What's wrong with a livable wage? $27,000 is a surviving wage.
If you're living in an expensive part of the country and stuck in a low-paying job, the problem isn't the job, it's you.
Also, it should be noted that many bus drivers will start to be replaced by automation over the next 4-5 years and other low skill, high minimum wage workers will find themselves phased out of the workforce due to intelligent automation...one reason I advocate for the elimination of the minimum wage. Otherwise, there will be a large permanent class of unemployed.
The problem is when you're pay used to afford you a decent living in an expensive part of the country, and now almost overnight it doesn't.
Remember that business owner that gave all his employees a starting salary of $70k last year? Well, as the old adage says, no good deed goes unpunished…
Tireless, never complaining machines are the future, whether society likes it or not.
Can't wait for those Shakespeare and David Hockney robots. So tired of whiny human artists. The Jony Ive robot will save Apple a lot of money too. ????
Then robot devs, all of our jobs will be gone in 5 years.
Remember that business owner that gave all his employees a starting salary of $70k last year? Well, as the old adage says, no good deed goes unpunished…
This is common psychological behavior-- once you achieve your social standing, you retain it by making sure you stay ahead of those under you. "Last place" aversion in games. Or colloquially, "Keeping up with the Jones's".
This is also a common argument against raising the minimum wage to $15 (or whatever number): "Well what about the people like me who are already making $15?" Great, you make $15, which is already a livable wage. Other people bringing $15 will not somehow lower your quality of life.
“The only time you look in your neighbor's bowl is to make sure that they have enough. You don't look in your neighbor's bowl to see if you have as much as them.” - Louis CK?
This is common psychological behavior-- once you achieve your social standing, you retain it by making sure you stay ahead of those under you. "Last place" aversion in games. Or colloquially, "Keeping up with the Jones's".
This is also a common argument against raising the minimum wage to $15 (or whatever number): "Well what about the people like me who are already making $15?" Great, you make $15, which is already a livable wage. Other people bringing $15 will not somehow lower your quality of life.
“The only time you look in your neighbor's bowl is to make sure that they have enough. You don't look in your neighbor's bowl to see if you have as much as them.” - Louis CK?
This is common, and it's sad, especially when your life won't negatively be affected as a result.
What's a livable wage? On $27K a year, you can't afford an apartment in the Bay Area.
A 2 bed apartment in a somewhat 'dangerous' neighborhood goes for $2000/mo here. So if you have a kid, that's $24K a year just for the apartment, and that comes from your post-tax money (On $27K/yr, that's at most $19K). A studio goes for $1-$1.25K.mo.
So it's clearly got to be more than $27K.
It's basic arithmetic: if companies want to have bus drivers, they need to pay the bus drivers enough to live in the Bay Area.
How do I know this? I work in tech and live in the Bay Area. Those of you saying it's "excessive" are just not familiar enough with the Bay Area.
Those of you wanting to inflict "hunger pains" on the people who drive us to work? Please stop buying our products. We don't need your money. Go away.
Mainly because paying people excessive wages is a disincentive for them to improve themselves. It is the same concept as to over supporting the welfare elite. Hunger pains can do wonders to get people off their asses and put in a little effort.
Besides how do you define livable wage? The whole concept is nonsense as we are all individuals with individual needs and vastly different desires as to what we get out of life. People should be driven to the occupations that meet their needs. Occupations shouldn't be inflated to meet a persons needs.
Funny how some on this forum view the world. I worked in a large multi-national corporation. Every so often there would be a blood-letting to save money. In those situations you would see executives, managers, financial professionals and the like taking low level positions within the company (if they could get them) just to survive and have a paycheck coming in. They were educated, skilled people confronted with the realities of life, something you seem to have no concept of. Maybe you have just been way too lucky and fortunate. These people show up to work every day. It's a job that pays the bills. You also constantly make broad assumptions about people that actually work for a living. So if you work (you're not working hard enough) you're lazy and if can't find work you're lazy.
Now please supply a definition of excessive wages (could it be 73 million for you're first year working for a company? That seems like a much larger leap of faith to me.)
Remember that business owner that gave all his employees a starting salary of $70k last year? Well, as the old adage says, no good deed goes unpunished…
Wow what an elitist comment. Improve themselves how exactly? All these workers flooded an area, and drove the prices of everything up, from property values, rents both commercial and residential, the price of food, etc... Everyone is raking in the dough except for the incumbent residents, and workers. A rising tide lifts all boats, from the luxury yacht to the little dinghy. Take waiters for instance, one works at a diner, and another works in a fancy upscale restaurant, they're both doing the same low skill labor but the latter one makes much more money, why? Because he/she is catering to people with more money.
