Why would anyone support entry-level (i.e. fast food, retail, etc.) unions?

[Moralgy]

I'd pay more to make sure workers had insurance and the chance to take a day off every now and then. I don't need some sick, grumpy person handling my food (I don't even eat McDonald's, so exchange any restaurant here).

That isn't how you are supposed to think! You are supposed to be okay with your life being slightly easier no matter what is happening to others.

[Uko]

I'm working a minimum wage job at a union grocery store and I still cant figure out what I'm getting out of the union I didn't get at a non union hardware store. I sure as heck am not paying into the union for better wages that's for sure.

[Elegiac]

I'm working a minimum wage job at a union grocery store and I still cant figure out what I'm getting out of the union I didn't get at a non union hardware store. I sure as heck am not paying into the union for better wages that's for sure.

Neither of the major parties identify very heavily with labor unions as is the case with a lot of other countries, making it difficult to effect reform.

[Barracks00]

Would I still get $1 hamburgers and fries at McDonalds? I know that price is a little obscene but I like $1 hamburgers and fries.

What I'm saying is, how much will it raise the prices?

If you are concerned with having to pay more than $1 for a burger and $1 for fries, then perhaps you, too, should also consider joining a union?

[Zantos]

To increase the minimum wage to 15 dollars in US, a bigmac's price will go up by 10%. So you will still get your cheap shit.

This interests me. How exactly do you know that it will only go up by 10%? What credible sources do you have to cite for this price increase? I hear people spouting these things all the time saying "prices will only go up a little bit so the workers can be paid more!", yet I have not seen them quote a source for the information. Like in depth analysis.

To add to that, they are also missing one thing. They go "well since minimum wage is increased, people will have more spending power so they can spend more!" To that, I say Maybe. Maybe because you are increasing EVERY employees pay. Not just the ones who work minimum wage. If a manage makes 15$ now, if minimum wage was raised, they too would want more money. Part of a higher level job is more money. Why bother doing a job that requires skill, and more work, if you don't get any benefits like increased pay? People will be lazy and go "meh, why bother working harder for the same as the cart pusher". So I ask, are these numbers assuming that Only those currently making Minimum wage get a pay raise too, or are they taking into account across the board pay rises?

OT: Really depends. Unions are sometimes bad and have negatives. Like for example, the two you worked for being jerks. Then you have mandatory union pickets where you can go days, weeks, months without pay because your union says so. Meanwhile you have cheap labor coming in and the company literally giving zero F's aside from the bad PR.

If a union really doesn't care about its entry level workers, then screw em. People need to realize a Union cannot and will not be able to magically make everything better. They cannot guarantee a pay raise, better conditions or promotion opportunities. Honestly, I would prefer a company do all that because they Want to rather then because they have a union riding them.

[Packing an i5]

Retail has union and so do the deli workers at the grocery store.

[Elegiac]

This interests me. How exactly do you know that it will only go up by 10%? What credible sources do you have to cite for this price increase? I hear people spouting these things all the time saying "prices will only go up a little bit so the workers can be paid more!", yet I have not seen them quote a source for the information. Like in depth analysis.

Because that has been the case in every country with a minimum wage every time it was raised?

It's also mathematically impossible for prices to increase proportionately to wages since production costs do not determine the price of the good or service in question.

To add to that, they are also missing one thing. They go "well since minimum wage is increased, people will have more spending power so they can spend more!" To that, I say Maybe. Maybe because you are increasing EVERY employees pay. Not just the ones who work minimum wage. If a manage makes 15$ now, if minimum wage was raised, they too would want more money. Part of a higher level job is more money. Why bother doing a job that requires skill, and more work, if you don't get any benefits like increased pay? People will be lazy and go "meh, why bother working harder for the same as the cart pusher". So I ask, are these numbers assuming that Only those currently making Minimum wage get a pay raise too, or are they taking into account across the board pay rises?

They're taking into account the latter because, again, that's what always happens when the minimum wage is raised.

OT: Really depends. Unions are sometimes bad and have negatives. Like for example, the two you worked for being jerks. Then you have mandatory union pickets where you can go days, weeks, months without pay because your union says so. Meanwhile you have cheap labor coming in and the company literally giving zero F's aside from the bad PR.

If a union really doesn't care about its entry level workers, then screw em. People need to realize a Union cannot and will not be able to magically make everything better. They cannot guarantee a pay raise, better conditions or promotion opportunities. Honestly, I would prefer a company do all that because they Want to rather then because they have a union riding them.

And the issue is companies have an in-built incentive to do the -opposite- thing, making unions necessary. QED.

[Barnabas]

Yeah dude wal mart is a great company to work for. They recently decided to enact this new dress code in their stores and the employees have to pay for it. Oddly enough wal mart carries the clothes in their store they want their employees to wear and will specially mark it for them to make it more distinguishable. Wal mart sounds more like the "company store" than some paradise you make it out to be. Not to mention they stand to rake in another $50-100 million in profits on this "dress code" change they ask for. A union would make wal mart spend 6 days of profits from their stores to pay for it. This goes without mentioning they'd have healthcare, they can't be fired at will, they'd work more hours, etc the list goes on and on.

