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.
Everything I read about the job market is all about the lack of jobs, 1000 applicants for every min wage job, etc, etc.
Well, yesterday, we drove past a Wendy's, went to go in, and it was closed. A big sign said closed due to lack of staffing
Let me get this straight---they had to close because they couldn't find anyone willing to work? Ok, I know, its a min wage job, but hey, better than nothing, many prefer the flexibility of PT work, it was in a nice area of town. Either--
--no one wants a min wage job
--that particular Wendy's management sucks and everyone walked off
--They want super-employees for nothing, so that's what they got
The turnover in fastfood is about 100%/6 mo--one year, so it seems strange to me there's absolutely NO ONE willing to work there, or they all quit at once
or maybe, just maybe----the economy isn't as bad as they make it out to be.
Strange............
Where is this Wendy's? City, suburbs, exurbs, off-the-interstate-but-otherwise-in-the-middle-of-nowhere, or rural?
Keep in mind that places are hiring more part timers rather than full time to avoid paying benefits, and many people need full time work. Need and greed are butting heads right now.
Funny - I saw a similar sign in the window of our local Pizza Hut. Said they were forced to close at 7PM every night til further notice due to a staffing shortage. I too, was surprised that the "powers that be" within the company or franchise would allow something like that to happen.
I live in a mountain town / resort area in Colorado. It seems like nearly every restaurant, retail, and grocery store is begging for workers, even in the "off season". The grocery stores' starting wage is $12 and up; not sure what restaurants and retail are paying, but I'm willing to bet that it's well over minimum wage.
Granted, rent isn't cheap, but it never has been; I've never seen businesses hurting for workers like this before. Wonder what's different this year?
Maybe because school has started and the kids are back in college? Is it possible that the Pizza Hut does not want to pay full time benefits, so they would rather cut hours than give their part timers more hours? Or the Pizza Hut may be making excuses because they are doing poorly?
Another issue is I'm sure HM would MUCH rather hire a middle aged person then a teen. The former is likely working to support his/her family and expenses. The latter's working for spending $$, but if pissed off, can quit since insurance, food, and room are still covered by their parents. It's also a matter of time before they march off to college and quit.
Part of it is the ability to quit BUT the other side to it and the bigger picture is the body of work and references. Which references do you give more weight to: co-workers, managers and customers; or friends and coaches?
Maybe because school has started and the kids are back in college? Is it possible that the Pizza Hut does not want to pay full time benefits, so they would rather cut hours than give their part timers more hours? Or the Pizza Hut may be making excuses because they are doing poorly?
Why couldn't they just hire more part-time workers to replace those who left? Is it that not enough people are applying or is it that the people that are applying are not getting the "preferred" requirements of working.
In my state, 40 hours at minimum wage would be $290.00 a week. Unemployment is $420 a week. Why take low paying minimum wage when you can live off the unemployment as long as you can.
In my state, 40 hours at minimum wage would be $290.00 a week. Unemployment is $420 a week. Why take low paying minimum wage when you can live off the unemployment as long as you can.
In order to get that $420.00 a week one would have to be gainfully employed and working long term at a firm that laid you off. It's not easy to get unemployment as some people think.
Out of the $420.00 one has to pay taxes and they get zero benefits including health insurance.
I can't blame anyone for not accepting a minimum wage job after earning 40K or higher at a previous job with full benefits. $420.00 a week is bad enough but it's better than nothing as well as the $290.00.
In order to get that $420.00 a week one would have to be gainfully employed and working long term at a firm that laid you off. It's not easy to get unemployment as some people think.
Out of the $420.00 one has to pay taxes and they get zero benefits including health insurance.
I can't blame anyone for not accepting a minimum wage job after earning 40K or higher at a previous job with full benefits. $420.00 a week is bad enough but it's better than nothing.
Most states do not even pay that.
If they get more for applying for work than what they would on full time wages, you know something is wrong with the minimum wage. I don't agree with more benefits for unemployment than minimum wage but if can make more sitting on your butt and applying and/or contacting employers (interviewing, follow-ups, etc.) for four jobs than working minimum wage, do you blame them for taking it?
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.
