Workers want pay boost

[GoofGoof]

But it is the consequence of your implementing your ideal. You want a standard that ensures single people living comfortably, but anyone who has a family you will in effect penalize them by ignoring their needs in your social reform. When you have dependents, your costs go up, but your minimum wage policy discriminates against people who raise families.

I am hearing what you are saying here. It's a tough decision to draw a line in the sand and say here is the basic minimum level when everyone's situation is different. The problem is you can't have a system that is completely flexible enough to accommodate everyone's exact needs. It's not a perfect system. You have to legislate for the good of the masses. I will ask this question, if minimum wage doesn't work what's the alternative? What system could we implement to ensure workers get a fair wage for a fair days work? Or do you just propose we scrap minimum wage and just let the market and supply and demand dictate wages? Not trying to be argumentative. Honest questions.

 

[wogwog]

Back to the original idea on this post. Maybe the exact numbers are in the news some place but an estimate from a cast member follows. As best she could remember from her union rep. She told me today that the first offers from Disney in the contract negotiations are something like this..

A reduction in the number of days cast can call in without discipline.

An increase in discipline for calling in with less than 2 hours before shift start.

Reduction of one paid holiday.

Reduction of guarantee of 32 hours a week to 30 for full time cast.

Disney is offering about 2 to 3% increase in wage.

Again, I do not no how accurate this is but maybe a cast member can verify or adjust.

Does not sound generous to me. Maybe they want cast to contribute to cover the cost of MM minus like the guest are doing through increased prices.

In addition to this Disney has already made it more difficult for cast to use comp admissions for family and friends.

Made getting a cast discount on a DCL more difficult and increasing the price to cast.

Increased the number of days per year the use of cast comp days are blocked.

Does not sound like a generous employer to me.

 

[Nubs70]

Are you being serious?

I am absolutely serious. If there is some legislated $/hr Living wage (asset), then there must be a certain $ that defines minimum standard of living (liability).

 

[jaklgreen]

Everyone knows what basic needs are. In fact my 6th grader was learning about them in school last month, the difference between want and need. I am no economist that is why I never say a definite number on how much minimum wage needs to go up. But it is plain as day that it is inadequate as it stands now. When minimum wage was instituted they did a fair job of deciding how much it would take for people to live off of the money they brought home. That and rent control helped this country grow. To have so many people who work and are still on government assistance is unacceptable.

 

[The Crafty Veteran]

Back to the original idea on this post. Maybe the exact numbers are in the news some place but an estimate from a cast member follows. As best she could remember from her union rep. She told me today that the first offers from Disney in the contract negotiations are something like this..

A reduction in the number of days cast can call in without discipline.

An increase in discipline for calling in with less than 2 hours before shift start.

Reduction of one paid holiday.

Reduction of guarantee of 32 hours a week to 30 for full time cast.

Disney is offering about 2 to 3% increase in wage.

Again, I do not no how accurate this is but maybe a cast member can verify or adjust.

Does not sound generous to me. Maybe they want cast to contribute to cover the cost of MM minus like the guest are doing through increased prices.

In addition to this Disney has already made it more difficult for cast to use comp admissions for family and friends.

Made getting a cast discount on a DCL more difficult and increasing the price to cast.

Increased the number of days per year the use of cast comp days are blocked.

Does not sound like a generous employer to me.

But Disney is employing people who are entitled to absolutely nothing. There will always be people in need of jobs, minimum wage or not. Working for something is better than nothing.

Does anyone remember Hostess?

 

[jaklgreen]

But Disney is employing people who are entitled to absolutely nothing. There will always be people in need of jobs, minimum wage or not. Working for something is better than nothing.

Does anyone remember Hostess?

The problem is that minimum wage is so low that it is more lucrative for someone to spit out a couple of babies and get on welfare then it is to get a job.

 

[The Crafty Veteran]

The problem is that minimum wage is so low that it is more lucrative for someone to spit out a couple of babies and get on welfare then it is to get a job.

Agreed.

But I have faith in humanity that people still believe in hard work for a days pay.

 

[Preston Chatsworth]

Like I said a pointless political debate. I don't really care about your political opinions. They have no place here.

My opinions are relevant to this thread and you know they are. Why is no one taking into account the windfall that the low wage earners are receiving at tax time? Are you telling me that the tax refund these people receive should not be counted as income when it comes to determining the minimum wage, food stamps, section 8 , etc...? Mr. Potter has proven that the low wage earner receives a lot more in return than they pay into the system. IMO, this progressive tax system is the reason why the parks are so crowded and why there is some low-rent family dining next to you at a signature restaurant. Those who have low wages should use the tax refund to pay for everyday expenses and not a $5,000 vacation at Disney.

