Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And we do want to do that...don't we? After all the American CEO is just sooooo much smarter than the average American dumb worker - which is why they outsourced millions of good paying American jobs, to justify their multi-million dollar salaries - they just had to do it!
'McDonald's gave a $9 million dollar raise recently to their new CEO.
McDonald's can't afford paying their workers enough to climb out of poverty but just happened to find $9 million lying around to give to their CEO.
Worker's wages stagnate but for some reason CEO salaries go through the roof. No one who works full time should be poor.
yet these CEO's then proceed to lecture us about being lazy and how they can't afford raises this year, maybe next year, and the stock markets rise and the CEO salaries rise but the rest of us will just have to wait.
But the CEO never has to wait. He always gets his raise. Always.'
Chief executives of the nation's largest companies earned an average of $12.3 million in total pay last year -- 354 times more than a typical American worker, according to the AFL-CIO.
What a silly post. McDonalds is franchised, the CEO has nothing to do with the end workers. HE is however charged with insuring the company is running properly so that all those franchises are all running and profitable, thus ensuring all those other people have a job to come to.
I wouldn't want the job of CEO. ANYTHING that goes wrong, is his fault, the responsibility for everything that happens falls on his shoulders. If an end worker fouls up, it's not as big a deal as, a CEO fouling up and watching how many millions of people becoming unemployed?
If the entry level underlings don't want to be on welfare, they need to make sure they have better skills, and/or make sure that they aren't trying to support a family on a minimum wage job.
It is no way an employers responsibility to make sure that an employee is able to stay off welfare. That is the employee's responsibility.
It doesn't matter what their skills are. If by doing their job correctly, they earn their company hundreds of dollars an hour, it's entirely fair & justified for them to ask for a bigger share of that haul than they're getting.
It doesn't matter what their skills are. If by doing their job correctly, they earn their company hundreds of dollars an hour, it's entirely fair & justified for them to ask for a bigger share of that haul than they're getting.
They don't. People are buying the burger and toppings, not the labor. No one will care if every burger flipper quits today. In 30 minutes, thousands more will be ready to go. If you want more money, do something where 30 minutes training would not bring a newbie on par with your acquired skills.
It doesn't matter what their skills are. If by doing their job correctly, they earn their company hundreds of dollars an hour, it's entirely fair & justified for them to ask for a bigger share of that haul than they're getting.
Admit it - you don't really understand how businesses work, do you?
It doesn't matter what their skills are. If by doing their job correctly, they earn their company hundreds of dollars an hour, it's entirely fair & justified for them to ask for a bigger share of that haul than they're getting.
During that hour, did they:
use raw materials the employer had to purchase?
use tools/technology the employer had to purchase?
employ electricity, lighting, heating, cooling, refrigeration, etc that the employer had to purchase?
perform their work in a building the employer pays rent/mortgage/taxes/commercial zoning fees on?
The point being, the employee does not create their value in a vacuum. Nor are they even aware of all the costs incurred by the employer they don't even see, like long term depreciable assets, franchise fees, advertising fees, storage, distribution, infrastructure maintenance/improvement, etc.
You'd have a point if every fast food worker came to work with their own supplies, raw materials, tools for cooking, etc and simply sold their wares at the employer's location, like a food bazaar or something. But since all they do is operate an assembly line that is 100% owned, run, maintained and supplied by the employer, their actual input to the value change is properly reflected in their wages.
They don't. People are buying the burger and toppings, not the labor. No one will care if every burger flipper quits today. In 30 minutes, thousands more will be ready to go. If you want more money, do something where 30 minutes training would not bring a newbie on par with your acquired skills.
That's irrelevant. The fair value of a job is not how many people can do it; it's how much revenue that job generates for a company.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd
Admit it - you don't really understand how businesses work, do you?
If you're not an idiot of business owner, that's exactly how you figure out when you should bring on new employees and how much you pay them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian
During that hour, did they:
use raw materials the employer had to purchase?
use tools/technology the employer had to purchase?
employ electricity, lighting, heating, cooling, refrigeration, etc that the employer had to purchase?
perform their work in a building the employer pays rent/mortgage/taxes/commercial zoning fees on?
The point being, the employee does not create their value in a vacuum. Nor are they even aware of all the costs incurred by the employer they don't even see, like long term depreciable assets, franchise fees, advertising fees, storage, distribution, infrastructure maintenance/improvement, etc.
You'd have a point if every fast food worker came to work with their own supplies, raw materials, tools for cooking, etc and simply sold their wares at the employer's location, like a food bazaar or something. But since all they do is operate an assembly line that is 100% owned, run, maintained and supplied by the employer, their actual input to the value change is properly reflected in their wages.
All those expenses are factored in when you look at the value an employee brings in. You can look at from either gross margin or just profit, but the only people who "deserve" minimum wage are the employee's who's contribution to the bottom line barely covers their wages & associated expenses.
Last edited by EddieB.Good; 03-20-2014 at 04:15 PM..
Who is we? I don't decide what wages a workers gets .Might want to include enterianers 'sports heroes etc but then again I don't decide really. I just pay for what I want and think is value.
That's irrelevant. The fair value of a job is not how many people can do it; it's how much revenue that job generates for a company
..
Wrong. First as the poster above aptly stated revenue and profit are not the same. 2nd, if you flip burgers, you are providing a widely available commodity, and like any other commodity, the lowest cost is the best cost.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