[zhero]

Do I expect Walmart to pay me $15 an hour? No. First off, I'm an unskilled laborer at the moment, so why would they pay me $15 to do something a monkey can do? Not to mention it would be impossible under their retail business model, not unless consumers wanted to pay ridiculous prices and a union isn't going to change that. Besides which, Walmart already pays their people better than most entry-level unions do, not to mention their better benefits.

because they can't keep people by paying them minimum wage. a business the size and profit of walmart should be paying people a near livable wage.

[Zogarth]

In Sweden unions are very important (e.g. we don't have nor need a minimum wage law), so perhaps this is more of an issue with US job ethics rather than unionising.

It is pretty much the same in Denmark. We don't have any law about wages, we let the unions handle that shit, and they seem to do quite a nice job.

[Zantos]

Because that has been the case in every country with a minimum wage every time it was raised?

It's also mathematically impossible for prices to increase proportionately to wages since production costs do not determine the price of the good or service in question.

Where is a source for all of this? Did I say prices could increase proportionately to wages? No. I said, where is their sources, the research put in to say that it would only be increased by 10%? I mean, again here, nothing is being cited. No source of information, no research on the subject, just saying "it works everywhere so it'll work here" while not giving something showing exactly who would experience the increases in wage, by how much, and what the end result would be on prices of goods and services.

[Elegiac]

Where is a source for all of this? Did I say prices could increase proportionately to wages? No. I said, where is their sources, the research put in to say that it would only be increased by 10%? I mean, again here, nothing is being cited. No source of information, no research on the subject, just saying "it works everywhere so it'll work here" while not giving something showing exactly who would experience the increases in wage, by how much, and what the end result would be on prices of goods and services.

If you're not saying that then what on earth are you bitching about? What matters is that there is -always- an increase in buying power, by definition.

And when I say it's been the case everywhere, I mean in the US as well. Otherwise you'd have doctors making minimum wage.

[Glnger]

because entry level and low skilled workers are the most exploited, and the most easily exploited.

[Zantos]

If you're not saying that then what on earth are you bitching about? What matters is that there is -always- an increase in buying power, by definition.

And when I say it's been the case everywhere, I mean in the US as well. Otherwise you'd have doctors making minimum wage.

When was I "bitching" about anything? I stated something, that you are continuing to prove true; No one who quotes that the prices of goods and services would only go up by X% can provide definitive research or source information with math proving that its only 10% or 5% or 15%. Nor do they say how many people would see a pay raise. They only say "well if we raise minimum wage" blah blah blah. What about the managers who need a pay raise then? The assistant managers? The employees who currently make more then minimum wage? What about all of Them. How much of a pay raise will they see? With your own example, a doctor is not payed the same as a burger flipper at mcdonalds. You cannot expect the manager to be paid the same either.

Here in my state, it would be a 107% increase in the minimum wage to go to 15$. In other states, its more. In some, less. What does that mean? You have varying degrees at which the pay for just minimum wage alone will go up. Where is the facts, the prove, the national studies done to show that an across the board, federally regulated increase in minimum wage to 15$ would only result in 10% increases.

I understand they cannot raise proportionally, what I want is the research and facts done to figure out what the cost rise would be. Saying "cause it worked then" doesn't cut it. If that was true, we wouldn't be in this mess now would we? Obviously the price can increase at to higher levels then the pay. What prove do you have that it wont just remain higher then the pay of minimum wage?

[Elegiac]

When was I "bitching" about anything? I stated something, that you are continuing to prove true; No one who quotes that the prices of goods and services would only go up by X% can provide definitive research or source information with math proving that its only 10% or 5% or 15%. Nor do they say how many people would see a pay raise. They only say "well if we raise minimum wage" blah blah blah. What about the managers who need a pay raise then? The assistant managers? The employees who currently make more then minimum wage? What about all of Them. How much of a pay raise will they see? With your own example, a doctor is not payed the same as a burger flipper at mcdonalds. You cannot expect the manager to be paid the same either.

Said research has been posted ad nauseum in the plethora of other minimum wage threads.

And again, I do not expect them to be paid the same; their wage will increase as well unless they happen to be incredibly inept at negotiation.

Here in my state, it would be a 107% increase in the minimum wage to go to 15$. In other states, its more. In some, less. What does that mean? You have varying degrees at which the pay for just minimum wage alone will go up. Where is the facts, the prove, the national studies done to show that an across the board, federally regulated increase in minimum wage to 15$ would only result in 10% increases.

In many of the developing states with low minimum wages it would be quite useful for stimulating their economies through the increase in demand, which alone helps weather any perceived detriments.

I understand they cannot raise proportionally, what I want is the research and facts done to figure out what the cost rise would be.

And I'm asking you; why the hell does it matter as long as there's an increase in buying power?

