-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AP: Seattle's $15 per hour minimum wage law hasnt cut jobs
- Thread starter KSweeley
- Start date
To work in a job that does not exist?
Waiters/waitresses/deliverers won't get $15/hr, so the tipping game will be largely unchanged.
This article mentions, but overlooks, how jobs leaving a city with a $15 minimum wage, wouldn't be able to do so if there was a universal $15 minimum wage.
Restaurants already use part-time employees to avoid insurance benefits. Minimum wage has nothing to do with it.
diablos991
Can’t stump the diablos
Automation takes a bit of time to implement.
In most cities an understaffed restaurant won't stay in business long.
Ron Mexico
Member
Wonder how many people were then kept short of 680 hours per year as a result? A quick google search says that's the minimum for WA unemployment.
Or, said in a different way, today we learned that economic policy changes can't, won't and shouldn't exist in a vacuum.
Personally, I'm torn on the minimum wage debate for that reason. There needs to be improvements but I've yet to see a conclusive how. This article sure as hell didn't do it.
Or, said in a different way, today we learned that economic policy changes can't, won't and shouldn't exist in a vacuum.
Personally, I'm torn on the minimum wage debate for that reason. There needs to be improvements but I've yet to see a conclusive how. This article sure as hell didn't do it.
Earthstrike
Member
So they are going to double their employment but also be more selective of their hiring at the same time?
The worst part about these kinds of discussion is people always discuss the ways businesses will cut costs. But people forget, these are businesses, they already cut all the costs they deem unnecessary.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
There's a lot of savings to working less though:
- Less money spent commuting
- Less money spent on eating out
- More time to make money through alternative means
- More time to fix things on your own or provide yourself with services that you would otherwise pay for like daycare/plumping/house repairs etc.
Yeah, I worked at a McDonald's a few years back, and it was constantly, severely understaffed. One of the busiest locations on a big 10 college campus, right down the street from the football stadium and student apartments. We would frequently, during a rush, only have 2 or 3 people total in the kitchen. The store literally wouldn't be able to operate if they dropped hours even a tiny bit.
Also, most people in these types of jobs, even if working 40+ hours a week regularly, are still technically "part-time" and don't necessarily get full benefits.
I'm all for studying the effect this has on hours though. More data is always good, but I've read over a few minimum wage studies while getting my econ degree, and have yet to see one that paints the dire picture many businesses throw around when legislation is debated.
My wife is a manager at a hospital-like place in downtown Seattle, and the biggest "problem"
she's facing right now is a lack of applicants because of low unemployment rates, forcing her to need to pay employees more (the company she works for can afford it).
It's a pretty great problem to have.
Sorry, but you can't keep shifting goalposts here.
Employers don't magically hire people out of the goodness of their hearts. They hire people to meet the needs of the company. Employers are not going to start hiring more people if they can pay those people less. They'll only hire people if they actually need those people to run the company.Meanwhile, those companies can get more employees who can actually afford to purchase their goods, since the totality of Seattle has more money to spend.
A company that can only survive by paying its employees poverty wages is not a company that is entitled to exist.
You think automation wouldn't happen anyway? You're awfully naive if you think automation is only coming because of higher wages.
Exactly. Employers love to talk all the time about how their employees are their "family", while treating their "family" like disposable shit the second they don't need them anymore.
Which, truly, is a sensible business decision!
But it's also why the minimum wage exists. When all the hiring power is on the side of businesses instead of employees, the general public suffers with dropping productivity.
she's facing right now is a lack of applicants because of low unemployment rates, forcing her to need to pay employees more (the company she works for can afford it).
It's a pretty great problem to have.
Sorry, but you can't keep shifting goalposts here.
Employers don't magically hire people out of the goodness of their hearts. They hire people to meet the needs of the company. Employers are not going to start hiring more people if they can pay those people less. They'll only hire people if they actually need those people to run the company.Meanwhile, those companies can get more employees who can actually afford to purchase their goods, since the totality of Seattle has more money to spend.
A company that can only survive by paying its employees poverty wages is not a company that is entitled to exist.
You think automation wouldn't happen anyway? You're awfully naive if you think automation is only coming because of higher wages.
Exactly. Employers love to talk all the time about how their employees are their "family", while treating their "family" like disposable shit the second they don't need them anymore.
Which, truly, is a sensible business decision!
But it's also why the minimum wage exists. When all the hiring power is on the side of businesses instead of employees, the general public suffers with dropping productivity.
Shifting goalposts is the wrong phrase - you're right.
The correct response from me would be "yes they did address it in the study, and literally the next few sentences answer your question":
This includes not just raw number of jobs, but overall "employment effects" - including hours worked.
