Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

that minimum wage should be the same regardless of age

58 replies

auntiepicklebottom2 · 22/11/2011 20:41

the rates are

£6.08 - the main rate for workers aged 21 and over
£4.98 - the 18-20 rate
£3.68 - the 16-17 rate for workers above school leaving age but under 18

now to me a 20 year old may have the same bills ect as a 21 year old, also IMO it break the age discrimination law.

www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/ResolvingWorkplaceDisputes/DiscriminationAtWork/DG_10026429

OP posts:
Purpleroses · 22/11/2011 20:44

I've never understood this one. The only arguemnt for it seems to be that young people need less, exactly the same argument that was once applied to women....

Just as some (many!) women are not in fact married and supported by partners, so too are some under 21s supporting themselves and sometimes children.

Think we live in a very agist society with the young at the bottom of the heap.

Kayano · 22/11/2011 20:47

Young and the elderly IMO

HecateGoddessOfTheNight · 22/11/2011 20:47

I see your point. It is age discrimination and seems unfair.

Trying to think of the reason it is done like this - Perhaps they think that, generally, 16-17 yr olds are likely to be living at home and have few expenses, and 18-20yr olds the same, with perhaps a few more expenses, but neither group - for the most part - is likely to be living independently?

Or course, there are those who are. But I expect that the vast majority are still at home.

so they don't have the same outgoings.

Then - how to get employers to choose to take on a young person with less experience over an older person?

I'm sure everyone would love to think employers don't think like this Grin but you'd be wrong. Cost matters.

If you had to pay the same, what would motivate you to take on a 16, 17, 18 etc yr old rather than a 25 or 30yr old? What impact would that have on youth unemployment?

Just trying to get a feel for it and think of possible reasons why they've set it up this way.

If minimum wage was standard - why would employers take on a 16yr old and train them, when they'd have to pay the same as for a 30yr old who's done the job before?

I'm not saying this is morally right or anything Grin but I suspect it's probably at least part of the picture.

Esta3GG · 22/11/2011 20:49

The minimum wage should be the same for all regardless of age.
It should also be doubled. £6.08 is a ridiculously small hourly wage.
I was doing the shittest of all possible shit temp jobs 25 years ago and earning that much.
I do wonder if the introduction of the minimum wage has given employees carte blanche to restrict wages.

scarlettsmummy2 · 22/11/2011 20:51

it also isn't practical in certain industries to pay 16 uear olds the same- for example in the construction industry, where you would have issues in big differences in pay for those on apprenticeships vs those doing a bit of casual labouring.

Purpleroses · 22/11/2011 20:55

I don't think it cover apprenticeships though does it? They get paid less whatever age, which is fair enough as they're learning.

But if they're doing exactly the same job (eg cleaning, shop work, etc) I can't see how it's fair to say that they get less just because they're younger?

auntiepicklebottom2 · 22/11/2011 21:01

it maybe the reason why parent under the age of 21 on income support have no desire to find work.......if they are only getting £4.98 on minimum wage, they could well be paying more per hour for childcare than what they earn

OP posts:
youngermother1 · 22/11/2011 21:12

Obviously there should be no minimum wage

ShellyBoobs · 22/11/2011 21:19

It should also be doubled. £6.08 is a ridiculously small hourly wage.

Confused

And how much would you then pay someone who currently earns, say, £9 p/h? Should that be doubled too?

CrystalsandDiamonds · 22/11/2011 21:29

this used to annoy me to no end at a job I had, I got paid less than my "seniors" but done just as much work as they did and better. Also when they needed someone to fill in for extra hours which legally some of them I shouldn't have been doing they used me and got a good bargain in the process.

FredFredGeorge · 22/11/2011 21:33

Yes the reason for it is to assist the young workers in getting some experience, as others have said there'd be little incentive for the employer to take someone who as 16 or 18 if they would have to pay them the same as an experienced worker. In industries with a high turnover of staff, then the employer can actually employ more people who are cheaper and train them up so that as they get older they'll either likely leave anyway on to other jobs, or have progressed into roles with more demands.