 

[GoofGoof]

My opinions are relevant to this thread and you know they are. Why is no one taking into account the windfall that the low wage earners are receiving at tax time? Are you telling me that the tax refund these people receive should not be counted as income when it comes to determining the minimum wage, food stamps, section 8 , etc...? Mr. Potter has proven that the low wage earner receives a lot more in return than they pay into the system. IMO, this progressive tax system is the reason why the parks are so crowded and why there is some low-rent family dining next to you at a signature restaurant. Those who have low wages should use the tax refund to pay for everyday expenses and not a $5,000 vacation at Disney.

No, your POLITICAL opinions are not relevant or appreciated. The moderators are pretty fair with letting most things go, but open political debate isn't allowed. If you want to express an opinion about the topic at hand that's always welcome.

You keep writing the same thing over and over. I explained in my last post that it's not a windfall, but you aren't actually reading what I'm writing, just getting ready with your next tirade. Why would a Disney CM need to spend $5,000 on a vacation to WDW? They already live there so no transportation or lodging and they get free park tickets. It makes no sense.

 

[flynnibus]

Sorry Flynnibus, I do not agree with your argument. Everyone knows what "basic needs" are. They might not like how basic they are but everyone know what they need to survive and what is a need and what is a want

No... everyone agrees what some of them are in PRINCIPLE - but principle "doesn't pay the bills" - hard definitions do. Even the very definition is not necessarily agreeable.. take for instance the earlier discussion about cellular phones or internet access. Then there is the whole problem of defining what is an acceptable amount to account for a category. Again, as illustrated earlier in the thread... housing is not uniform. So how do you define what number to include for housing?

If a person works in location A... but everything within 15mins of that location costs 3x as much to rent as if the person lived 35mins away. So which rent must your 'basic needs' cover? The rent within a 15 min radius? Or a 35min radius? Or some other number? Put this ideal in practice and you have to face real world choices like these... and then you have to look at what the consequences of those choices are.

Basic living is just that, food, shelter, transportation. To imply that someone can not define that is another way of "dumbing down" the people of this country.

If you think it's 'dumbing down' - I encourage you to try to come up with definitions that meet your ideals, and yet are able to be put into practice with the minimal consequence. Economists around the world would love to hear the answer This is the problem.. there is no simple answer.

 

[flynnibus]

Are you being serious?

How do you define a wage that can cover a cost.. if you can't define what that cost is in actual dollars?

 

[The Crafty Veteran]

My opinions are relevant to this thread and you know they are. Why is no one taking into account the windfall that the low wage earners are receiving at tax time? Are you telling me that the tax refund these people receive should not be counted as income when it comes to determining the minimum wage, food stamps, section 8 , etc...? Mr. Potter has proven that the low wage earner receives a lot more in return than they pay into the system. IMO, this progressive tax system is the reason why the parks are so crowded and why there is some low-rent family dining next to you at a signature restaurant. Those who have low wages should use the tax refund to pay for everyday expenses and not a $5,000 vacation at Disney.

Not to sound elitest but people on welfare should not be going to Disney World with that revenue. People whine about resort prices but Disney should reach a point where people on public assistance should not be paying for the best Disney has to offer.

 

[flynnibus]

I am hearing what you are saying here. It's a tough decision to draw a line in the sand and say here is the basic minimum level when everyone's situation is different. The problem is you can't have a system that is completely flexible enough to accommodate everyone's exact needs

I know.. but the problem is if you set out to define a LAW (which MUST be adhered to uniformly) that intends to insures EVERYONE a minimum... this is where the ideal of 'living wage' falls down in practice. As you say, you can't make a system that accommodates everyone.. which is precisely what is being illustrated with these examples. This ideal is a fantasy - it can't be defined in law and stay within the consequences people pitch it as.

And you should never define a law with 'well, we'll just hope for the best..' and ignore the consequences. California's constiutional amendement process illustrates how this 'ignoring consequences just to pass a feel good law' can have far reaching consequences (see Cali prop 13 and property taxes)

It's not a perfect system. You have to legislate for the good of the masses. I will ask this question, if minimum wage doesn't work what's the alternative? What system could we implement to ensure workers get a fair wage for a fair days work? Or do you just propose we scrap minimum wage and just let the market and supply and demand dictate wages? Not trying to be argumentative. Honest questions.

