to judge an employer that doesn't pay at least a living wage?

[Objection]

I am passively job hunting at the moment and have noticed a huge amount of jobs that are paid below a living wage - I can't help but give a mental black mark against the companies that don't pay their staff a living wage.

I'm trying to think of why it would be acceptable; a job is a job, after all and employees are free to leave (though not much of an argument), and small independent companies may not have a big enough budgets...
but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
AIBU to immediately judge a company for paying so little?

[expecting to be told I am!]

I'd rather see individuals receive working tax credits for working than see individual receive child tax credits just for having children they can't feed and clothe without government handouts.

I think the living wage need to be higher than £ 8 for london. I would guess around £11/hr. I think it needs updating.

If all companies paid higher wages, one of two things would happen:

1. In a closed economy, prices would rise and people would be no better off - see the late 70's
2. In a global economy, jobs are outsourced from the UK- see the textile industry

The textile industry is a great example because until the late 90's M&S sold only British made clothes. Its profits halved, as customers said it was over-priced, so it sourced offshore - no UK jobs, NMW or otherwise and no UK tax income on the manufacturers. Higher state burden as unemployed, not just tax credits.

Well, I'd rather see people paid a fair wage for their labour and not have businesses to depend on the govt when they cannot manage to do that themselves.

I guess that's asking for the moon on a stick in the UK in 2014 though, which is fucking depressing.

A lot of people would like that Rommell. But wanting it, and it actually happening are quite a long way from each other. And it would require normal people in the UK to change their attitudes to a lot of things, for example shopping for the cheapest item and then wondering where are the formerly reasonably paid manufacturing (and retail) jobs are.

Well, the former manufacturing jobs have all gone now thanks to successive govt policies starting from Thatcher onwards. That doesn't even have anything to do with the global economy - Germany is part of a global economy and still produces its own stuff. The problem that we have here is that we've moved to being a service sector economy (retail, hospitality etc) with the accompanying low wages because profit margins are so low due to spending being discretionary. Not really sure how we can get back from that having lost our market. We're fucked, really.

Rommell
Most??? Depends if you are a glass half full or half empty person, 2012- around 20% failed in first year, so 80% still around to trade after first year, yes after that there will be more that don't continue.
Businesses don't just fail as they are not financially viable.

I get paid over the living wage and still have to claim tax credits, housing benefit and council tax reduction.

I dont think putting up wages will solve anything by itself. Everything needs to change. If rent, energy prices and food costs reduced companies wouldnt need to increase their wage bills meaning that a lot of companies wouldnt struggle to pay their employees.

OP said she was passively looking, which may mean she is already working, self supporting or many other scenarios which do not warrant the accusations of "entitled".

Are Germans as motivated by cheap goods as we are? Or are they prepared to pay for quality made German goods over cheap foreign ones?

Thatcher just pulled the plug on a lot of industry. It was in a terrible state long before she came along. Public money subsidising the manufacture of stuff that nobody wanted to buy one foreign imports became widely available. Maybe it could have been turned around. But the old style factories employing everyone in a local area were destined to become obsolete, no-one could prevent that.

'living wage'is a rather vague term. but i think anyone working full time should be earning enough to be able to support themselves, pay rent, buy food etc.

Thatcher did not pull the plug on UK manufacturing, she reduced state subsidies and drove them to become more efficient and added value. In the UK, this was fought by the unions who went on strike and destroyed the businesses, in Germany the unions accepted the need for this due to globalisation and worked with management to improve things for all. The unions are just as culpable as Thatcher for the loss of manufacturing.
The Germans also due have state subsidies for thier coal industry and exempt business from energy green taxes - the difference is the subsidy goes to the company rather than to the workers, so is less visible.

I think I remember reading that small businesses are overall better for the economy than larger ones (in terms of numbers of jobs created and the "value" of those jobs). Most small business owners I know work very long hours for what ends up being a low hourly rate.

I have a lot more sympathy for those companies than I do for the huge corporations (like Amazon or Google) who come up with tax arrangements so that they don't pay a reasonable amount in tax, but whose workers rely on UK government benefits because they are paid so little. That really does mean that everyone paying UK tax is subsidising the massive profits those companies make.

I agree with you ribbityrabbit, especially your last paragraph.

It's a problem that needs long term measures put in place to resolve and I don't think any government is going to be brave enough to do it tbh because it will involve devaluing peoples current assets.

