Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Minimum Wage?
Options
Comments
-
Although, we do have ourselves to blame for that. Research has shown that Irish consumers are incredibly brand-conscious and unnecessarily purchase higher priced goods (although I suppose some would argue that many consumers find utility in buying branded goods). But there is an element of snobbery there. Take hairdressers for example: there are perfectly good Asian hairdressers around that charge under 30 for a cut & blowdry but the majority of Irish women continue to go to establishments where prices start at €55. Madness.
So it is up to the government to keep living costs down or is it up to consumers?
you right
tho judging by how import figures into this country have collapsed
its seems alot of people a deciding to tighten belts and live without them luxury items, or maybe they simply dont have the money to buy that latest BMW0 -
You seem to be under the impression that everyone has a chance to avail of a good education. My parents have children depending on them, and wouldn't be able to attend college and have to work full-time.
yes everyone is given an equal chance by the state to get education, and thats something to be proud of
its not the state fault (or is it?) that some people decide to have a large family and then find they are stretched (tho in fairness you get more money from state the more kids you have)
i came from very ****ty background, i was first in my family to get into 3rd level, and for that i thank the government for providing the opportunity, and yes i had to work hard during studies to be able to afford noodles and beans, i know what its like to be on breadline and work hard, if anything that was one heck of a motivator to move on and grab opportunitiesIf someone ever threatened to cut their wages, I would take that as a direct threat to my family. I detest snobby, shítehawks who think that people don't deserve a fair wage because they don't have the same education, or upbringing. .
if the company is about to go under do you prefer they close down completely and then everyone looses jobs? how about jobs that are not being created in first place because its not worth it??
and it did help, right now the corpo tax is the only plus of doing business in this country, i find it funny that you and your SF actually want this corpo tax raised as was touched on in another thread before, make it completely impractical to do business hereDidn't Ireland set one of the world's lowest corporate taxes in order to increase competitiveness?
ever ask yourself why the cost of living is so high?If the cost of living wasn't so high here - the wage requirements wouldn't be so high.but it's not an easy life for a family which is operating on the minimum wage, and if that were to be reduced or even abolished - they would suffer further, and workers would be exploited because the wages would be dictated by the employer..
its damn easier than just about everywhere else in world where people might starve, like it or not we are competing against people who have great will to work as the alternative is working the land by hand
and funny how the workers in this country are being shafted not by employers but by the government and tradeunions, all of that money thats being borrowed now will have to be paid back + interest thru taxation direct and indirect (making it harder to live)
and that it will, wages/welfare are less in UK and so is their cost of living be equal amountsWell, if they are going to reduce wages - then the cost of living also needs to come down. You can't have it both ways. .It is life, but it doesn't have to be that way. People shouldn't have to have their studies suffer because they spend countless nights in work. If someone can afford it - it's fine, but for more disadvantaged families - they really need the support.
someone somewhere has to work, money doesnt grow on trees and we cant borrow indefinitely, neither do we have a natural resource that we can sell
the disadvantaged in Ireland get great support, would you want to be "disadvantaged" in any other country?I would have worked elsewhere. They operated at a HUGE profit in there. The assistant manager at the time was only clearing about 4.50 an hour. They routinely had 800-900 people in there. We were exploited as workers, and there was no excuse to pay us the terrible pay that we received. We deserved more for our work. My job consisted of listening to drunk idiots at night, and then scraping their vomit up off the ground in the morning, taking bottles out of bins and putting them back in cases - meanwhile getting stung by wasps never every 2nd hour because the coke bottles attracted them. 2.50 an hour for that?
there are ****ty jobs, what can you do? if no one wanted to do this job then the wages would either have to rise to attract employees or the business close
the owner of that nightclub took a risk and created jobs you didnt take a risk thats a huge difference, if you think you deserve more and can do the same then why dont you? why dont you startup your own nightclub and pay the employees 30 an hour? how long would you be able to continue to run this charity business of yours for??If the employer can't make a profit, without paying a fair wage - then fúck them - they don't deserve to be in business. Nobody should get rich off the backs of hard workers, without paying them a fair and decent wage for their work.
if everyone had same attitude as you there be no jobs for workers, once again you think workers have a god given right to a job, well business people have a right not to create jobs if they dont see profit in taking a risk with a venture
what then? you get "workers" to dig canals?I'll be proud of my stance 10 years on. I've always supported a fair wage for workers. That stance will never change.
all your stance will accomplish and has accomplished is create an environment where some people will not find jobs and have to go on dole, and this dole has to be borrowed, and these debts have to be repaid by other workers0 -
Can someone clarify for me what the arguments for maintaining a minimum wage level is in a country where a welfare system exists?
As far as I can see having social welfare available autmatically creates a minimum wage level at which an organisation must offer prospective employees in order to make it worth their while to accept the offer of employment.
I've asked this question in a few threads about removing / reducing the minimum wage recently and I've not received a single response, nevermind an actual argument for maintaining it.