[Zantos]

And I'm asking you; why the hell does it matter as long as there's an increase in buying power?

Because as I ask you, what guarantee does an increase in buying power have that it'll increase enough to offset the cost of goods and services? It matters because we are in This situation. The cost of goods and services cost so much that minimum wage cannot allow one to survive on their own.

What, do you think we can just continuously increase minimum wage? I remember being able to buy a can of soda for 25cents. Now its 75. Bottles are 1.25$. The dollar is losing its value. We cannot just simply continue to add on bigger numbers and then add more when we feel the prices are too high.

I have been in a few threads about minimum wage, but I have never seen any of this research that was posted.

Im sure the undertaking for creating a minimum wage at the federal level would be big. There are a few stats the do not appear to have a minimum wage at this time. Most others have varying minimum wages.

[Elegiac]

Because as I ask you, what guarantee does an increase in buying power have that it'll increase enough to offset the cost of goods and services? It matters because we are in This situation. The cost of goods and services cost so much that minimum wage cannot allow one to survive on their own.

Which happens to be the case presently. I'm not sure you understand the definition of the word offset. If the minimum wage increases by 100% and the costs of goods increases by 75% then there is still a 25% increase in buying power.

And again, production costs do not determine prices.

What, do you think we can just continuously increase minimum wage? I remember being able to buy a can of soda for 25cents. Now its 75. Bottles are 1.25$. The dollar is losing its value. We cannot just simply continue to add on bigger numbers and then add more when we feel the prices are too high.

Yes, I do think that. The numerical increase is irrelevant if wages keep pace with inflation; the soda might cost more money, but you'll also be making more money resulting in at minimum no real difference.

I have been in a few threads about minimum wage, but I have never seen any of this research that was posted.

Do you have Endus or Masark on ignore, or something?

[Bullettime]

Because as I ask you, what guarantee does an increase in buying power have that it'll increase enough to offset the cost of goods and services? It matters because we are in This situation. The cost of goods and services cost so much that minimum wage cannot allow one to survive on their own.

What, do you think we can just continuously increase minimum wage? I remember being able to buy a can of soda for 25cents. Now its 75. Bottles are 1.25$. The dollar is losing its value. We cannot just simply continue to add on bigger numbers and then add more when we feel the prices are too high.

I have been in a few threads about minimum wage, but I have never seen any of this research that was posted.

Im sure the undertaking for creating a minimum wage at the federal level would be big. There are a few stats the do not appear to have a minimum wage at this time. Most others have varying minimum wages.

The minimum wage is supposed to keep up with inflation. The reason for the large jump being needed now is because it was not steadily increased year to year like it was in most other countries.

If people have disposable income, they're more likely to spend it on extra things like luxuries and services. Seattle for example had a massive boom in small business and profitability when the minimum wage was increased there as more people could afford to look at antiques or eat at the local pizza place.

Almost every other first world country has had a steadily increasing minimum wage to combat inflation and they have a much healthier and growing middle class and quality of living.

Endus and Masark have posted the links a billion times. Go browse the other threads for the research.

[Captain N]

I showed some math on page 147 of the last wage thread showing a massive increase to profits while increasing the wages of all employees in the store. Granted this is a small business of 8 employees but with a small cost of goods increase and acceptance that more money will generate more sales despite the increase shows everyone benefits.

[Zantos]

Which happens to be the case presently. I'm not sure you understand the definition of the word offset. If the minimum wage increases by 100% and the costs of goods increases by 75% then there is still a 25% increase in buying power.

And again, production costs do not determine prices.

See, there's that random number tossed out again. Not you, nor anyone has given or can give a definitive answer as to how much the cost will increase by. There is no guarantee that it wont simply increase by enough, even if its less then the pay increase, to still be higher.

Yes, I do think that. The numerical increase is irrelevant if wages keep pace with inflation; the soda might cost more money, but you'll also be making more money resulting in at minimum no real difference.

And how does that effect us on the global scale? If we simply keep decreasing the value of each dollar, what effect does that have on a global scale. I don't want to get to a point where they have to start printing 1million dollar bills.

Do you have Endus or Masark on ignore, or something?

You say those names as if they are to be known. No I do not have those two on ignore nor have I ever seen them post personally.

- - - Updated - - -

The minimum wage is supposed to keep up with inflation. The reason for the large jump being needed now is because it was not steadily increased year to year like it was in most other countries.

If people have disposable income, they're more likely to spend it on extra things like luxuries and services. Seattle for example had a massive boom in small business and profitability when the minimum wage was increased there as more people could afford to look at antiques or eat at the local pizza place.

Almost every other first world country has had a steadily increasing minimum wage to combat inflation and they have a much healthier and growing middle class and quality of living.

Endus and Masark have posted the links a billion times. Go browse the other threads for the research.

I understand that fully. Trust me I do. I am just saying, What research has been done to try and determine, on a federal level, how much of a cost price increase we may see and will it be enough to make the pay price increase a useless effort.