Fast-Food Workers in NYC Stage Strikes, Rallies

[Deleted]

Aug 1, 2013 13:03:27 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Aug 1, 2013 12:36:49 GMT -5 fairlycrazy23 said:

The first casualty will be the order and money takers.

I have wondered for a long time why restaurants have servers taking orders?  They just end up tippy tapping it into a touchscreen in the back.  Why not have a touchscreen at the table, or an interactive menu app and WiFi? Yes, you'd need servers for alcohol, and to deliver the food-- but even that could be interactive and electronic ordering.

already being done at places

you tap order into computer, swipe card, and then someone brings you your food

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Aug 2, 2013 15:25:08 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

Aug 1, 2013 13:03:27 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I have wondered for a long time why restaurants have servers taking orders?  They just end up tippy tapping it into a touchscreen in the back.  Why not have a touchscreen at the table, or an interactive menu app and WiFi? Yes, you'd need servers for alcohol, and to deliver the food-- but even that could be interactive and electronic ordering.

already being done at places

you tap order into computer, swipe card, and then someone brings you your food

Years ago I went to a bar in Winnipeg where they card people at the door, and then beer is selected and metered at the table like a gas pump- you pour your own, pay by the pint (or liter- I forgot).  Anyway, the wait staff did take food orders.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Aug 2, 2013 12:52:52 GMT -5 zdaddy said:

Aug 2, 2013 9:21:21 GMT -5 workpublic said:

Umm... I think you meant unskilled IT workers. Desktop support and call center is the bottom of the pyramid in that profession. Those aren't mid career jobs, and aren't meant to raise a family on either. They're the foot in the door crap jobs that brand new graduates get.

imho, you have no idea what you are talking about in this case. or you don't know what desktop support reps have to do. it's not reading from scripts and rebooting computers. it's hands on hardware and software support. you need to be able to think to do those jobs. the frauds are the managers who couldn't fix an issue if their life depended on it. is that what you do?

i was just at a 10 year anniversary party at the corp I'm contracting at. it was for level II desktop support workers. they are making a living at it because they were hired as employees in the time before the "war on workers".

level II desktop is not a foot in the door job. programming is not a foot in the door job.

also if what you say is true, shouldn't they make more than fast food workers? you need at least an associates degree and most time certifications to get these jobs.

plus my point was that these days there are a lot of "real" jobs that are being contracted or just paying very low that require professionalism, knowledge, integrity that make burger flippers demanding $15 an a joke.

Overall I think Americans are way underpaid considering the huge gains in productivity we've seen over the past couple decades, and the fact that we're seeing record corporate profits. I don't see it as being a bad thing if everyone's pay went up a few dollars an hour. Granted, I'm not saying fast food wages should double, only that $7.25 is way too low for people living in NYC.

We're entering phase one of the realization that American workers are WAY overpaid.  Not only that, but there's no correlation- let alone causation- between the productivity of American workers and gains in productivity.  In fact, there's plenty of correlation that might suggest the opposite is true.

[workpublic]

i have no problem with wages being reset downward. its the landlords, banks, govts, oil companies, retail, etc. that are going to have the problem. they too will have scale way back, lose profits, etc.  a million dollars will mean something again.

[fairlycrazy23]

McDonalds can just charge a few cents more and pay all there employees a 'living wage'

Of course there is this little caveat  "And finally, there is no guarantee that all or some of the increased sales revenue from a price hike would go toward the lowest-paid workers."

So the theroy is this companies could just raise price a little, not effect  sales and pass the extra money to low paid employees, hello McFly!! if McDonald's etc... could charge more they would already be charging more!!!

[zdaddy]

Aug 2, 2013 16:12:10 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Aug 2, 2013 12:52:52 GMT -5 zdaddy said:

Overall I think Americans are way underpaid considering the huge gains in productivity we've seen over the past couple decades, and the fact that we're seeing record corporate profits. I don't see it as being a bad thing if everyone's pay went up a few dollars an hour. Granted, I'm not saying fast food wages should double, only that $7.25 is way too low for people living in NYC.

We're entering phase one of the realization that American workers are WAY overpaid.  Not only that, but there's no correlation- let alone causation- between the productivity of American workers and gains in productivity.  In fact, there's plenty of correlation that might suggest the opposite is true.

Citation please - because everything I'm seeing shows Americans continue to be near the top in productivity. Only the Norwegians are beating us, and surprise surprise, they have high minimum wage laws and generous worker protections.

www.cbsnews.com/2100-500395_162-3228735.html


And from the sources I'm reading, worker productivity does play a major role in how businesses are doing, especially considering how many hours American workers are willing to put in compared with the rest of the First World.

crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/american-productivity-record-levels-i

[zibazinski]

The nursing home my grandfather was in raised their rates 6 times in 3 years. The stories were better pay and bennies for their employees. Since no one wants gramps to have unhappy caregivers, everyone pays up. Then there was the envelope for the Christmas bonus for the ones who worked the holiday.  All paid up as well. My mom finally asked an employee what she did with her bonus? Turns out owners pocketed it all and took a cruise and no one had had a raise in years. 

[Sum Dum Gai]

imho, you have no idea what you are talking about in this case. or you don't know what desktop support reps have to do. it's not reading from scripts and rebooting computers. it's hands on hardware and software support. you need to be able to think to do those jobs. the frauds are the managers who couldn't fix an issue if their life depended on it. is that what you do?

That's weird, since I've done the job before.  IT is a skilled profession.  Entry level jobs aren't meant for some random teenage kid that's never worked a day in their life and has no skills.  They're meant for new grads or certified employees with a certain basic level of knowledge.  In the IT world, desktop support is as entry level as it gets.  Yes it requires you to think, and it requires a certain base knowledge set, but for IT work it's the lowest rung on the ladder.  So you can't say the pay rate for the lowest job on the ladder is low and therefor the whole field is underpaid.

And no, I wasn't a manager that couldn't fix an issue if my life depended on it.  I was a team leader, and managed my team, but it was still a hands on position.  I got it because I was the most knowledgeable person on the team, not because I had a degree that said I knew how to manage people with no actual IT experience.  I didn't fix desktop computers though, at least not after my first couple years in the military.  I built out and maintained enterprise level systems.  If you're monitor was acting up, or you lost a word document, you called the flunky that worked the helpdesk.  If you needed a clustered database system with web front end and tape backup built you called me.

level II desktop is not a foot in the door job. programming is not a foot in the door job.

You're right, level II desktop support as the name implies, is one step above a foot in the door job.  Programming can be a foot in the door job.  The low level routine stuff that they farm out to new graduates is obviously a foot in the door job.

also if what you say is true, shouldn't they make more than fast food workers? you need at least an associates degree and most time certifications to get these jobs.

They do make more than fast food workers.  About double.  Which seems right for entry level work that requires an associates degree and little experience.

[Deleted]

market wage is really a simple concept

the more people that can do a job, and want to do that particular job, the lower the wages will go.....

just the opposite, the fewer people than can do a job, or want to do a job, the more the wages will rise

so entry level IT workers will probably make less than sanitation workers

why? because far more people want the IT job, than hanging off the back of a truck

same reason why people that work with bodily fluids in hospitals, care facilities, etc make far more than cashiers at Walmart

so specialize your talents......get really good in your field......or choose a job no one else wants

[djAdvocate]

Aug 5, 2013 15:45:10 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

market wage is really a simple concept

the more people that can do a job, and want to do that particular job, the lower the wages will go.....

just the opposite, the fewer people than can do a job, or want to do a job, the more the wages will rise

so entry level IT workers will probably make less than sanitation workers

why? because far more people want the IT job, than hanging off the back of a truck

same reason why people that work with bodily fluids in hospitals, care facilities, etc make far more than cashiers at Walmart

so specialize your talents......get really good in your field......or choose a job no one else wants

you are assuming totally free markets.  but markets are NOT totally free.  they are governed by irrational forces.  the greater the irrational force, the less the market functions in an "efficient" way.  and times of national duress like recessions are more irrational times than most.

[fairlycrazy23]

Aug 5, 2013 23:14:55 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Aug 5, 2013 15:45:10 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

market wage is really a simple concept

the more people that can do a job, and want to do that particular job, the lower the wages will go.....

just the opposite, the fewer people than can do a job, or want to do a job, the more the wages will rise

so entry level IT workers will probably make less than sanitation workers

why? because far more people want the IT job, than hanging off the back of a truck

same reason why people that work with bodily fluids in hospitals, care facilities, etc make far more than cashiers at Walmart

so specialize your talents......get really good in your field......or choose a job no one else wants

you are assuming totally free markets.  but markets are NOT totally free.  they are governed by irrational forces.  the greater the irrational force, the less the market functions in an "efficient" way.  and times of national duress like recessions are more irrational times than most.

If the irrational forces are from individuals freely making choices then the market is still free, it is only when some outside force is mandating certain aspects of the market that is not free.

