Minimum wage increased to 11.50

kippy

Gatling wrote: »

more down to the fact record numbers are in college and record numbers are returning to education .
Making fewer positions available to those who are working and studying

You really believe that?
I happen to be involved in the Co-Op area. Employers, who we would have used in the past for student placement, have told me straight out in the past few years that it makes better sense for them to take someone on a job bridge scheme than a student on work placement for numerous (obvious) reasons.
Granted plenty employers still take on students.

That's only one reason why I am totally against the scheme. It devalues "Work" in such a big way. The person isn't even covering their expenses.

Frank Lee Midere

creolebelle wrote: »

I wish it would be raised to $12 or €9.46 an hour. Research actually shows that increasing the minimum wage is actually good for the economy and only slightly raises the price of foods and goods. Like in Australia the minimum wage is like 13 aud but the price of a burger is only .50 cents higher compared to the states

Yes. I always find it amusing that economists predict that.

A) immigration ( or any increase in the supply in labour) will have no effect on the wage price.
However, at any time increasing the minimum wage price will reduce demand and create unemployment.

The second argument is claiming that labour acts like any commodity - that is, all else being equal:
1) if you increase the supply prices fall,
2) if you increase price demand falls,
3) if you increase demand price rises.

The first argument claims that feedback loops - however unspecified, or algorithmically worked out - will compensate for that and not cause a fall in wage prices if labour supply increases. Theres clearly some truth in that, like during the boom wages rose, but it doesn't seem to be rigourously worked out.

In any case if A) is true of migration, then it should be true of wage rises. There must be a feedback loop so while it looks like, at a first pass that wage increases should reduce employment, the feedbacks of extra demand cause that to not happen.

Iwasfrozen

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

What? On the one hand you refuse to discuss or acknowledge your biases but then accuse others of bias.

Do I? I openly admit I'd rather decrease minimum wage but since results of raising or lowering the minimum wage are inconclusive the logical thing to do is keep the level as it is.

Kyuss is famous round these parts for accusing others of ideological posting and asserting his stance is the only one. I'm pointing out in this case the logical stance is to keep minimum wage static.

I'd like to see the level tied to inflation though to keep the real level static. As the way things stand now it decreases every year.

Iwasfrozen

kippy wrote: »

You really believe that?
I happen to be involved in the Co-Op area. Employers, who we would have used in the past for student placement, have told me straight out in the past few years that it makes better sense for them to take someone on a job bridge scheme than a student on work placement for numerous (obvious) reasons.
Granted plenty employers still take on students.

That's only one reason why I am totally against the scheme. It devalues "Work" in such a big way. The person isn't even covering their expenses.

It's good experience for the candidate though.

jank

An increase to the minimum wage would hurt SME's and actually make it harder for people of low skills to get a job.

jank

Iwasfrozen

I find the language in that article worrying. Employers do not have a "responsibility" to their workers beyond what is agreed in the contract of employment.

I understand the times is only writing to its audience but the entitlement some people feel is ridiculous.

Sorry folks but you're not entitled to a stable job, house or a car. If you want any of these things you must work for them.

Is anyone else reminded of the "gimmies" from star trek ds9?

smash

Gatling wrote: »

Don't agree with the minimum wage increase at all .
It would literally kill business' s over night

I personally think that there's should be a varied minimum wage system based on industry. For example, should an unskilled McDonalds worker get paid the same as a childcare worker who's done a few years in college?

smash

smash wrote: »

I personally think that there's should be a varied minimum wage system based on industry. For example, should an unskilled McDonalds worker get paid the same as a childcare worker who's done a few years in college?

There already is one, there's 3 levels of it
Or do you mean add more levels depending on industry?

It does seem odd that childcare workers with qualifications get very little

It's interesting we also have an unemployment clause

Exemption for employer
If an employer cannot afford to pay the national minimum wage due to financial difficulty the Labour Court may exempt an employer from paying the minimum wage rate for between 3 months and one year. Only one such exemption can be allowed.

The employer must apply to the Labour Court for the exemption with the consent of a majority of the employees, who must also agree to be bound by the Labour Court decision.

The employer must demonstrate that he/she is unable to pay the national minimum wage and that, if compelled to do so, would have to lay-off employees or terminate their employment.

An exemption may only be sought from paying the full rate of the national minimum wage, not for cases covered by the reduced rate, for example, employees who are under 18 years of age.

smash

bluewolf wrote: »

There already is one, there's 3 levels of it
Or do you mean add more levels depending on industry?

