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.
"Unemployed workers still exceeded openings by almost a 2-to-1 margin in June, but that's much improved from the 3-to-1 ratio a year earlier."
With millions always between jobs willingly or otherwise marginally skilled, a 2-1 ratio (and we're under 2-1 (almost signals that) is reaching unhealthy territory for employers.
Higher raises , soon, will not be a choice for them. Supply and demand cuts both ways. I know both at my corp and at others I know folks at, recent backfilled spots have cost more, and have gotten less stellar candidate pools and hires, than say, 2009 brought.
As Ponderosa said the big corporations will just push to increase visas for foreign workers, just like they've been doing for decades, as soon as wages show any sign of going up. What is needed is a tightening of immigration rules for a while as that would tighten the labor supply and result in increased wages for working folks.
Most of the Leftists on here (if not all) will never understand that. They are the "living wage" crowd. They think they deserve to be paid "according to their needs," and there have been a few that have said, "my forty hours [or thirty, since the ACA] are worth just as much as the CEO's forty hours."
And not only all of that (), but the "living wage" mantra never addresses one issue that reveals how inane the idea is: Are interviewers to inquire of prospective employees how large their families are and whether there's another provider in the household? Are those doing the same job to earn less because they don't have as many dependents?
What constitutes a "living wage" for one employee may not do so for another.
If you were a business owner and needed to hire a PHD level engineer, which would you do:
Pay $250,000, plus benefits and payroll taxes to a qualified US citizen, or
Pay $45,000 to a qualified applicant in India who is fluent in English and will remain in India
Oh yeah, your competition outsourced to India. So you either have to charge more than your competition and thus be noncompetitive or take less profit for yourself.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 16 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,543 posts, read 16,524,552 times
Reputation: 6029
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz
I don't disagree, bob. At my work unit we recently hired 5 new employees. It is blue collar work, but fairly well paid, and appears to be slim pickings for the employer. The younger people can't pass the required drug test, and the older people can't pass the physical.
No doubt that salary raises will be in the offing, but I have to wonder whether they will be cancelled out by tax increases to support those who are dropping out of the work force.
Translation: We don't want to raise wages.
I'll make sure to cry for them.
I'd add that they don't want to train anyone either. Spend some time in Germany and explain that to people there and they wouldn't get it.
Quote:
If you were a business owner and needed to hire a PHD level engineer, which would you do:
Pay $250,000, plus benefits and payroll taxes to a qualified US citizen, or
Pay $45,000 to a qualified applicant in India who is fluent in English and will remain in India
Oh yeah, your competition outsourced to India. So you either have to charge more than your competition and thus be noncompetitive or take less profit for yourself.
There's plenty of additional costs in that $45k engineer from India. The math isn't the only consideration.
Only thing USA Today is good for is lining a bird cage. But you can all believe what they tell you.
It's a wire story originally, not their own reporting.
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.
), but the "living wage" mantra never addresses one issue that reveals how inane the idea is: Are interviewers to inquire of prospective employees how large their families are and whether there's another provider in the household
? Are those doing the same job to earn less because they don't have as many dependents?
What would you do?
