Trump voters: do you regret your vote?

[Max_Polo]

It all depends

Plenty, I would say most big box retailers think "turnover" is NOT "expensive"

For the most part Costco is an "outlier" who for years now has been mocked by right wingers as being "stupid" for paying wages as high as they do, paying wages that are high enough so that most of it's employees are NOT eligible for all that "welfare" that your typical Wal-Mart employee was.

According to them the "smart" "membership club" was "Sams club" High employee turnover and all !!

According to them employers such a Wal-Mart are "smart" to have the government subsidize their employees.

I don't see myself as right wing (mic drop) but even so, I cannot understand that criticism and regardless would ignore it wholesale - if you don't like wages paid by Costco to its employees, don't buy their stock. Or boycott their stores. Or whatever else you choose I suppose. Clearly the team running Costco saw the issue the same way.

 

[Chrysippus]

No, I'm suggesting an example. There may be exceptions, but in general the market is efficient, particularly given the free flow of information. As an employer, I understand the value of consistent service and that I have to pay employees appropriately to provide it. If I don't, my customers will seek that service elsewhere.

A bad example.

 

[Klingsor]

So both Walmart and Target are electively raising their minimum pay to $11 per hour and Target plans to move to $15 per hour by 2020. That's the solution, not government intervention.

Apparently, the solution also requires decades of slave-labor wages before these companies finally "elect" to become a little more enlightened. But I guess better late than never.

 

[StormfrontFL]

I don't think we disagree about the goal - but likely about the way to get there. I favor a market-based solution, not very popular here.

There's a new high-end office/residential/retail complex a couple of miles up the road from us. Least expensive housing within fifteen minutes drive or so is not affordable for entry-level employees...who are absolutely necessary to run restaurants, shops, etc. So, wages in that development are higher than in the surrounding areas so that they can attract either people who tolerate a longer drive, or who can then afford to rent apartments nearby. Problem solved. If they tried to pay less, they'd have no employees in the restaurant, making it hard to earn profit.

I live in Miami. The rents in Miami are so high that people who work here have to live outside of town because it's cheaper. Now imagine someone on financial assistance doing this. Between the low wages and the cost of transportation, he or she, is now making less than they received on assistance. If the goal is to end the need for assistance either the wages need to increase, costs need to go down, or some way must be devised to increase the skills and marketability of the applicants.

 

[Max_Polo]

If the goal is to end the need for assistance either the wages need to increase, costs need to go down, or some way must be devised to increase the skills and marketability of the applicants.

On that we do not disagree at all.

 

[StormfrontFL]

I shop at Costco (also big box) and I value service. And turnover is very expensive.

Not necessarily. The company I work for has undergone changes in ownership over the last few years. The previous owners valued their long term employees and questioned any part of their organization which had high turnover rates. Today, the new owners see nothing wrong with high turnover because it means they no longer have to deal with higher wages for those who have years of service.

 

[Max_Polo]

Not necessarily. The company I work for has undergone changes in ownership over the last few years. The previous owners valued their long term employees and questioned any part of their organization which had high turnover rates. Today, the new owners see nothing wrong with high turnover because it means they no longer have to deal with higher wages for those who have years of service.

Shortsighted. And would seem to demotivate all employees, old and new. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think a bad strategy.

 

[StormfrontFL]

Shortsighted. And would seem to demotivate all employees, old and new. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think a bad strategy.

Oh it's horrible but to a lot of businesses that is the trend. So to believe that businesses will pay more to attract talented staff isn't a guarantee.

 

[phonehome]

Exactly and of all these "new benefits" and even most of the old ones, 401-K or even insurance do not kick in until you have been on the job for lets say one year and plenty employees quit or get "manuevered into quitting" at lets say 13 months then the company in question never pays any of that anyway/

I worked for a wireless company that had what they called "employee stock options" but really it was nothing more than "profit sharing" because it was a "privately held company" and as such had no actual stock.

So really it was just a bookeeping excercise. IE nothing more than numbers in ledger or on a spread sheet

Now you were not "vested" until you had been with the company 5 years and at 5 years you had to quit, as in NOT "get fired" to be able to collect.

