right. I’m sure there are lawyers involved. That goes without saying.
The rest is pure speculation.
Mikeyohe/Vyazma,
What was the last union started by workers.
One of the best known and celebrated union leaders is Cesar Chavez for organizing the National Farm Workers Association. Workers would come up from Mexico and pick grapes. Each year they would negotiate the wage for picking. The farmers would worry each year that the picking crew would not show up for picking on time. What the Union did was organizing the workers was fill the need for the supply and demand of grape pickers and the result was the union workers end up working for the same money the next twenty years
Cesar Chavez was an American farm worker, labor leader and civil rights activist, who, with Dolores Huerta, co-founded the National Farm Workers Association
Now look at what Cesar Chavez accomplished for the workers. Lower wages, because he did not understand the whole picture and how the demand and supply system works with wages. Then he created more strikes and cause the grape growers to invest in machinery the replaced the grape pickers.
Overall he did more damage for the workers than good, yet he is thought of as a hero today for the grape pickers.
…
MikeYohe
There are a fair percentage of fast food workers that would lose income by getting a raise. Many are on relief and minimum wage and less than forty hours lets them qualify for relief. They might make say $560.00 a month more and take home $450.00 of that after taxes, but they would lose $600.00 a month in food stamps. So I do not see this movement coming from all the workers.
Vyazma
This is just conjecture and windbaggery. I bet if you polled 10,000 fast food workers and asked them if they wanted their salaries doubled and health benefits etc… they would say yes. Probably on the order of say…99.99%.
It’s about raising people up. I would have thought you preferred them to make a living wage with some benefits and get off of food stamps.
People don’t want to be on food stamps.
Why would I even have to emphasize this?!?!?
mikeyohe/Vyazma,
Ask people if they want double their wage and health benefits, are you going to throw in a new car too? Please keep the facts straight. No body is adding health benefits. That is one of the reason people are on relief, is they get full medical.
Add medical to part time workers and the cost goes from $28.00/hr to $31.80/hr. Add full medical like the state and it would be closer to $35.00\hr. Right now their cost for a guy earning $7.25/hr is $13.54/hr. You think it is ok to pass a law raising the overhead cost by $18.26/hr to $28.00/hr.
Now the question is the $5.00 hamburger will now cost $8.50. Are you willing to pay $8.50 for a fast food hamburger?
…
mikeyohe
I started a union one time. And it’s not that hard. I did it for the reason that unions can get around most labor laws to a point. The state let injured workers go to these worker’s compensation medical clinics for treatment and spent six weeks before we could get them to a real doctor and heal the injury. These clinics were known as millionaire mills and were jointly run by the attorneys and doctors. When an employee is hurt the best thing you can do is get him to the best specialist and doctors you can find as quickly as possible. It will be cheaper in the long run and better for the employee.
Vyazma
Ok, do you think is really fairly admissible in this discussion?
mikeyohe/vyazma
Sorry, I some times forget the basic labor laws are not very well known by the public.
Yes, the point being is that most labor laws are enforced by attorneys.
Point, labor laws are most of the time enforced by attorneys representing workers in lawsuits against the business.
Companies like McDonalds, KFC, Jack in the Box and most of the big companies are set up with self insurance. But the cost of lawsuits by workers can be quite costly.
What I was trying to point out is that the business may be behind the creation of the union, just like I did years ago. They know the $15.00/hr will not pass. But just the talk about it may get the union in.
Who will be against the union, all the attorneys but a few? The reason is that unions are under federal laws. Therefore 98% of the attorneys are not qualified to work in federal courts. And unions can have mandatory arbitration. In mandatory arbitration the employee can have an attorney, but the employee must pay for the attorney.
So, Vyazma, I do think that these points are fairly admissible in this discussion.
It is quite possible that the business are willing to deal with the unions to be able to stop fraudulent lawsuits, thus the business would be willing to pay the workers more if they can save costs on the employee lawsuits.
Today, some unions can be more beneficial to the employer than to the employee.
Either you know an atypical group of wealthy people or you're just making that up. It is less likely a poor worker in the United States will do better than their parent than workers in Europe.Both me and my wife have family members and friends who have started out or at one point, ended up very poor, but are now quite wealthy. They range from cotton farmers, to car salesmen, to investors. ALL of them have been poor at one or more points in their lives. And yes, they are atypical. That's my point.
I'd really like to meet tons of college educated fast food workers who would turn down a living wage because they felt they were being amply rewarded for their unskilled work and and their integrity wouldn't allow them to accept a raise. Actually, I'd like to meet just one.Nobody is saying that the worker would reject the offer. But someone who really knows how things works would not demand $15.00 for flipping a burger.
I can't believe that anyone in this discussion believes that fast food workers are going to ever be paid some ridiculously high wage.I never said that it's "ridiculously high". I stated continuously that what they want is way more than their market value.
But a person who works an honest 40 hours should be making a living.Think about that for a moment. What if my job was to kick a rock repeatedly all day long. Sure, it's a job, but I would look silly asking for 10-15 dollars an hour for it.