It does seem odd that childcare workers with qualifications get very little

Yea I mean based on industry. I know girls with H-Dips and BA Honours Degrees in early childhood education who earn between €10.00 to €11.50 an hour, doing a 40 hour week. With childcare being so expensive in Ireland it's clear to see that the money goes straight to the top of the chain.

bluewolf wrote: »

It's interesting we also have an unemployment clause

That's pretty shocking to be honest.

I think it's a good counter to the unemployment claims especially as it's a once-off only exemption and designed to keep people in work.
I still think it would be easier to not jack up the min wage in the first place but it addresses the argument

B.A._Baracus

I say increase minimum wage. Bloody hard to live on 8.65 an hour.
But before someone says "oh but everything else will go up because of the increase" :rolleyes: .... lets be realistic. things are going to go up regardless.

Iwasfrozen

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

I say increase minimum wage. Bloody hard to live on 8.65 an hour.
But before someone says "oh but everything else will go up because of the increase" :rolleyes: .... lets be realistic. things are going to go up regardless.

Why not just get educated and get a better paying job?

And I don't mean going back to college because that's very expensive but a person could do accounting/ actuarial or architectural exams relatively cheaply outside college.

krudler

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Why not just get educated and get a better paying job?

I know, since everyone in Ireland with a degree is in high paying work, and none are in making ends meets jobs or unemployed, no sirree.

Iwasfrozen

krudler wrote: »

I know, since everyone in Ireland with a degree is in high paying work, and none are in making ends meets jobs or unemployed, no sirree.

Then either 1. They're really bad at negotiating or 2. They're degree is in a bad industry and they should retrain.

Probably 2.

karma_

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Do I? I openly admit I'd rather decrease minimum wage but since results of raising or lowering the minimum wage are inconclusive the logical thing to do is keep the level as it is.

Kyuss is famous round these parts for accusing others of ideological posting and asserting his stance is the only one. I'm pointing out in this case the logical stance is to keep minimum wage static.

I'd like to see the level tied to inflation though to keep the real level static. As the way things stand now it decreases every year.

Those results are no inconclusive. There have been at least two papers published that show no adverse effect on employment when raising the minimum wage and indeed show that doing so creates many benefits.

Your big idea there Jimmy is also as daft as a big daft thing because it would stimulate absolutely nothing. The thing is that when you have low-skilled workers earning a good basic living they spend more, the middle class expands and everyone is better off...

And here, you're as big an ideologue as the next neo-liberal poster round these parts, you might be a small fringe group but you are loud.

krudler

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Then either 1. They're really bad at negotiating or 2. They're degree is in a bad industry and they should retrain.

Probably 2.

Negotiating what? Low paying jobs are low paying, hell you're the one arguing against those kinds of jobs paying more. Minimum wage jobs usually dont have room for negotiations you get what the company is paying people at the time.

And retraining, well yeah that might be an option depending on people's circumstance, but not everyone can do that.

Iwasfrozen

karma_ wrote: »

Those results are no inconclusive. There have been at least two papers published that show no adverse effect on employment when raising the minimum wage and indeed show that doing so creates many benefits.

Your big idea there Jimmy is also as daft as a big daft thing because it would stimulate absolutely nothing. The thing is that when you have low-skilled workers earning a good basic living they spend more, the middle class expands and everyone is better off...

And here, you're as big an ideologue as the next neo-liberal poster round these parts, you might be a small fringe group but you are loud.

No the results are inconclusive there are biased reports on both sides so it's impossible to tell what the results are.

My idea would keep minimum wage static. It would help employers budget to pay their employees and would help employees maintain a basic non fluctuating standard of living while they (hopefully) work to get themselves off the min wage line.

Iwasfrozen

krudler wrote: »

Negotiating what? Low paying jobs are low paying, hell you're the one arguing against those kinds of jobs paying more. Minimum wage jobs usually dont have room for negotiations you get what the company is paying people at the time.

And retraining, well yeah that might be an option depending on people's circumstance, but not everyone can do that.

Why not?A person can do accounting/ actuarial or architectural exams relatively cheaply outside college.

That's what I did you just apply for membership, study part time and do the exams.

krudler

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Why not?A person can do accounting/ actuarial or architectural exams relatively cheaply outside college.

That's what I did you just apply for membership, study part time and do the exams.

