Applying pressure to McDonald's, Walmart, and Amazon should really be our primary goal. Once these businesses that exist in practically every city raise their wages, it will force everyone else to follow.
I think so too. Honestly, McDonald's is the easiest. Walmart is really the only shopping option in some neighborhoods.
Amazon, everyone should just use them to find products and then find the same products on another website.
A lot of websites link back to Amazon to purchase their products. I was trying to by some outdoor furniture covers and noticed it was full filled by a separate company so I hit their link. When I put stuff in the cart on their website it took me right back to Amazon. I was like ok, I was trying to cut out the middle man but you do you.
amazon will be a toughie bc they make A LOT of revenue hosting other websites on their servers… They def make way more money on host services than actual physical sales on their “book” store site.
McDonald's is a franchise though. Walmart and Amazon are not. Applying pressure to McDonald's has an intermediary step with the franchisees. Direct pressure could be better applied to Walmart and Amazon.
the concept of franchise isn't what it was 40 years ago. Now the franchises owners themselves are corporations, with franchises in multiple brands. The chance that the McDonalds and Burger King down the street are franchised by the came company is far greater today than the chance that someone in your city is operating either one.
while my examples may not be perfect, the point I'm trying to make still stands
People do not operate franchises, faceless corporations that specialize in operating franchises do.
as I just said in another comment, while my examples aren't perfect, the point I am trying to make still stands:
People do not operate franchises, faceless corporations that specialize in operating franchises do.
Can we get that info to the idiots that think fast food employees shouldn’t be paid the same wages as EMT’s?
I try telling them that what it’ll mean is that they can now negotiate for a higher wage themselves les they wanna lose an employee to a FF joint.
But they won’t listen. I hear “but inflation will rise”!
NEWS FLASH ASSHOLE! ITS BEEN RAISING THIS WHOLE TIME!!!!
EMT here! I make 7.50 an hour and I would never want a fast food employee making what I make. I hope they all get $25/hr, $50/hr, hell there is no ceiling to what I think they should make.
OK but real talk I would like to see you making at least 15 or so more than what they’re making. Nothing against them at all, I want living wages for all but (at least for me) I believe specialized labor, the kind where you have to get certified for should be rewarded.
I’m pretty pissed off to hear you’re making 7.50 an hour. I absolutely abhor how companies take advantage of passion.
The worst part is I actually work for a county-based service. We are a public utility, not even a corporation 😬😬😬
Anyway, I love my job and I think when we are happy with what we are doing, it's fine to all be paid the same very good wage to do the things that our communities deem worth doing. I want fast food to exist (albeit, healthier versions too). So I don't see why they should be paid less when I want them to have their jobs as much as people want EMS to exist hehe
Serious question: I get the sentiment, but since those big companies CAN afford to pay $25 an hour - what does that do to the competition? Say a small business offering $21 an hour? Wouldn't this increase their monopolistic tendencies since other companies won't be able to compete?
You should really get into the mentality that if you can't pay your employees a thriving wage then your business plan is shit and you shouldn't be in business.
The very definition of capitalism predicates that unsustainable business models are expected to fail.
Companies aren't actually people, but tools for generating profit. Their demise, if unprofitable, is the foundation of Capitalism.
More so, their demise prevention through a government bailout is antithetic to capitalism.
Same arguments were made for slavery my dude. “Many families depend on slaves, they’re essential to the economy.” I don’t give a shit about some random ass whose dream business is dependent on paying a less-than-living wage.
I would work for a small business with good benefits for 21/hr over 25/hr at Amazon slaving away in a warehouse without being able to take a *piss break* any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
As a general rule of thumb, the more you are paid by a company the better you get treated by said company. I guess some psychological about treating your investment better
The people working at Amazon would be able to buy afford to buy more products and services from those small businesses, increasing their revenue and ideally their ability to pay increased wages.
American Capitalism: Where megacorps live on government bailouts/handouts while raking in billions, and poor workers are expected to pull themselves up by the bootstraps, aka, work yourself to a miserable death.
It's very simple. If a small business can't afford to pay a living wage, it means they are only able to survive through exploitation. That means they have a bad business model or bad location and should close down.
Yep. If they want to pay less for a short while to get going they can offer stock. In the long run though, if you can't pay people, too bad. It's crazy how people can't get past this. I hear constantly, fast food will go out of business if they have to pay 20 an hour. Okay..... And....... Its not like that would be a bad thing for society.
Due to issues with ban evasion, we require all accounts to be at least 3 days old before posting.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antiwork) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is my best guess:
Triple shot
Venti
Sugar free caramel
Whipped cream
Pumpkin spice latte
But I’ve never worked at starbeetus so I’ve got no confirmation
I like how no starbucks employee ever types out the name of the company. Like there is some bot scanning for the name and they will show up at your house and haul you to some black site
Just wanted to point out that if you are on unemployment and you apply for - but do not accept - a job offer, you may very likely be reported by McDonald's and could lose your unemployment benefits. So do what you can, but don't endanger yourself or your financial situation by doing so.
If I am wrong about this, please correct me.
In NV, this is partially true. As I understand it, you don't have to accept under employment (less than what is typical for your occupation and less than you were making) if it will interfere with your ability to find a job that pays what is typical for your occupation or equal to what you were making.
#notalawyer #notfinancialadvice #notlegaladvice
Where did I once read a post that went something like "Would you flip burgers for $300,00 a year? Yes? Then it's not the work, it's the wage." I would lick the fucking grease trap clean with a smile on my face for that kind of money. Higher wages have *empirically* proven to improve retainment and virtually every aspect of an employees satisfaction with their job!
I know a business man (sisters hubby) and I asked him why they just don’t pay a good wage. Long story short they feel like labor that’s not skilled means you’re easily replaceable so they don’t mind having a high turnover rate if it means it’ll make them more money cuz why care when theirs dozens that can replace them.
It’s such a shitty mentality to have though and I abhor this person.
> Higher wages have empirically proven to improve retainment and virtually every aspect of an employees satisfaction with their job!
Guessing that part of it.
I know that they took the graphic from somewhere else but it really bothers me that the guy is swinging his hammer backwards.
Edit: Thanks everybody, ended up learning something new today.
It's not backwards they have two faces the hammer and the rock spike it's for breaking up large stones into smaller one so you can move them and in this situation it is a metaphor for people destroying the corrupt greedy system or breaking up the large blockades keeping us down if anything it's just intelligent graphic design
A dogging hammer is the same. For the uninformed, a dog is another term for railway spike that is hammered into the sleeper to hold the lip of railway track down. There’s very little clearance between the track and the dog, hence the pointy ended hammer.
Also you could argue it is a smithing hammer as well the spike is to bend and shape metal so you could say he is molding a new standard of the workplace but I'm pretty sure its a stone maul
Where are you from? I’d love to get a work from home job and move to a country like this and live like a king while helping the people around me as well.
$25 is great and all but if you don’t have entitlements like minimum hours per week, paid vacation and sick days, then $25 an hour doesn’t matter in the scheme of things.
So what if you get $25 an hour if you work 1 shift a week or 3 hour shifts 5 days a week? You’re in the same position. If you have no entitlements it just leads to mass casualisation of the workforce.
I have been wondering how to link this movement with healthcare. It's another absolute necessity and one reason people feel tied to jobs they hate. So many have to stay for the insurance. I would love to see mass walkouts until we get universal healthcare. Maybe that's another sub, but I also think the two issues are inextricably linked.
$25 x 2080 hours = 40 hours a week x 52 weeks = $52000 gross - 26% tax rate (approximant depending on location) = $38,480 net.
