Flipping burgers for £31,200 a year
Discussion
Thankyou4calling said:
Fake news
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/m...That slimeball Starmer involved, surprise, surprise.
nikaiyo2 said:
Mothersruin said:
McDonalds workers on strike for £31,200 a year, all over the country, for basic positions.
Minimum wage of £15 an hour, guaranteed 40 hour weeks plus other stuff.
Link coming.
Reading the article workers at 6 Mcdonalds... 6 out of 1300.Minimum wage of £15 an hour, guaranteed 40 hour weeks plus other stuff.
Link coming.
Big news or not.
Shakermaker said:
cbmotorsport said:
£31,200 is more than most Sous chefs and line chefs get at many Michelin starred restaurants.
They could push for more if they wanted to. Article said:
“If we got £15 an hour, it would have a massive impact - I would be able to afford to pay my rent, to pay my bills, go on holiday and have some kind of work-life balance.
“I think it's important to strike against massive corporations like McDonald's who are making millions.”
The issue here is the simplistic view they're taking.“I think it's important to strike against massive corporations like McDonald's who are making millions.”
£15/hr would have a massive impact - just not in the way he thinks. He would still be in the same relative position - if everyone's income jumped suddenly, inflation would rocket, rents would shoot up... And matey-boy would be in exactly the same position as he is now.
This is the thing Labour seem to forget - you can't 'eradicate poverty', it's a relative thing. There will always be people who are poorer relative to everyone else, all you do is redefine it, not get rid of it.
Edited by Funk on Wednesday 13th November 13:48
Funk]rticle said:
“If we got £15 an hour, it would have a massive impact - I would be able to afford to pay my rent, to pay my bills, go on holiday and have some kind of work-life balance.
“I think it's important to strike against massive corporations like McDonald's who are making millions.”[/article]
The issue here is the simplistic view they're taking.
£15/hr would have a massive impact - just not in the way he thinks. He would still be in the same relative position - if everyone's income jumped suddenly, inflation would rocket, rents would shoot up... And matey-boy would be in exactly the same position as he is now.
This is the thing Labour seem to forget - you can't 'eradicate poverty', it's a relative thing. There will always be people who are poorer relative to everyone else, all you do is redefine it, not get rid of it.
You should proffer this view on some of the Brexit threads where the curtailing of cheap foreign labour and the subsequent increase in the working wage is lauded as a 'great' thing.“I think it's important to strike against massive corporations like McDonald's who are making millions.”[/article]
The issue here is the simplistic view they're taking.
£15/hr would have a massive impact - just not in the way he thinks. He would still be in the same relative position - if everyone's income jumped suddenly, inflation would rocket, rents would shoot up... And matey-boy would be in exactly the same position as he is now.
This is the thing Labour seem to forget - you can't 'eradicate poverty', it's a relative thing. There will always be people who are poorer relative to everyone else, all you do is redefine it, not get rid of it.
Funk]rticle said:
This is the thing Labour seem to forget - you can't 'eradicate poverty', it's a relative thing. There will always be people who are poorer relative to everyone else, all you do is redefine it, not get rid of it.
Not if we revert back to "poverty" meaning "absolute poverty" not "relative poverty". I'd wager most people's picture of "poverty" is africa, not owning a Fiat when everyone else on the street drives a BMWI wonder how many work 16 hours a week so they can continue to claim their full benefits because they are better off financially doing so?
I also wonder if they increased the pay would workers suddenly work less hours but for the same money? I.e 60% pay rise, then work 60% fewer hours.
I also wonder if they increased the pay would workers suddenly work less hours but for the same money? I.e 60% pay rise, then work 60% fewer hours.
I worked there 22 years ago as a 16/17 year old student. £6.20/hour iirc, it was one of the best rates on the high street and works out at £10.50 in today's money. You could work your way up easily to. 2nd assistant manager back then was on £22k (38k eqiv today) that was pretty achievable in a couple of years. Burger King was always crap money.
I will agree with them on a few things, advance notice of shifts should be do-able. I think it was 2 weeks when i was there but sounds like they get chopped and changed now. 4 weeks is easily do-able. When i started a a management job in retail one of the first things i did was sort a decent rota out which made my life easier and received well by staff.
One thing i do notice is when i worked there the queue used to be out the door on a Saturday lunch time, when i walk past now you can see straight to the counters so not sure how much quieter the branches are now.
I will agree with them on a few things, advance notice of shifts should be do-able. I think it was 2 weeks when i was there but sounds like they get chopped and changed now. 4 weeks is easily do-able. When i started a a management job in retail one of the first things i did was sort a decent rota out which made my life easier and received well by staff.
One thing i do notice is when i worked there the queue used to be out the door on a Saturday lunch time, when i walk past now you can see straight to the counters so not sure how much quieter the branches are now.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff