[RyanT]

I'm voting no, there's a lot of unemployed over 21s and if you were forced to compete against them with the same min wage handicap you will get eaten for breakfast and spat back out.

A lower minimum wage increases employment % of under 21s which is important. The level of the lower min wage is too low I agree, but it shouldn't be abolished in principle.

If there was enough demand for under 21 workers, then the going rate will be higher then the minimum wage. The fact that so many of you guys are on the minimum should serve as a warning that you will get ditched if you're forced into open competition with much more experienced workers.

[poiuy]

(Original post by Hylean)
And then they get taken to court for unfair dismissal or breach of human rights. Also, that particular issue affects all age groups and education levels.

Yes, but in the real world that doesn't happen, and not everyone has money to pay a law firm- and also it looks terrible if you're going to apply for another job. It's such a widespread problem, and employers have their ways. It used to be, in my old job, all workers were on a zero hour contract, one worker complained about the break policy, she didn't get fired, she got her hours cut to zero! She knew she was being heavily exploited-she would work 14 hour shifts; but she was polish, really depended on her job.

[MissLightyear]

(Original post by poiuy)
Fair enough, a 16 year old should have the same break policy as a 21 year old if they were to be paid the same. But if this was the case would you agree?

I'd need an explanation of the different rates first, before I could make a decision. I work with people that are over 21 so get paid £6.08 (apparently going up to £6.19 in october) and Im 18 so get £4.98. We do exactly the same job so it's frustrating that theyre paid so much more, but all I think to myself is that there must be a reason.

[Popular-reject-x]

(Original post by poiuy)
Yes, but in the real world that doesn't happen, and not everyone has money to pay a law firm- and also it looks terrible if you're going to apply for another job. It's such a widespread problem, and employers have their ways. It used to be, in my old job, all workers were on a zero hour contract, one worker complained about the break policy, she didn't get fired, she got her hours cut to zero! She knew she was being heavily exploited-she would work 14 hour shifts; but she was polish, really depended on her job.

Go to your local newspaper and 'expose' them. Or even better, The Daily Mail, they love that stuff.

[d123]

Personally I'm in favour of the living wage being introduced across the board. The minimum wage was a brilliant thing to be introduced, but it is too low. I'm on just above minimum wage, and it's okay for me as I'm a student and I also get support from my parents. It's not enough to live on though, not if you have pay rent and bills etc.

[poiuy]

(Original post by Popular-reject-x)


Go to your local newspaper and 'expose' them. Or even better, The Daily Mail, they love that stuff.

Yes but working 14 hour shifts isn't illegal; you can opt out the working hour cap. I was also quite well paid at £6.50 an hour plus tips. I'm pretty sure if you go to the newspapers your employment prospects are null-they'll see you as a problem worker. That's why we should have unions to represent and support us. Also daily mail+young people+polish people= no sympathy. look what happened in the comments section of this article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Poundland.html

[Hopple]

(Original post by MissLightyear)
I'd need an explanation of the different rates first, before I could make a decision. I work with people that are over 21 so get paid £6.08 (apparently going up to £6.19 in october) and Im 18 so get £4.98. We do exactly the same job so it's frustrating that theyre paid so much more, but all I think to myself is that there must be a reason.

If you're doing it for £4.98, then one of two things is true - if you ask for £6.08 per hour then you'll get it, or if you offer to bring in a bunch of other 18 year olds, your boss will kick out the over 21s to get them in. Each actually works in your favour as the one on lower wages.

[WelshBluebird]

(Original post by Popular-reject-x)
Which is why people aren't employed based on age.

But in a job where minimum wage is paid, then people are PAID based on age. Which was my point.

[MissLightyear]

(Original post by Hopple)
If you're doing it for £4.98, then one of two things is true - if you ask for £6.08 per hour then you'll get it, or if you offer to bring in a bunch of other 18 year olds, your boss will kick out the over 21s to get them in. Each actually works in your favour as the one on lower wages.

My boss just hired the people best for the job, me telling him to get rid of people wouldnt go down well. Pay cant be review until 18 months of working there, i'll be 20 by then anyway. I just have to hope something changes in regards to minimum wage, or wait until im 21.

The only issue is that next year I'll be supporting myself as I plan to take a year out of education.