The one problem with the welfare net is that it's against the terms of JSA/JSB to refuse a job while on welfare. Someone could offer you a job that pays a pittance and you'd be forced into accepting it for fear of losing your benefits/having your benefits halved.0 -
donegalfella wrote:This post has been deleted.Of course they would. The goal for a company is to turn profit. If we don't have a minimum wage, then workers will earn less. It's really that simple.
dlofnep, how do you explain why wages went up during the boom years and, more specifically, why many employers pay above the minimum wage? If your response to donegalfella is accurate, then they shouldn't have gone up at all. Wages cannot go up just because governments and unions want them to -- they go up because labour is a scare resource, and rival employers must compete with each other in the labour market. Labour is exceptionally scarce in the Yukon Territory -- minimum wage of $8.89 per hour -- in the north of Canada; to the point where the evil capitalists over at McDonald's are paying their staff close to $20 per hour. How can this be?!0 -
Then how do you explain people doing internships? Is it that there is more utility in employment (to the employee) than just the money received?
It'd work the same way as apprentices or trainee accountants. You work for peanuts today because once you're qualified you'll be able to command a wage far in excess of the minimum wage.
It's a very different situation to traditional "minimum wage jobs" where you aren't getting a good qualification out of it.0 -
Advertisement
-
yes everyone is given an equal chance by the state to get education, and thats something to be proud of
No, everyone does not have an equal chance to get an education in this state. Mature students, who live at home who pay rent to their parents, and pay for their own food have a high chance of not getting a grant based on their parents income. Tell me the equality there? The Government somehow expects parents to fork out for their children's education, even when they are in their late 20's or 30's?its not the state fault (or is it?) that some people decide to have a large family and then find they are stretched (tho in fairness you get more money from state the more kids you have)
It's not about "fault". You claimed that everyone has an equal opportunity to go out and get an education and better their lives. I provided you with a scenario where this was not the case.i came from very ****ty background, i was first in my family to get into 3rd level, and for that i thank the government for providing the opportunity, and yes i had to work hard during studies to be able to afford noodles and beans, i know what its like to be on breadline and work hard, if anything that was one heck of a motivator to move on and grab opportunities
It's not about motivation. It's about being able to financially cope with the situation.if the company is about to go under do you prefer they close down completely and then everyone looses jobs? how about jobs that are not being created in first place because its not worth it??
A company that does not pay someone a fair wage does not deserve to be in business. If a company exploits workers, by profiting solely on the base of underpaying their workers - then they do not deserve to be in business, as it only benefits the higher-ups in the company and not the real backbone of the company.
You might be in favour of underpaying workers to keep an exploitative company afloat - I'm not.and it did help, right now the corpo tax is the only plus of doing business in this country, i find it funny that you and your SF actually want this corpo tax raised as was touched on in another thread before, make it completely impractical to do business here
Shut up about Sinn Féin. Nobody mentioned Sinn Féin in this thread. This is a one-to-one discussion between me and you.
The idea of lowering the corporate tax was to entice business - but now what you're proposing is that we both lower corporate tax, AND undercut worker's pay. When people make comparisons between minimum wages - they often compare the difference between Britain and Ireland, without examining the differences in the corporate tax.
If you are to drastically reduce pay - then that lowers the tax being put back into the economy by workers. Businesses cannot have a free ride in any country. They can either have lower paid workers, or lower corporate tax. They cannot have both, as it's exploiting the country.
Show me an example of a country, that has a fair and balanced society - where their corporate tax is near 12.5%, with a minimum wage of ¢5 as was suggested , and has a similar cost of living as Ireland.
Please - give me an example. I really would love to see it.and that it will, wages/welfare are less in UK and so is their cost of living be equal amounts
They also have a 28% corporate tax.someone somewhere has to work, money doesnt grow on trees and we cant borrow indefinitely, neither do we have a natural resource that we can sell
the disadvantaged in Ireland get great support, would you want to be "disadvantaged" in any other country?
You're talking shíte at this point. The issue isn't about people not working. It's about people who are working hard, and whom I feel deserve to be paid a fair wage - but you don't.there are ****ty jobs, what can you do? if no one wanted to do this job then the wages would either have to rise to attract employees or the business close
the owner of that nightclub took a risk and created jobs you didnt take a risk thats a huge difference, if you think you deserve more and can do the same then why dont you? why dont you startup your own nightclub and pay the employees 30 an hour? how long would you be able to continue to run this charity business of yours for??
Who said anything about 30 euro? You've clearly missed the point. Nobody is expecting employees in nightclubs to earn 30 euro an hour. I said a FAIR wage for their work. 2.50 an hour was not a fair wage for the work that I did. It's this key issue that you are conveniently avoiding - instead putting exaggerated words in my mouth, claiming I proposed that night club staff should earn 30 euro an hour.
