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?

Want to form a political party with me matey???

@Crikeyalmighty - I'm in!

Also for the pp talking about it, you don't need to link pay to profits. What is needed is to link executive pay to shop floor pay. There are countless studies that show that even as recently as (I think) 20 years ago in some companies the CEO was earning about 20 times that of the least well paid employee(s). I think that is fine.

Sensible boni and profit sharing are good at encouraging personal investment (as in your time and effort) in the success of the company. Incentives for things like cost saving, efficiencies, sustainability all give people a "stake" (god i hate that word but it is appropriate) in the success or failure of the company. I work for a horrible corporate glob (but actually it's pretty good) where part of your salary is used as your bonus - so once a year you have the evaluation chat with your boss and either you're ok (just get that chunk of your salary) or you did better than expected, or excellently and you get a multiplier added to the bonus.

If you work in a job where there is nearly no prospect of progression (not everyone can be promoted) and the only salary progression is banding, and you see the CEO and the shareholders sucking all the available cash away (even if a good portion of those shareholders are pension funds) - where is the incentive to work more efficiently? to really care about the quality of your work?

If we, as a society took more time to really evaluate and recalibrate our thinking towards so many things (care of the young, care of the old, healthcare, policing, teachers what we really value as a society) I'm sure we'd end up paying the essential services a) more money and b) more attention and thanks

Here endeth the party political broadcast on behalf of the Crikeyalmighty/Brefugee party (we need a better name)

Profits vary year to year. Would you like salaries to vary year on year, too? How about after the pandemic, for example? Sorry guys, we’ve made a loss this year so it’s pay cuts all round?

Does CEO basic pay go up and down every year or are they on a contract, with bonuses tied to profit/performance?

Though CEO's often do somehow manage to get a large bonus, despite making a loss and even when dismissed for failure, get a significant pay off... yet all this seems perfectly ok for the defenders of the current system.

Supermarket workers do get abuse.
Supermarket workers are not however proxy social workers.
Supermarket workers do not have the responsibility of 30 little people trying to kill themselves or each other in their immediate care.
Supermarket workers do not take their work home with them.

I'd love to have it explained to me HOW working in a supermarket is harder than teaching rather than dismissive comments about snobbery against supermarket workers.

This is true. One of the hardest things about most retail jobs is that you are not allowed to sit down. You will be standing from 8.30am to 6.00pm every day, or longer. You may get 30mins for lunch, but quite often it's too busy. You certainly can't get a drink of water or go to the toilet when you want. There is certainly little respect or dignity to make up for this. Factory work is similar, but often longer shifts, lifting heavy items, and 15 minutes for lunch. These sorts of jobs are also often very boring and repetitive. I really don't think barristers, doctors, nurses would prefer these jobs if the money paid is the same. Jobs take a huge part of our lives, it's not just about money. It's also about enjoying work, finding it interesting, being treated with respect etc.

@Bluesky2507

Trade union is a choice & lots of min wage workers are also in a TU eg unite retail or unite hospitality so no difference

Teachers pension does have an opt out (foolish but min wage workers have to plan & save for retirement also so no difference

On £31000 repayment of maximum loan taken over a 4 year degree monthly is £40

A lot of wages need to rise. I'm a specialist in a very niche profession with a lot of subject specific knowledge and experience. It's not a brag - I'm paid peanuts tbh. If NMW goes up to £15 I will quit in a heartbeat and get a NMW job. Training, qualifications, experience etc down the pan. I care about my job but I won't put up with the stress if I can do something else for that amount of pay.

The best solution is surely supporting people into accessing training/qualifications/experience which helps them progress rather than to stay in low paid jobs forever.

But then there would be a shortage of workers to do the lower paid jobs.

I think there should be a new rule that says shareholders of companies can only take out a percentage (say 20%) of profits for themselves. Anything about that must be put back into the business. This could be reinvestment, wages or expanding etc.

also dividends should be taxed like salary. It’s not right that bosses who run businesses take the minimum salary and then top up with dividends. If you are a shareholder and spend a certain percentage of time running the company then all dividends should be taxed as salary. If you are just a passive investor then fine to be taxed using the dividend rate.

If all jobs were minimum wage people would still gravitate to different jobs. Not that I think its a great plan.

And yes terms and conditions go beyond pay. Like i would pick an indoor job over outdoors.

Really the cost of training should be on the employer not the employee.

Crunch the numbers. Taking a few £K of a handful of people will do beggar all to significantly increase the pay of thousands of staff!

Exactly, if those wages are going up at the top everyone including public sectors workers need to go up as well because I guarantee the prices will be reflected in groceries and rent. I think we need to get a handle on the high housing costs on this country, because having recently moved to a cheaper part of the country with the same wage that has made all the difference. High rents/housing prices and energy prices are what they need to focus on.

There's not much difference between nic/tax on wages and tax on dividends now that we have personal dividend tax rates.

I was just pondering how we could even out the profits of stocks and shares @XjustagirlX. it’s a tricky one since it needs to be a global agreement since companies will just move and trade on the stock market elsewhere.

@takealettermsjones

But would you also be willing to have the degradation of asking to go to the loo & stress of monotony & physical discomfort of hard physical work & lack of control & unsociable working hours.

If so, then great. No problem. Doesn't mean min wage shouldn't rise.

Sorry I've done both as well and no supermarket is not harder than teaching for many reasons. One of them being as a teacher you need to take your work home and I don't just mean marking - that too - but also the mental strain of the worry about that kid you seen coming to school hungry etc, or the bullying that's started going on in your class or thinking about the extra materials that you're going to pay out of your own pocket etc. This is no disrespect to supermarket work but it's not comparable.

I know exactly the job I would do so yes I would personally swap it.

I wasn't suggesting NMW shouldn't rise. I'm just...despairing at the whole situation, I suppose.

It is definitely not fair to assume minimum wage = minimum stress. There are cases where that fits but also higher paid jobs that aren't stressful.

I worked for a retailer that had a sister shop in the same shopping centre. The company were very very slow at hiring new staff as it was done by head office rather than through the shop manager. This led to the manager of the sister shop working very long hours with very little time off. The only break he got most days was when one of us in our shop covered him for a short break usually 15/20 minutes. The rest of the time he had to be out on the shop flooring dealing with every single customer on his own for 9 and a half hours with no help. He ended up so stressed that he ended up extremely unwell and had to go on sickness benefits.

Technically he didn't earn minimum wage but as he had a low salaried wage it worked out as minimum wage due to all the hours the company expected salaried managers to work.

I also had a colleague who went on sickness leave due to the stress. The irony is the company is a well known health shop.

So how would you bridge the shortage of GPs? We are already short of them despite an experienced GP earning typically £100k. Do you really think they'd do the job for half that? In reality, they'd beggar off abroad or do more lucrative work, such as hospital consultant or locum work.

Many professionals including healthcare professionals don't sit down all day and work unsocial hours too. On top of that they get a lot of responsibility and stress. You are deluded if you don't think any of them would swap for a “boring job” with no responsibility but the same pay.

Maybe at the checkout shelf stacking level but in store supervisor/management, they are under a great deal of pressure for v poor reward & will take home the job and work long shifts too, 7 days a week, inc almost all bank holidays.

Our company had a lot to do with Morrisons, no way would i want to work in a Supermarket in any position.

Our Tesco recently lost their chill' section, the abuse given out to staff on occasion was shocking.

Plus who did we need during lockdowns? clue: it wasn't teachers.

@beachcitygirl suggesting teachers opt
out of a union and their pension is not a suitable solution. It would make much more sense to increase their salary.

And I don't know where you got that figure from for the student loan, but I earn around 31k and my student loan repayment is £90 a month not 40.

Can we just address the minimum wage rise = more money to spend = higher inflation fallacy quickly?

As it stands, (simple numbers to make it easy to follow) for the sake of argument, it costs around £15 per hour to cover the costs of living, that is to pay bills, get to work, put food on the table. Currently around £10 of that is earned and £5 comes from benefits or getting into debt.

If you make it £15 from earned income then nothing will come from benefits.

The worker has the same money, no extra to spend anywhere.

The benefit system gains £5 per hour. This does not get spent on latte and cake, it gets spent on other areas of public spending.

INCREASED MINIMUM WAGE DOES NOT INCREASE MONEY BEING SPENT IN THE ECONOMY it does not contribute to a wage spiral in and of itself.

Yes there are many other issues but I thought it might help to lay it out.

Welcome to Economics 101.

@gnilliwdog well I was much fitter both physically and mentally when I stacked shelves. If it paid the same as the salary I get paid now as a lawyer I would go back to stacking shelves in a heartbeat. It would be amazing to go on holiday without worrying about the 1000’s of emails that I receive whilst I am away and the “emergency” texts and calls that will most probably be made to my mobile phone. The constant worry that one tiny mistake on a document could cost a client (and therefore the firm) 1000’s (or more). Waking up in the morning (or in the middle of the night) thinking shit did I remember to do that? I never worried about whether cereal was stacked neatly or that the labels on baked beans were facing the correct way!!! I know so many unhappy professionals who only continue for the money. Take that benefit away and they will leave.

Ugh, proof read. I meant it doesn't contribute to inflation not wage spiral