The Mac Donald's Strike

[Salandriagado]

Well that's easy: tie the minimum wage to local PPP.

Isn't that what I just said?

I tend to catch up through a few pages at a time, responding to posts as I reach them.

[Lordieth]

Last time I checked, 15 dollars was double that of 7.5. Unless I got the math completely wrong. "a few bucks" is meaningless. We're talking about doubling of a salary. That is what's ludicrous. If they were asking for a raise to 9, or even 10 dollars, then you could say "a few bucks".

A few bucks and double are not mutually exclusive. 7 bucks is a few bucks. It is also half of 14. They are two separate scales.

They people who work at McDonalds always have a choice. I never said the choice was "another job". It seems the problem isn't that McDonalds are paying too little, it's that the market is so monopolised that there isn't enough local competition to compete on wages. I don't think forcing McDonalds to double the salary of workers is at all beneficial.

The other choice is what then... dying? I'm sorry, are you trying to convince me your position is correct?

And if the market is too monopolized, something that McDonalds and other companies like it have done (and its not monopolized, its cartel'ed), why should they not pay for it? Or do you think companies out-rank humans?

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm stating facts. They're not being forced to take a minimum wage. If they cannot get better pay for similar work elsewhere, then it seems glaringly obvious to me that this is the problem. As if McDonalds is somehow the only fast-food restaurant offering lousy worker salaries.

I get the point. McDonalds bad. Wage increase good. What about Burger King? Wendys? (Those are the only 3 I know that are American, although I'm not too sure about Wendys).

I'm saying the problem isn't McDonald's salaries. It's McDonald's market position. That's it.

[Grenartia]

1. That's EXACTLY what they're doing, as has been stated multiple times in this thread. Its negotiation 101 that you always start out demanding more than you want, so you can negotiate down and appear reasonable.

Then why argue with me? I'm in total favour of that. I clearly stated originally that my issue was with the doubling of the wage. Not the wage going up.

Because of the other shit you're saying.

They people who work at McDonalds always have a choice. I never said the choice was "another job".

That's really not much of a choice, since these people really don't have much in the way of options. Its either minimum wage or the soup kitchen.

Hell, for too many, its both.

[Union Of Canadorian Socialists Republic]

Minimum wage should be lowered or even abolished. High minimum wage is one of the reasons why American factories are shutting down and moving abroad. Besides, working is not a right. One should appreciate even being employed. If someone wants to make more money, they must move up the corporate ladder. This requires effort, of course. If one is lazy, they shouldn't deserve a promotion.

[Enadail]

A few bucks and double are not mutually exclusive. 7 bucks is a few bucks. It is also half of 14. They are two separate scales.



The other choice is what then... dying? I'm sorry, are you trying to convince me your position is correct?

And if the market is too monopolized, something that McDonalds and other companies like it have done (and its not monopolized, its cartel'ed), why should they not pay for it? Or do you think companies out-rank humans?

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm stating facts. They're not being forced to take a minimum wage. If they cannot get better pay for similar work elsewhere, then it seems glaringly obvious to me that this is the problem. As if McDonalds is somehow the only fast-food restaurant offering lousy worker salaries.

I get the point. McDonalds bad. Wage increase good. What about Burger King? Wendys? (Those are the only 3 I know that are American, although I'm not too sure about Wendys).

I'm saying the problem isn't McDonald's salaries. It's McDonald's market position. That's it.

Like I said, its a cartel. We're focusing on McDonalds here, because that's the topic and that's who's striking. It doesn't mean it should stop there.

[Enadail]

Minimum wage should be lowered or even abolished. High minimum wage is one of the reasons why American factories are shutting down and moving abroad. Besides, working is not a right. One should appreciate even being employed. If someone wants to make more money, they must move up the corporate ladder. This requires effort, of course. If one is lazy, they shouldn't deserve a promotion.

Right, because hard work always leads to a successful life...

[Grenartia]

Isn't that what I just said?

I tend to catch up through a few pages at a time, responding to posts as I reach them.

Gotcha.

A few bucks and double are not mutually exclusive. 7 bucks is a few bucks. It is also half of 14. They are two separate scales.



The other choice is what then... dying? I'm sorry, are you trying to convince me your position is correct?

And if the market is too monopolized, something that McDonalds and other companies like it have done (and its not monopolized, its cartel'ed), why should they not pay for it? Or do you think companies out-rank humans?