You've clearly no problem with workers being underpayed for their work, and are siding with the big businessmen. You believe that businessmen should be able to fill their pockets, while their hard workers be undercut and underpayed for their work. Aren't you just great?0 -
dlofnep, how do you explain why wages went up during the boom years and, more specifically, why many employers pay above the minimum wage? If your response to donegalfella is accurate, then they shouldn't have gone up at all. Wages cannot go up just because governments and unions want them to -- they go up because labour is a scare resource, and rival employers must compete with each other in the labour market. Labour is exceptionally scarce in the Yukon Territory -- minimum wage of $8.89 per hour -- in the north of Canada; to the point where the evil capitalists over at McDonald's are paying their staff close to $20 per hour. How can this be?!
I can tell you my experiences, before and after minimum wages were introduced. If you read my post, you'd see that prior to it - workers were exploited, and severely underpayed for their work (I was one of them).
Some businesses will pay people a fair wage - But you cannot chose to ignore that the primary goal of a business is to turn a profit, and if they can do so at the expense of workers - I'm surprised that you would find it shocking that they would.
Without a minimum wage, it is at the discretion of the employer on what to pay employees. This means that employees will most certainly in many cases be payed under what they earned.0 -
This post has been deleted.0
-
donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
I would prefer that people are paid a fair wage for a fair week's work. You seem to have an issue with this. Why should anyone be underpaid for their time while big businessmen profit from it?0 -
This post has been deleted.0
-
Advertisement
-
So regular people reduce their wages and the banks who got us into alot of this mess will raise their prices just as Permanent TSB are doing.
If the price of money is going up does that not also mean that prices will rise??
Does it not then follow that lowering the min wage will not in fact lower prices but rather keep them at current levels??0 -
donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
Nowhere was the basis of my point only about students making a fair wage. I gave an example of students requiring a fair wage to go through college - but that everyone deserves a fair pay.
Regarding elderly people not affording food or fuel, it's a valid point. But your solution to it is to have other people not being able to afford food and fuel by not paying them a fair wage. I think that any elderly person who is under financial strain should have state support.
Your method of cut and slash means that the worst off in society take the blunt of everything, scraping by on a few pennies - while big businessmen continue to stay rich because they are profiting off underpayed employees.donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
What's your definition of a fair wage? Do you feel that 2.50 an hour was a fair wage for scraping puke up off the ground because I certainly don't. It has nothing to do with socialism. When I was earning 2.50 an hour, I didn't know socialism from capitalism, and libertarianism from a librarian. I was simply someone who was underpayed for their work and it was an unfair wage. There is no hidden agenda behind it.0 -
Taxipete29 wrote: »If the price of money is going up does that not also mean that prices will rise??
no increased cost of borrowing is generally a cause of deflation thats why they use interest rates to control inflation0 -
Join Date:Posts: 6185
This study provides a different slant on how much people should be paid:Hospital cleaners are worth more to society than bankers, a study suggests.
The research, carried out by think tank the New Economics Foundation, says hospital cleaners create £10 of value for every £1 they are paid.
It claims bankers are a drain on the country because of the damage they caused to the global economy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8410489.stm0 -
Worth spending 5 years in hospital cleaner school and years of long hours working one's way up the hospital cleaner ladder in that case.0
-
Would a good alternative be to alter minimum wage into a system involving a maximum wage at which one could refuse a job without losing welfare benefits?
This allows those who are prepared to work below the current minimum wage to do so in order to gain secondary benefits of having a job (self esteem, experience, gratuities etc.) while providing employers with the option to offer work at whatever wage they can afford to pay.
It also allows you to factor in individual circumstances. You could set the individual's refusal limit at their Benefit Entitlements + 5-10% which would allow a person supporting a family to refuse a job which would leave him/her worse off than they are on welfare whilst that job may pay enough to support a single person without the overheads of a family.
Or would a system like this just lead to further discrimination against those with a family?0 -
The family income supplement is there for families on low incomes so there should be no disincentive to work really.Would a good alternative be to alter minimum wage into a system involving a maximum wage at which one could refuse a job without losing welfare benefits?
This allows those who are prepared to work below the current minimum wage to do so in order to gain secondary benefits of having a job (self esteem, experience, gratuities etc.) while providing employers with the option to offer work at whatever wage they can afford to pay.
It also allows you to factor in individual circumstances. You could set the individual's refusal limit at their Benefit Entitlements + 5-10% which would allow a person supporting a family to refuse a job which would leave him/her worse off than they are on welfare whilst that job may pay enough to support a single person without the overheads of a family.
Or would a system like this just lead to further discrimination against those with a family?
I believe 5-10% to be too low as there is a cost involved in working, petrol, travel etc, but a scheme such as this may help alright. How exactly though are welfare supposed to prove that you refused a job offer, unless of course they act as some sort of intermediary with employers, and doubt they have the resources for that.0
Advertisement