So, You Want $15 An Hour?

LV426 said:
I do not care about personal stories because I know you're not being 100% truthful about it...you should know that by now.

Stop wasting your time.




Are you sure?

Desperate for workers, US restaurants and stores raise pay
https://apnews.com/article/health-coronavirus-pandemic-business-5eb1432c117e217fea65bfaa138002e9

The thing I hate most about you, TA, isn't your arrogance.

It isn't your bullshit.

It isn't the stupid way you conduct yourself on JPP.

It isn't your fascist tendencies.

It isn't the love you hold for Nazis.

It isn't your inability to read the room.

All of that I can overlook because it's expected of your kind.

The thing I hate most about you, TA, is your fucking abject laziness.




If they didn't do it from 2000-2020, they sure as shit aren't going to do it now.




Currently, there are more job openings than there are job applicants.

At least 50M people changed jobs in the last 2 years.

It's not that there's fewer jobs...it's that there's fewer people willing to work those shitty jobs.

So you think threatening those jobs with automation will force those applicants into accepting shit pay? How has that been working out for companies today?
Click to expand...

How does it feel to hate?
 
danielpalos said:
As slow as this pandemic happened, should we criticize the private sector for not already having the equivalent to turn-key operations set up to take advantage of the supply-side shortfalls?
Click to expand...

Interesting point. Did you personally have enough food, supplies and monies put away to see you through the pandemic instead of relying on government? I mean the pandemic was slow. What did you personally do to prepare?
 
Sailor said:
Interesting point. Did you personally have enough food, supplies and monies put away to see you through the pandemic instead of relying on government? I mean the pandemic was slow. What did you personally do to prepare?
Click to expand...
With the resources available to me at the time?
 
LV426 said:
Why do you think that, and what do you base that judgment on?




How am I doing that? I'm pro-worker here, and I seem to be the only one on this thread who understands that in the current labor market, it's workers who have the leverage, not employers.




We are at least 1 generation away from even a tenth of our workforce being automated...it's just not going to happen so we should stop thinking of it as a threat.

It's not a threat...it's a confession...right now, the labor market favors workers, so when a company decides to "automate", it's confessing that it cannot find enough workers to work for the rate they are offering, and/or in the conditions they are offering.

The labor market made that choice for them...look how hard it is for these garbage franchises to find workers today! They're having to increase their starting wage, they're having to offer better benefits, better managers, better working conditions. Even with all that, they still have staffing holes to fill...so instead of whining about how "no one wants to work", why don't these people just get robots to do the work?

It's only been 22 years we've been hearing about it...
Click to expand...

If it is cheaper it's fine with you though?

THis is an if.
 
LV426 said:
Exactly...and that turd had been trying to frame the shift to kiosks at Walmart as the result of a $15/hr wage when it's really because no one wants to work for shitty old Walmart, so they can't even find enough people to fully staff up.

That turd was like, "they brought in 8 kiosks and kept two cashiers" and doesn't stop to think why didn't they just bring in 10 kiosks and keep no cashiers?
Click to expand...

Raising wages would help.

You're actually an enemy of the people.
 
LV426 said:
Exactly...and that turd had been trying to frame the shift to kiosks at Walmart as the result of a $15/hr wage when it's really because no one wants to work for shitty old Walmart, so they can't even find enough people to fully staff up.

That turd was like, "they brought in 8 kiosks and kept two cashiers" and doesn't stop to think why didn't they just bring in 10 kiosks and keep no cashiers?
Click to expand...

I was a manager at walmart in the early 90s when they expanded to the west coast and Hillary was on their board........

walmart sucks ass
 
danielpalos said:
Why is that when we can always ask Academia for Pareto Optimal answers if we can get the questions to them. How about a federal research university system?
Click to expand...

Elites now have surpassed the pareto prescribed amount of control.

instead of 80/20 they want 99.999/.001

it cannot be.
 
Street Glider said:
So, you want $15 to start as a cashier at Wal-Mart?