Yes in many ways it's unfair, but sometimes a job is better than no job.

slavetofilofax · 22/11/2011 21:48

I don't think there is anything wrong with under 18's getting a lower rate, because as people who are still legally children, they should be getting support from parents at that age. And they can still be in free education.

But over 18's should all have the same minimum wage.

Sherbert37 · 22/11/2011 22:04

Reputable retailers such as M&S and JL do not differentiate by age. I too think it must come under age discrimination rules. Some young people are only paid £2.50 an hour for apprenticeships such as working with young children which seems wrong.

EttiKetti · 22/11/2011 22:11

Apprentices are paid £2.60/hour for doing the same job as the next person, really. Such a shame but better than nothing when you're 28 and can't get a regular job....

EttiKetti · 22/11/2011 22:11

28 :o 18 clearly!

Kiwiinkits · 22/11/2011 23:51

We used to have a youth wage in New Zealand, until the Labour government discarded it 4 years ago using the same 'equality'-type thinking you're propounding auntiepicklebottom. Four years down the track and youth unemployment affects 25% of all those under 18 in the workforce (i.e. working or seeking employment). It used to be about 7-8%. A recent report by the Department of Labour recently found that 67% of the increase in youth unemployment can be explained by taking away the youth wage.
Economists, of which I am one, live by the law of unintended consequences. Even the most fair sounding policies have side-effects that are unintended. In this case, the group that the government was most trying to help, have been harmed. Sometimes these kids will be harmed for life, simply because they were denied a first step on the ladder because of woolley headed government policy.

youngermother1 · 22/11/2011 23:58

As I said before, the minimum wage should be abolished

mamamoonmim · 22/11/2011 23:59

I was living alone at the age of 16 (back in 2002)
and earing £3.20 an hour.
So I don't think that was very fair, as I had the same bills as an older person living self sufficiently.

mamamoonmim · 23/11/2011 00:00

yeah, then I could have gotten 50p an hour instead??

Breezy1985 · 23/11/2011 00:04

I think over 18's should have the same minimum wage, I had 2 children at 20! At 16 (10 years ago!) though i was doing an apprenticeship and working 40 hours a week for £40.

Moominsarescary · 23/11/2011 00:33

They bought in the minimum wage for apprentices when I was 21 and training as a hairdresser on £40 a week, my employer sacked me as she didn't want to pay me the rate, much cheaper to employ a 16 year old

She did write on my references that it was the only reason she was letting me go, but I still wasn't able to get another job as a trainee as obviously noone else wanted to pay me the extra either

2 bloody years I worked for over 40 hours a week on £40 all wasted because I couldn't finish. I also had a young child to support

squeakytoy · 23/11/2011 00:41

youngermother1 Tue 22-Nov-11 23:58:02
As I said before, the minimum wage should be abolished

yes, you said, but can you explain how on earth that will help? Confused

uphillbothways · 23/11/2011 01:01

Well the theory is that it encourages employers to take on young people, which is a good thing - unemployed spells when you're young have been shown to affect your life chances and earnings much more than when you're older.

Unfortunately this policy still causes some people to lose out like moominsarescary :( and of course unemployment is horrible whatever your age.

squeakytoy · 23/11/2011 01:06

Not ALL employers pay minimum wage. It isnt the law that they have to, and plenty of them pay above minimum rate.

The minimum is to stop workers being exploited. It doesnt stop people from being able to earn more if they can get the jobs that pay more.

youngermother1 · 23/11/2011 01:09

The minimum wage prevents employers employing people, training them and making products which benefits us all. If a manufacturer has a minimum wage, that puts a minimum price on the products. They may be able to sell more if priced more cheaply but cannot because need a certain amount of labour. Also people who may be prepared to work for less than minimum wage are not allowed to and forced to remain on benefits. There is a huge amount of evidence that being at work increases your employability and therefore enables people to move up the ladder - the minimum wage moves the bottom rung above peoples heads.

Swipe left for the next trending thread