Labour pledges £10 minimum wage for under-18s Watch

ThomH97
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#21
Report 1 week ago
#21
(Original post by Stevo F)
I don't think the person you were replying to was arguing against the concept of the minimum wage, they were simply saying that its not fair that having got experience and qualifications to get where they are they suddenly have to take a pay cut.

Which is what you're suggesting by the way, if a business wanted to keep its profit the same but had to increase the pay of their lowest paid staff (which in most cases will be most of their staff) they will have to give everyone above them a pay cut by more than the payrises.

Say you have 5 times as many lowest paid staff as higher, for ever extra pound per hour extra you give to the lowest paid staff you'd have to take £5ph off the higher paid staff, does that seem fair bearing in mind these are the people have put a lot of resources (financial or otherwise) in getting this higher paid job?
I don't think they intended to, but the argument they used against increasing the minimum wage (to £10 for everyone) is also an attack on the minimum wage's existence. And you are doing the same here. The point of having the minimum wage is so that desperate people who could easily be negotiated down in their pay due to their desperation by an employer, no longer can be. What that level should be is up for debate, but with the costs of living increasing, it makes sense to incorporate that into the minimum wage (if you agree with it) over time as well. This £10 minimum wage isn't Labour's pledge for all time, I am certain they will propose ever higher figures in future, as would the Tories (though they would drag their heels more). All of those increases will prevent other employees' pay from increasing as much (or reduces dividends paid to shareholders, reduces investment in the company etc, the company's choice which to prioritise), we know this, but by and large we support the existence of the NMW.
0
reply
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#22
Report 1 week ago
#22
Nothing about unpaid work experience or trial shifts which are even worse than low pay for those who should be at school.
2
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#23
Report 1 week ago
#23
(Original post by barnetlad)
Nothing about unpaid work experience or trial shifts which are even worse than low pay for those who should be at school.
Yeah but who cares about kids.
Seriously though, given that the people you're reffering to would be living at home and under their parents finances it makes little to put any overt amount of care into how much theyre being paid seeing as they arent saddled with any real living costs. Plus you get paid for the vlaue of your work, no? A 14yr old (or whatever) is rather unlikely to have any valuable skill sets.
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 week ago
#24
(Original post by lilacdolphin)
To be honest, I don't care what the living costs of the majority of 16 year olds are. What I care about is the fact that two people, doing the same job, should be earning the same for that said work - not one of them earning double what the other is.
So, when you get your first permanent job you will expect to earn what those people who have been doing the job for five to ten years will be earning? How will you compete in the market against more experienced people looking to move if the employer has to pay you the same as them?

Conversely, you will be happy, in order to ensure those following you can earn the same in the same role, not to receive pay rises (based on your improving expererience, skills and ability) until you can get a promotion to the next job up in the hierarchy?

I don't think you have thought this through.
Last edited by Good bloke; 1 week ago
1
reply
Skyeye
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#25
Report 1 week ago
#25
First and foremost this is to buy votes.It is a bad idea. As an employer, I would not pay £10.00 to someone under training.We get our flowers from people being paid about £8.00 a week from Kenya.If they were paid £10.00 an hour, there would be no flowers, the industry would collapse and the people on poverty wages would have no income at all.I don't know how many young people who don't consider consequences there are, but surely it is evidently a very bad idea.
1
reply
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#26
Report 1 week ago
#26
This is an academic discussion as there will not be a Corbyn led government.
1
reply
Skyeye
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#27
Report 1 week ago
#27
(Original post by ThomH97)
I don't think they intended to, but the argument they used against increasing the minimum wage (to £10 for everyone) is also an attack on the minimum wage's existence. And you are doing the same here. The point of having the minimum wage is so that desperate people who could easily be negotiated down in their pay due to their desperation by an employer, no longer can be. What that level should be is up for debate, but with the costs of living increasing, it makes sense to incorporate that into the minimum wage (if you agree with it) over time as well. This £10 minimum wage isn't Labour's pledge for all time, I am certain they will propose ever higher figures in future, as would the Tories (though they would drag their heels more). All of those increases will prevent other employees' pay from increasing as much (or reduces dividends paid to shareholders, reduces investment in the company etc, the company's choice which to prioritise), we know this, but by and large we support the existence of the NMW.
Yes, there are many points of view Thom.
I don't think there should be a minimum wage at all. It is manipulating natural market forces. If an employer wants staff he has to offer a sufficient incentive - if the wage (incentive) is insufficient, he will not get staff until he raises it to what he can afford. If the employer has to pay more than he can afford, he will not be able to have staff and his business will either collapse or fall on his shoulders as a one man business.
At the moment there are plenty of jobs and the economy is booming, but when the economy shrinks job offers will disappear and millions will end up on benefits - the country can't afford too many people on benefits so the consequence will be a financial crisis because of a minimum wage.
0
reply
ThomH97
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 week ago
#28
(Original post by Skyeye)
Yes, there are many points of view Thom.
I don't think there should be a minimum wage at all.
Perhaps you can put the onus on desperate unemployed people to unionise, but the fact remains that people will still undercut others who are trying to improve working conditions for everyone, a 'good' thing to do in many people's eyes.
It is manipulating natural market forces.
Is that intrinsically a bad thing? Natural market forces would see the elephant and rhino hunted to extinction, for instance.