Servers in high end restaurants do not do the same work as a person serving in a diner nor is it really low skilled. Not even close. The level of knowledge you need to have at a high end restaurant is well beyond that of a diner server. There is an art to high end serving that takes years to learn. Not just anyone can walk in and do it. This I know because I did it myself. I made roughly $70k per year. At a five star restaurant you can make $100k.
I'm friends with a quite a few servers and chefs who have worked at a wide variety of places ranging from your basic Coney Island to very high end dining and they all said that the mental load and physical effort involved was basically the same. Memorizing the menu is the same regardless of the language, its simple memorization. Side work is the same regardless if the napkins are paper or cloth. The salt goes in the salt shaker and learning how to use a comically over sized pepper grinder or cheese grater is pretty easy. Filling water and bread and doing an entree check is the same. Cooking the food is the same save for more expensive ingredients. Once you have some basic knife and pan skills anyone can cook short order Coney food or high end overpriced filet and lobster tails. They all say the only thing that main thing that is different is the level of ass kissing and the size of the check. That and maybe the outfit, placing a fresh napkin when the patron uses the john, and carrying a crumb scoop.
Same with real estate agents and car sales. The only difference between the low end and the high end is your appearance and how far you are willing to spread the butt cheeks of the customer when you pucker up. It's not rocket science. Having a touch of personality and charisma and knowledge of the product is not overly complicated. It does not take any art or years to learn the differences between a Mercedes and a Honda. Either you are a closer who makes themselves available or you aren't.
If you stick to the basics and stick to the script you will be fine.
Remember that business owner that gave all his employees a starting salary of $70k last year? Well, as the old adage says, no good deed goes unpunished…
He didn't make the starting salary $70K overnight. It's being phased in over three years. His customer load has increased a great deal since he made the decision to share the wealth.
Negativity has come from a couple whiny, elitist workers that have quit, and a few business people that don't like the move because now they look bad compared to him.
He may have a bit of trouble keeping that promise, but only because his brother is a dick that is suing, demanding a buyout. Probably would have happened no matter what salary he gave.
These particular bus drivers deserve whatever they can negotiate out of some of the richest companies in the area. I don't have a problem with that.
Remember that business owner that gave all his employees a starting salary of $70k last year? Well, as the old adage says, no good deed goes unpunished…
Did you read that before posting.?It doesn't at all support the argument that his minimum salary was a mistake. Actually somewhat the opposite.
For those who don't live in the Bay Area, a livable income is well above the minimum wage. And it's not just about the workers. People need services, and the whole financial equation has to work. Salaries get too low and something breaks.
Did you read that before posting.?It doesn't at all support the argument that his minimum salary was a mistake. Actually somewhat the opposite.
:???: I did read it, but it looks you are reading something into my comment that isn't there. Nothing in my comment suggests that a minimum salary is a mistake. I even refer to it as a good deed.
Remember that business owner that gave all his employees a starting salary of $70k last year? Well, as the old adage says, no good deed goes unpunished…
Did you read that before posting.?It doesn't at all support the argument that his minimum salary was a mistake. Actually somewhat the opposite.
For those who don't live in the Bay Area, a livable income is well above the minimum wage. And it's not just about the workers. People need services, and the whole financial equation has to work. Salaries get too low and something breaks.
Let's hope what breaks aren't the necks and backs of tech workers because the bus driven by a second rate driver crashed.
"Silicon Valley shuttle drivers are fighting to bring parity to a wage gap between contract workers and the high-income tech employees they serve."
I'm so sick of seeing this correlation. Everybody in the Bay Area deserves a living wage but please stop making it sound like they're "owed" more money simply because of the highly-skilled, highly-educated, (not to mention the many thousands of dollars in student-loan-having) people they drive around. Personally, I do not want, or think it's safe, to see the same bus driver that picks me up at 7am pick me back up again at 6pm!
A livable wage in the San Francisco bay area is always a contentious subject. I'm split in the middle on this. Sure, a bus driver that shuttles the best minds in the software world is an important responsibility. I sure would not want to be driving those gargantuan buses on San Francisco streets and traffic. That's a high-stress position for sure!
At the same time, everything has to be balanced too. Where is the line drawn? As an adult, if my job does not pay a livable wage, I examine my options to get out of that situation. That means look for another higher-paying job, maybe buy time and go to college to further my options into other careers? To me, that makes sense. It does not make sense to me to complain to my boss at the bus company, or even to my boss at McDonalds to "demand" they pay me a lot more for a job that - frankly - most people can do with little skill.
Just because your job at one moment provided a "livable wage", and the next day it does not doesn't give people the expectation that their surroundings should submit to their demands that they be compensated more just because everyone else is making more too.
A livable wage in the San Francisco bay area is always a contentious subject. I'm split in the middle on this. Sure, a bus driver that shuttles the best minds in the software world is an important responsibility. I sure would not want to be driving those gargantuan buses on San Francisco streets and traffic. That's a high-stress position for sure!