Because not everyone's circumstances are the exact same as yours? "relatively cheaply" is a subjective term depending on people's situations.

As for negotiating pay, do you think people on low paying jobs should be able to ask for more? isn't that what you're arguing against on this thread? people being paid more than basic wage?

Iwasfrozen

krudler wrote: »

Because not everyone's circumstances are the exact same as yours? "relatively cheaply" is a subjective term depending on people's situations.

As for negotiating pay, do you think people on low paying jobs should be able to ask for more? isn't that what you're arguing against on this thread? people being paid more than basic wage?

Relatively cheaply being around 1.2k to start off depending on the area. It's not a lot when you take into consideration the change in income you can expect and college would be a lot more.

By negotiation I mean outside government interference. If the company is paying a person less than their market value negotiation will push that price up.

PopePalpatine

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Completely not true. I'm all for getting rid of of jobbridge and I don't know any pro-market posters who aren't.

By the way, what's pro-free-market about a heavily-regulated Internet?

kippy

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It's good experience for the candidate though.

Good experience?
The state someone managed to get by for decades without one of these schemes. How exactly did people get "good experience" in the past.

A lot of time these candidates may already have this experience as I have seen in certain areas and feel they have to do a job bridge.
The very fact that the employer is not expected to monetarily reward the person is a joke.

EDIT: I'm not pro increasing the minimum wage either tbh just against a state policy of making people work for free.

Iwasfrozen

kippy wrote: »

Good experience?
The state someone managed to get by for decades without one of these schemes. How exactly did people get "good experience" in the past.

A lot of time these candidates may already have this experience as I have seen in certain areas and feel they have to do a job bridge.
The very fact that the employer is not expected to monetarily reward the person is a joke.

The market was set up differently in the past. Increases in technology and more accessible education has heightened competition or a decreasing number of entry level white collar positions.

Monife

candytog wrote: »

Keep the minimum wage and let the market raise the price. if the cost of living is high in Dublin then Dublin businesses need to raise their hourly rate. If the Dublin businesses can't afford the labour then move out of Dublin where there are plenty of people willing to work for minimum wage.

And for heavens sake scrap the bloody scambridge because if they increase the minimum wage and keep that then even more companies will exploit it.

Brilliant idea. Would love to see this in practice.

In no universe are actuarial exams + membership cheap

krudler

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Relatively cheaply being around 1.2k to start off depending on the area. It's not a lot when you take into consideration the change in income you can expect and college would be a lot more.

By negotiation I mean outside government interference. If the company is paying a person less than their market value negotiation will push that price up.

Right so someone on the dole can just whisk up 1.2k not a bother, or someone who is on minimum wage (which you are championing) can just pull a grand out of nowhere when what money they do make is going on rent and food and possibly not just on them but on family.

Market value? hold on so if someone gets a minimum wage job in a supermarket (which you are championing keeping at the current rate) and say "well I think I'm worth more than that to this company" ..what will happen? the next person on the list willing to work what the company is paying as standard will get the job, that's what. Low paying jobs are exactly that, low paying. There's wiggle room if you're coming in at a supervisor or management level yeah but for bottom rung employees? not a bit, here's what we pay take it or leave it.

Iwasfrozen

bluewolf wrote: »

In no universe are actuarial exams + membership cheap

It's about 350 for membership 120 for an exam and 90 for notes pounds sterling far cheaper than college and easily affordable for a person on 8.50 an hour.

kippy

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The market was set up differently in the past. Increases in technology and more accessible education has heightened competition or a decreasing number of entry level white collar positions.

What?
That's absolute nonsense.
So in 2009 a realisation was suddenly had at the top level of government that the market suddenly changed in relation to easily accessible education leading to a decreasing number of entry level white collar positions (I'd add that job bridge is not just applicable to "entry level white collar positions".)

You believe that a person should be expected to work for nothing (from the employers side), in order to increase their practical experience.

I know of lots of people who work in various areas of IT. How long should they be expected to work for free to "learn" their field, what happens if they change their area? Should they work for free again to learn that area?

The basic reality is that lots of people learn on the job and get rather well paid for it a lot of the time. I don't see why those on job bridge should be expected to endure a different standard, while at the same time letting employers off on hiring full time staff.

krudler

bluewolf wrote: »

In no universe are actuarial exams + membership cheap

In Iwasfrozen's universe everything is easily done

krudler

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It's about 350 for membership 120 for an exam and 90 for notes pounds sterling far cheaper than college and easily affordable for a person on 8.50 an hour.