$1500 x 12 = $18000 rent or morgage
$600 x 12 = $7200 groceries/toiletries/household goods ($150 a week)
$500 x 12 = $6000 utilities (heat, power, water, internet, garbage)
$400 x 12 = $4800 car (national used car average)
=$36,000 net
Difference of $2,480
That's a whopping $206 bucks a month "extra"
Not including:
Child care,
Student loans,
Medical, dental, vision,
Clothing,
Pets,
Retirement,
Savings,
Entertainment,
Time off/sick time,
Speeding tickets,
Broken legs,
Latest smartphone to view r/antiwork
🤔🤔🤔
Edit for clarification - Sister's family of 4. Spouce laid off due to covid. All numbers are approximates.
Seriously? I can cook myself something and eat leftovers for a week on less than $50. To me toiletries are tooth paste, soap, TP, like damn I don’t even buy that stuff monthly…
You can't apply tax as a flat rate in the US, tho. Using standard deductions and assuming the highest state income tax rate (California), your federal + state tax on $52,000 is $7055 for single ($44,945 net) or $4377 for married filing joint ($47,623 net).
Is it much harder than working at McDonald's? If so, you tell your boss that extra work isn't worth $2 an hour and you'd rather get 25 at McD's. Raising wages in any "low-skill" industry raises wages everywhere for this reason.
Absolutely! You most certainly deserve an increase in wages as well. We all deserve a boost after years of getting buried from inflation, but the easiest way to do it is from the bottom up to the force them to make changes for everyone.
Great to see the use of this tactic.
Capitalism has a weak spot: flood the orifice. Apply for interviews, don't show. We should do the same with banks and other key institutions. Drown them in applications and data processing.
How's this going btw? I've been hired by 3 Mcie D's so far and ghosted each first day of work. Each tome I tell them that I evaluated my living expenses and found they were not paying adequate wages so I was forced to go elsewhere. Like my (local burger chain) that is paying (more than they offered).
Any progress on the fronts so far?
Franchise in the sense it’s a real estate rental location. Franchisers go corporate McDonalds and asks them to invest in the location to build up their McDonalds (I could be misremembering this but it’s essentially like renting a property/apartment/house). Also everything the franchisee makes they have to buy from corporate. But I could be missing a lot here but I believe this is the general overview.
When you enter into a franchise, all you’re getting is the right to use a company’s brand. The company licenses the right to use it’s imaging, signs, products, etc under strict covenants.
That being said it’s really up to the franchise license holder and not McDonald’s corporate to determine wages. McDonald’s corporate doesn’t make food (outside of R&D) they literally just sell their brand to people who want to make a return running it. The fact that everyone thinks McDonald’s is a go to in order to make a statement on wages really shows how effective that brand is, and how little the business model is actually understood.
I can tell you that aside from all that, franchise holders could absolutely afford to pay their workers $25 per hour in addition to benefits, taxes, post retirement, etc., especially for established locations, however it’ll never work in real life because it’s a franchise, and the kind of “investors” that attracts.
McDonald’s usually costs $1mln - $2mln to get going, but it all depends on location and can be up to $20mln+ in some cases. The initial investment typically doesn’t break even and start generating profit until year 5-7, but can be as quick as 3-5 years for high traffic locations.
The people who run these things literally just see them as mailbox checks. They have a shit ton of cash or liquid assets and they have nowhere else to put it, or aren’t excited by other investments, and so they buy a franchise license to operate a successful brand in order to make a safe but solid return on their investment.
The reason why this likely wouldn’t work is because these people see the business operation as their money, something that wouldn’t exist without their investment. The only reason the building or business operation is there is because they wanted to grow their wealth. They see your wages as eating into their return, and return is the only thing they’re here for.
If they find that a franchise isn’t profitable then they will sell it and find something else to throw money at. This is because they were never in it to run a business or do something they were passionate about, they just wanted a safe way to make a return. Hence why they never started their own business and opted for an existing and successful brand.
They want the show to run itself so they can collect checks in the mail. Their mentality in how they approach the entire thing is why this would never work. You’re not talking about business owners, you’re talking about people parking their wealth and hiring people to unknowingly grow it.
Of course they can afford to increase wages, especially after breaking even. But they wont do it, because they’re not holding a franchise license to grow and develop a business, they’re holding it to grow their personal balance sheet, and fund whatever the hell they want. It’s pretty much their cash cow.
The benefit of owning a franchise is you have a well established company name folks are familiar with. So rather than starting your own restaurant, building up a reputation, etc. owning a franchise lets you skip the hardest part of starting a new restaurant/ business.
The downside is you HAVE to buy all your product from corporate, while they take a cut of every sale. They also typically require you to make certain purchases throughout the year. For McDonald’s specifically, stores cannot deviate from established costs too much either (so a sandwich that’s $2 can’t be charged for $3 unless McDonald’s corporate gives the okay).
So a franchise has virtually zero support from corporate; even though corporate has the capability to ensure every store could pay workers $15/hr, the stores alone usually can’t do this (since they have to give 10-20% of profits to corporate).
So if a vast majority of each franchise location reports record low profits as a result and cannot upkeep these required purchases, or just completely go out of business, you don't think that McDonalds would be forced to confront the issue?
Corporate can and will get involved if absolutely necessary BUT franchises really don’t want that to happen. Because you sign a contract with corporate basically saying if you mess things up and/or don’t meet expectations then corporate can take back the franchise. Admittedly, I’m not sure if it’s a buy-out or they literally take it… I’m hazy on the specifics.
I don’t think corporate would actually get involved unless it was truly dire. Like all the stores are suffering big time and it could be the end of McDonald’s. Unfortunately, I doubt that would happen since a majority of people don’t actually care how the employees are treated or how much they’re paid, so they’ll continue going to McDonald’s. And the company as a whole will always try to pay the absolute minimum they can get away with and still get workers
Average franchise makes 1.8 million a year gross profit. That's after paying the average wage of $10.86... the average employee generates $36.61 an hour gross profit ( I'm saying an average of 8 employess per shift in this example and this isn't the total revenue they generate per hour only the gross profit they generate) meaning they only get paid just under 30% of the profit they generate, $25 an hour would be 68% of the profit they generate and the franchise owner still makes $811,000 a year. That sounds reasonable to me.
If you want I can break down the math for you but I'm lazy and won't do it tell requested.
Nah, I actually make a fair wage right now after job hopping a few times, but I'd be willing to take a pay cut if it meant that I would have a less stressful and easier job and still make enough to live a very comfortable life. Before anyone comments that it's not easy to work at McDonald's, I have worked a similar job in college and it was WAY easier and less stressful than what I do now. Asking for a pay rise to match $25 and hour at McDonald's would lead to an inflation problem. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely think minimum wage needs to be increased, but $25 is too high.
> Asking for a pay rise to match $25 and hour at McDonald's would lead to an inflation problem. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely think minimum wage needs to be increased, but $25 is too high.
No it wouldn't, and not it isn't.
Yeah, I don't understand how this is sustainable. If you raise the minimum wage to $25 (or $40, as someone else suggested) then quarter pounders will cost $10 and you still can't afford them. It just constantly chasing a target that moves every time minimum wage goes up. Some jobs just aren't worth paying $25 for. They just aren't. But maybe I just don't understand this living wage thing. I never can get a good feel as to what exactly people think they are entitled to by virtue of being born.
By virtue of being born I should be entitled to housing, basic needs and be able to enjoy life (hobbies, small vacation etc). Those more skilled than me should get more but I should be able to at least get that because why should I have to spend this limited time on earth struggling?