Theonik
Member
Yes and no. Automation is coming eventually but the rate in which it becomes widespread depends on cost. Once it is cheaper to automate then companies will automate. Higher wages can accelerate this process. (they can drive more companies to do what McDonalds is experimenting on with using vending machines and in doing so automation cost drops faster too.)
There are normal ebs and flows to unemployment rates anywhere. That article focuses on a blip that has since more than been corrected:
Seattle, WA Unemployment Rate:
https://ycharts.com/indicators/seattle_wa_unemployment_rate
Which is why a more than 1 year old article might say something different than an up to date article.
There are 1,000 people moving to Seattle every week. They are moving here because jobs are being created here.. population booming while unemployment going down is.. impressive.
YourMaster
Member
People need to start realizing that paying employees a sub-living-wage basically means that the government is subsidizing that company, by covering the costs to society through other means like food-stamps, increased health care cost due to lack of insurance or through the justice system.
Well, that's good then! It was not made clear that includes hours worked.
The rate at which automation is improving in efficiency, reliability and cost far outpaces the rate that the minimum wage is growing. The real crime is a society not preparing itself for that inevitability.
Too bad that cost won't be able to passed to the customer like it should because nowadays people will raise hell for a slight increase in food prices. But yet everyone is always clamoring about equal pay in restaurant industry, really just a bunch of hypocrites..."restaurant workers should be paid more, just don't pass the bill to me!"
Lord of Ostia
Member
To everyone suggesting that employers will cut hours in an attempt to avoid paying benefits to employees due to a higher minimum wage...businesses already do this, without minimum wage increases. At least now people are making more money.
TyphoonStruggle
Member
As far as I can tell, there's three arguments against high minimum wage:
1. Increased unemployment rate
2. Reduced hours
3. High inflation
If 1 is proven false, then 2 and 3 matter.
If 2 is also proven false, then only 3 matters.
Then, is high inflation bad?
Modern economies try to keep inflation arbitrarily low at ~1.5%. The right uses the argument "high inflation is bad for the poor because higher prices." Truth is, high inflation is bad for the poor only if wages don't increase as much as inflation. So while "high prices" look bad, what really matters is the ratio of wage increase to price increase.
(P.S.: Rich people--i.e., large savers--hate inflation because it reduces their large amount of savings. Creditors also benefit from low inflation. Therefore, "high inflation" is not a universally bad thing but it is for the rich and creditors.)
1. Increased unemployment rate
2. Reduced hours
3. High inflation
If 1 is proven false, then 2 and 3 matter.
If 2 is also proven false, then only 3 matters.
Then, is high inflation bad?
Modern economies try to keep inflation arbitrarily low at ~1.5%. The right uses the argument "high inflation is bad for the poor because higher prices." Truth is, high inflation is bad for the poor only if wages don't increase as much as inflation. So while "high prices" look bad, what really matters is the ratio of wage increase to price increase.
(P.S.: Rich people--i.e., large savers--hate inflation because it reduces their large amount of savings. Creditors also benefit from low inflation. Therefore, "high inflation" is not a universally bad thing but it is for the rich and creditors.)
I think people understand that but when you are studying the real consequences of these increases you would look for increased incidences of this and things like that. With the new information that employment effects includes hours worked, it's not a concern as that means that hours aren't being reduced.
boiled goose
good with gravy
Umm. If the company has to sell the same amount of stuff, why would they cut hours?
They don't have longer hours to be nice. It's all about profit.
Plus, same money taking less time is better!
BobTheFork
Member
CrunchyFrog
Member
If you're getting the same pay at less hours though isn't that still a net benefit? You now have time for either another part time job to bring your income up to speed, or to get the education required for career advancement, or to schedule that doctor's appointment for that pain in your side which discovers a tumor before it goes malignant, or frankly just to live the life you want. People on both sides of the spectrum seem to not value time as much as they should.
As someone who is living in Seattle, I don't think this can be even debated.
Using McDonalds as a standard, try 2.5 to 3 times the price elsewhere. A McDouble cost damn near $3.
Numerous stores and places are saying that they are raising prices due to the wage hike. Whether they are using it as a cover, it is hard to say. I certainly think that some places are raising prices more than need be to try and sneak in a price hike.
That isn't the case. It is a bit more complex than that. Which just means many servers are making way more money as they are now getting 12 (I think is the current phase-in level) plus tips from people thinking they make 2.
People are confused about it here. I have started to titrate down my tips. Towards 10 percent rather than 20. Someone making 15 an hour doesn't really deserve a tip for handing me a beer.
This.
We shouldn't be talking about a minimum wage versus automation.
We should be planning for floors for people who don't have work no matter the case, or more importantly to expand the notion of work to what it really is: beyond jobs. Doesn't matter if it's via higher wages or technology, we need a floor for people.