If that person has zero outgoings and wants to live on rice and water for a month

It's 200 pounds sterling for the first 8 basic exams each, 600 sterling for the first core applied, the specialist ones are somewhere in between. There's courses also

basic notes are 120 sterling yes but start adding on stuff like ASET for 30-60 pounds, 200-500 for marking, and tutorials for ~150 per day, and all this twice a year- it's not cheap

I'm all for upskilling and getting experience where possible and yes that may involve paying for part time evening courses or whatever - I just think this is a very bad example!

looking_around

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Relatively cheaply being around 1.2k to start off depending on the area. It's not a lot when you take into consideration the change in income you can expect and college would be a lot more.

By negotiation I mean outside government interference. If the company is paying a person less than their market value negotiation will push that price up.

you do realise for most people on min wage, 1k is not relatively cheap! it doesn't matter what the pay increase wil be, most people won't have 1k to.spare

Iwasfrozen

krudler wrote: »

Right so someone on the dole can just whisk up 1.2k not a bother, or someone who is on minimum wage (which you are championing) can just pull a grand out of nowhere when what money they do make is going on rent and food and possibly not just on them but on family.

Market value? hold on so if someone gets a minimum wage job in a supermarket (which you are championing keeping at the current rate) and say "well I think I'm worth more than that to this company" ..what will happen? the next person on the list willing to work what the company is paying as standard will get the job, that's what. Low paying jobs are exactly that, low paying. There's wiggle room if you're coming in at a supervisor or management level yeah but for bottom rung employees? not a bit, here's what we pay take it or leave it.

And there's the culture of entitlement again, finding problems with every solution. If a person wants to better themselves they must make sacrifices, if they don't want to make sacrifices then they can just stay at their minimum wage job...

As for negotiation if a person's market value is actually less than minimum wage (like the example you used) they should keep head down.

Iwasfrozen

bluewolf wrote: »

It's 200 pounds sterling for the first 8 basic exams each, 600 sterling for the first core applied, the specialist ones are somewhere in between. There's courses also

basic notes are 120 sterling yes but start adding on stuff like ASET for 30-60 pounds, 200-500 for marking, and tutorials for ~150 per day, and all this twice a year- it's not cheap

I'm all for upskilling and getting experience where possible and yes that may involve paying for part time evening courses or whatever - I just think this is a very bad example!

The courses aren't necessary to pass the nine basic, neither is marking or tutorials or anything else.

Perhaps it's a bad example I'm just reaching from my own experiences. :P

krudler wrote: »

If that person has zero outgoings and wants to live on rice and water for a month

looking_around wrote: »

you do realise for most people on min wage, 1k is not relatively cheap! it doesn't matter what the pay increase wil be, most people won't have 1k to.spare

Living on rice and water for a month is a small price to pay for increasing your livelihood!

A person has to be willing to make sacrifices to develop and all I'm hearing on this thread are excuses from people. They don't want to earn more money they just want the government to take it from someone else and give it to them.

ct9 ca2 and ca3 are courses :pac:

Iwasfrozen

bluewolf wrote: »

ct9 ca2 and ca3 are courses :pac:

Feck off, :pac: you must be in the industry?

krudler

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

As for negotiation if a person's market value is actually less than minimum wage (like the example you used) they should keep head down.

And if they think they're worth more? there's no room for pay negotiations in bottom rung minimum wage jobs, you're the one saying mimimum wage should remain that. So which is it, do people stay on bottom scale pay or negotiate for more in interviews and risk not getting a job?

looking_around

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The courses aren't necessary to pass the nine basic, neither is marking or tutorials or anything else.

Perhaps it's a bad example I'm just reaching from my own experiences. :P





Living on rice and water for a month is a small price to pay for increasing your livelihood!

A person has to be willing to make sacrifices to develop and all I'm hearing on this thread are excuses from people.

assumes they have no outgoings. rent, bills, depends medications. 1k is alot of money for people struggling. in fact so much so, that most people would be better off quiting altogether going on welfare, and studying full time. . it's not easy, and it's not a "small price".

Depends on why they think they're worth more and they can argue the case I suppose

krudler

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Living on rice and water for a month is a small price to pay for increasing your livelihood!

A person has to be willing to make sacrifices to develop and all I'm hearing on this thread are excuses from people. They don't want to earn more money they just want the government to take it from someone else and give it to them.