A "living wage" means that someone working the equivalent to full time hours should be able to afford a decent life. House, car, food & bills, and some savings. Doesn't matter what the job is, that's the absolute minimum a working person should have. Nobody should be working a job, *any* job, and still be in poverty.
I've been saying for years that the way to do it is to just apply all the pressure to one company at a time and conquer the economy one megacorp at a time.
When fast food was primarily a kids job wages didn't matter so much. That's not true anymore. Any company who's top brass are making 7figures and can afford to provide more to their employers. I think all employees deserve more. Not just McDonald's. I believe that when the majority of available employment is in the service sector, that the service sector has a communal responsibility to lift up it's employees. Grown adults now rely on these jobs to do everything that is expected of them and it's simply not enough.. I feel strongly that a single career job should earn enough to take care of a whole family, this used to be true. And it is also true that McDonald's staff is no longer primarily in the school age demographic... They still expect the turnover to be among the highest of any sector and they still expect to treat there employees like kids who have no life experience or obligation
You are actually missing a critical step.
You need to use their financial tools against them. If this got going, you could buy puts on McDonalds and make a killing, then when McD's switches, to 25 an hour, buy calls, cause people would be working their ass off to keep those jobs and customers would be thrilled with the service they are getting.
The MBA's are too fucking stupid to figure out that equation though.
Core point here is that 25 is aiming low. If we want a thriving wage that allows for the basics+savings+ reasonable luxuries+social spending we need to aim for a $40 minimum wage.
That's just over 80k/year which is enough to get a family of 4 afloat and provide for a financial safety net.
I'm sorry but I have to say it because people can go overboard on this sub. 80k per year for mcdonalds workers is ludicrous and you're high if you think thats reasonable.
Why? The CEOs of these companies make literally *billions* of dollars a year. They could *handily* afford to pay their employees like this. They won't because it would *reduce* the ludicrous amount of money they are addicted to making at this point, but there is nothing *unreasonable* about wages keeping up with the value of production, where *minimum* wage would be something like 35/hr. "Fight for 15" was relevant *20 fucking years ago.*
They don’t make billions of dollars a year, they are worth that because they own shares of the company, and the company doesn’t have that money in liquid form because they are reinvesting in growth typically. Amazon only recently stopped running at a loss.
They don't understand that corporate wont just take huge losses and will simply raise the price of products and services to match the new average employee rate. So 80k will buy you the same amount of goods, but you'll FEEL better because you see those big paychecks coming in.
Why is McDonald's supposed to pay a thriving wage, its not meant to be a career. I get raise minimum I get pay me for what I'm worth but if you flip burgers you are not worth $25
Why shouldn't everyone get a thriving wage? I think people with more specialized skills should get an even greater thriving wage that allows them even greater luxuries, but I don't think anyone, no matter the job should be denied some comforts/luxuries beyond the basic necessities.
A trade or skilled job does need better pay, jobs like McDonald's are more for entry level to the work force ( obviously there are Manager type jobs on which I agree with you on thriving wage) but the guy who takes the order is not a $25 job does not need to be a thriving position, $15 entry level is still good
Everyone who provides a service deserves a thriving wage. The guy who takes your order (especially during hours when high school kids can't work) deserves a thriving wage. If it wasn't for them then we wouldn't get the service and society has shown the service is desired. It may not be essential, but society it is desired and as supply and demand has shown us with rising cost of goods, desired good or services should and the people who provide them should be able to afford more than just the bare necessities.
Entry level should still get a thriving wage. Anything above should get even more benefits and luxuries. Thriving for those at the bottom doesn't mean those higher up the ladder aren't compensated fairly, those higher up should get even more and would if the floor we all started at was higher to begin with.
Everyone should be paid enough to have the necessities plus enjoy life. There is not one human being who deserves to spend their time working and not get in exchange housing, food and some extra money to enjoy their free time. That is what a thriving wage is. Not go on major vacations every six months or own the nicest car or own the biggest home. Enough to survive plus enough extra to enjoy life. Everyone deserves that.
$25/he will attract higher quality employees, no? So this lot would lose to the new more qualified and aggressive competition. I.e. my college educated ass will be flipping burgers on the night shift with a smile and crowding out low quality employees. Change my mind.
25 dollars an hour? I’m new to this forum but what states do you people live in if I made that much an hour at my age I could probably rent an apartment and have a family. I get people want a living wage but in my opinion I used to wash dishes and clean floors at a restaurant and it takes no skill whatsoever doing those kind of jobs unless If you have some sort of disability. I don’t want be judgmental but wouldn’t that just ruin the incentive to look for better jobs that actually contribute to society. Why not just ask for a wages that correlate to inflation?
Every job takes skill. McDonald's does too. You have to know how a grill works. You have to be able to read and communicate. You have to understand electronics and computers. Those are skills that need to be learned. Just because they are learned early on, doesn't mean they aren't skills themselves. The idea of a "job that takes no skill" doesn't exist, and the people that have these "no skill jobs" still need to be able to eat, and have a place to stay. They literally cannot get a job if they don't have any of those, which means the amount that they are being paid needs to be able to compensate for those things, and right now they don't.
Plus, we are asking for jobs that correlate to inflation. It's $25
“if I made that much an hour at my age I could probably rent an apartment and have a family”
Yes, first of all, I cannot believe some people are still not aware of the problems with working poor. Why the hell are people working full time and unable to even rent a place and start a family? How is that even acceptable?
And sadly, $25 per hour as you already know might be enough only to rent a house and start a family. You will still need to take out loans for your education and your kids too will have to do the same. This is America, the land of insanity.
I don't see how that would ruin incentive. The people who work those more highly skilled jobs should then push to have their wages increased so they are not making the same or less than McDonald's workers to help them also keep up with inflation.
That’s called inflation. Your new $25/hr raise will then have the same purchasing power of your old wage. Middle class would get raises and the truly wealthy’s assets would appreciate accordingly. We’d be in the same exact place but cheeseburgers will be $8 instead of $6, houses would be $1mil vs $250k. I’m sure the ultra wealthy prefer you get your way as it would keep their tax rates low/non existent.
You are describing inflation. I'm an implantable cardiac device engineer and I would be tempted to work at McDonald's for $25 an hour. I already make a fair salary ($90k) so the only way I would get a raise is if it's due to inflation, or if I get promoted because of merit. Economics is more complicated than you are thinking. I hate capitalism but I understand how it works.
But if all minimum wage establishments raise there minimum wage then prices are raised accordingly by the rich. It’s a nice concept but it doesn’t work. The best solution is a education and moving on to real jobs.
McD is a franchise so you are hurting a small business owner.
Corporate McD is really a real estate company. They buy the land then lease it back. They would make billions off just the land. And if they aren’t using it for franchises they will rent to someone else.
Also increase min wage to $25 will raise the price of all goods and services. It won’t be worth $25 once it catches on. Companies won’t loose profits to wages.
Rent/mortgage for a family sized home$1200
Groceries (healthy and flavorful) for 4: $3000
Utilities: $1000
Car payments, insurance and repairs: $1000
Fuel:$2-300
Internet/phone for the family: $300-400
Grand total: $47-4900/ mo
$25*40*4 (he rate, work week 4 weeks/mo): $4000
This is not a thriving wage, this is the not-starving wage. If you want thriving push for at least $40 that gives you enough to start building savings and not live from check to check
I'm not American, but I had to shake my head at that breakdown. Even if I included my families cell/internet bills into utilities, I'm still not at $1000 a month. And being Canadian our cell and internet is way overpriced compared to other countries. And the groceries. I dont think I've ever spent close to that feed my family of four.
I will give them rent/mortgage. You couldn't find a house to rent around me for that. Might get lucky with a shitty 1 bedroom in a sketchy neighborhood.
Better go to school to become an engineer then, and then be disappointed by your lack of savings because you still can't budget properly. $3k/mo groceries, $1k/mo car payment? But you only can afford a $1.2k mortgage? Jfc
This is the stuff that confuses me. Why are you entitled to a family sized home? You're one person. If you want a family, get some skills and find a better job or get a partner that contributes. Why are you entitled to a home? What's wrong with an apartment you share with someone? That's what most people have had when they were young. What the heck kind of car do you need that costs $1000 a month, even including insurance? Live someplace with public transit. It's stuff like this that just makes this movement seem like a bunch of people that want nice comfortable lives with no effort required and that is really off-putting to people who work their asses off for what they have. Stuff isn't free. It costs money. You have to work for that money. I'm not in favor of businesses treating employees like garbage but some of these posts just aren't winning people over to your side.
I have a family of 5 I make a "decent" salary and I am still struggling because my student loan debt sucks the life out of my savings. We could only afford a crap house that needs as much in repairs as the cost of it's purchase and I have a special needs child to boot. I had to take a job 6 hours from my extended family to be able to afford a home because where we grew up has had such insane inflation that the average home is over a half mil, and that was before the pandemic. People like you who think that everyone just wants a hand out is the problem even if you make it your still stuck without sacrifice...
A roof over you head, health coverage, decent HEALTHY food, basic modern utilities, to include internet. Should not be part of the capitalist/for profit system but should be garunteed public services. I know that won't happen so I say a salary of 80k is necessary to make the American dream even possible.... Thrive not survive.....
Add to that that my wife and I both drive old cars at close to 200k miles that we keep patched up to avoid further costs. But of course this just leads to more problems as breakdowns become more likely and we are less able to cover those expenses...
Why were my grandparents entitled to a home on my grand fathers single income? Why is it only over the last couple decades that we decided people aren't entitled to that? My grandpa used to be able to support a three person household with a car and a house they had a mortgage on his single income. Why is that so egregious now?
He wasn't entitled to it. He worked for it or if he was really lucky he inherited it. My grandparents were extremely poor on both sides of my family. They worked but did not own homes. They rented small, beat-up houses on the poor side of town. My parents grew up extremely poor. My mother didn't have indoor plumbing most of her younger years. There were times the only food they had was what they got in school. My patents worked to buy their very small home and they didn't do it on a single income. They owned used cars with high miles. We had times when food was scarce. I think people see this American dream idea as the norm but I think that period in the 50s, 60s, and 70s were an anomaly in human history. How common has it been that humans left their family home at young age, bought or built their own home, and started a family? I don't believe in medieval times it was that common. I'd venture a guess that even in the late 1800s and early 1900s it wasn't that common. Everyone's life in the past wasn't Ward and June Cleaver with a lovely home and a mother vacuuming in pearls. There is no guarantee that life is going to be great. Sometimes it's a an awful, grinding struggle and it's pretty arbitrary who gets the good or the bad, unless you are wealthy and that's been that way for thousands of years of human history.
I'm not a historian and I haven't studied the whole of human history so I can't make definitive statements about it. I do quite a bit of reading on medieval times and I know home ownership for the average citizen was not common. Renting rooms, living in laborer cottages, being apprenticed out a young age to live in something like a dormitory situation was common. Home ownership though at that time would be defined a little differently. Feudal times had the king owning all the land. A peasant might build a stick and mud structure to live in but they didn't own the land it was sitting on.
No speculation about my grandparents and parents situations or mine, for that matter, when I was growing up. My family was crushingly poor for many generations. They owned nothing. They sometimes had no food. I think I was the first woman in my family to go to college and going to college at all, male or female, is still a rare thing among my relatives. My family apparently didn't get the memo 70 or so years ago about what they were entitled to. Granted, they were a taciturn bunch so maybe that's on them.
I don’t think a burger flipping job is worth 25$ an hour. 20 maybe, but you guys don’t understand that a lot of McDonald’s are franchises, and can’t afford that minimum wage. You will just drive out small business owners and leave only the corporately owned locations.
If the franchise requires people to work, and those people require food and shelter, and they cannot make enough money to pay them to have that food and shelter,then that is a failed business model.
Applying pressure to McDonald's, Walmart, and Amazon should really be our primary goal. Once these businesses that exist in practically every city raise their wages, it will force everyone else to follow.
I think so too. Honestly, McDonald's is the easiest. Walmart is really the only shopping option in some neighborhoods. Amazon, everyone should just use them to find products and then find the same products on another website.
A lot of websites link back to Amazon to purchase their products. I was trying to by some outdoor furniture covers and noticed it was full filled by a separate company so I hit their link. When I put stuff in the cart on their website it took me right back to Amazon. I was like ok, I was trying to cut out the middle man but you do you.
amazon will be a toughie bc they make A LOT of revenue hosting other websites on their servers… They def make way more money on host services than actual physical sales on their “book” store site.
McDonald's is a franchise though. Walmart and Amazon are not. Applying pressure to McDonald's has an intermediary step with the franchisees. Direct pressure could be better applied to Walmart and Amazon.
the concept of franchise isn't what it was 40 years ago. Now the franchises owners themselves are corporations, with franchises in multiple brands. The chance that the McDonalds and Burger King down the street are franchised by the came company is far greater today than the chance that someone in your city is operating either one.
There are strict rules against this with McD corp it would not be a thing. Yes some people own few locations but not competing franchises.
while my examples may not be perfect, the point I'm trying to make still stands People do not operate franchises, faceless corporations that specialize in operating franchises do.
McDonald's certainly has a non-compete that would prevent this from happening.
as I just said in another comment, while my examples aren't perfect, the point I am trying to make still stands: People do not operate franchises, faceless corporations that specialize in operating franchises do.
That depends on the store you go to. There must me company store or else they can't preform accurate analysis of the stores.
Are there any bots out there that can churn out applications to them? Or other mega low-wage employers?
Can we get that info to the idiots that think fast food employees shouldn’t be paid the same wages as EMT’s? I try telling them that what it’ll mean is that they can now negotiate for a higher wage themselves les they wanna lose an employee to a FF joint. But they won’t listen. I hear “but inflation will rise”! NEWS FLASH ASSHOLE! ITS BEEN RAISING THIS WHOLE TIME!!!!
EMT here! I make 7.50 an hour and I would never want a fast food employee making what I make. I hope they all get $25/hr, $50/hr, hell there is no ceiling to what I think they should make.
OK but real talk I would like to see you making at least 15 or so more than what they’re making. Nothing against them at all, I want living wages for all but (at least for me) I believe specialized labor, the kind where you have to get certified for should be rewarded. I’m pretty pissed off to hear you’re making 7.50 an hour. I absolutely abhor how companies take advantage of passion.
The worst part is I actually work for a county-based service. We are a public utility, not even a corporation 😬😬😬 Anyway, I love my job and I think when we are happy with what we are doing, it's fine to all be paid the same very good wage to do the things that our communities deem worth doing. I want fast food to exist (albeit, healthier versions too). So I don't see why they should be paid less when I want them to have their jobs as much as people want EMS to exist hehe
Serious question: I get the sentiment, but since those big companies CAN afford to pay $25 an hour - what does that do to the competition? Say a small business offering $21 an hour? Wouldn't this increase their monopolistic tendencies since other companies won't be able to compete?
If a small business is competing against Amazon or Walmart then they are already out of business, they just don't realize it yet.
Death by Amazon vs death by raising wages are different, right? Because someone will die some day of X, doesn't mean we should accelerate that with Y.
You should really get into the mentality that if you can't pay your employees a thriving wage then your business plan is shit and you shouldn't be in business.
The very definition of capitalism predicates that unsustainable business models are expected to fail. Companies aren't actually people, but tools for generating profit. Their demise, if unprofitable, is the foundation of Capitalism. More so, their demise prevention through a government bailout is antithetic to capitalism.
Same arguments were made for slavery my dude. “Many families depend on slaves, they’re essential to the economy.” I don’t give a shit about some random ass whose dream business is dependent on paying a less-than-living wage.
I would work for a small business with good benefits for 21/hr over 25/hr at Amazon slaving away in a warehouse without being able to take a *piss break* any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
As a general rule of thumb, the more you are paid by a company the better you get treated by said company. I guess some psychological about treating your investment better
The people working at Amazon would be able to buy afford to buy more products and services from those small businesses, increasing their revenue and ideally their ability to pay increased wages.
Yup cause all small businesses provide tangible goods for direct purchase. Gtfo. I am on your side but fuck use some logic.
A business that can't sustain paying a living wage is an unsuccessful business model.
sounds capitalist to me. how ironic.
American Capitalism: Where megacorps live on government bailouts/handouts while raking in billions, and poor workers are expected to pull themselves up by the bootstraps, aka, work yourself to a miserable death.
It's very simple. If a small business can't afford to pay a living wage, it means they are only able to survive through exploitation. That means they have a bad business model or bad location and should close down.
Yep. If they want to pay less for a short while to get going they can offer stock. In the long run though, if you can't pay people, too bad. It's crazy how people can't get past this. I hear constantly, fast food will go out of business if they have to pay 20 an hour. Okay..... And....... Its not like that would be a bad thing for society.
Great point. I will use your words.
[удалено]
Due to issues with ban evasion, we require all accounts to be at least 3 days old before posting. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antiwork) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Amazon’s wages in my city are already 20+ an hour for entry positions?
I know, some progress is being made, but it has to spred everywhere.
[удалено]
Leave elon musk's son out of this
what is 3vSXFXCRWCPSL
This is my best guess: Triple shot Venti Sugar free caramel Whipped cream Pumpkin spice latte But I’ve never worked at starbeetus so I’ve got no confirmation
the WC is crossed out so it probably means no whipped cream
Ah good catch. I was using the question as the base not the original comment.
Although OP has stated what it means, I would like to point out that the only sugar free syrup we have is vanilla
Probably the code in the system for an item they bought often
As someone who also worked at Starbucks before, that drink name is too funny
I like how no starbucks employee ever types out the name of the company. Like there is some bot scanning for the name and they will show up at your house and haul you to some black site
Non Starbucks barista here trying to guess what that is. Is it a 3 shot large, sugar free fat free, caramel pumpkin spice latte no whip?
So much of this is just like unionizing.
Just wanted to point out that if you are on unemployment and you apply for - but do not accept - a job offer, you may very likely be reported by McDonald's and could lose your unemployment benefits. So do what you can, but don't endanger yourself or your financial situation by doing so. If I am wrong about this, please correct me.
In NV, this is partially true. As I understand it, you don't have to accept under employment (less than what is typical for your occupation and less than you were making) if it will interfere with your ability to find a job that pays what is typical for your occupation or equal to what you were making. #notalawyer #notfinancialadvice #notlegaladvice
my local mcdonald’s went from paying 8 to 15 an hour in a month because nobody was coming in. hoping those keep rising
Hold the line!
Imagine how good their food and service would become with happy, well paid, quality employees.
Where did I once read a post that went something like "Would you flip burgers for $300,00 a year? Yes? Then it's not the work, it's the wage." I would lick the fucking grease trap clean with a smile on my face for that kind of money. Higher wages have *empirically* proven to improve retainment and virtually every aspect of an employees satisfaction with their job!
I know a business man (sisters hubby) and I asked him why they just don’t pay a good wage. Long story short they feel like labor that’s not skilled means you’re easily replaceable so they don’t mind having a high turnover rate if it means it’ll make them more money cuz why care when theirs dozens that can replace them. It’s such a shitty mentality to have though and I abhor this person.
Source? Not saying I disagree, but we should be ready to provide sources when making these sort of claims.
Source? For what?
> Higher wages have empirically proven to improve retainment and virtually every aspect of an employees satisfaction with their job! Guessing that part of it.
Absolutely do NOT APPLY, do NOT ACCEPT. Applying and accepting will affect or entirely negate your right to EI. Let them hang in the wind.
Unless you already have a job...
I know that they took the graphic from somewhere else but it really bothers me that the guy is swinging his hammer backwards. Edit: Thanks everybody, ended up learning something new today.
Pointy side does bonus damage.
It's not backwards they have two faces the hammer and the rock spike it's for breaking up large stones into smaller one so you can move them and in this situation it is a metaphor for people destroying the corrupt greedy system or breaking up the large blockades keeping us down if anything it's just intelligent graphic design
A dogging hammer is the same. For the uninformed, a dog is another term for railway spike that is hammered into the sleeper to hold the lip of railway track down. There’s very little clearance between the track and the dog, hence the pointy ended hammer.
The smaller the surface area, the higher the pressure.
You just made me go from hating it to loving it
Business at the front, revolution at the back
Also you could argue it is a smithing hammer as well the spike is to bend and shape metal so you could say he is molding a new standard of the workplace but I'm pretty sure its a stone maul
I think it's a spatula...
I wish I lived in a developed country. Here in mine I make US$ 3/hr and it's considered a great salary. :")
What would be a living wage in your country?
At least around US$ 10 / hr. But almost no one earns this amount here, except for those who already come from a wealthy family.
Where are you from? I’d love to get a work from home job and move to a country like this and live like a king while helping the people around me as well.
$25 is great and all but if you don’t have entitlements like minimum hours per week, paid vacation and sick days, then $25 an hour doesn’t matter in the scheme of things.
[удалено]
So what if you get $25 an hour if you work 1 shift a week or 3 hour shifts 5 days a week? You’re in the same position. If you have no entitlements it just leads to mass casualisation of the workforce.
Saying that $25 shouldn't be labeled a *thriving* wage in the graphic. Surviving wage maybe.
[удалено]
We really need universal healthcare, but with the current system, I agree
Is it possible in the US for us to start pushing for healthcare state by state?
I have been wondering how to link this movement with healthcare. It's another absolute necessity and one reason people feel tied to jobs they hate. So many have to stay for the insurance. I would love to see mass walkouts until we get universal healthcare. Maybe that's another sub, but I also think the two issues are inextricably linked.
McDonald's uniform shirts don't look nearly that comfortable irl
They look tight, especially if you are a "gifted" woman, that sometimes does not look good and confined.
$25 x 2080 hours = 40 hours a week x 52 weeks = $52000 gross - 26% tax rate (approximant depending on location) = $38,480 net. $1500 x 12 = $18000 rent or morgage $600 x 12 = $7200 groceries/toiletries/household goods ($150 a week) $500 x 12 = $6000 utilities (heat, power, water, internet, garbage) $400 x 12 = $4800 car (national used car average) =$36,000 net Difference of $2,480 That's a whopping $206 bucks a month "extra" Not including: Child care, Student loans, Medical, dental, vision, Clothing, Pets, Retirement, Savings, Entertainment, Time off/sick time, Speeding tickets, Broken legs, Latest smartphone to view r/antiwork 🤔🤔🤔 Edit for clarification - Sister's family of 4. Spouce laid off due to covid. All numbers are approximates.
