Fast food CEO: Minimum wage hikes closing locations

[BehindBlueI's]

Here is my question: if it is truly so inconsequential why wouldn't McDonald's do just that and take the pick of the best employees?

Primarily because they don't have to. There is a plethora of unskilled labor willing to take the job, and if they can't live on it then they can still use social programs. You don't have to pay a living wage, because the government will subsidize your wages with food stamps, medicare, etc. A program designed to help the poor ends up subsidizing the rich, because the working poor can accept lower wages (and survive to keep working) thanks to the social safety net.

It might surprise you to know that when Pepsi Co ran restaurants directly, even entry level workers had benefits including paid vacation, medical insurance, life insurance, etc. The wages weren't much better than other fast food places, but the benefits blew them out of the water. Turn over was a lot lower, reducing training costs and increasing efficiency, but then Yum! took over the formerly Pepsi Co owned restaurants, and they went away from that model.

 

[RockofStrength]

Primarily because they don't have to. There is a plethora of unskilled labor willing to take the job, and if they can't live on it then they can still use social programs. You don't have to pay a living wage, because the government will subsidize your wages with food stamps, medicare, etc. A program designed to help the poor ends up subsidizing the rich, because the working poor can accept lower wages (and survive to keep working) thanks to the social safety net.

It might surprise you to know that when Pepsi Co ran restaurants directly, even entry level workers had benefits including paid vacation, medical insurance, life insurance, etc. The wages weren't much better than other fast food places, but the benefits blew them out of the water. Turn over was a lot lower, reducing training costs and increasing efficiency, but then Yum! took over the formerly Pepsi Co owned restaurants, and they went away from that model.

Then why should McDonalds raise their wages if the company that owns them feels that they're making enough money with the staff they can keep? Shouldn't we instead look at eliminating the social safety net in order to remove the ability to hire employees and rely on the government to pick up the tab?

 

[Indynic]

I am at such a crossroad with this whole topic. The are statistics out there that claim that in 1950 the CEO to Worker Pay Ratio was 20 to 1. For every $1 that the average paid employee made, the CEO made $20. There are claims that in 2013 that number has grown to 475 to 1.

There is more money being held by fewer and fewer.

What has happened? How can we reverse this trend? I am against government involvement in capping CEO pay, so that is a bad option IMO.

 

[Lex Concord]

Pyramid schemes. Like Social Security?

Just don't call it a Ponzi scheme...Charles wasn't a legal counterfeiter, and therein lies the only significant difference...and the only reason the system "isn't broke".

 

[actaeon277]

That's the point of supply side. It isn't about anyone on this board. I just think it is sad that some folks think they can be/are part of the club. They go as far to vote against their best interest.

And it's sad that some people want the government to be a "daddy" and solve our problems.
Hell, its doing such a great job, lets just put it in charge of everything, and burn that pesky constitution.

 

[Indynic]

I work for a multi-billion dollar company. My CEO took home $10 million, plus who knows how many perks. He is not the founder of the company. If he was gone tomorrow, the company I work for, would continue to succeed. I don't believe that he is worth that much to the business. Thoughts?

 

[Bunnykid68]

I work for a multi-billion dollar company. My CEO took home $10 million, plus who knows how many perks. He is not the founder of the company. If he was gone tomorrow, the company I work for, would continue to succeed. I don't believe that he is worth that much to the business. Thoughts?

Good for him, wish I had went to school for business management and worked my way up to one of those jobs.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Then why should McDonalds raise their wages if the company that owns them feels that they're making enough money with the staff they can keep? Shouldn't we instead look at eliminating the social safety net in order to remove the ability to hire employees and rely on the government to pick up the tab?

Without the social safety net, people die. Literally. I was born into a two room house with no heat, slept in a drawer for a crib, and developed pneumonia as an infant. If I lived in Jordan, I'd be dead. However, I am American and we live in a system were poverty doesn't equal death due to lack of access to basic medical care. When my grandfather got too sick with cancer to work, we were on food stamps for awhile. Luckily, we were the rural poor and had access to food via gardening, animal husbandry, and hunting, but in the winter food stamps sure helped. I wouldn't be here to write this without the social safety net. My other grandparents helped out in raising me as well, and I went to live with them when things got too tough, but I remember those times very well. The poor aren't always poor because they are lazy, stupid, or uneducated. My grandfather worked way harder than I ever have, he was a 16 year Marine Corps veteran (WWII and Korea), could do math in his head that I can barely do with a calculator, but he went through losing a farm to bankruptcy and before he really got back on his feet he got cancer. It's a terrible country that is as rich as we are who would turn their back on its citizens in that situation. For everyone here who can quote "shall not be infringed", I've yet to see "promote the general welfare" quoted

There is no simple answer. If there was, the problem wouldn't exist. However with the huge amount of resources this country has, its an abomination to let the poor starve, to have little chance of rising out of poverty, etc. The wealth gap continues to grow, unions are demonized as lazy and 'the problem', and any attempt to check the growing oligarchy is decried as socialism.

 

[stchas]

Why does anyone feel that they have the right to dictate to anyone else how much money is "too much"? Sadly, a large portion (not all) of people who rely on minimum wage are there because of their own poor life choices and lack of effort.

 

[Hotdoger]

"I work for a multi-billion dollar company. My CEO took home $10 million, plus who knows how many perks. He is not the founder of the company. If he was gone tomorrow, the company I work for, would continue to succeed. I don't believe that he is worth that much to the business. Thoughts? "

And you can't be replaced for someone earning less?

