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.
I'd be happy to cite statistics on fast food workers because I have those right at hand. Lobbyists for the fast food industry promote the idea that these companies employ teenagers who are working while they're still in school or earning spending money while they live with mom and dad. But while many of them might be living with family (since low wages are not adequate to support a person living alone in most parts of the country), only 30% of fast food workers are teenagers.
In reality, 40% of fast-food workers are 25 or older, with an additional 30% between 20 and 24, old vote and marry and usually to drink alcohol legally. A full quarter of fast food workers as a whole are raising one or more children and for those over the age of 20% that number rises to more than 33%. In a fact that might be especially surprising to those who advocate education for better jobs, 70% of all fast-food workers hold a high school degree, while about a third have some college education. Those figures are from a report published by the Center for Economic and Policy Research, culled from U.S. Census Statistics.
I read the entire article and didn't see anything that breaks down how many adults rely on income from a fast-food restaurant as their primary household income vs. the percentage who use it to suplement their income. This is pretty significant.
I would also argue that 20 is an arbitrary number that's probably a little low since many people work in fast food while pursuing their college degrees, and the typical age of someone graduating with a bachelor's degree is probably 22 or so.
I also think the results are skewed by using raw numbers of employees rather than hours worked. Reason being, when you're dealing with students and people working for supplementary income you're going to have people who can only work 1-2 days a week, or just a few hours at a time. So when they say only 1 in 12 workers makes over $12 and hour, that might actually work out to 1 in 3 or 4 when you equalize the hours.
So I still haven't seen any data that prooves that a large percentage of adults are relying on a minimum wage fast-food income for their primary sustenance.
Of course the other aspect is frankly if we really wanted to help people out there is a group that could use it more then anyone else.
Unpaid interns.
it is hypocritical for those like the President to advocate for raising the minimum wage when he isn't paying his interns one flat dime. There are also no legal protections as well. Hurt at work...too bad, harassment? nope sorry. If you aren't an employee many of the standards do not apply in terms of insurance.
How many people volunteer? How many get paid anything for that time? I'm not suggesting they turn into a full time job but what about a gas stipend?
Minimum wage was NEVER meant for breadwinners, but for entry-level, part-time, and summer jobs. Keep artificially jacking it up if you want to hike prices across the board and lose jobs.
And our real manufacturing jobs were never MEANT to be sent to Communist China, yet here we are.
And our real manufacturing jobs were never MEANT to be sent to Communist China, yet here we are.
This is the crux of the problem. We don't have enough living-wage jobs in this country for uneducated or minimally-educated people, so many people are stuck working in industries that were founded around cheap, part-time labor provided by those who don't rely on the income to put food on the table.
It's a big problem, but I don't know that it's a problem that needs to be fully shouldered by businesses that relies on minimum-wage employees.
And our real manufacturing jobs were never MEANT to be sent to Communist China, yet here we are.
We have plenty of manufacturing. Just because there is manufacturing domestically does not exactly mean there are many jobs for it. Automation replaced much of the need for it.
I've been to China. I've toured factories and frankly much of it is automatic. Communist? hardly. That's a name of a party it means nothing in practice. That's like saying the democrats are democratic even after that disaster in 2008 primary.
We have plenty of manufacturing. Just because there is manufacturing domestically does not exactly mean there are many jobs for it. Automation replaced much of the need for it.
I've been to China. I've toured factories and frankly much of it is automatic. Communist? hardly. That's a name of a party it means nothing in practice. That's like saying the democrats are democratic even after that disaster in 2008 primary.
Fine, let's refer to it as The People's Republic of Forced Abortion.
This has already been said, but minimum wage isn't really the issue; the issue is job creation and business development. Companies can afford to hire more employees when the wage is relatively low. The solution, in my opinion, would be to lower minimum wage so that the companies would hire more employees and then allow those employees to get training for specialized fields that inherently pay higher wages. People will always need plumbers and electricians. One reason companies are so picky about who they hire now and are outsourcing much of their work is because of the cost of operation, including having to pay their workers a higher minimum wage. If the minimum wage were lowered, companies could afford to hire more people, and unemployment wouldn't be as high. I know it seems counter-intuitive, but if a company can afford to hire two guys for five dollars per hour versus having to hire one guy for ten dollars per hour, the company would take the chance on hiring the two guys. This means that a man who would otherwise be completely unemployed would get a shot at making some kind of living. Five dollars per hour is a lot better than zero per hour.
