Aibu to not want a £15 minimum wage?

[Israisingwagesworthit]

This morning I saw a post saying there are calls for a £15 per hour minimum wage.

I understand fully that the current minimum wage doesn't give people enough to survive on and something needs to change to ensure everyone gets a comfortable living wage, and I support this.

However by pushing up the minimum wage doesn't that just add additional costs for businesses, therefore increase costs to consumers removing any benefit of an increased minimum wage in addition to reducing the disposable income and pay gap of anyone above minimum wage.

Surely this only benefits the government with additional income tax?

Is this the best option in a time of potential 18% inflation, would this not increase it further?

Capitalism is the issue, rather than sharing the profit wealth, CEO's (of all levels of business, small and large) keep the profits for themselves and just raise prices when costs go up.

Am i being unreasonable to assume that in order for the £15ph wage to be successful, companies must accept lower profits rather than increasing prices in line with the wage increase otherwise its just pointless and daminging to all wage earners not just the minimum wage.

Won't the government have to threaten windfall taxes to those who increase prices to maintain profits to make it work and to actually benefit minimum wage earners?

I'll admit I'm a middle earner (£40k) civil servant (so no chance of a payrise anytime soon) so would be financially damaged by a raise in minimum wage if nothing is done to stop the subsequently price increases of products after a minimum pay rise. As a result my view may be biased, but am I wrong?

I do have to laugh at the 'why will people aspire to become nurses and teachers and police, when they can work in a supermarket or factory for the same wage?' line people are trotting out. And here's me thinking people went into these 'caring' professions for the love of the job. Clearly not LMFAO!
Nobody goes to work because they love their job. They work for money. Even nurses and teachers work for money. This attitude that you’re supposed to work because you love your job not for money - this is how we’ve ended up with valued professions being low paid and teachers being asked to work overtime for free.

My sister was a supply teacher and they asked her to mark work for a sick colleague, but were horrified when she said “that’s 10hrs extra work so I want paying x amount or I’m not doing it”. Because she should give up her time to do it for free, because she loves her job and cares about the kids. And this situation won’t stop as long as people like you keep saying that certain professions should work for love not money.

Question: we have a cost of living crisis. This centres a lot on energy atm.

Tell me how putting up minimum wages is going to help the boomer who only receives a state pension?

Ironically we should be thinking about this, given the number of people we have in this situation, especially as am increasing number find themselves also having to pay for care.

This is why I stress, that a rise in the minimum wage isn't necessarily a solution to the problem of the cost of living. Because the problem is the cost of living. And that affects people who aren't on wages.

Great post @Brefugee 👏👏

Oh and @Whyareyouasking what demands? I didn't make any. Your post doesn't make any sense..

I’ve never voted Tory. People like you give the left a very bad name so please stop.

@Bluesky2507 I was laughing at your ridiculous comment, not supermarkets staff. Where did I say anything negative about unskilled jobs? All I said was if minimum wage goes up (I don't have an issue with that) then teachers and nurses salaries need to have a meaningful payrise too.

Oops didn't mean to tag myself! @beachcitygirl

@Whyareyouasking

Nope, people like you who begrudge someone who wants to be able to live on their wage give humanity a bad name.
People like you who look down on unskilled workers give humanity a bad name.
People like you that are too stupid to understand the stresses of undervalued unskilled roles give humanity a bad name.

Vile really. Just please stop.

Why? Why? Should they go up because someone else's wage does? Spite? Jealousy?

Teachers/nurses unions should negotiate a wage/t&c's that the workers are happy with. That should be higher than currently is & better conditions.

No one else's wage or t&c's are then of any relevance.

The idea is that we pay the CEO etc hundreds of thousands of pounds less than at present and use that to pay a higher minimum wage. So no need to raise prices. And less need to pay UC to people in work.

Yep. Or people could stop buying from those who have conspicuous wealth to spend on utterly vacuous trivialities and buy from small local independents. If you don’t want them to make unseemly profits, don’t give them your money.

I’m not against capatilism. BUT I think the role of government is to establish an acceptable moral ceiling and floor. I think there should be an acceptable level of wealth beyond which you cannot go. It’s immoral that people can afford to go to space for fun, for example. At all, but more so when they do it by profiting from workers who are exploited and by not paying tax on their profits thus leeching the life from the country who’s people they profit from and who’s public services they use. It’s an extreme example, but many companies have a very large disparity of wealth, and are not paying their share of taxes. And governments role should be to MAKE them pay. If their workers are all fairly paid, with appropriate breaks and working weeks, and can afford all their own bills plus a few luxuries (including a holiday of their own) AND the country’s public services are well funded and there to support those workers and THEN the owner can still fuck into space on giant penis, maybe that’s a defensible inequality of wealth. But I suspect that’s not actually possible. I suspect you can’t accumulate millions without exploiting someone, let alone billions.