At the same time, everything has to be balanced too. Where is the line drawn? As an adult, if my job does not pay a livable wage, I examine my options to get out of that situation. That means look for another higher-paying job, maybe buy time and go to college to further my options into other careers? To me, that makes sense. It does not make sense to me to complain to my boss at the bus company, or even to my boss at McDonalds to "demand" they pay me a lot more for a job that - frankly - most people can do with little skill.
Just because your job at one moment provided a "livable wage", and the next day it does not doesn't give people the expectation that their surroundings should submit to their demands that they be compensated more just because everyone else is making more too.
I just love a good 'go to college, and live happily ever after' story. Going to college isn't a guarantor that someone is going to find a higher paying job. In fact the person might only be able to find a lower paying job once he/she graduates.
I just love a good 'go to college, and live happily ever after' story. Going to college isn't a guarantor that someone is going to find a higher paying job. In fact the person might only be able to find a lower paying job once he/she graduates.
I don't have enough data in which state my personal feelings on the subject, but it seems like I've read more articles in the last 5 years about how college is just an expensive waste of time and energy for something that will do most people in the future little to no good. That reads a bit too extreme, for me, but I can see how college may not be as important or as financially advantageous today where even children with a marketable idea can get rich quickly due to anonymity and a worldwide market. Maybe the last brilliant 99¢ app I bought on the App Store was designed by a 14yo who became millionaire overnight, or the last youTube video I was sent had enough page views to support someone for a few years.
Comments
The problem is when you're pay used to afford you a decent living in an expensive part of the country, and now almost overnight it doesn't.
[LIST]
[*] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/business/a-company-copes-with-backlash-against-the-raise-that-roared.html?_r=2
[/LIST]
Then robot devs, all of our jobs will be gone in 5 years.
This is common psychological behavior-- once you achieve your social standing, you retain it by making sure you stay ahead of those under you. "Last place" aversion in games. Or colloquially, "Keeping up with the Jones's".
This is also a common argument against raising the minimum wage to $15 (or whatever number): "Well what about the people like me who are already making $15?" Great, you make $15, which is already a livable wage. Other people bringing $15 will not somehow lower your quality of life.
“The only time you look in your neighbor's bowl is to make sure that they have enough. You don't look in your neighbor's bowl to see if you have as much as them.” - Louis CK?
This is common, and it's sad, especially when your life won't negatively be affected as a result.
What's a livable wage? On $27K a year, you can't afford an apartment in the Bay Area.
A 2 bed apartment in a somewhat 'dangerous' neighborhood goes for $2000/mo here. So if you have a kid, that's $24K a year just for the apartment, and that comes from your post-tax money (On $27K/yr, that's at most $19K). A studio goes for $1-$1.25K.mo.
So it's clearly got to be more than $27K.
It's basic arithmetic: if companies want to have bus drivers, they need to pay the bus drivers enough to live in the Bay Area.
How do I know this? I work in tech and live in the Bay Area. Those of you saying it's "excessive" are just not familiar enough with the Bay Area.
Those of you wanting to inflict "hunger pains" on the people who drive us to work? Please stop buying our products. We don't need your money. Go away.
Mainly because paying people excessive wages is a disincentive for them to improve themselves. It is the same concept as to over supporting the welfare elite. Hunger pains can do wonders to get people off their asses and put in a little effort.
Besides how do you define livable wage? The whole concept is nonsense as we are all individuals with individual needs and vastly different desires as to what we get out of life. People should be driven to the occupations that meet their needs. Occupations shouldn't be inflated to meet a persons needs.
Funny how some on this forum view the world. I worked in a large multi-national corporation. Every so often there would be a blood-letting to save money. In those situations you would see executives, managers, financial professionals and the like taking low level positions within the company (if they could get them) just to survive and have a paycheck coming in. They were educated, skilled people confronted with the realities of life, something you seem to have no concept of. Maybe you have just been way too lucky and fortunate. These people show up to work every day. It's a job that pays the bills. You also constantly make broad assumptions about people that actually work for a living. So if you work (you're not working hard enough) you're lazy and if can't find work you're lazy.
Here is a definition of a living wage: http://livingwage.mit.edu
Now please supply a definition of excessive wages (could it be 73 million for you're first year working for a company? That seems like a much larger leap of faith to me.)
I remember the story but don't know the specifics. How was he able to afford the pay raise?
He reduced his pay.
Wow what an elitist comment. Improve themselves how exactly? All these workers flooded an area, and drove the prices of everything up, from property values, rents both commercial and residential, the price of food, etc... Everyone is raking in the dough except for the incumbent residents, and workers. A rising tide lifts all boats, from the luxury yacht to the little dinghy. Take waiters for instance, one works at a diner, and another works in a fancy upscale restaurant, they're both doing the same low skill labor but the latter one makes much more money, why? Because he/she is catering to people with more money.