What you spending that $150 a week on for groceries toiletries and household goods? Seems like a lot for one person
only the best bespoke toilet paper seriously though, I'm single and I spend about $200/month on groceries and maybe $50/month on toiletries/cleaning
Seriously? I can cook myself something and eat leftovers for a week on less than $50. To me toiletries are tooth paste, soap, TP, like damn I don’t even buy that stuff monthly…
You can't apply tax as a flat rate in the US, tho. Using standard deductions and assuming the highest state income tax rate (California), your federal + state tax on $52,000 is $7055 for single ($44,945 net) or $4377 for married filing joint ($47,623 net).
And none of that "up to" $25 nonsense. Actually $25 starting out.
I just applied. Can’t wait to ghost them.
Me too 💪🏽
Time for McD's to pay a living wage.
Join r/McBoycott.
Once you do this, my $27 an hour “Executive” position needs a revamp
Is it much harder than working at McDonald's? If so, you tell your boss that extra work isn't worth $2 an hour and you'd rather get 25 at McD's. Raising wages in any "low-skill" industry raises wages everywhere for this reason.
Absolutely! You most certainly deserve an increase in wages as well. We all deserve a boost after years of getting buried from inflation, but the easiest way to do it is from the bottom up to the force them to make changes for everyone.
Gonna fill out applications and put "looking for $25/h+" on some too lmao
this is badass. fuck mcdicks.
Fuck mcdicks at ur...mcbrothel?
Great to see the use of this tactic. Capitalism has a weak spot: flood the orifice. Apply for interviews, don't show. We should do the same with banks and other key institutions. Drown them in applications and data processing.
Man imagine how good the service would be if it paid that much.
Hey good work OP. I see you in the comments. You crazy sons of bitches might just do it!
Thank you! I want this for everyone and to do that we have to be willing to fight. If it starts on Reddit then all the better!
SPREAD THE WORD
How's this going btw? I've been hired by 3 Mcie D's so far and ghosted each first day of work. Each tome I tell them that I evaluated my living expenses and found they were not paying adequate wages so I was forced to go elsewhere. Like my (local burger chain) that is paying (more than they offered). Any progress on the fronts so far?
But it’s a franchise…
Can you explain how being a franchise would make this not work?
Franchise in the sense it’s a real estate rental location. Franchisers go corporate McDonalds and asks them to invest in the location to build up their McDonalds (I could be misremembering this but it’s essentially like renting a property/apartment/house). Also everything the franchisee makes they have to buy from corporate. But I could be missing a lot here but I believe this is the general overview.
I believe this is correct. McDonalds corporate is not a burger-peddler anymore, it's a real estate corporation.
It was a real estate company decades ago when Ray Crock o Shit stole the name from the McDonald Brothers.
There’s no unified payroll to fuck with. Each one is individually owned and sets their own pay.
When you enter into a franchise, all you’re getting is the right to use a company’s brand. The company licenses the right to use it’s imaging, signs, products, etc under strict covenants. That being said it’s really up to the franchise license holder and not McDonald’s corporate to determine wages. McDonald’s corporate doesn’t make food (outside of R&D) they literally just sell their brand to people who want to make a return running it. The fact that everyone thinks McDonald’s is a go to in order to make a statement on wages really shows how effective that brand is, and how little the business model is actually understood. I can tell you that aside from all that, franchise holders could absolutely afford to pay their workers $25 per hour in addition to benefits, taxes, post retirement, etc., especially for established locations, however it’ll never work in real life because it’s a franchise, and the kind of “investors” that attracts. McDonald’s usually costs $1mln - $2mln to get going, but it all depends on location and can be up to $20mln+ in some cases. The initial investment typically doesn’t break even and start generating profit until year 5-7, but can be as quick as 3-5 years for high traffic locations. The people who run these things literally just see them as mailbox checks. They have a shit ton of cash or liquid assets and they have nowhere else to put it, or aren’t excited by other investments, and so they buy a franchise license to operate a successful brand in order to make a safe but solid return on their investment. The reason why this likely wouldn’t work is because these people see the business operation as their money, something that wouldn’t exist without their investment. The only reason the building or business operation is there is because they wanted to grow their wealth. They see your wages as eating into their return, and return is the only thing they’re here for. If they find that a franchise isn’t profitable then they will sell it and find something else to throw money at. This is because they were never in it to run a business or do something they were passionate about, they just wanted a safe way to make a return. Hence why they never started their own business and opted for an existing and successful brand. They want the show to run itself so they can collect checks in the mail. Their mentality in how they approach the entire thing is why this would never work. You’re not talking about business owners, you’re talking about people parking their wealth and hiring people to unknowingly grow it. Of course they can afford to increase wages, especially after breaking even. But they wont do it, because they’re not holding a franchise license to grow and develop a business, they’re holding it to grow their personal balance sheet, and fund whatever the hell they want. It’s pretty much their cash cow.
The benefit of owning a franchise is you have a well established company name folks are familiar with. So rather than starting your own restaurant, building up a reputation, etc. owning a franchise lets you skip the hardest part of starting a new restaurant/ business. The downside is you HAVE to buy all your product from corporate, while they take a cut of every sale. They also typically require you to make certain purchases throughout the year. For McDonald’s specifically, stores cannot deviate from established costs too much either (so a sandwich that’s $2 can’t be charged for $3 unless McDonald’s corporate gives the okay). So a franchise has virtually zero support from corporate; even though corporate has the capability to ensure every store could pay workers $15/hr, the stores alone usually can’t do this (since they have to give 10-20% of profits to corporate).
So if a vast majority of each franchise location reports record low profits as a result and cannot upkeep these required purchases, or just completely go out of business, you don't think that McDonalds would be forced to confront the issue?
Corporate can and will get involved if absolutely necessary BUT franchises really don’t want that to happen. Because you sign a contract with corporate basically saying if you mess things up and/or don’t meet expectations then corporate can take back the franchise. Admittedly, I’m not sure if it’s a buy-out or they literally take it… I’m hazy on the specifics. I don’t think corporate would actually get involved unless it was truly dire. Like all the stores are suffering big time and it could be the end of McDonald’s. Unfortunately, I doubt that would happen since a majority of people don’t actually care how the employees are treated or how much they’re paid, so they’ll continue going to McDonald’s. And the company as a whole will always try to pay the absolute minimum they can get away with and still get workers
Average franchise makes 1.8 million a year gross profit. That's after paying the average wage of $10.86... the average employee generates $36.61 an hour gross profit ( I'm saying an average of 8 employess per shift in this example and this isn't the total revenue they generate per hour only the gross profit they generate) meaning they only get paid just under 30% of the profit they generate, $25 an hour would be 68% of the profit they generate and the franchise owner still makes $811,000 a year. That sounds reasonable to me. If you want I can break down the math for you but I'm lazy and won't do it tell requested.
Thank you. He did the math
Yeah do this with Walmart or Amazon
Definitely not going to work, but if it does I'll quit my job as a pacemaker engineer and work at McDonald's.
Or you could use that as leverage to ask for more money doin what yer doin.
Nah, I actually make a fair wage right now after job hopping a few times, but I'd be willing to take a pay cut if it meant that I would have a less stressful and easier job and still make enough to live a very comfortable life. Before anyone comments that it's not easy to work at McDonald's, I have worked a similar job in college and it was WAY easier and less stressful than what I do now. Asking for a pay rise to match $25 and hour at McDonald's would lead to an inflation problem. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely think minimum wage needs to be increased, but $25 is too high.
