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.
Yeah. Let's all be outraged by these guys at a time when top financiers can only make a billion a year and Goldman Sachs was just able to afford 166K per employee for the first three months of the year.
If the Union doesn't approve of that contract, the company should pull a Ronald Reagan on their asses and fire every damn employee. While the company hires new employees, and once trash starts to pile up on the streets, the ire will then be thrust on City Hall, who ultimately has the responsibility of ensuring waste disposal. Afterall, there are but a few capable waste management companies in the whole country. Those companies have the upper hand in this when its all said and done. The City would be well advised to step in and tell the Union that it had better stand down.
Yeah. Let's all be outraged by these guys at a time when top financiers can only make a billion a year and Goldman Sachs was just able to afford 166K per employee for the first three months of the year.
You are another one who doesn't get it and never will. Why should people working a NON-SKILLED job get wages that equal or are better than a SKILLED position? Anyone with atleast a 3rd grade education can pick up trash.
Where do you come up with the things you say? $2.69/hour? LMAO! You are aware thst there is a minimum wage law right?
Minimum wage is supported by the left and unions play a role in it as well. I don't see those serving corporate interests (as in "conservatives") like it. Put those lunatics in charge, and minimum wage would head further towards a minimum. I did exaggerate the number by dividing it by ten, but only to get this point across.
If the Union doesn't approve of that contract, the company should pull a Ronald Reagan on their asses and fire every damn employee.
Technically, that is something the Nazis did, by killing unions. A less hostile movement would involve weakening of unions and ensuring that they disappear somehow (by hook, or by crook).
You are another one who doesn't get it and never will. Why should people working a NON-SKILLED job get wages that equal or are better than a SKILLED position? Anyone with atleast a 3rd grade education can pick up trash.
Yeah. I am also outraged that those SUPER-SKILLED guys in Goldman Sachs who contribute greatly to the overall economy and well-being were only able to get 166K as bonuses for the first three months of the year.
I mean think about it. What kind of a third world country would we be without the contributions of SUPER-SKILLED guys in Wall Street?
Anybody can pick up trash but you need to be SUPER-SKILLED to cause a Recession.
Yeah. Let's all be outraged by these guys at a time when top financiers can only make a billion a year and Goldman Sachs was just able to afford 166K per employee for the first three months of the year.
I view this as a matter of principle, not a matter of compensation. Notwithstanding the importance of waste disposal, these folks possess no marketable skills to carry out their work. Therefore, they don't deserve compensation that goes beyond what they could achieve in another job requring like skills.
No, the problem is that unskilled workers think they should get paid the wages of something that actually involves skill.
There are more things than skill that go into pricing out wages. Placed on any supply and demand curve, I can guarantee that there are very unskilled jobs that require higher pay simply to attract someone to do the work. It's a basic function of utility.
If we assume all things being equal, we can assume that a worker would prefer a safer, cleaner less physical job to one that was unsafe, dirty and required great physical exertion. If that is the case, an employer would have to raise the wages of the dirtier job to entice more workers away from cleaner jobs, regardless of skills required or education achieved.
There are more things that skill that go into pricing out wages. Placed on any supply and demand curve, I can guarantee that there are very unskilled jobs that require higher pay simply to attract someone to do the work. It's a basic function of utility.
If we assume all things being equal, we can assume that a worker would prefer a safer, cleaner less physical job to one that was unsafe, dirty and required great physical exertion. If that is the case, an employer would have to raise the wages of the dirtier job to entice more workers away from cleaner jobs, regardless of skills required or education achieved.
thank you for this post.
amazing to be so "high minded" that you can look down your nose at "unskilled" workers and say they don't deserve a good paycheck. you wanna do the job or do you prefer to sit behind your desk for your living? if you find yourself envious of the garbage mans paycheck go do the job and see if you think his wage is fair.
as to the employer, some would more than willingly pay people a less than living wage, work them past the point of exhaustion just to line their own pockets with more money. human nature doesn't change in a bad economy.
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.