If an employer wants staff he has to offer a sufficient incentive - if the wage (incentive) is insufficient, he will not get staff until he raises it to what he can afford.
You are looking at it from only one side. Governments also have a responsibility to the employees, and quality of life for them is a factor.

If the employer has to pay more than he can afford, he will not be able to have staff and his business will either collapse or fall on his shoulders as a one man business.
True, but this is not as precise a calculation as you are implying it is. Businesses won't go under if one employee is overpaid by a penny. There is plenty of room between paying the minimum an employee will accept and the maximum financially possible - the NMW narrows this gap on behalf of desperate employees, but does not close it.
At the moment there are plenty of jobs and the economy is booming, but when the economy shrinks job offers will disappear and millions will end up on benefits - the country can't afford too many people on benefits so the consequence will be a financial crisis because of a minimum wage.
It is possible for the minimum wage to be set too high, but you're arguing against the very existence of the NMW claiming it would be the sole cause of a financial crisis. What do you think of tax credits?
0
reply
ltsmith
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#29
Report 1 week ago
#29
(Original post by barnetlad)
Nothing about unpaid work experience or trial shifts which are even worse than low pay for those who should be at school.
Unpaid trial shifts more than 3 hour ought to be banned
0
reply
ltsmith
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#30
Report 1 week ago
#30
(Original post by barnetlad)
This is an academic discussion as there will not be a Corbyn led government.
0
reply
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#31
Report 1 week ago
#31
I disagree with the policy, but I also disagree with the idea mentioned by a lot on the right that this is pandering/vote buying..

I don't see it.. the under 18 part is helping a group of people who can't actually vote. And when they can, the vast vast majority will vote labour anyway, without any need for vote buying.

I think it's just an extension of the lefts idea that equal always means good/progress..

In this case it's just removing one of they key negotiating chips for young job applicants. When your going for a job, you have two ways of negotiating: I am better, or, I am cheaper.. in the case of young people, they are very unlikely to be better, they ( on average are:

Less experianxed,
Not as disciplined
Can't work as flexible hours,
Aren't as strong,
Aren't as good at communicating
Are less likely to stay with you for more then 2 years..

I run a business that hires people, but not in the UK. In this country I can't higher under 18s because it's frowned upon for them to work rather than study.. If I were to move my business to the UK? I can't see why I would ever invest in a 16 year old, if I can get a 30 year old instead. Sure the 16 year old may be great, but it's not worth the risk.. the 30 year old is a much safer long term investment.

Now if I only have to pay the 16 year old half as much? Now your making it tempting.. that swings it in their favour.. if it's just a simple job, they are not twice as risky an investment as the older person, and they are definitely not twice as worse a worker.. so now you have just made them very very employable to me.
4
reply
hansraeder
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#32
Report 1 week ago
#32
More lies. Business won’t be able to pay it, and will employ less <18 year olds.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
Last edited by hansraeder; 1 week ago
0
reply
AperfectBalance
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#33
Report 1 week ago
#33
the typical strategy of the left "oh it sounds nice for me/others so therfore it has to be good!"
1
reply
Skyeye
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#34
Report 1 week ago
#34
I don't know how tax credits may work - a strange name 'tax credits' - it seems to be a way of 'means' testing. Sounds fair.
If everyone was paid a universal basic payment, whether in or out of work, no one would need to be means tested, no one would need to queue up at the benefits office, the army of people working out hugely complicated subsistence allowance entitlements, people having to go to the food bank, soup kitchens, and charities like Shekinah would be history. Life would suddenly become simpler and we would all be better off. You would feel better because you would know others are not getting more than you are if you're out of work - there wouldn't be the fear related to losing your job, there would always be this income into your account. If you get paid work, you would not have to let anyone know because you would still be entitled to the basic payment - this sounds better than "Tax Credits".
(Original post by ThomH97)
Perhaps you can put the onus on desperate unemployed people to unionise, but the fact remains that people will still undercut others who are trying to improve working conditions for everyone, a 'good' thing to do in many people's eyes.

