..to think that £6.15 an hour...

[BertrandRussell]

.....really is shit wages?

Yep its shit

In 1994 I worked for a clothes store. Mark One. Got 1.63 and hour. A few more risky and "entrepreneurial" types used to allow people to shoplift in the changing rooms for a fiver. I never had the bollocks to do it, but you can see how undervaluing staff and exploiting them causes behaviour like this to occur. If they were paid fairly and respected this would never of happened. Stock takes were interesting events

Really where? I'm still waiting to hear where this low cost nirvana with jobs, cheap rooms and cheap transport is?

Well, I've just looked up spareroom.co.uk, and put in Birmingham - being middle of the country, good transport and neither an expensive nor very cheap part of the country. After dismissing the first couple of pages which were dss only, then you can get a room in a shared house from about £225 a month (not in bad areas).

Council Tax is £1062.67 for 2019/20 - obviously shared between all occupants - so the £2K comment doesn't really reflect it.

I say again. No-one is saying it is some kind of utopia to be aiming for but nor is it impossible. That is all some of us are saying.

@backtoschool There are plenty of adults with families earning less than that.

That's all well and good if your job is in Birmingham.

You can probably find similar in and around most cities outside the south east, Leeds, Manchester, Glasgow, Liverpool, Newcastle etc.

Vibrant cities with many shops, restaurants, leisure facilities, services and even businesses and major employers. So plenty of jobs and also rooms available for those who want them.

Believe it or not, life exists outside London.

Selfishly, I'm of the mind that if you dont work hard for something, this is the result.

I worked my absolute ass off to get my qualification, I'm a professional and I need to pay for indemnity and to be on a register to even work and it isn't cheap. I've only just managed to get myself up to £9.50 an hour. It's not enough, everyone knows it's not enough. But I'd feel even more shite if Sally the waitress just out of school was being paid £9.50 an hour.. but that could easily be down to my anxiety and feeling like I've always got to do the best I can.

“Selfishly, I'm of the mind that if you dont work hard for something, this is the result.“
So all those people out there on low wages just haven’t worked hard enough. OK.....

My DD is 18.
She is not a student.
She is living in Swansea, working 24 hours a week in a minimum wage job - around £600 per month.
She does not own a car, work is within 20 min walk.
She and her boyfriend (who is a student and contributes the same to their budget) rent a large room in a shared house for £380 per month between them including all bills - (gas/electric/water/council tax/communal area cleaning/wifi).
She feels "well off"... it is all relative I guess.

She feels "well off"... it is all relative I guess.

exactly,
dont rain on their parade

A friend of DS who was 16 in July has just got a job in our local Sainsburys paying £9.20/hour. Sainsburys have gone upon my estimation. DS (also 16) qualified as a lifeguard and earns about £6.40 a hour!

up in my estimation

It's a terrible wage, I completely agree with you Bertrand.

If you looked past your initial outrage and thought about what you would do as a small business owner

I wouldn't assume that someone was better and more valuable at a job just because of their age. Of course it depends on the job, but anyone can work a till with training (I did it from 15) and it doesn't matter if you are 15 and 65, the job is the same.

Clearly if you are a hairdresser you will pay a lot more to someone with experience than you will the 14 year old who sweeps the floors and gets the drinks.

Selfishly, I'm of the mind that if you dont work hard for something, this is the result.

What has working hard for something got to do with the fact that an 18 year old will be paid less to do the exact same job as someone older?

The problem with the lower minimum wage for younger people is that it penalises the disadvantaged. The 18 year olds with no parental support who are doing it alone. It appears that many of this thread don't think that matters because that doesn't affect them or their children.

What has working hard for something got to do with the fact that an 18 year old will be paid less to do the exact same job as someone older?

So what's the alternative? Put everyone regardless of age on £6.15 an hour? Expect 45 year olds to houseshare with 20 year olds?

Or increase NMW for everyone to the 25+ rate. And watch while 18 year olds with largely very little in the way of maturity and work experience languish on the unemployment line because employers can get older experienced workers for the same rate?

A lot of posters probably won't remember when it was introduced, but the reason behind the age differential was to recognise that it wouldn't be fair to expect older people to have the same house-share lifestyle that youngsters are happy with.

Remember these are minimum, not statutory rates. It's a market, and employers can, and many do, pay more if the market demands.

We don't all have jobs in cities

As a small business owner you would probably be more likely to employer the younger/cheaper candidate.

We don't all have jobs in cities

well, no, I suppose not.

DD moved to a city - partly to get work, partly because she wants to be independent, and live on her terms.

I don’t think anyone should be working for a wage that requires subsidy by parents or by benefits. A person working full time should be able to live on that money alone. And while people are insisting that it is possible to live on £240 a week it depends very much on area and circumstances.

Again all well and good if you have the money to live off for a bit or to get the train to the city for job interviews. It's not much good if you live rurally or suburbanly with parents that don't have the disposable income to help you out.

I can't think of any other scenario where an employer would be allowed blatantly to discriminate according to the age of the employee.

Having said that, the minimum wage has definitely improved and raised the wages of people working in low-paid jobs.

In early 1999 I was working in a community nursery school, as a qualified nursery practitioner. I was paid less than £3 per hour. Then the minimum wage came in and my colleagues and I all received a huge pay rise (and the nursery's fees went up, inevitably).

It's worth noting that when the nmw was first introduced, it was set at £3.60 for age 22 and above and £3 for ages 18-21 and under 18s had no wage protection.

According to the inflation calculator, £3.60 would now be £6.13 and £3 would be £5.11. So the minimum wage has risen at a rate greater than inflation.

i would worry about the 25 year olds who may be discriminated in this case, let alone the over 20s

but you are free to move to an area where you can survive on your wages? People accept lower wages because of reluctance to move and that's part of the choice when taking jobs.

All people should be able to earn a living wage but I'm not sure governments whacking up minimum wages without testing the impact on employment is how we want to go about fixing this. The minimum wage setting should never have been taken out of the hands of the low pay commission as governments unilaterally increasing it in an untested way seems likely to cause more harm than good.

I'd rather we spent money on training to boost the skills of the low waged rather than having the government commanding wages.

You're only free to move to a new area if you have the money to do so. First months rent? Deposit? Transport costs to interviews? Those things aren't free.

This is what ds gets paid for working front of house at a hotel. He does 10 hour shifts with only a 20 minute break. It's exploitative imo.
I remember years ago that benefits were paid at a lower rate for under 25s. As if the child of a 23 year old costs less to feed and clothe than the child of a 26 year old! I hope that's changed now.
It's just a way to steal from the young really. Luckily for ds, his wage is just for saving towards uni and for going out with his mates. If he had to support himself he'd be unable to.
It's wrong that parents are expected to support adult kids and basically subsidise employers.