Earthstrike
Member
Inflation is bad for middle class people like myself who bust their ass and save money. This means making my own meals every day, not pissing away all my money on things like booze, alcohol and drugs, and buying things like vehicles (in my case vehicle) used. Don't think for a second that inflation won't hurt me, or impact my ability to create a better future for myself. I would consider myself very left, and I'm probably the most left out of most people I know (though I classify myself as a scientific leftist, not a socialist or communist). High inflation is unequivocally bad and this consensus exists across the political aisle amongst economists. There could be theoretical debates about marginal changes at low numbers (0 - 1 percent) but the last thing I would want is the embrace something tantamount to a reset button on the economy and lose everything I've worked hard for.
poppedcollar69
Member
No, you are just ignorant of basic economics. If we raise the minimum wage, then we'll have to eliminate all the dishwashers secretaries, and we won't be able to take the bus boys on a team building retreat in Jamaica
LinkAndEpona
Banned
Yea I hear ya, it can be a bad mindset to have but really, what's the point of making more money when the prices of stuff increase as well? A very fine balance needs to be made.
Earthstrike
Member
Wait, what? If the average customer is disproportionately angered by a price increase, then that actually means the majority of the wage increase costs will be eaten by businesses, not customers. Angry customers at price tend to indicate competitive markets. The more competitive a market is, the more likely it is an increase in production costs is eaten by the industry and not the consumer.
From my experience as a restaurant owner - if place A and B serve supposedly the same quality of food, and place A wants to pay their workers better by increasing the food price a bit, consumers raise hell and goes to place B. Write angry yelp reviews indicating they know exactly what's going on in the kitchen and the food/wage costs. People are entitled as fuck nowadays, and that's just the truth.
TyphoonStruggle
Member
Not entirely true.
Inflation won't immediately kill your savings. It will reduce the rate at which it grows, but in the worst (bad) cases it can reduce your savings.
Higher inflation will incentivize spending; even progress the repatriation of offshore money. Plus, you can even make money off inflation by getting low interest rate loans.
[1] you didn't define high
[2] if you're saying 2-4% is high, then you're lying
Superinflation IS unequivocally bad, but you didn't say that.
(P.S. You're not the only one busting ass, but there's many ways to play the US economy.)
That would be a good thing if so
Oh cool
RPGCrazied
Member
Won't be seeing this in Georgia anytime soon. I think $15 per hour should be in every state. You just can't live on $7.50 these days.
Just looked up some online order prices to see. Papa johns large pizza is $4 more in seattle. Panera sandwich is about $2 more. So increase seems to be 10-15% or so
If businesses can cut costs by reducing staff hours, why wouldn't they be doing that already? Regardless of minimum wage.
People need a living wage rate, and businesses won't bother unless they have to. If that means you as a middle class individual gets mad or whatever because your own wage looks now worse in comparison, or you worry about paying a few dollars more for your burger, maybe that means your own wage should go up too. Only now you have more leverage to make that happen.
People need a living wage rate, and businesses won't bother unless they have to. If that means you as a middle class individual gets mad or whatever because your own wage looks now worse in comparison, or you worry about paying a few dollars more for your burger, maybe that means your own wage should go up too. Only now you have more leverage to make that happen.
Federally, we need a system to keep the federal level to keep up with inflation so states can price accordingly.
But $15/hr in Seattle is not the same as $15/hr in Georgia. Some regions/cities are much more expensive than others.
For instance, I live in Boston now. I live with 3 other roommates in a dump ass apartment/multi family home. The place itself is shitty, I'm not that close to public transit and the city center, but the neighborhood is nice. I pay 725 a month for this place.
Me and my GF are planning to move to Texas. We were looking at apartments in downtown Houston and hooooooly shit. For those rent prices we payed while in Boston we could live like kings in Houston.
GoldenEye 007
Member
I feel like resistance to increased minimum wages have not centered around concern for employees potentially having less hours.
It always centered around the notion that the thought of increased wages would lead to mass closings of businesses - especially small ones and massively increased prices across the board. Reduced hours is a valid question, but let's not pretend that was a major point of argument for those against bringing wages into the 21st century.
Are second jobs common in the US? I live in the UK and don't know (and have never known) anyone that's worked 2 jobs. Not to say that it doesn't happen, but in my (albiet limited) experience it's pretty rare.
Seems like a pretty disheartening existence to have to work 2 shitty retail jobs just to pay the bills.
Seems like a pretty disheartening existence to have to work 2 shitty retail jobs just to pay the bills.
Skellig Gra
Member
Yes...yes it is.
BladeoftheImmortal
Member
These companies already do that at 7.50/hr. Don't tell me working 20 hrs for the same pay you worked 40 hrs for is somehow worse. especially when most minimum wage workers work part-time anyways.