Full disclosure, I do buy from those companies, for two reasons. Firstly I have no economic choice at the moment, I have negative disposable income. It needs middle income people to make choices that are a moral choice, not the cheapest choice (but I went majorly out of my way to when I could) and secondly some of the small independents I was using have been acquired by them, so to access content I have already purchased, I have their devices (Chiefly Audible) meaning there is less and less choice as time goes on.

The fact that people need to claim benefits working full time is an issue in itself. This isn't just about income it's about expenditure, particularly for people in areas of high housing prices and high private rental prices , it's about childcare costs when it takes 2 people earning to actually afford mortgage/rent- it's about no gvt intervention in utilities/fuel prices and allowing totally unfettered profits.

The country needs to look at the 'whole' system ---not just minimum wage as unless you are very high earners, have a lot of equity, high pension pot and a ton of savings - it simply isn't working for all but those who live in low cost areas, often areas with poor job prospects. . It's also not encouraging people who aren't high earners to actually work at lower wage levels either as the difference between working and not working if you are a single parent with kids , childcare and rent is quite minimal.

You haven’t read any posts properly or if you have you don’t understand them. You’re just on a rant and you make a good argument for economic education in schools being compulsory. It’s clearly lacking in this country.

No one has looked down on unskilled workers they’ve pointed out the obvious flaws of them earning the same as a nurse, police officer. teacher, etc. If you don’t understand that then that’s not my problem.

This isn't about teachers vs shop staff, but I'll bite.

But I would absolutely argue that dealing with the public on a shop floor for long hours is tough physically and mentally.

As is dealing with a room full of teenagers with the same, if not worse attitudes.

It's largely an insecure role with zero respect, zero status. Unsociable hours [...] working for large corporations that don't give a fuck.
All of those are true for teaching.

No dream of upward progression
BS again. That's what managers have done, literally.

or sense of satisfaction
I talk to many a shop worker who this isn't true for.

or knowledge that you have helped people,
down to attitude, not experience - shop workers help society every day, too.

no autonomy
Same for teaching.

gut wrenchingly mind numbing boring and monotonous with zero self satisfaction
It's what you make of it. Anyone with customer contact can make their day more interesting. Same for teaching, I don't just dumbly deliver the same material every year; it's the interaction with students that make the difference.

and (as evidenced here) so so many people look down on you.
Just like you look down on teachers?

Your posts are unnecessarily hostile against people on higher wages than you. The anti-NMW hike people are not doing this out of envy or to try and keep the underclass down or whatever bull is going on in your head. They are merely pointing out that it doesn't work like that, for all the reasons given.

I also agree with pp who said we should take a good look at Universal Basic Income. What that would do is lead to a flourishing of the arts, as much as anything else and I'd be all for it.

We also need to cut away from thinking that if only you'd work harder you'd earn more. Well, sure if you really do get an hourly rate and you double your hours and are paid for them. Sure working harder = more money. But as the saying goes, if those who worked the hardest got the most money, women in developing nations* would be millionaires. (can not remember where i read that)

I mean this is mumsnet: how about feminist economics? how about feminist international relations while we're at it?

There are rumblings among preppers and so on about the Great Reset. How great would it be if we could really really run with that? (but not in the way those preppers want)

*sorry, i never remember if Global South is considered less patronising.

@beachcitygirl teachers and nurses have had to pass exams, go to university, train for years on the job and are saddled with student loans for starters! And the fact that nurses literally save people's lives surely they need rewarding. Do you not appreciate the work that teachers, nurses do??

I'm not saying low skilled workers don't do important work too, but anyone can work in a supermarket. Not many people can teach A level physics or be a cancer nurse. You have to pay these jobs a better salary to attract the best people into those careers.

And you obviously have no idea because unions have been asking for more pay for years and years. Any pay rises have to paid out of the existing budget from which there is no extra funding from the government.

I think a minimum wage should never be a measure in isolation. Tackle the causes of the race to the bottom that has made this necessary.

First thing should be keeping energy costs down. Reduce costs is better for many than increasing income.

@Whyareyouasking

Once again wrong. You either haven't read or understood my posts.

The op is about a decent minimum wage. Good

I also said very early on in the thread that I'm a trade unionist. Unions should be negotiating on behalf of their workforce upwards & that teachers & nurses deserve higher pay.