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm stating facts. They're not being forced to take a minimum wage. If they cannot get better pay for similar work elsewhere, then it seems glaringly obvious to me that this is the problem. As if McDonalds is somehow the only fast-food restaurant offering lousy worker salaries.

I get the point. McDonalds bad. Wage increase good. What about Burger King? Wendys? (Those are the only 3 I know that are American, although I'm not too sure about Wendys).

I'm saying the problem isn't McDonald's salaries. It's McDonald's market position. That's it.

McDonalds, Burger King, Wendy's, [insert other fast food chain here]; they're all the fucking same with regards to how they "pay" their workers.

[European Socialist Republic]

Minimum wage should be lowered or even abolished. High minimum wage is one of the reasons why American factories are shutting down and moving abroad.

Oh please. The USA can never compete with the low wages of countries like China and India.

[Union Of Canadorian Socialists Republic]

Minimum wage should be lowered or even abolished. High minimum wage is one of the reasons why American factories are shutting down and moving abroad.

Oh please. The USA can never compete with the low wages of countries like China and India.

Yes it can, the government just needs to get off the private sector's back for it to happen.

[Lordieth]

I tend to catch up through a few pages at a time, responding to posts as I reach them.

Gotcha.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm stating facts. They're not being forced to take a minimum wage. If they cannot get better pay for similar work elsewhere, then it seems glaringly obvious to me that this is the problem. As if McDonalds is somehow the only fast-food restaurant offering lousy worker salaries.

I get the point. McDonalds bad. Wage increase good. What about Burger King? Wendys? (Those are the only 3 I know that are American, although I'm not too sure about Wendys).

I'm saying the problem isn't McDonald's salaries. It's McDonald's market position. That's it.

McDonalds, Burger King, Wendy's, [insert other fast food chain here]; they're all the fucking same with regards to how they "pay" their workers.

What if, hypothetically speaking, McDonalds did increase the wage to $15. Being reasonable, food prices also stay pretty much the same, or go up by very little. What if Burger King and Wendy's don't follow suit? If McDonalds has such a cartel, and the workers have no choice but to work for McDonalds, then Burger King, Wendys, and insert-name-here would have very little incentive to increase their employees' wages too, wouldn't they?

Isn't that then an artificial wage increase? If people have no choice but to take these jobs, then they're not all suddenly going to flood to McDonalds. There's a finite amount of positions available. If they have no choice, the what incentive does McDonalds have, except media pressure to increase its wages?

Wages should go up (incrementally), but it seems like the bigger problem is the fast-food market as a whole. Not just one restaurant.

[Greed and Death]

Entry-level position has NO meaning here. An entry-level engineering position is entirely different from entry-level in the services industry. And even managers working for McDonalds have trouble making ends meet. That's no by no means entry-level. This obsession over "entry-level" baffles me.

Regardless, low skilled workers can't simply leave their jobs for another one; they can barely survive on the job they currently have. Quitting, even for a week, would mean starving for that time, ASSUMING they could find another job, which is unlikely, because its a saturated market.

As for raising prices, why? Is McDonalds barely making a profit? Do they have no margin? Or are they making tons of money on the backs of workers who can barely afford to feed themselves? This idea that raising the wages would lead to a rise in prices assumes that the company maintains the same exact profit margin, which means they actually are exploiting their workers.

Companies answer to shareholders, not just consumers. Would McDonald's shareholders be happy with them absorbing the wage increase? Taking it from their profit margin. I don't think it's as economically straight as is being made out.

Is McDonalds' pay worse than any other similar job in the sector?

What happens is Mcdonald's shares go down in value someone like Gordan Geeko( or Mitt Romney) shows up and makes a move to buy the company, takes it private then borrows a lot or money. They then proceed to close down less profitable parts to sell and at some point they go to the workers and explains to them hey we are in a lot of debt we are all going to have to take a pay cut ( except the CEO because the pay cut triggers his bonus provisions). The workers and a lot of middle management then take cuts because it is a saturated market and they can not get other work.


There is a solution Raise the minimum wage across the board for all employers(in a region) that way there is no stock price drop because there are no other companies for shareholders to flee to.

[Llamalandia]

Companies answer to shareholders, not just consumers. Would McDonald's shareholders be happy with them absorbing the wage increase? Taking it from their profit margin. I don't think it's as economically straight as is being made out.