[Popular-reject-x]

(Original post by poiuy)
Yes but working 14 hour shifts isn't illegal; you can opt out the working hour cap. I was also quite well paid at £6.50 an hour plus tips. I'm pretty sure if you go to the newspapers your employment prospects are null-they'll see you as a problem worker. That's why we should have unions to represent and support us. Also daily mail+young people+polish people= no sympathy. look what happened in the comments section of this article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Poundland.html

That is not the same. It was unpaid work experience. She didn't already have a job and they weren't forcing her to work hours that are illegal. I also didn't see any comments there concerning polish people or young people. They were based on benefits and the worst rated about universities and the tories.

[Popular-reject-x]

(Original post by WelshBluebird)
But in a job where minimum wage is paid, then people are PAID based on age. Which was my point.

Where I work, every customer assistant is paid the same. A lot of this also comes down to the company you work for.

[WelshBluebird]

(Original post by Popular-reject-x)
Where I work, every customer assistant is paid the same. A lot of this also comes down to the company you work for.

True, but the point is that it does happen in many many places. You cannot just ignore it because it isn't an issue where you work.

[MissLightyear]

(Original post by Popular-reject-x)
Where I work, every customer assistant is paid the same. A lot of this also comes down to the company you work for.

It's great that your company does that, but the point he's making is that not every company does that. So there are companies that pay based on age

[Hopple]

(Original post by MissLightyear)
My boss just hired the people best for the job, me telling him to get rid of people wouldnt go down well. Pay cant be review until 18 months of working there, i'll be 20 by then anyway. I just have to hope something changes in regards to minimum wage, or wait until im 21.

The only issue is that next year I'll be supporting myself as I plan to take a year out of education.

No offence, but minimum wage work can't have a 50% difference in quality. If you had brought along people your age willing to work, your boss would have taken you all instead of the older people. Think about it from his position, he'd rather pay less for the same work if possible.

[Popular-reject-x]

(Original post by WelshBluebird)
True, but the point is that it does happen in many many places. You cannot just ignore it because it isn't an issue where you work.

I already stated my reasoning for why I don't think 16/17 year olds should be paid the same as 21 year olds, so I'm not ignoring it.

• 16/17 year olds get more breaks that are longer throughout a working day.
• They're legally required to take 2 days off a week instead of 1.
• 16/17 year olds can't work 'any' hours (between 10pm and 6am is a no-no)

[somethingbeautiful]

Well I'm over 21 but I do think that there should be one national minimum wage - not one for older people and one for younger people. It's discriminatory - what difference does age make if someone does the exact same job as me? I remember feeling that way in my part time job when I was in uni - just because I'm not under 21 anymore doesn't mean that I don't feel that way anymore. I thought it was unfair then and I still think it's unfair now. People should be paid based on their ability to do a job - not based on age, skin colour, height, or how many toes they have - it's ALL irrelevant to the job unless it affects their ability.

[Origami Bullets]

The reason why the NMW is lower for under 18s is that they want to make staying in education, rather than going into full time work, more attractive, so I understand the logic behind it.

That said, I've never felt the need to work for less than the 21+ NMW - I've very rarely been offered a job with less than that, and have always turned those jobs down on the basis that it is age-based discrimination to offer me - an experienced worker - less than a 21 year old on their first day.

[WelshBluebird]

(Original post by Popular-reject-x)
I already stated my reasoning for why I don't think 16/17 year olds should be paid the same as 21 year olds, so I'm not ignoring it.

• 16/17 year olds get more breaks that are longer throughout a working day.
• They're legally required to take 2 days off a week instead of 1.
• 16/17 year olds can't work 'any' hours (between 10pm and 6am is a no-no)

And what about 18-20 year olds?

[Popular-reject-x]

(Original post by WelshBluebird)
And what about 18-20 year olds?

Now that I agree is unfair and that minimum wage should be the same from 18+.

[MissLightyear]

(Original post by Hopple)
No offence, but minimum wage work can't have a 50% difference in quality. If you had brought along people your age willing to work, your boss would have taken you all instead of the older people. Think about it from his position, he'd rather pay less for the same work if possible.

When I was trying to get a job I didnt think 'oh I know I'll get loads of my friends to apply too so Im not annoyed at someone getting paid more for the same job'. I just needed a job, which Im grateful for getting. My boss could only choose from those that had applied, and by the time it came to interviews those without experience were cut out. I did beat over 21s to the job, as well as people my own age.

My boss cant exactly start sacking people that are over 21 just because Im worried about my pay. Plus the store only opened 6 years ago, theres a high turnover of staff and at the minute (apart from recent starters) its pretty much the same people from day one, so obviously theyre ove r21 but hes not going to sack them