|I'd rather be hated for who I am than loved for who I am not |
Yes...if the employees knew that they were going to make them all part time or reduce benefits they wouldn't have been for it.
When Seattle went to 15.00 dollars an hour most workers demanded part time so that they could make the same money and not lose any welfare benes!!!
|Nosce te ipsum|
True. But doing it through two busy shifts a day, on your feet, sweaty, greasy, slippery floor, loud buzzers, always a demand for speed, it cannot be an easy job. We cannot find dependable laborers at double that rate.
I stop at one particular McD's on Saturday evenings a few times a year. It is off the beaten path; not a "neighborhood hangout". The burgers are outstanding, searing grease dripping onto my shirt every time. The fries are always super fresh.
Finally I had to call the manager and comment what a well-run franchise they have, and the Saturday night crew in particular. And she already knew it.
But for the grace of God it could be me coming home every night, sore, beat, and smelling of a deep fryer ...
I just want to post again to make absolutely clear that the intent of this thread was in no way to bash anyone, at any level, who is going in and working every day. I have been there and done that and have the utmost respect for anyone who is out there hustling for a dollar rather than sitting on the government dole.
The intent of this thread was to point out the economic reality that arbitrarily raising unskilled labor wages above what the market will bear has 100% predictable outcomes. This is known stuff that has been repeated over and over and over again in the real world and the consequences don't change, it is just economic reality.
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
- John Adams
|Hop head |
like I said it is all about percentages,
Target like most work off of either Sales Per Labor Hour, or Payroll %, or something similar,,
those goals are set by corporate, to control the most controllable expense in retail,,,,
each store has it's own goal, the District has a goal, the region (or however they are broke down) has its combined goal,
SPLH,, as in the goal is for every $100 or $1000 in sales, you can used X number of hours,
last store I managed for one company in the grocery business I was set at 5.9% labor, and that included my Store Manager wages, and a RX,,
was lucky to use 1200 hrs a week,
this was a change, since before we used SPLH and I could use 1800 hrs or so, (including 150 hrs allotment for salaried managers (me, comanager, rx))
the company I left a few years ago used a similar system that required ~5% labor dollars, ($800K a week, +/-, and used 4-4300 hrs labor)
my avg hourly rate was around $11,
if that company agreed to pay everyone $15 and up, then hours would have been cut down to about 2700 or so +/-, total store,
that is a ton of time to be cut out of a retail business,,,
question is, is Target still maintaining store conditions? in stock position good? enough help on the front end?
Doubt many here have a problem with that basic economic concept, Target isn't a victim of out of control local wage laws since the majority of the stores are not in areas with forced $15 wage minimums.
This was done to either virtue signal to progressive customers, and/or to signal to governments, you force us into this, and this is what happens, since politicians pander to voters they really don't care about the consequences of their decisions, unless it hurts their voter numbers.
Its how it plays, Target could simply be signalling politicians...
"My rule of life prescribed as an absolutely sacred rite smoking cigars and also the drinking of alcohol before, after and if need be during all meals and in the intervals between them." Winston Churchill
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 2 3 4|