Is McDonalds' pay worse than any other similar job in the sector?

And this the root of the problem: companies, specially those with saturated work forces, have NO incentive to actually treat their workers as human. Its why the government sets the minimum wage, because companies, had they the choice, would just pay enough so their workers could stay alive. Hell, McDonalds already does this and ADMITS it. They know their workers can't get by on their wages; their own budget recommends getting a second job to make ends meet.

Frankly, I care more about people then I do companies, because a lot of these large multinational literally do work on greed. I can't image a CEO is doing literally 1000x the work a line cook is, yet they're getting paid in that range. You want me to give a damn about the company and its shareholders? Then the company better give a damn about its employees, because a CEO isn't getting anywhere without the workers actually doing work.

No, becasue companies have to compete with each for workers, it's just that the quality of the pool and the demand for the labor right now is disadvantageous to workers. I mean if workers themsleves had no power then unions would have never existed at all, or rather they would have done nothing directly for workers but rather become glorified lobbiest begging the govt to save the poor exploited masses through their benificient legislation. On top of that there is also the risk of migration (like what happens when mexicans are drawn to the usa for the higher wages) additionally people will drop out of the labor force if it isn't worthwhile to be there. I mean at some point it ust makes sense to go live on a farming commune if you really make so little pay as to be unable to feed yourself.
I think entrylevel means that the job isn't meant to be permit but rather a transitory stage in a persons career path (normally at the very young end ie high school age) and then people move on to better paid jobs. It's supposed to be the lowest rung on the ladder of success not the middle rung. Plus I'm guessing a single person can get by on minimum wage and that's really who these jobs are aimed at, if you're trying to raise a family you really should wait to do so until you have a better job.
I agree with you on ceo pay though Im guessing half the peple working at mcdonalds could do a half decent job as ceo, I'm not sure how they managed to inflate ceo pay so much but that hurts everyone as ceos rarely provide alot of added value in my opinion.

[European Socialist Republic]

Oh please. The USA can never compete with the low wages of countries like China and India.

Yes it can, the government just needs to get off the private sector's back for it to happen.

Can you provide evidence for that?

[Grenartia]

1. Minimum wage should be lowered or even abolished. High minimum wage is one of the reasons why American factories are shutting down and moving abroad. 2. Besides, working is not a right. 3. One should appreciate even being employed. 4. If someone wants to make more money, they must move up the corporate ladder. 5. This requires effort, of course. 6. If one is lazy, they shouldn't deserve a promotion.

1. Yes, because we need more poor people starving in the fucking streets.

2. But living IS. And you have to work to get the money to live. So yes, working IS a right. As is a living wage.

3. Bullshit. If an employer can't be fucking bothered to pay me enough to live, why the fuck should I be bothered to appreciate the "opportunity" to slave myself out to them until I die?

4. Except, doing so requires this thing. Called education. That you have to pay for with this thing. Called money. If you can't make enough money on minimum wage to get the education required to move up.

5. There's a difference between working hard to achieve your goals, and slaving yourself to a corporation for barely any pay, and having to thank them for the 'privilege'.

6. Has nothing to do with "laziness". Instead, its a matter of NOBODY can be expected to work their ass off as hard as is required to obtain the money to obtain the education required to move up the ladder. You either have to be Superman, doing illegal activities, or performing sexual favors on your boss in order to move up the ladder while working for minimum wage.

[Llamalandia]

Companies answer to shareholders, not just consumers. Would McDonald's shareholders be happy with them absorbing the wage increase? Taking it from their profit margin. I don't think it's as economically straight as is being made out.

Is McDonalds' pay worse than any other similar job in the sector?

What happens is Mcdonald's shares go down in value someone like Gordan Geeko( or Mitt Romney) shows up and makes a move to buy the company, takes it private then borrows a lot or money. They then proceed to close down less profitable parts to sell and at some point they go to the workers and explains to them hey we are in a lot of debt we are all going to have to take a pay cut ( except the CEO because the pay cut triggers his bonus provisions). The workers and a lot of middle management then take cuts because it is a saturated market and they can not get other work.


There is a solution Raise the minimum wage across the board for all employers(in a region) that way there is no stock price drop because there are no other companies for shareholders to flee to.

Umm mcdonalds is largely a d is largely made up of locally owned franchises, i don't know how much power corporate really has over closing down "unprofitable" units or how much borrowing against the company they can leverage.