I left my home, my family, friends and girlfriend to come to another country and pursue what I want to do instead of being stuck working a dead end job like I was for the past few years, no excuses from me on here just not everything fits into your black and white world view.

Iwasfrozen

looking_around wrote: »

assumes they have no outgoings. rent, bills, depends medications. 1k is alot of money for people struggling. in fact so much so, that most people would be better off quiting altogether going on welfare, and studying full time. . it's not easy, and it's not a "small price".

That's always an option and I know I'm the first to say dole should be cut but I wouldn't begrudge a person studying full time an increase in dole.

looking_around

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

That's always an option and I know I'm the first to say dole should be cut but I wouldn't begrudge a person studying full time an increase in dole.

point is, it's not easy, or cheap.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Here's an example Iwasfrozen, I have a degree that I studied 4 years for, and it's next to impossible to find work in that industry now, as I was half way through it when the bottom fell out of it. So, when I finished that degree, I went off and I did another course, that cost the guts of 10k when you add up tuition, kits, and exams, and additional courses to up skill.

When I left college, there was a rake of jobs. But they all wanted somebody with experience. I found a job, eventually, but it was 8.65 per hour. Not so bad, I was getting full time hours and experience. Fast forward 3 and a half years, with lots of experience and I'm currently on 9.50 per hour. On average, I bring in my employer between 60 - 80 euro per hour.

There's two girls here working on jobs bridge, they get 150 a week from the dole for a full weeks work. They're doing exactly the same work as I'm doing and both of them have experience already, this isn't their first job.

I worked in another place up until June, and when I left they advertised the job I left as jobs bridge.

So what do you suggest there? Leave it and go retrain in something else? One of my best friends is working just outside Sydney in the same industry, she's on 27 dollars an hour, which will go up the longer she's there. There's no chance of that happening here.

PopePalpatine

krudler wrote: »

In Iwasfrozen's universe everything is easily done

Including screwing over the Internet!

krudler

bluewolf wrote: »

Depends on why they think they're worth more and they can argue the case I suppose

Would depend on the job though, a mass hiring of part timers in Tesco or something? it'd be very much a case of take the pay we offer or leave it, there's probably a few hundred applicants on a list after you who will.

krudler

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Including screwing over the Internet!

Indeed, and all that easily accessible education

krudler

krudler wrote: »

Would depend on the job though, a mass hiring of part timers in Tesco or something? it'd be very much a case of take the pay we offer or leave it, there's probably a few hundred applicants on a list after you who will.

If so the pay must be considered worth it by both applicant and employer in which case it's their own business
For people with no experience and no prospect of getting any in anything else, it's ideal. If you have experience and skills and reckon you can argue for more, go for it

smash

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Why not?A person can do accounting/ actuarial or architectural exams relatively cheaply outside college.

That's what I did you just apply for membership, study part time and do the exams.

You mustn't be living in the real world. Feck all architectural jobs, accountants in most companies don't get paid a huge amount and becoming an actuary takes a lot of time and a lot of brains. Not to mention that a lot of people don't want to work in these industries anyway.

Iwasfrozen

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Here's an example Iwasfrozen, I have a degree that I studied 4 years for, and it's next to impossible to find work in that industry now, as I was half way through it when the bottom fell out of it. So, when I finished that degree, I went off and I did another course, that cost the guts of 10k when you add up tuition, kits, and exams, and additional courses to up skill.

When I left college, there was a rake of jobs. But they all wanted somebody with experience. I found a job, eventually, but it was 8.65 per hour. Not so bad, I was getting full time hours and experience. Fast forward 3 and a half years, with lots of experience and I'm currently on 9.50 per hour. On average, I bring in my employer between 60 - 80 euro per hour.

There's two girls here working on jobs bridge, they get 150 a week from the dole for a full weeks work. They're doing exactly the same work as I'm doing and both of them have experience already, this isn't their first job.

I worked in another place up until June, and when I left they advertised the job I left as jobs bridge.

So what do you suggest there? Leave it and go retrain in something else? One of my best friends is working just outside Sydney in the same industry, she's on 27 dollars an hour, which will go up the longer she's there. There's no chance of that happening here.

This is exactly what jobbridge is for. To give graduates like you were an opportunity to get experience.

Now you've got more experience perhaps negotiate up your wage? Threaten to leave if your employer doesn't play ball but don't make any threats you don't plan to carry out.

Have you considered going to Sydney to work with your friend? Your experience would be appreciated more out there.