I realize that we can't allow companies to hire employees for slave wages, and in areas where the minimum cost of living is high, the wage should be high, too, but overall, I think lowering the minimum wage to a slightly more agreeable level and allowing the companies to hire more people could be a win for everyone. In return for the lower wage, companies could offer their employees more health benefits or perhaps even provide room and board. It's just a suggestion. Anything that would cut costs would probably be appreciated. A higher minimum wage sounds like a great idea, but it really just may lead to fewer people being hired. I think even huge penny-pinching conglomerations would relax their hiring criteria if they could get away with paying a lower wage.
I'm sorry, but that is a horrible idea. No one can live on $5 an hour. If you are going to hire two people instead of one, then there needs to be enough work to warrant that extra person being hired and I don't think it's always easy to come up with more work just because you can afford to hire more people.
Another huge issue with starting so low is that it's harder to get a raise to get to a livable wage. For example, I started one job in 2011 at $8.50/hr and when I was there a year I recieved a raise of 50 cents, which brought me to $9/hr. Even when I was promoted, I only went up to $11/hr. At my current job, I am earning $13/hr. It would have taken me years to get to that pay level even with a promotion and in the interim time, I would still need enough money to pay rent and my other bills.
I read the entire article and didn't see anything that breaks down how many adults rely on income from a fast-food restaurant as their primary household income vs. the percentage who use it to suplement their income. This is pretty significant.
I would also argue that 20 is an arbitrary number that's probably a little low since many people work in fast food while pursuing their college degrees, and the typical age of someone graduating with a bachelor's degree is probably 22 or so.
I also think the results are skewed by using raw numbers of employees rather than hours worked. Reason being, when you're dealing with students and people working for supplementary income you're going to have people who can only work 1-2 days a week, or just a few hours at a time. So when they say only 1 in 12 workers makes over $12 and hour, that might actually work out to 1 in 3 or 4 when you equalize the hours.
So I still haven't seen any data that prooves that a large percentage of adults are relying on a minimum wage fast-food income for their primary sustenance.
I agree with you. The author misses some points.
There is also an assumption that a fast food worker is automatically an entry level cashier. A fast food worker can be in management. The workers in management are the most likely not the teenagers, but the older employees climbing the ladder.
Even if a person is the primary income earner, the fast food job may be a second income source. Dave Ramsey is always telling people to deliver pizza as a 2nd job to help pay off debts. His middle class followers may be making $100k+ for a husband and wife at day jobs, but they are working fast food on the side to help payoff debts. He's got people all the time talking about this situation.
Some of these fast food joints are family owned and operated. It may be their primary source of income, but they are not making minimum wage. The husband was the pizza maker, wife was the server, sons and daughters were cashiers and hosts. The adult children often working for free, because they are just helping out after their main job. They may eventually take over the business from their parents.
Last edited by move4ward; 08-02-2014 at 05:45 AM..
Yet, for many hardworking, conscientious people, it is the only option open to them, and the need to work minimum wage jobs to pay for the basics of life, and the general lack of opportunities to jump to a better circumstance, preclude any other alternative.
I'm sorry, but that is a horrible idea. No one can live on $5 an hour. If you are going to hire two people instead of one, then there needs to be enough work to warrant that extra person being hired and I don't think it's always easy to come up with more work just because you can afford to hire more people.
Another huge issue with starting so low is that it's harder to get a raise to get to a livable wage. For example, I started one job in 2011 at $8.50/hr and when I was there a year I recieved a raise of 50 cents, which brought me to $9/hr. Even when I was promoted, I only went up to $11/hr. At my current job, I am earning $13/hr. It would have taken me years to get to that pay level even with a promotion and in the interim time, I would still need enough money to pay rent and my other bills.
Congratulations. You are a great example of people moving on from fast food. You have switched jobs and increased your salary by almost 50% in 2-3 years. After 2-3 more jobs and 50% salary bumps, it really adds up.
I have been working a bit longer than of you. I can share my personal story.
After a month, I was ready to leave fast food. I was one of those "limited skills" person working minimum wage. I made the jump from $5.15/hr pt job for $100 week to a $8.50 FT job for $340 week. I made more than 3 times as much!! I was ecstatic.
After a 3-4 years, I was making $11-12/hr. Eventually, I went from $11-12/hr to $50k with another job.
Now, I make nearly $90k. That's not bad income for single income-earner that never graduated college.
Last edited by move4ward; 08-02-2014 at 06:40 AM..
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.