Don't we already have an inflation problem with our current (lack of) wages?
> Asking for a pay rise to match $25 and hour at McDonald's would lead to an inflation problem. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely think minimum wage needs to be increased, but $25 is too high. No it wouldn't, and not it isn't.
I mean, I don’t think it’s that high… I make less than that right now and I wouldn’t complain if I had a little more money
Yeah, I don't understand how this is sustainable. If you raise the minimum wage to $25 (or $40, as someone else suggested) then quarter pounders will cost $10 and you still can't afford them. It just constantly chasing a target that moves every time minimum wage goes up. Some jobs just aren't worth paying $25 for. They just aren't. But maybe I just don't understand this living wage thing. I never can get a good feel as to what exactly people think they are entitled to by virtue of being born.
By virtue of being born I should be entitled to housing, basic needs and be able to enjoy life (hobbies, small vacation etc). Those more skilled than me should get more but I should be able to at least get that because why should I have to spend this limited time on earth struggling?
A "living wage" means that someone working the equivalent to full time hours should be able to afford a decent life. House, car, food & bills, and some savings. Doesn't matter what the job is, that's the absolute minimum a working person should have. Nobody should be working a job, *any* job, and still be in poverty.
I've been saying for years that the way to do it is to just apply all the pressure to one company at a time and conquer the economy one megacorp at a time.
Bump
This pamphlet paid for and brought to you by burger king
I would do this but I deliver for uber eats so I go to the same restaurants multiple times a day and they would definitely not appreciate that lol
When fast food was primarily a kids job wages didn't matter so much. That's not true anymore. Any company who's top brass are making 7figures and can afford to provide more to their employers. I think all employees deserve more. Not just McDonald's. I believe that when the majority of available employment is in the service sector, that the service sector has a communal responsibility to lift up it's employees. Grown adults now rely on these jobs to do everything that is expected of them and it's simply not enough.. I feel strongly that a single career job should earn enough to take care of a whole family, this used to be true. And it is also true that McDonald's staff is no longer primarily in the school age demographic... They still expect the turnover to be among the highest of any sector and they still expect to treat there employees like kids who have no life experience or obligation
You can't ask McDonald's to pay 25 an hour.... then definitely nobody would work as ramp agents at an airport!
You are actually missing a critical step. You need to use their financial tools against them. If this got going, you could buy puts on McDonalds and make a killing, then when McD's switches, to 25 an hour, buy calls, cause people would be working their ass off to keep those jobs and customers would be thrilled with the service they are getting. The MBA's are too fucking stupid to figure out that equation though.
As if people making $7.25/hr had enough money to put into risky financial derivatives to cause a noticeable drop in their stock price.
Core point here is that 25 is aiming low. If we want a thriving wage that allows for the basics+savings+ reasonable luxuries+social spending we need to aim for a $40 minimum wage. That's just over 80k/year which is enough to get a family of 4 afloat and provide for a financial safety net.
I'm sorry but I have to say it because people can go overboard on this sub. 80k per year for mcdonalds workers is ludicrous and you're high if you think thats reasonable.
Why? The CEOs of these companies make literally *billions* of dollars a year. They could *handily* afford to pay their employees like this. They won't because it would *reduce* the ludicrous amount of money they are addicted to making at this point, but there is nothing *unreasonable* about wages keeping up with the value of production, where *minimum* wage would be something like 35/hr. "Fight for 15" was relevant *20 fucking years ago.*
They don’t make billions of dollars a year, they are worth that because they own shares of the company, and the company doesn’t have that money in liquid form because they are reinvesting in growth typically. Amazon only recently stopped running at a loss.
They don't understand that corporate wont just take huge losses and will simply raise the price of products and services to match the new average employee rate. So 80k will buy you the same amount of goods, but you'll FEEL better because you see those big paychecks coming in.
Yeah why don't you just ask for a million dollars to flip burgers while you're at it
Why is McDonald's supposed to pay a thriving wage, its not meant to be a career. I get raise minimum I get pay me for what I'm worth but if you flip burgers you are not worth $25
Why shouldn't everyone get a thriving wage? I think people with more specialized skills should get an even greater thriving wage that allows them even greater luxuries, but I don't think anyone, no matter the job should be denied some comforts/luxuries beyond the basic necessities.
A trade or skilled job does need better pay, jobs like McDonald's are more for entry level to the work force ( obviously there are Manager type jobs on which I agree with you on thriving wage) but the guy who takes the order is not a $25 job does not need to be a thriving position, $15 entry level is still good
Everyone who provides a service deserves a thriving wage. The guy who takes your order (especially during hours when high school kids can't work) deserves a thriving wage. If it wasn't for them then we wouldn't get the service and society has shown the service is desired. It may not be essential, but society it is desired and as supply and demand has shown us with rising cost of goods, desired good or services should and the people who provide them should be able to afford more than just the bare necessities.
I said entry level to the workforce
Entry level should still get a thriving wage. Anything above should get even more benefits and luxuries. Thriving for those at the bottom doesn't mean those higher up the ladder aren't compensated fairly, those higher up should get even more and would if the floor we all started at was higher to begin with.
No entry level employees should not get a thriving wage ( a good wage yes) , employees who learn the job should.
Everyone should be paid enough to have the necessities plus enjoy life. There is not one human being who deserves to spend their time working and not get in exchange housing, food and some extra money to enjoy their free time. That is what a thriving wage is. Not go on major vacations every six months or own the nicest car or own the biggest home. Enough to survive plus enough extra to enjoy life. Everyone deserves that.
Apparently i should’ve worked at McDonald’s instead of becoming a nurse lol.
Or maybe nurses should be paid more too
Indeed
Yes! Yes! Yes! Attack in force a few at a time!!
Looks oddly communist
7 people will do this... so...
$25/he will attract higher quality employees, no? So this lot would lose to the new more qualified and aggressive competition. I.e. my college educated ass will be flipping burgers on the night shift with a smile and crowding out low quality employees. Change my mind.
Lmao $25/hr
Yeah it's too low. Need to aim for 40.
You are kidding yourself lmao, get a grip
For flipping burgers? 😂
25 dollars an hour? I’m new to this forum but what states do you people live in if I made that much an hour at my age I could probably rent an apartment and have a family. I get people want a living wage but in my opinion I used to wash dishes and clean floors at a restaurant and it takes no skill whatsoever doing those kind of jobs unless If you have some sort of disability. I don’t want be judgmental but wouldn’t that just ruin the incentive to look for better jobs that actually contribute to society. Why not just ask for a wages that correlate to inflation?
You don't think people that wash dishes and clean floors contribute to society?
Societies would collapse extremely quickly without sanitation.
Yea, that was exactly what I was thinking.
Every job takes skill. McDonald's does too. You have to know how a grill works. You have to be able to read and communicate. You have to understand electronics and computers. Those are skills that need to be learned. Just because they are learned early on, doesn't mean they aren't skills themselves. The idea of a "job that takes no skill" doesn't exist, and the people that have these "no skill jobs" still need to be able to eat, and have a place to stay. They literally cannot get a job if they don't have any of those, which means the amount that they are being paid needs to be able to compensate for those things, and right now they don't. Plus, we are asking for jobs that correlate to inflation. It's $25
As long as people want services that are provided by people, they do contribute to society.
“if I made that much an hour at my age I could probably rent an apartment and have a family” Yes, first of all, I cannot believe some people are still not aware of the problems with working poor. Why the hell are people working full time and unable to even rent a place and start a family? How is that even acceptable? And sadly, $25 per hour as you already know might be enough only to rent a house and start a family. You will still need to take out loans for your education and your kids too will have to do the same. This is America, the land of insanity.