I rarely go to Wal-Mart, but the last time I was there (about three weeks ago) there were two cashiers on duty, and eight self-service lanes open.

It's a smart move by Wal-Mart. At $15 an hour, eight cashier lanes running 17 hours a day (my local Wal-Mart is open from 6am-11pm) costs Wal-Mart $2,040 per day to operate. In just 2-1/2 days a single kiosk can pay for itself (they run around five grand a pop). The kiosk then no longer needs anything; no training, no time off, no breaks, no health insurance, no paid holidays; nothing.

This is where retail is headed. If we assume ten kiosks per store and an otherwise hourly wage of $15 an hour per soon-to-be-out-of-work cashier, once these kiosks pay for themselves (which would happen in rather short order) Wal-Mart will save a total of $2,550 per day in hourly wages. That's $17,850 per week, or $928,200 a year, and that's per store. Wal-Mart has approximately 10,500 stores. If this approach was put in place in all of their stores, Wal_Mart would save $9,746,100,00 per year.

Many retailers will follow Wal-Mart's lead. If the kiosk idea ultimately fails, Wal-Mart is large enough to absorb the loss. If it succeeds, though, other retailers will start adopting the use of kiosks instead of employing cashier's. Even the largest grocery stores (which are also currently employing self-serve kiosks) will be able to operate with far fewer employees.

This is just an observation based on what I've seen locally here in northeast Florida. I have to believe that northeast Florida is not unique...
Click to expand...

Agreed. Not just pay for workers, but the upkeep in work training, "diversity/sexual harassment training" and all the other stuff laid on people that isn't necessary for machines.

The UAW found out the hard way in the 1970s that striking for higher pay and less efficiency promotes automation. When striking workers returned, they did so in order of seniority BUT had to be able to operate the new equipment. Many of the older geezers couldn't do it, were given a severance package and booted out the door. McDonald's and Walmart workers are unlikely to get a severance package.
 
Fifteen bucks an hour isn't money.
For a forty hour week, that's six hundred bucks.
It costs at least a hundred bucks for two people to grab dinner in these parts.
How many times a week do you eat?

America will simply not survive with its current system of wealth distribution,
and probably doesn't deserve to.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
Fifteen bucks an hour isn't money.
For a forty hour week, that's six hundred bucks.
It costs at least a hundred bucks for two people to grab dinner in these parts.
How many times a week do you eat?

America will simply not survive with its current system of wealth distribution,
and probably doesn't deserve to.
Click to expand...
Aside from the obvious "don't eat out if you're poor" you explain why a NATIONAL minimum wage should be limited if not non-existent. It should be local to accommodate local cost of living.


Minimum wage is a minimum. Not intended to fund fancy dinners in town.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
Fifteen bucks an hour isn't money.
For a forty hour week, that's six hundred bucks.
It costs at least a hundred bucks for two people to grab dinner in these parts.
How many times a week do you eat?

America will simply not survive with its current system of wealth distribution,
and probably doesn't deserve to.
Click to expand...
I agree to, "blame the right-wing". they also have a problem with equal protection of our own laws if the Poor may benefit for "free" under our form of Capitalism.
 
TTQ64 said:
WRONG!
THEY DESERVE $20.00 HR. WALMART MAKES BILLIONS AND PAYS NO TAXES.
Click to expand...

And therein lies the problem. You think someone deserves more, not because they've earned it, but because someone else makes even more. I make a lot of money; sometimes I can't even believe it. Should my employees, who are already paid well, be paid more simply because I make a lot of money? No. They should be paid more when they demonstrate that they represent an even greater value to the company. When an employee does that we gladly and willingly give them a raise.

You can say I'm wrong, and that's fine. But what I know is what I see. Wal-Mart is drastically cutting down the number of cashier's at the front of the store and replacing them with machines. That's happening. The local Wal-Mart is preparing to be cashier-free in three years. That's happening. Now, from a philosophical standpoint is it wrong? Well, that can certainly be argued. But, while you're saying the cashiers deserve $20 an hour they're being replaced for wanting $15 an hour...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top