And people choosing crappy jobs because crappy jobs are the only ones available would still be a choice, they could choose to not work, or move or try to increase there skills or start there own business.

[Deleted]

why arent the markets totally free?

even during recessions, and depressions, there are choices.....just fewer of them

during boom times, and high growth, there are more choices

during the down period, the employers have the upper hand

during boom times, the employees do

that is why i love open markets.....it is all about decisions, and choices

employers that screw over employees during tough times will see them leave in droves during the boom cycles

employees that dont progress, and make themselves more valuable will be the first to go in the down cycles

it is, and always has been a symbiotic relationship....there is a need on both sides

the only question is a meeting of the minds on the wage

[fairlycrazy23]

Aug 6, 2013 8:10:53 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

why arent the markets totally free?

even during recessions, and depressions, there are choices.....just fewer of them

during boom times, and high growth, there are more choices

during the down period, the employers have the upper hand

during boom times, the employees do

that is why i love open markets.....it is all about decisions, and choices

employers that screw over employees during tough times will see them leave in droves during the boom cycles

employees that dont progress, and make themselves more valuable will be the first to go in the down cycles

it is, and always has been a symbiotic relationship....there is a need on both sides

the only question is a meeting of the minds on the wage

I agree that recessions and depressions don't preclude free markets, however there are no true free markets because the government mandates/controls certain activities.
And as long as the money supply is not free (the Fed) there will be no true free market.

[Opti]

"same reason why people that work with bodily fluids in hospitals, care facilities, etc make far more than cashiers at Walmart"


Some people must live in very different areas than I do or are unaware of CNA(certified nursing assistant) pay. In central NJ I'm not sure what Walmart Cashiers make perhaps its fairly low, but
I know if you work in a better Mall store say Sephora you can make $10/hr. CNAs start at $10.25/hr.
at the facility I work at. Entry level care-givers for the mentally ill and developmentally disabled typically make in the $9 to 11/hr. range. Yes its more than $7.25/hr. but living where I do I have
a hard time calling it far more.


I'd much rather hang off a garbage truck or drive it than be a CNA. Not sure they get paid all that well
here either.

[Opti]

"If the irrational forces are from individuals freely making choices then the market is still free, it is only when some outside force is mandating certain aspects of the market that is not free."


I don't agree. When the irrational forces are employers or hiring managers not hiring women, the Irish,
blacks, non-Ivy league, whatever it still constrains the market. When employers hire because of belief
not fact(usual practice for most), they don't hire the best or pay wages totally based on market they pay and hire based on what they believe to be true. I've seen people grossly overpaid and significantly underpaid because of how an employer values them. The free market is a philosphical ideal which will
likely never be reached ever. People do things based on emotion far more often than they do on pure logic. Many times its a mixture of both.

People make the market not free. Not just government, not just employers, not even just employees.
Its all the people. Look at consumer goods. We don't have testing labs in our homes so we don't know if generic glue stick is the same as Elmer's glue stick just with a different label or a different formulation all together. Many things are valued not on merit, not on utility, but belief on merits
and utility.

[Deleted]

I don't agree. When the irrational forces are employers or hiring managers not hiring women, the Irish,
blacks, non-Ivy league, whatever it still constrains the market. When employers hire because of belief
not fact(usual practice for most), they don't hire the best or pay wages totally based on market they pay and hire based on what they believe to be true. I've seen people grossly overpaid and significantly underpaid because of how an employer values them. The free market is a philosphical ideal which will
likely never be reached ever. People do things based on emotion far more often than they do on pure logic. Many times its a mixture of both.


hr managers make mistakes all the time

all managers do.....

thankfully, we have a remedy when we make a mistake in hiring, called firing

and of course everyone has certain personal biases that they use to determine the best candidate.....

and other people use their biases to hire their best candidate....

but the days of discrimination in hiring are for the most part, long gone

it still happens, and may even happen in your field more than others....

but the managers that i know and meet with on a regular basis, could give a crap less what color, race, or sexual orientation you have

they want to know the following.....

what can you do for my organization.....and how much will it cost me......

and let me ask you a question......

for the person grossly underpaid.....whose fault is that? and why?

[Opti]

for the person grossly underpaid.....whose fault is that? and why?


Its often a two-sided thing. Employers who want to pay below market and employees who
might not have other viable employment choices or are breaking back into an area.
Sometimes, contractors don't find out they are being ripped off until they compare
wages with other people. And when wages are discriminatory because of gender, race, or creed
there might not be other options. The boys got paid better than the girls in my very first
job. Didn't find that out until later. They wouldn't hire girls for the job boys did even though
I was more than physically capable of doing it. Boys being worth more than girls was still a big
belief when I started working.