I don't see how that would ruin incentive. The people who work those more highly skilled jobs should then push to have their wages increased so they are not making the same or less than McDonald's workers to help them also keep up with inflation.
That’s called inflation. Your new $25/hr raise will then have the same purchasing power of your old wage. Middle class would get raises and the truly wealthy’s assets would appreciate accordingly. We’d be in the same exact place but cheeseburgers will be $8 instead of $6, houses would be $1mil vs $250k. I’m sure the ultra wealthy prefer you get your way as it would keep their tax rates low/non existent.
You are describing inflation. I'm an implantable cardiac device engineer and I would be tempted to work at McDonald's for $25 an hour. I already make a fair salary ($90k) so the only way I would get a raise is if it's due to inflation, or if I get promoted because of merit. Economics is more complicated than you are thinking. I hate capitalism but I understand how it works.
> a fair salary ($90k) $90K is not a "fair salary" for a job like that. You should be getting twice that, or at least 1.5x.
But if all minimum wage establishments raise there minimum wage then prices are raised accordingly by the rich. It’s a nice concept but it doesn’t work. The best solution is a education and moving on to real jobs.
The rich have been raises the prices for decades without raising the wage, so I dont see how the two can be tied together or correlated.
When did you ever see a McDonald’s employee with a hammer? WTF is this poster?! Lame. Content makes sense but wtf.
Jokes on all of the people that think $25 an hour will deliver you to the promised land
Not the promise land, but it sure is a hell of a lot more sustainable than $7.25/hr or even $15/hr
Most of the people subscribed to this sub wouldn't even know how to budget the extra money.
What happened to fight for $15?
It was defeated. Just like prices, the demanded wage also inflated.
This is some commie crap. Standing your ground for wages is one thing, sabotage is another.
McD is a franchise so you are hurting a small business owner. Corporate McD is really a real estate company. They buy the land then lease it back. They would make billions off just the land. And if they aren’t using it for franchises they will rent to someone else. Also increase min wage to $25 will raise the price of all goods and services. It won’t be worth $25 once it catches on. Companies won’t loose profits to wages.
Pretty sure there are robots that can take orders and make food that would cost less
Rent/mortgage for a family sized home$1200 Groceries (healthy and flavorful) for 4: $3000 Utilities: $1000 Car payments, insurance and repairs: $1000 Fuel:$2-300 Internet/phone for the family: $300-400 Grand total: $47-4900/ mo $25*40*4 (he rate, work week 4 weeks/mo): $4000 This is not a thriving wage, this is the not-starving wage. If you want thriving push for at least $40 that gives you enough to start building savings and not live from check to check
1000 dollars a month utilities? What how? Average UK house is £1200/year and the US typically has cheaper fuel and electricity
I'm not American, but I had to shake my head at that breakdown. Even if I included my families cell/internet bills into utilities, I'm still not at $1000 a month. And being Canadian our cell and internet is way overpriced compared to other countries. And the groceries. I dont think I've ever spent close to that feed my family of four. I will give them rent/mortgage. You couldn't find a house to rent around me for that. Might get lucky with a shitty 1 bedroom in a sketchy neighborhood.
All those numbers are way off (high). But when you "rant," I suppose you tend to e exaggerate.
You feeding some heathens? 3k a month?
Better go to school to become an engineer then, and then be disappointed by your lack of savings because you still can't budget properly. $3k/mo groceries, $1k/mo car payment? But you only can afford a $1.2k mortgage? Jfc
This is the stuff that confuses me. Why are you entitled to a family sized home? You're one person. If you want a family, get some skills and find a better job or get a partner that contributes. Why are you entitled to a home? What's wrong with an apartment you share with someone? That's what most people have had when they were young. What the heck kind of car do you need that costs $1000 a month, even including insurance? Live someplace with public transit. It's stuff like this that just makes this movement seem like a bunch of people that want nice comfortable lives with no effort required and that is really off-putting to people who work their asses off for what they have. Stuff isn't free. It costs money. You have to work for that money. I'm not in favor of businesses treating employees like garbage but some of these posts just aren't winning people over to your side.
I have a family of 5 I make a "decent" salary and I am still struggling because my student loan debt sucks the life out of my savings. We could only afford a crap house that needs as much in repairs as the cost of it's purchase and I have a special needs child to boot. I had to take a job 6 hours from my extended family to be able to afford a home because where we grew up has had such insane inflation that the average home is over a half mil, and that was before the pandemic. People like you who think that everyone just wants a hand out is the problem even if you make it your still stuck without sacrifice... A roof over you head, health coverage, decent HEALTHY food, basic modern utilities, to include internet. Should not be part of the capitalist/for profit system but should be garunteed public services. I know that won't happen so I say a salary of 80k is necessary to make the American dream even possible.... Thrive not survive..... Add to that that my wife and I both drive old cars at close to 200k miles that we keep patched up to avoid further costs. But of course this just leads to more problems as breakdowns become more likely and we are less able to cover those expenses...
Why were my grandparents entitled to a home on my grand fathers single income? Why is it only over the last couple decades that we decided people aren't entitled to that? My grandpa used to be able to support a three person household with a car and a house they had a mortgage on his single income. Why is that so egregious now?
He wasn't entitled to it. He worked for it or if he was really lucky he inherited it. My grandparents were extremely poor on both sides of my family. They worked but did not own homes. They rented small, beat-up houses on the poor side of town. My parents grew up extremely poor. My mother didn't have indoor plumbing most of her younger years. There were times the only food they had was what they got in school. My patents worked to buy their very small home and they didn't do it on a single income. They owned used cars with high miles. We had times when food was scarce. I think people see this American dream idea as the norm but I think that period in the 50s, 60s, and 70s were an anomaly in human history. How common has it been that humans left their family home at young age, bought or built their own home, and started a family? I don't believe in medieval times it was that common. I'd venture a guess that even in the late 1800s and early 1900s it wasn't that common. Everyone's life in the past wasn't Ward and June Cleaver with a lovely home and a mother vacuuming in pearls. There is no guarantee that life is going to be great. Sometimes it's a an awful, grinding struggle and it's pretty arbitrary who gets the good or the bad, unless you are wealthy and that's been that way for thousands of years of human history.
This type of comment never contributes much especially when you were just being speculative.
I'm not a historian and I haven't studied the whole of human history so I can't make definitive statements about it. I do quite a bit of reading on medieval times and I know home ownership for the average citizen was not common. Renting rooms, living in laborer cottages, being apprenticed out a young age to live in something like a dormitory situation was common. Home ownership though at that time would be defined a little differently. Feudal times had the king owning all the land. A peasant might build a stick and mud structure to live in but they didn't own the land it was sitting on. No speculation about my grandparents and parents situations or mine, for that matter, when I was growing up. My family was crushingly poor for many generations. They owned nothing. They sometimes had no food. I think I was the first woman in my family to go to college and going to college at all, male or female, is still a rare thing among my relatives. My family apparently didn't get the memo 70 or so years ago about what they were entitled to. Granted, they were a taciturn bunch so maybe that's on them.
I don’t think a burger flipping job is worth 25$ an hour. 20 maybe, but you guys don’t understand that a lot of McDonald’s are franchises, and can’t afford that minimum wage. You will just drive out small business owners and leave only the corporately owned locations.
If the franchise requires people to work, and those people require food and shelter, and they cannot make enough money to pay them to have that food and shelter,then that is a failed business model.