You think the company would not "succeed' without you?

The only difference I see is envy.

 

[Indynic]

My POV looks beyond minimum wage. I have a four year degree from one of the top business universities in the nation. It seems to me that in corporate America, all levels of employees are getting wages shaved, little by little and the top are the ones with the razor.

Record sales and profits, but regional managers aren't making as much, district managers aren't making as much, local managers aren't making as much, the lowly employee isn't making as much.

Wages on all levels except the top are going down/staying the same (factor in inflation). Factor in reduced compensation packages, such as health care insurance increases or profit sharing decreases and your total compensation gets smaller and smaller.

 

[Lex Concord]

Without the social safety net, people die. Literally. I was born into a two room house with no heat, slept in a drawer for a crib, and developed pneumonia as an infant. If I lived in Jordan, I'd be dead. However, I am American and we live in a system were poverty doesn't equal death due to lack of access to basic medical care. When my grandfather got too sick with cancer to work, we were on food stamps for awhile. Luckily, we were the rural poor and had access to food via gardening, animal husbandry, and hunting, but in the winter food stamps sure helped. I wouldn't be here to write this without the social safety net. My other grandparents helped out in raising me as well, and I went to live with them when things got too tough, but I remember those times very well. The poor aren't always poor because they are lazy, stupid, or uneducated. My grandfather worked way harder than I ever have, he was a 16 year Marine Corps veteran (WWII and Korea), could do math in his head that I can barely do with a calculator, but he went through losing a farm to bankruptcy and before he really got back on his feet he got cancer. It's a terrible country that is as rich as we are who would turn their back on its citizens in that situation. For everyone here who can quote "shall not be infringed", I've yet to see "promote the general welfare" quoted

There is no simple answer. If there was, the problem wouldn't exist. However with the huge amount of resources this country has, its an abomination to let the poor starve, to have little chance of rising out of poverty, etc. The wealth gap continues to grow, unions are demonized as lazy and 'the problem', and any attempt to check the growing oligarchy is decried as socialism.

While it may be that the social "safety net" helped in those times of which you speak, that truth does NOT equate to the claim that you would have died or received no help had that "safety net" not been in place.

It is a sad day when anyone believes that charity and assistance would not exist or occur without application of government force; it seems to belie a misunderstanding of the concept of charity.

 

[Indynic]

"I work for a multi-billion dollar company. My CEO took home $10 million, plus who knows how many perks. He is not the founder of the company. If he was gone tomorrow, the company I work for, would continue to succeed. I don't believe that he is worth that much to the business. Thoughts? "

And you can't be replaced for someone earning less?

You think the company would not "succeed' without you?

The only difference I see is envy.

Making a huge leap there. No jealousy on my part. If I left, the company would continue to succeed. It has a sound business model and no debt.

 

[poptab]

Government force isn't going to solve this problem. If it could it would have already done so.

 

[BogWalker]

My POV looks beyond minimum wage. I have a four year degree from one of the top business universities in the nation. It seems to me that in corporate America, all levels of employees are getting wages shaved, little by little and the top are the ones with the razor.

Record sales and profits, but regional managers aren't making as much, district managers aren't making as much, local managers aren't making as much, the lowly employee isn't making as much.

Wages on all levels except the top are going down/staying the same (factor in inflation). Factor in reduced compensation packages, such as health care insurance increases or profit sharing decreases and your total compensation gets smaller and smaller.

I don't think anyone is arguing wages aren't getting crappy, but how does one fix it without a massive violation of the capitalist system?

 

[Lex Concord]

Government force isn't going to solve this problem. If it could it would have already done so.

No, we haven't applied nearly as much government force here as say, Stalin. Surely if we go "far enough" we'll get it right and end hunger and suffering.

In other news - WTS: Arizona Acreage - Amazing ocean vistas. Call today!

 

[Lex Concord]

I don't think anyone is arguing wages aren't getting crappy, but how does one fix it without a massive violation of the capitalist system?

Please define this "capitalist system". If you mean free market, we don't have one. If you mean our current system, it is in need of serious violation (i.e. it needs to be made more free).

 

[dmarsh8]

"Fast food is bad for you anyway.'


There are healthy options at all fast food places.

Meh, some do. Most places definition of healthy is many times far from it.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

While it may be that the social "safety net" helped in those times of which you speak, that truth does NOT equate to the claim that you would have died or received no help had that "safety net" not been in place.

It is a sad day when anyone believes that charity and assistance would not exist or occur without application of government force; it seems to belie a misunderstanding of the concept of charity.

If charity and assistance are so omnipresent for the needs of the poor, why did government programs start? Why do people in other countries still die of incredibly easily treated diseases? Why do so many lack even adequate clean drinking water? You can lie to yourself, but I know better. It is not abstract to me. I'm quite aware of what government programs have helped me go from a house with no running water to a comfortable middle class existence, from food stamps to the GI Bill. I've traveled abroad too much and seen too many things to believe that simple charity from the community is enough to successfully combat poverty.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I don't think anyone is arguing wages aren't getting crappy, but how does one fix it without a massive violation of the capitalist system?

Likely, we don't. Even if we waved a magic wand and all jobs paid a living wage tomorrow, that simply makes more of a market for machines to replace labor. There is a certain amount of inevitability to the shrinkage of the middle class, a reduced value for laborers, and an ever widening wage gap. What you can guarantee is things won't stay the same. What you can't guarantee is we'll like what this country looks like in 30-50 years as a result.