Personally I think it's no good starting with corporations. The threat of further unemployment and supply chain issues would just impact society to quickly and to harshly. I do believe that the money we're currently spending on topping up wages could be much better invested in the long term with a real push to create a basic foundation that people earning the lowest wages could actually afford.

Social housing and childcare would be my starting points.

How is it not better that people pay back into the government at a fair and affordable price than being given a few quid to pay onto private organisations?

I work for a large Multinational company. We recently had a letter from them thanking us for working so hard and keeping the company's cost down. It's a public company which made millions in profits and paid its shareholders a dividend. The letter was to tell us that there would be no pay rise this year, not so much as a cost of living increase.

So the company made a profit, the shareholders got a little bit richer but my colleagues and I get what amounts to a pay cut in real terms, how is this in any way fair or equitable?

Am I being naive to think this shouldn't be allowed? To feel exploited?

It certainly means I feel no loyalty to the company, less inclined to go the extra mile and I'm looking around for other work.

"tax payers subsidise Tesco and other companies profits via WTC."

So instead customers would subsidise Tesco more directly? By paying higher prices for goods. So you'd all be whinging at the cost of food and household consumables (prices of which are massively lower nowadays than in the 50s or 60s).

Or you could blame people like me who work for minimum wage (& less) because we can afford to (due to income from other sources). I guess rich people are to blame after all?

The problem is that there is a widening of the gap between the value of someone's labour in the UK and the cost of living in the UK. One of the major reasons for this is globalisation because many lower skilled jobs are now priced at a global level rather than a national standard, so (eg) someone living in Manila can do x job at a lower wage than someone in London and retain a similar std of living. Now moving the company to Manila is a PITA so you'll always have some buffer on labour costs before that happens but it's becoming easier and easier. Even where jobs can't be relocated technology increasingly facilitates demanning.

In many cases in the UK, the min wage is probably higher than the actual value of the work undertaken by that individual. In pure economic terms, tax credits subsidise the individual ( total income less mkt value of labour supplied) at least as much as the employer. The government wants people in work and wants to keep companies which employ a lot of people in this country. It's quite frightening how much things have changed and how much technology is likely to eradicate entry level jobs ( example- we're now entirely on self- service HR and payroll admin at work). Now arguably over time, all countries even out so theres no labour cost advantage anywhere but that's going to take decades.

Re company profits, you need to look at margin more than actual profits. Supermarkets make low margins. The profits are large in absolute terms but that's because these companies are enormous.

So, no idea what the answer is. It's all quite fucked up.

Brilliant. I just read a thread about how food is getting too expensive. Then I read this.

I run a small (in the scheme of things) business where we produce a healthy food I imagine many of you put in your shopping basket.

We pay above minimum wage but below living wage - I'd love to be able to pay the latter but I doubt many consumers would be equally happy to pay the resultant price increases in the supermarket.

AIBU to immediately judge a company for paying so little?

Yes, and also YABU for not understanding how the economy works. It is the job of people who buy things to pay as little as possible. Employers buying labour is (and should be) no different than you buying baked beans.

There are various people other than yourself who might arguably have some responsibility for ensuring you have enough money, but actual or potential employers do not.

The thing I find most annoying is that the government are critical of employers who do not pay a decent living wage whilst doing the same thing themselves. I have a degree and will shortly have a second yet I am employed my the government and earn only marginally more (

Mrs bucket, if u can't afford to pay someone a decent wage on the work u are requiring them to do, you should do that work yourself, or think harder about whether your business is viable at all.

It's depressing how little some jobs pay. Sometimes sometimes nothing for being on call 24/7 without being allowed to work elsewhere (zero hours hours). However we have to remember that we've returned to the days when the poor are considered expendable, worthless to society and preferable that they didn't exist at all.

aspiring we've returned to the days when the poor are considered expendable, worthless to society and preferable that they didn't exist at all. when was life better for the poor?

In many cases in the UK, the min wage is probably higher than the actual value of the work undertaken by that individual. This is one of the problems of the NMW, as because you are paying some more than they are worht, then you are paying others less than they are worth to keep overall salaries level. Scrapping the NMW would raise wages for quite a large group of people.

Not better as such in terms of many of the living conditions but I think the overall view of the poor, the undeserving stuff etc improved after the Victorian era but we've very much returned to that hatred of the poor let's blame them for all society's ills mentality.