Fast food workers and laborers across the nation are protesting for higher wages. Though the number of participants who are workers is unclear, walkouts and rallies are planned in over 100 cities. They are trying to raise the federal minimum wage of $7.25, which amounts to $15,000 a year for full time workers, to $15. Raising the federal minimum wage would combat the growing income inequality.
Though support is growing, it is still an uphill battle since the fast food industry is a "price sensitive business". If wages increase to this amount, the prices of the food will increase at least by 20%. Also, higher wages might also mean eliminating jobs within this industry.
President Obama supports the Democratic proposal to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour. How do you stand on this issue? Is $15 per hour reasonable?
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/fast-food-strikes-return-amid-push-wage-hikes-21107127
8 comments:
To be completely honest, raising the wage from $7.25 to $15 sounds a little bit over the top. They are asking for a 52% increase in payment, at the cost of other jobs and higher priced fast food. Although more expensive fast food may not sound like that big of a deal to us, there are others who can only afford the dollar menu. I think Obama is right to find a compromise, and I hope that both the customers and the employees will be satisfied with the $10.10/hr wage.
I am opposed to Obama's decision to raise minimum wage to $10.10. Any raise to the current minimum wage will result in fewer jobs as well as the increased market value of goods. With a $10.10 minimum wage, fewer jobs will be available to compensate for the money needed for this increase. Furthermore, if wages are raised, the cost of living will raise along with it. This increase in wages may be disproportionate to the increased cost of goods. Thus, minimum wage earners may still have little ability to purchase desired items and necessities. I believe this increase will be even more detrimental to the minimum-wage earning population because of the increased unemployment and disproportionate increase in costs of goods that may ensue.
First of all, I don't think that the laborers actually think they will get $15 per hour. They are using this high and round number as a symbol for what they want: an increase in the minimum wage. Although I cannot relate to living on around $15,000 per year as stated by Celene, I know it would be extremely difficult. I don't see it as unreasonable to want an increase in pay. Whether or not they will get it due to the business consequences is a different question. Increasing the price of food due to the increase in wages could be a necessary evil (or the owners could just leave the food the same price and take a loss... never mind). Obama's number is a much more reasonable, but still high number in the eyes of the business leaders. Personally, I think that $7.25 is too low, and that number needs to be increased.
I think that Obama's proposal seems reasonable. While I agree that minimum wage should be raised, jumping from $7.25 to $15 just seems like a ridiculously huge increase. I think that Connor brings up an interesting point that by increasing minimum wage could force buisnesses to raise the prices on their food. It would be nice if they left the prices as they were, but I feel like this isn't going to happen if minimum wage is increased due to buisness' tendency to want more money.
Although the 7.25 figure may be low in California, there are areas of the U.S. where the COL is dramatically lower. Honestly, I don't think the 40 hr workweek is economically feasible for people at the bottom of the ladder. As someone who worked 60+ hrs/week during the summer, I know how stressful it can be to keep up with this schedule, but the ideal of an 8-hr workday is now but a pipe dream. Considering that many people work far more than 40 hrs/week, or take more than one job, I don't see why the 40 hr/wk figure should be kept as a benchmark.
I feel that the minimum wage should be pinned to regional COL differences, rather than some federally mandated value - states/cities should determine the minimum wage rather than the federal government, as the same wage has very different impacts depending on the region. For someone who lives in rural Kansas, $7.25 may be more than enough, while for someone in NYC or SF, $10 may be the minimum level. If a federal level were to be set at $10.10 (or even $15), then the person in Kansas would be making far more than he should be (50-100% more).
I agree with Nathan that regional cost of living differences should be considered in determining minimum wage; actually, state and local governments can set the minimum wage at a higher value - California's minimum wage is $8.00, while San Francisco's is $10.55 (http://www.minimumwage.com/). (I find it interesting that this website asserts, "Minimum wage increases do not help reduce poverty.")
I found a recent article (http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-minimum-wage-20131209,0,7295277.story?page=1#axzz2mxPP621b) that says that California is set to raise its minimum wage to $9.00 this July, with more state and local governments seeking to raise the minimum wage as well. Although an increase in the federal minimum wage would be more ideal, hopefully these more local efforts will be effective in aiding those who struggle to survive on minimum (or in general, low) wages.
I agree with Connor, that $15 is just a representative statement that depicts their desire for a higher minimum wage. I feel like this is just a tug war, where if you increase the minimum wage, you will lose employment. Although I think $7.25 is way too low, I don't know if we should prioritize the minimum wage or the unemployment rate. Also, Elkana brings up a good point about local government's ability to raise the minimum wage, but I think local governments can do much when the federal government can't raise the minimum wage from $7.25. I don't think we can fully rely on all cities to individually raise their minimum wage. This will also bring an issue of inequality between cities.
Also, I don't think the federal government should immediately increase the minimum wage from 7.25 to 10.10. It'd be such a big jump, that prices will noticeably rise. And consumers are not gonna like that. If consumers stop buying food, then raising the minimum wage by that much would not be effective at all.
I agree with what Connor said about leaving food the same price. I'm pretty sure that fast food chains make such an insane amount of profit that it wouldn't really matter if minimum wage was increased. They could easily afford to pay workers more, keep everyone's jobs, and leave the food the same price. The people "on top" would just be a little less rich. I know it's not that simple, but it shouldn't be as hard as some people are making it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/21/mcdonalds-profit-taxpayers_n_4136336.html
I support the $10.10 minimum wage, and I'd even say it should be higher.
Post a Comment