For people with limited income and mobility, their employment choices are restricted more
than those wih cars and money for longer commutes. (Another reason employees might not find
other employers.)

[Opti]

"but the days of discrimination in hiring are for the most part, long gone

it still happens, and may even happen in your field more than others....

but the managers that i know and meet with on a regular basis, could give a crap less what color, race, or sexual orientation you have"

I really doubt this. Its an employer's market and that's when personal preferences rule.
My guess is you are a white guy and because you don't know what its like to be discriminated against
you only notice you and other managers are more open to looking at everyone compared to the past.
Older folk are having a hard time getting jobs simply because they aren't thirty-somethings.
A black sales guy lost out on a job simply because a white male Texan had the final say. Everyone
else he spoke to in management said he was the best candidate. Good looking and thin often beats
plain, ugly, or fat. While it is better than it was, we are still have a ways to go to get to a pure merit based employment market. Or at least one that only doesn't ignore personal relationships.

[Deleted]

Aug 6, 2013 13:12:09 GMT -5 Opti said:

for the person grossly underpaid.....whose fault is that? and why?


Its often a two-sided thing. Employers who want to pay below market and employees who
might not have other viable employment choices or are breaking back into an area.
Sometimes, contractors don't find out they are being ripped off until they compare
wages with other people. And when wages are discriminatory because of gender, race, or creed
there might not be other options. The boys got paid better than the girls in my very first
job. Didn't find that out until later. They wouldn't hire girls for the job boys did even though
I was more than physically capable of doing it. Boys being worth more than girls was still a big
belief when I started working.

For people with limited income and mobility, their employment choices are restricted more
than those wih cars and money for longer commutes. (Another reason employees might not find
other employers.)

i call bullshit

if you dont know what the market pay for your job is, in your area, that is YOUR fault

If you remember what i said above, job markets during recessions and depressions are employers markets

There are more candidates for every position, and therefore wages fall or stagnate.....

Do you remember the boom times? It was freaking hard to keep people.....still is in certain positions

But boom times are the employees payback for cycles like today

And i said TODAY as far as discrimination being almost gone.....not when you got your first job

Of course employers WANT to pay below market......your job is to say NO.....

And to ask for what you think you are worth....again, if you dont do that, it is YOUR fault...not the employer..

[workpublic]

I really doubt this. Its an employer's market and that's when personal preferences rule.
My guess is you are a white guy and because you don't know what its like to be discriminated against
you only notice you and other managers are more open to looking at everyone compared to the past.
Older folk are having a hard time getting jobs simply because they aren't thirty-somethings.
A black sales guy lost out on a job simply because a white male Texan had the final say. Everyone
else he spoke to in management said he was the best candidate. Good looking and thin often beats
plain, ugly, or fat. While it is better than it was, we are still have a ways to go to get to a pure merit based employment market. Or at least one that only doesn't ignore personal relationships.

i agree

workpublic

old, plain, fat guy

[Deleted]

Aug 6, 2013 13:26:12 GMT -5 Opti said:

"but the days of discrimination in hiring are for the most part, long gone

it still happens, and may even happen in your field more than others....

but the managers that i know and meet with on a regular basis, could give a crap less what color, race, or sexual orientation you have"

I really doubt this. Its an employer's market and that's when personal preferences rule.
My guess is you are a white guy and because you don't know what its like to be discriminated against
you only notice you and other managers are more open to looking at everyone compared to the past.
Older folk are having a hard time getting jobs simply because they aren't thirty-somethings.
A black sales guy lost out on a job simply because a white male Texan had the final say. Everyone
else he spoke to in management said he was the best candidate. Good looking and thin often beats
plain, ugly, or fat. While it is better than it was, we are still have a ways to go to get to a pure merit based employment market. Or at least one that only doesn't ignore personal relationships.

again...same reply as above as far as employee/employer market

it changes as economic times change.....

and yes...there is, and always will be "personal" bias

not sure that can be programmed out.....

some people like redheads...some dont

There have been enough discrimination lawsuits to scare any manager into really looking at his/her applicants

No one can afford stupid lawsuits......

older folks are having issues getting jobs because of cost.....

they have experience and want to be paid for it...at least most of them do

and they cost more to insure for health insurance

and ask any actuarial how many sick days an average 55 yr old takes compared to a 30 something

if you think HR managers arent aware of those facts, you would be wrong

So yes...if they can hire a 30 something to fill the same role as a 55 yr old for the same pay, the 30 something wins every time

if you were hiring, and that scenario came up, would you hire the 55 yr old?   honestly?

