Political Ramblings

[ChickensRDinos]

Who pays for that? The argument I keep hearing against Obamacare is that companies claim they can't afford to treat their employees like human beings. Is raising the minimum wage not the same? It seems this sort of business culture where companies lay off minimal wage workers and fight labor laws while increasing salaries of CEO's and overall profits may be a greater contributing factor to the problem than some cases of welfare abuse.

Also this would decrease the need to supplement the working poor but would not eliminate the need for welfare.

 

[MamaRoo]

Speaking of CEOs, just saw this on Snopes. The workers were striking to not have their wage lowered at Hostess while the execs were giving themselves raises. The extra 1.5 Million dollars the CEO gave himself would have paid for a lot of benefits.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/hostess.asp

 

[chickened]

Who pays for that? The argument I keep hearing against Obamacare is that companies claim they can't afford to treat their employees like human beings. Is raising the minimum wage not the same? It seems this sort of business culture where companies lay off minimal wage workers and fight labor laws while increasing salaries of CEO's and overall profits may be a greater contributing factor to the problem than some cases of welfare abuse.

Also this would decrease the need to supplement the working poor but would not eliminate the need for welfare.

I was not serious but making a point

the unions tried this and the response was more automation, reduction in benefits and layoffs and yes shipping jobs overseas where labor is cheaper. Most jobs shipped overseas are minimum wage/skill labor of the manufacturing field and really who wants them jobs?? The market will set the wage usually. For example our city buses (Trimet) pays the drivers union scale of about $20.00 an hour plus bennies they have zero responsibility for the riders once they step off the bus. Our school bus drivers make about $12.00 an hour in a non union scale and poor benefits and they are responsible for the riders to see that they get to school and back home and are held accountable if little suzie does not make it home. Which driver should make more? Which system is broken?

 

[chickened]

Speaking of CEOs, just saw this on Snopes. The workers were striking to not have their wage lowered at Hostess while the execs were giving themselves raises. The extra 1.5 Million dollars the CEO gave himself would have paid for a lot of benefits.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/hostess.asp

Did you read the whole article? Hostess was paying 100 million a year to pay for pensions and the CEO's gave back all but $1.00 for salaries to try and make things work. The really dumb move was the strike. The raises were scheduled and allowed for by company policies. Only 30% of the workers are union which means 70% of the workers lost thier job thanks to the union strike.

 

[MamaRoo]

Quote:
The NEW CEO who was a restructuring expert altered salaries after bankruptcy was filed. It doesn't seem as if they were working to prevent the bankruptcy, only deal with it after the fact. Not saying who was right or wrong, only that the top level people didn't appear to be concerned enough to turn down raises until after there was an issue.

 

[rufus]

The other point is that working a minimum wage job still puts you below the poverty level. Minimum wage for 2000 hours a year is $14,500, well below the poverty line in the US. If you have younger children, you must pay daycare out of that money, as well as all the other needs for life. The average price of a one bedroom apartment nationally is $700/month. Minimum wage simply doesn't go very far. This is what we call the working poor. Most of the people I see at the local food pantry fit into this catagory. They are bus drivers, daycare workers, nursing home aides, grocery store cashiers, etc.

There are some interesting articles out there about Walmart, welfare and healthcare. Basically, Walmart has policies in place to refer their workers to outside help agencies due to their corporate culture of underpaying workers. It amounts to a strange sort of corporate welfare when it is practiced by the largest employer in the US.

Reread my link to the Speenhamland System. The more the government paid laborers, the less the landed class paid them. History repeats itself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speenhamland_system

 

[rufus]

It would seem then the answer is to raise the minimum wage to above the poverty level. then there would be no excuse or ned for welfare and the poor would go away.

That would just mean more jobs going abroad. Perhaps the problem is lack of motivation. In the 1930's, Joseph Stalin had all the slackers rounded up and shipped to Central Asia to dig a canal. They were never heard of again. That was a terrible process, but it sure motivated people to get to work on time.

 

[Goose and Fig]

In regards to Hostess, this is written by an employee, and is very on point:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/18/1162786/-Inside-the-Hostess-Bankery

But I found this Denny's story quite funny too:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...35.html?ir=Politics&ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009

 

[hemet dennis]

Did you read the whole article? Hostess was paying 100 million a year to pay for pensions and the CEO's gave back all but $1.00 for salaries to try and make things work. The really dumb move was the strike. The raises were scheduled and allowed for by company policies. Only 30% of the workers are union which means 70% of the workers lost thier job thanks to the union strike.

I think you will find that 30% of the workers are bakery union workers and the other 70% are teamsters union workers. The teamsters had agreed to the pay cuts.

 

[bakerjw]

I've seen some of the most ridiculous things in union shops where I've worked. Like you can't pick up a piece of paper lying on the floor without fear of getting a grievance filed against you. Or change a light bulb on your desk lamp for the same reason.