During the time I worked there the average turnover was at 13 months, either people quit or were let go because back then the measure of "success" was "new activations" you needed a number to get any kind of bonus and a minimum per month, miss that number for x number of months in a row and you were let go.

There were a few instances where it certainly looked like with a person over 5 years they for lack of better way of put it "set up" that person to be fired just so they could fire them.

In either case it is then nothing more that "erasing a number on page" and in the end this "benefit" cost the company NOTHING

 

[Klingsor]

Shortsighted. And would seem to demotivate all employees, old and new. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think a bad strategy.

A lot of things, from quarterly reports to golden parachutes, encourage that kind of shortsightedness.

 

[Scooter5]

I live in Miami. The rents in Miami are so high that people who work here have to live outside of town because it's cheaper. Now imagine someone on financial assistance doing this. Between the low wages and the cost of transportation, he or she, is now making less than they received on assistance. If the goal is to end the need for assistance either the wages need to increase, costs need to go down, or some way must be devised to increase the skills and marketability of the applicants.

Yeah, everything here is more expensive than it should be. I don’t understand how all of these buildings ...offices, condos, rentals, or mixed used, have gone up with ZERO improvements on our infrastructure! Only created more traffic for a now big city that can’t handle it! Grr! The traffic gets worse each year!

 

[Chrysippus]

Maybe I'm wrong

and you are wrong—again. You dont have a strategy to present, so you didn’t.

 

[Elmer Gantry]

and you are wrong—again. You dont have a strategy to present, so you didn’t.

Huh?!?

So what you're saying is that dumping employees constantly to avoid paying long term benefits is a good thing?

 

[Chrysippus]

Huh?!?

So what you're saying is that dumping employees constantly to avoid paying long term benefits is a good thing?

No, I am not saying that.

 

[Elmer Gantry]

Ok, I guess it was nothing then.

 

[Chrysippus]

Ok, I guess it was nothing then.

If that’s what you guess, that’s all you get.

 

[phonehome]

From the companies involved perspective many of them do in fact view "turnover" even almost constant turnover as 'good thing"

About the only "long term benefit" left in the private sector is the 401-K plan

If an employee is not "vested" in the 401-K plan until 5 years and a day and the vast majority quit or get fired before that happens which means that ALL the company does is give that now ex employee THEIR MONEY BACK and whet ever amount the company "contributed" they get to recoup as if they never "spent" it in the first place then that "benefit" cost nothing

Using my above example of that wireless company I worked for "employee stock option" plan.

If you quit before 5 years was up you got nothing and it cost the company literally NOTHING

If after you got fired for what ever, and it was "non union company" in and "at will" state so "what ever" could be anything and they were not ever required to ever state what that "what ever" was then you lost that and again it cost the company literally nothing.

If you do not get fired but you also do not quit then until you do quit/retire 20 or 30 or how ever many years later it still cost the company literally nothing.

Then there is "healthcare" assuming the company even offers it if you can keep turning over your employees so none or at least only a few ever reach 25 much less 30 or 35 then you will keep your "risk pool' young and cheap and less likely to ever buy your "employer provided insurance" to begin with.

Plenty of CEO's who never look past the next quarterly report would call all of that a "good thing"

 

[wd656166248]

This seems like a good place to ask this question given the recent comments. Wouldn’t raising the minimum wage just make things more expensive? Also wouldn’t that make things even harder on the people who currently make above minimum wage but don’t make a lot? What I mean is that let’s say I make $18 an hour and minimum wage is raise to $15 an hour I’m not getting a raise of anything I just became even poorer right?

 

[Elmer Gantry]

I know it makes it easier to get yourself replaced by a robot or some form of automation.

 

[Klingsor]

This seems like a good place to ask this question given the recent comments. Wouldn’t raising the minimum wage just make things more expensive? Also wouldn’t that make things even harder on the people who currently make above minimum wage but don’t make a lot? What I mean is that let’s say I make $18 an hour and minimum wage is raise to $15 an hour I’m not getting a raise of anything I just became even poorer right?

What's your solution, then? Or do you see any problem in the first place?