As do binmen & care workers & home helps & supermarket workers.

These two things are not mutually exclusive.

If someone has a wage they are happy with then someone else's pay rise is NONE of their business.
If a teacher prefers to quit & work in a low status, unsociable hour, zero progression role for the £15 an hour. I've zero issue with that.. what's the best precisely none of them will. 🙄

I said that if a private enterprise doesn't earn enough profit to pay a decent wage then it's not viable.

I said that a low paid menial unskilled job is a tougher gig than one with career progression, decent pension, self respect & status & good holidays & office hours.

You're entitled to disagree but if you can't understand any of that - not my problem.

Genuinely you keep replying to me and quoting teachers. Why? It’s really bizarre. Why not nurse, barrister, engineer. You’ve clearly got a serious issue with teachers and your trade union position goes hand in hand with the complete lack of economic awareness in your posts. Maybe work on your own education rather than making a career out of being aggressive and stubborn. Also look to your bosses.

Completely agree @JustALittleHelpPlease

Did you learn maths at school?

How many ‘CEOs etc’ earning many hundreds of thousands do you think that there are ?

Let’s say that there are 10,000 people in the U.K. earning at least £500k per year. You take £300k per annum off each of them, presumably before tax so that’s a load of income tax revenue gone, and somehow redistribute it as a boost to minimum wage.

Can you do the sums? In case not, I will. You’d get £3 million. Add up the zeros. Let’s say that there are 1 million people working for minimum wage. How much extra would they get per year? If it helps, divide 3 million by 1 million. The answer is an extra £3 per year. Each.

This has been explained so many times on this thread. It’s depressing.

I agree with previous posters, while the minimum wage does desperately need to increase, this only works if other, relatively low, wages increase too.
I am a doctor and I don't earn £15/h. The amount of stress and responsibility is so much more than all of the minimum wage jobs I have also worked (cafe, pub, care assistant). I imagine the same goes for teachers, nurses, barristers etc. It doesn't encourage people to go into these under-resourced jobs if they can earn the same in a job with better hours, less responsibility and less stress. Of course people don't go into teaching/nursing/medicine for the money, but to my mind it is fair to pay more to those with higher levels of responsibility.
We do desperately need higher wages for lower earners, but I don't think it is as simple as increasing minimum wage (much as I would love to have my pay bumped to £15/h....!)

I understand fully that the current minimum wage doesn't give people enough to survive on and something needs to change to ensure everyone gets a comfortable living wage, and I support this.

Yes, so increase the minimum wage allows people to have money to live on

However by pushing up the minimum wage doesn't that just add additional costs for businesses, therefore increase costs to consumers removing any benefit of an increased minimum wage in addition to reducing the disposable income and pay gap of anyone above minimum wage.

No, it doesn't just add additional costs - it means that profits are reduced for those at the top and distributed further down the pecking order

Surely this only benefits the government with additional income tax?

This decrease the amount of working benefits that are payable, thus reducing the benefits bill considerably

Is this the best option in a time of potential 18% inflation, would this not increase it further?

Capitalism is the issue, rather than sharing the profit wealth, CEO's (of all levels of business, small and large) keep the profits for themselves and just raise prices when costs go up.

Am i being unreasonable to assume that in order for the £15ph wage to be successful, companies must accept lower profits rather than increasing prices in line with the wage increase otherwise its just pointless and daminging to all wage earners not just the minimum wage.

Won't the government have to threaten windfall taxes to those who increase prices to maintain profits to make it work and to actually benefit minimum wage earners? no

I'll admit I'm a middle earner (£40k) civil servant (so no chance of a payrise anytime soon) so would be financially damaged by a raise in minimum wage if nothing is done to stop the subsequently price increases of products after a minimum pay rise. As a result my view may be biased, but am I wrong?

Your thinking seems to be - Im alright on my wages and will get by but can't see why those at the bottom should earn more to make it easier to heat and eat. The more people that do not have money to spend the worse the economy becomes and people then lose jobs as its self perpetuating and a spiral downwards. As a society we should want people to earn a living without relying on working benefits. People earning their own money and not reliant on the state for top up is a healthier society and people wanting those at the bottom to be suffering and not have enough money to live on should be regarded with suspicion.

This thread has proven that economics should be compulsory at GCSE.

Perhaps increasing the tax & NI threshold for those on NMW would give low earners a bit of extra in their take home pay.
Not completely taking FT out of paying tax & NI at all but would certainly help not add to the spiralling cost of living.