See there is a huge difference you left out. I'm not against a minimum wage...or increased wages. I'm against defining a minimum wage as a wage defined to sustain a certain minimum standard of living for all people. A very different definition than simply defining a minimum wage. The former's aspirations are not feasible with a single wage definition for all people. We have people saying a certain wage is insufficent because it doesn't support a certain lifestyle or individual's needs... that problem only gets WORSE when you try to define the law as explicitly providing for every individual's needs.

I'm still a big believer that jobs are opportunities... not something that exists because citizens are entitled to work.

 

[Preston Chatsworth]

No, your POLITICAL opinions are not relevant or appreciated.

How is the minimum wage not political? The MODS knew what they were getting into when this thread was started. As for Disney employees, I would bet the average wage is well above $10.10 per hour; however, I don't think a kid who is looking for a summertime job should receive that that kind of pay (hence, lower wages).

 

[GoofGoof]

Not to sound elitest but people on welfare should not be going to Disney World with that revenue. People whine about resort prices but Disney should reach a point where people on public assistance should not be paying for the best Disney has to offer.

I don't think that sounds elitist at all. WDW is definitely a luxury vacation. Those programs are designed to provide the basics for people like food, clothing and shelter.

 

[flynnibus]

Does not sound like a generous employer to me.

One of the many negative consequences of unions.. you don't find many 'generous' offers because the offer must be applied to EVERYONE regardless of their actual value. Unions penalize the above average worker in trade to ensure all workers get minimum protections. It's the ultimate normalizer...

 

[GoofGoof]

How is the minimum wage not political? The MODS knew what they were getting into when this thread was started. As for Disney employees, I would bet the average wage is well above $10.10 per hour; however, I don't think a kid who is looking for a summertime job should receive that that kind of pay (hence, lower wages).

It's a slippery slope. The Disney workers asking for more money isn't explicitly about minimum wage. Disney could just offer higher wages without being required to by federal law. The part that will get your posts deleted are the political attacks against the president.

The average employee is likely above $10.10. That doesn't help the people making less. The union in question stated that 20,000+ employees are under $10.10. Not all of these people are kids working summer jobs. When is the last time you saw a teenager cleaning your room at a Disney hotel?

 

[Andrew C]

The union in question stated that 20,000+ employees are under $10.10. Not all of these people are kids working summer jobs. When is the last time you saw a teenager cleaning your room at a Disney hotel?

A $10.10 starting wage for a housekeeper in a low cost of living state like Florida would be extremely high. Hotels just do not pay that much to a housekeeper. I am not saying it is right or they should not be paid more. I am just talking from personal experience.

 

[Preston Chatsworth]

When we used to stay on site, we would tip $2.00 to $3.00 a day. Are you telling me that no one tips their housekeepers any more?

 

[GoofGoof]

I know.. but the problem is if you set out to define a LAW (which MUST be adhered to uniformly) that intends to insures EVERYONE a minimum... this is where the ideal of 'living wage' falls down in practice. As you say, you can't make a system that accommodates everyone.. which is precisely what is being illustrated with these examples. This ideal is a fantasy - it can't be defined in law and stay within the consequences people pitch it as.

And you should never define a law with 'well, we'll just hope for the best..' and ignore the consequences. California's constiutional amendement process illustrates how this 'ignoring consequences just to pass a feel good law' can have far reaching consequences (see Cali prop 13 and property taxes)



See there is a huge difference you left out. I'm not against a minimum wage...or increased wages. I'm against defining a minimum wage as a wage defined to sustain a certain minimum standard of living for all people. A very different definition than simply defining a minimum wage. The former's aspirations are not feasible with a single wage definition for all people. We have people saying a certain wage is insufficent because it doesn't support a certain lifestyle or individual's needs... that problem only gets WORSE when you try to define the law as explicitly providing for every individual's needs.

I'm still a big believer that jobs are opportunities... not something that exists because citizens are entitled to work.

Anyone who thinks raising minimum wage will be a magic bullet to solve all problems is kidding themselves. There needs to be a systematic approach to address not just minimum wage, but housing, education, healthcare and certain aspects of the economy and tax system.

I'm not married to $10.10 and I'm not saying that's some magical number that guarantees a quality lifestyle. To me it's just simply time to raise the minimum wage. It's been raised 20+ times since it was established and it's been 5 years. It's time for an adjustment.