[djAdvocate]

Aug 6, 2013 7:40:31 GMT -5 fairlycrazy23 said:

Aug 5, 2013 23:14:55 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

you are assuming totally free markets.  but markets are NOT totally free.  they are governed by irrational forces.  the greater the irrational force, the less the market functions in an "efficient" way.  and times of national duress like recessions are more irrational times than most.

If the irrational forces are from individuals freely making choices then the market is still free, it is only when some outside force is mandating certain aspects of the market that is not free.

And people choosing crappy jobs because crappy jobs are the only ones available would still be a choice, they could choose to not work, or move or try to increase there skills or start there own business.

yes, but market efficiency analysis assumes that people will act in their own self interests, where those self interests are VERY narrowly defined: that people will respond to income only.  my point was that this is far too simple a model.  i know LOTS of people that have chosen to work in social services for 2/3 the pay because they like what they do, and feel it is important and beneficial.  i know OTHER people that have low paying jobs that they LOVE.  they would never leave them for higher paying work.

trying to explain how people behave on economics alone doesn't work.  but i think we agree on that.

[Deleted]

Aug 6, 2013 14:08:07 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

But boom times are the employees payback for cycles like today

This cycle is about played out, at least for us.  It is once again difficult to find people, and it is once again becoming an employees market.  Some know it and some don't.

not yet for us.....but the wheel is turning

HR weeds out resumes based upon certain criteria that i give her for the position...so i only see the ones that make that cut

i dont need to waste my time on people that have zero chance of making the cut.....

Then i decide based upon an initial 10 minute phone call who i want to interview more extensively

i used to have my pick of 20-30 candidates for a position

now i get 12-15 (not complaining...it gives me a lot of choices still)

but during the last boom cycle, i might get as few as 6 or 7 to choose from

and store employees would leave more frequently.....right now we have stability in all sides of the organization

i want to keep it that way.....

[Angel!]

Aug 6, 2013 14:08:07 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

But boom times are the employees payback for cycles like today

This cycle is about played out, at least for us.  It is once again difficult to find people, and it is once again becoming an employees market.  Some know it and some don't.

  We are definitely seeing the turn.  We have spent months trying to hire a mid/high-level engineer and the stack of resumes and interest has been extremely bleak.  We used to have a pick from tons of applicants, but now job-seekers are being much more picky.  We still gets stacks and stacks for entry level, but I am guessing that is always the case just due to graduates entering the job market.

[Tennesseer]

gdgyva-regarding the resumes you review.  Do you and your employer only accept resumes for jobs you have externally advertised or do you review all solicited and unsolicted resumes that arrive at the company even when no positions have been advertised?  Also-does your employer do any government business and must it follow OFCCP guidelines.  

I ask because you may not consider the folks you screen over the phone as applicants but the OFCCP may think otherwise.

[Deleted]

we do no government business at all....nor do we want to

too much red tape, and not nearly the gross margins we are used to having

we get 30-40 resumes annually just looking for any jobs in our business, which really isnt many compared to other places i have been

we note them for experience in our business, general experience, and education/training

if they meet the qualifications for any new job opening, we add them to any resumes we receive from the ads

from that, HR does basic verification of items on the resume,to ensure info is fairly accurate

if those are okay, i do the initial 10 minute conversation/interview

from those i pick at most 6-7 that i want a more in depth interview with

sometimes some of the ones i want to interview are no longer available

if so, i will add to the list to bring in at least 6 interviews from the other candidates

we spend a lot of time trying to match the right person for the job opening.....

we succeed far more than we fail......but we have had some major faux pas

[Tennesseer]

gdgyva-how many employees in your company?  I'm wondering if your employer is large enough (15 or more employees) to have to worry about discrimination laws.

[zibazinski]

I wouldn't answer that question, either.

[Deleted]

Tenneesseer

You are probing for something.....

what exactly is it that you think we (i) do at the company that is wrong?

I have never heard of OFCCP, but will check with HR today to see if they know what it is

[Deleted]

OFCCP Mission


The purpose of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs is to enforce, for the benefit of job seekers and wage earners, the contractual promise of affirmative action and equal employment opportunity required of those who do business with the Federal government.


well, since we dont do business with the feds, nor do we want to, i guess that answers that question