[Grand Britannia]

They should at least give them some benefits for working...

[Grenartia]

Gotcha.



McDonalds, Burger King, Wendy's, [insert other fast food chain here]; they're all the fucking same with regards to how they "pay" their workers.

What if, hypothetically speaking, McDonalds did increase the wage to $15. Being reasonable, food prices also stay pretty much the same, or go up by very little. What if Burger King and Wendy's don't follow suit? If McDonalds has such a cartel, and the workers have no choice but to work for McDonalds, then Burger King, Wendys, and insert-name-here would have very little incentive to increase their employees' wages too, wouldn't they?

Isn't that then an artificial wage increase? If people have no choice but to take these jobs, then they're not all suddenly going to flood to McDonalds. There's a finite amount of positions available. If they have no choice, the what incentive does McDonalds have, except media pressure to increase its wages?

Wages should go up (incrementally), but it seems like the bigger problem is the fast-food market as a whole. Not just one restaurant.

I'm having a hard time following anything before the second part of the second to last sentence.

And yes, the problem IS the fast-food market. In case you haven't noticed, McDonalds isn't the only fast-food chain where workers are protesting/striking. Its happened with Burger King and Wendy's as well. For some reason, the OP just chose to focus on McDonalds.

[Lordieth]

What if, hypothetically speaking, McDonalds did increase the wage to $15. Being reasonable, food prices also stay pretty much the same, or go up by very little. What if Burger King and Wendy's don't follow suit? If McDonalds has such a cartel, and the workers have no choice but to work for McDonalds, then Burger King, Wendys, and insert-name-here would have very little incentive to increase their employees' wages too, wouldn't they?

Isn't that then an artificial wage increase? If people have no choice but to take these jobs, then they're not all suddenly going to flood to McDonalds. There's a finite amount of positions available. If they have no choice, the what incentive does McDonalds have, except media pressure to increase its wages?

Wages should go up (incrementally), but it seems like the bigger problem is the fast-food market as a whole. Not just one restaurant.

I'm having a hard time following anything before the second part of the second to last sentence.

And yes, the problem IS the fast-food market. In case you haven't noticed, McDonalds isn't the only fast-food chain where workers are protesting/striking. Its happened with Burger King and Wendy's as well. For some reason, the OP just chose to focus on McDonalds.

The point I was trying to make was that a wage increase isn't necessarily beneficial if it's forced upon industry, rather than as natural result of competition. So competition is a more favorable option than political or media pressure.

[Greed and Death]

What happens is Mcdonald's shares go down in value someone like Gordan Geeko( or Mitt Romney) shows up and makes a move to buy the company, takes it private then borrows a lot or money. They then proceed to close down less profitable parts to sell and at some point they go to the workers and explains to them hey we are in a lot of debt we are all going to have to take a pay cut ( except the CEO because the pay cut triggers his bonus provisions). The workers and a lot of middle management then take cuts because it is a saturated market and they can not get other work.


There is a solution Raise the minimum wage across the board for all employers(in a region) that way there is no stock price drop because there are no other companies for shareholders to flee to.

Umm mcdonalds is largely a d is largely made up of locally owned franchises, i don't know how much power corporate really has over closing down "unprofitable" units or how much borrowing against the company they can leverage.

Corporate has as much control as a the Franchise agreement gives them. In bad times practically like they own the franchisee.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/0 ... 12931.html

[Grenartia]

I'm having a hard time following anything before the second part of the second to last sentence.

And yes, the problem IS the fast-food market. In case you haven't noticed, McDonalds isn't the only fast-food chain where workers are protesting/striking. Its happened with Burger King and Wendy's as well. For some reason, the OP just chose to focus on McDonalds.

The point I was trying to make was that a wage increase isn't necessarily beneficial if it's forced upon industry, rather than as natural result of competition. So competition is a more favorable option than political or media pressure.

I still fail to see where you're coming from.

[Llamalandia]

1. Minimum wage should be lowered or even abolished. High minimum wage is one of the reasons why American factories are shutting down and moving abroad. 2. Besides, working is not a right. 3. One should appreciate even being employed. 4. If someone wants to make more money, they must move up the corporate ladder. 5. This requires effort, of course. 6. If one is lazy, they shouldn't deserve a promotion.