Servers in high end restaurants do not do the same work as a person serving in a diner nor is it really low skilled. Not even close. The level of knowledge you need to have at a high end restaurant is well beyond that of a diner server. There is an art to high end serving that takes years to learn. Not just anyone can walk in and do it. This I know because I did it myself. I made roughly $70k per year. At a five star restaurant you can make $100k.
I'm friends with a quite a few servers and chefs who have worked at a wide variety of places ranging from your basic Coney Island to very high end dining and they all said that the mental load and physical effort involved was basically the same. Memorizing the menu is the same regardless of the language, its simple memorization. Side work is the same regardless if the napkins are paper or cloth. The salt goes in the salt shaker and learning how to use a comically over sized pepper grinder or cheese grater is pretty easy. Filling water and bread and doing an entree check is the same. Cooking the food is the same save for more expensive ingredients. Once you have some basic knife and pan skills anyone can cook short order Coney food or high end overpriced filet and lobster tails. They all say the only thing that main thing that is different is the level of ass kissing and the size of the check. That and maybe the outfit, placing a fresh napkin when the patron uses the john, and carrying a crumb scoop.
Same with real estate agents and car sales. The only difference between the low end and the high end is your appearance and how far you are willing to spread the butt cheeks of the customer when you pucker up. It's not rocket science. Having a touch of personality and charisma and knowledge of the product is not overly complicated. It does not take any art or years to learn the differences between a Mercedes and a Honda. Either you are a closer who makes themselves available or you aren't.
If you stick to the basics and stick to the script you will be fine.
He should've done it without the media catching wind of it. It could be taken that he did it for the publicity.
He didn't make the starting salary $70K overnight. It's being phased in over three years. His customer load has increased a great deal since he made the decision to share the wealth.
Negativity has come from a couple whiny, elitist workers that have quit, and a few business people that don't like the move because now they look bad compared to him.
He may have a bit of trouble keeping that promise, but only because his brother is a dick that is suing, demanding a buyout. Probably would have happened no matter what salary he gave.
These particular bus drivers deserve whatever they can negotiate out of some of the richest companies in the area. I don't have a problem with that.
Cheers
Did you read that before posting.?It doesn't at all support the argument that his minimum salary was a mistake. Actually somewhat the opposite.
For those who don't live in the Bay Area, a livable income is well above the minimum wage. And it's not just about the workers. People need services, and the whole financial equation has to work. Salaries get too low and something breaks.
:???: I did read it, but it looks you are reading something into my comment that isn't there. Nothing in my comment suggests that a minimum salary is a mistake. I even refer to it as a good deed.
Let's hope what breaks aren't the necks and backs of tech workers because the bus driven by a second rate driver crashed.
"Silicon Valley shuttle drivers are fighting to bring parity to a wage gap between contract workers and the high-income tech employees they serve."
I'm so sick of seeing this correlation. Everybody in the Bay Area deserves a living wage but please stop making it sound like they're "owed" more money simply because of the highly-skilled, highly-educated, (not to mention the many thousands of dollars in student-loan-having) people they drive around. Personally, I do not want, or think it's safe, to see the same bus driver that picks me up at 7am pick me back up again at 6pm!
A livable wage in the San Francisco bay area is always a contentious subject. I'm split in the middle on this. Sure, a bus driver that shuttles the best minds in the software world is an important responsibility. I sure would not want to be driving those gargantuan buses on San Francisco streets and traffic. That's a high-stress position for sure!
At the same time, everything has to be balanced too. Where is the line drawn? As an adult, if my job does not pay a livable wage, I examine my options to get out of that situation. That means look for another higher-paying job, maybe buy time and go to college to further my options into other careers? To me, that makes sense. It does not make sense to me to complain to my boss at the bus company, or even to my boss at McDonalds to "demand" they pay me a lot more for a job that - frankly - most people can do with little skill.
Just because your job at one moment provided a "livable wage", and the next day it does not doesn't give people the expectation that their surroundings should submit to their demands that they be compensated more just because everyone else is making more too.
I just love a good 'go to college, and live happily ever after' story. Going to college isn't a guarantor that someone is going to find a higher paying job. In fact the person might only be able to find a lower paying job once he/she graduates.
I don't have enough data in which state my personal feelings on the subject, but it seems like I've read more articles in the last 5 years about how college is just an expensive waste of time and energy for something that will do most people in the future little to no good. That reads a bit too extreme, for me, but I can see how college may not be as important or as financially advantageous today where even children with a marketable idea can get rich quickly due to anonymity and a worldwide market. Maybe the last brilliant 99¢ app I bought on the App Store was designed by a 14yo who became millionaire overnight, or the last youTube video I was sent had enough page views to support someone for a few years.