1. Yes, because we need more poor people starving in the fucking streets.

2. But living IS. And you have to work to get the money to live. So yes, working IS a right. As is a living wage.

3. Bullshit. If an employer can't be fucking bothered to pay me enough to live, why the fuck should I be bothered to appreciate the "opportunity" to slave myself out to them until I die?

4. Except, doing so requires this thing. Called education. That you have to pay for with this thing. Called money. If you can't make enough money on minimum wage to get the education required to move up.

5. There's a difference between working hard to achieve your goals, and slaving yourself to a corporation for barely any pay, and having to thank them for the 'privilege'.

6. Has nothing to do with "laziness". Instead, its a matter of NOBODY can be expected to work their ass off as hard as is required to obtain the money to obtain the education required to move up the ladder. You either have to be Superman, doing illegal activities, or performing sexual favors on your boss in order to move up the ladder while working for minimum wage.

Um the world band defines the poverty line as being $1.25 per day and I believe the UN uses the figure of $2 a day. Thus minimum wage in the usa is 3.25x that of the un poverty line per day for working just one hour! if we assume that an average work day is say 8 hours then that means that someone making minimum wage in the usa is making 28x the un poverty line. I would say that's a "living wage"

[Union Of Canadorian Socialists Republic]

Yes it can, the government just needs to get off the private sector's back for it to happen.

Can you provide evidence for that?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thatcherism

[Lordieth]

The point I was trying to make was that a wage increase isn't necessarily beneficial if it's forced upon industry, rather than as natural result of competition. So competition is a more favorable option than political or media pressure.

I still fail to see where you're coming from.

If an increase in wage isn't driven by competition, but artificially inflated, then it raises the question that wages could be artificially raised above the value of the work. Again, I was not talking about incremental wage increases.

Stupid question, but do we actually know how much the average employee at McDonalds is worth?

[Llamalandia]

The point I was trying to make was that a wage increase isn't necessarily beneficial if it's forced upon industry, rather than as natural result of competition. So competition is a more favorable option than political or media pressure.

I still fail to see where you're coming from.

I htink is an argument about the unintended consequences of govt actions. It's like how Obamacare seems to be cusing some business (not all but some) to cut hours of workers to get them below full time status so that they don't have to pay for health insurance. I mean no one disputes that obamacare like an increase in the minimum wage is well intentioned but just like obamacare there may be some unforseen consequences that a hike in the minimum wage lead to (more automation, few hours etc).
It would be better if the two sides could work out an agreement without involving govt.

[Grenartia]

1. Yes, because we need more poor people starving in the fucking streets.

2. But living IS. And you have to work to get the money to live. So yes, working IS a right. As is a living wage.

3. Bullshit. If an employer can't be fucking bothered to pay me enough to live, why the fuck should I be bothered to appreciate the "opportunity" to slave myself out to them until I die?

4. Except, doing so requires this thing. Called education. That you have to pay for with this thing. Called money. If you can't make enough money on minimum wage to get the education required to move up.

5. There's a difference between working hard to achieve your goals, and slaving yourself to a corporation for barely any pay, and having to thank them for the 'privilege'.

6. Has nothing to do with "laziness". Instead, its a matter of NOBODY can be expected to work their ass off as hard as is required to obtain the money to obtain the education required to move up the ladder. You either have to be Superman, doing illegal activities, or performing sexual favors on your boss in order to move up the ladder while working for minimum wage.

Um the world band defines the poverty line as being $1.25 per day and I believe the UN uses the figure of $2 a day. Thus minimum wage in the usa is 3.25x that of the un poverty line per day for working just one hour! if we assume that an average work day is say 8 hours then that means that someone making minimum wage in the usa is making 28x the un poverty line. I would say that's a "living wage"

Implying that the world poverty level and the US poverty level are the same. Which is bullshit.

I challenge you to live on $1.25 a day, in the suburbs of any American city.

Can you provide evidence for that?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thatcherism

Nice to see you've ignored my post.

I still fail to see where you're coming from.

If an increase in wage isn't driven by competition, but artificially inflated, then it raises the question that wages could be artificially raised above the value of the work. Again, I was not talking about incremental wage increases.

Stupid question, but do we actually know how much the average employee at McDonalds is worth?

The wages shouldn't be tied so much to the perceived value of the work that jobs deemed to not be worth much mean that those who work them can't live off the wages.

I'd argue that their work is worth making sure they can fucking live and move up the ladder.