Is that intrinsically a bad thing? Natural market forces would see the elephant and rhino hunted to extinction, for instance.


You are looking at it from only one side. Governments also have a responsibility to the employees, and quality of life for them is a factor.


True, but this is not as precise a calculation as you are implying it is. Businesses won't go under if one employee is overpaid by a penny. There is plenty of room between paying the minimum an employee will accept and the maximum financially possible - the NMW narrows this gap on behalf of desperate employees, but does not close it.

It is possible for the minimum wage to be set too high, but you're arguing against the very existence of the NMW claiming it would be the sole cause of a financial crisis. What do you think of tax credits?
0
reply
DukeNukem
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#35
Report 1 week ago
#35
That's just ridiculous, people under 20 are generally useless and can do nothing more than carrying boxes around. £10 minimum would make all of you completely unemployable Labour are either morons or really evil. £10 is more that what a regional manager of a fast food chain makes and that is the boss of your future boss

Labours are essentially communists, they promise whatever they can just to get votes of all available morons around.

The main problem with socialism/communism is that eventually you will run out of others people money and then everything goes to hell.
1
reply
Skyeye
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#36
Report 1 week ago
#36
At last one person seeing beyond the end of his nose!
(Original post by DukeNukem)
That's just ridiculous, people under 20 are generally useless and can do nothing more than carrying boxes around. £10 minimum would make all of you completely unemployable Labour are either morons or really evil. £10 is more that what a regional manager of a fast food chain makes and that is the boss of your future boss

Labours are essentially communists, they promise whatever they can just to get votes of all available morons around.

The main problem with socialism/communism is that eventually you will run out of others people money and then everything goes to hell.
0
reply
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#37
Report 1 week ago
#37
There is a parallel arguement going on within disability cricles about minimum wage exceptions for disabled people. Most think that it's essential for people to not descriminate and that all people should be paid the same.. but there is a growing number of activists who would like to see minimum wage exemptions possible to enable more disabled people to work and have fulfilling lives.

Take my friend as an example. He is very autistic, and has a degree in a good area.. but he can't get a job in that area at all. Its too competative and he can't compete with non autistic applicants.. he's just not able to give the companies the same value for the same money. So what's happened is he was unemployed for ages, then got a very low level job in a kitchen. Entirely unrelated to his field. He is miserable and feels like a failure.

Now what if the companies in his profession were able to pay him half as much, if he could apply for an exception from the minimum wage/equal pay etc. There is a rate of pay where he would be a great asset to a company, it's just not at the same rate as their other employees. Personally I think his life would be miles better if he could get s job in his field, even if he was paid less.. no one else knows it, in the eyes of society he is just normal, and he feels like he made it. Its not fair, but for his mental health and quality of life, it would be a huge improvement.

This isn't related to under 18s di4ectly but just in the sense that there are a lot of interesting arguements about the concept of a universal minimum wage, and plenty of times where it may not actually help some people
1
reply
Skyeye
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#38
Report 1 week ago
#38
I'm now an 'ancient' - life has flashed by in a blink of an eye - When I needed certain specific things, like carving wooden signs, I would go to a large government funded organisation where disabled people were employed. They did a really good job. The National Trust bought their goods - it couldn't have been very profitable - I don't know whether it still exists, but it should do and the disabled people working there felt a great sense of achievement.
Maybe such places are still sponsored by the government - Google knows everything - ask Google!
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
There is a parallel arguement going on within disability cricles about minimum wage exceptions for disabled people. Most think that it's essential for people to not descriminate and that all people should be paid the same.. but there is a growing number of activists who would like to see minimum wage exemptions possible to enable more disabled people to work and have fulfilling lives.

Take my friend as an example. He is very autistic, and has a degree in a good area.. but he can't get a job in that area at all. Its too competative and he can't compete with non autistic applicants.. he's just not able to give the companies the same value for the same money. So what's happened is he was unemployed for ages, then got a very low level job in a kitchen. Entirely unrelated to his field. He is miserable and feels like a failure.

Now what if the companies in his profession were able to pay him half as much, if he could apply for an exception from the minimum wage/equal pay etc. There is a rate of pay where he would be a great asset to a company, it's just not at the same rate as their other employees. Personally I think his life would be miles better if he could get s job in his field, even if he was paid less.. no one else knows it, in the eyes of society he is just normal, and he feels like he made it. Its not fair, but for his mental health and quality of life, it would be a huge improvement.

This isn't related to under 18s di4ectly but just in the sense that there are a lot of interesting arguements about the concept of a universal minimum wage, and plenty of times where it may not actually help some people
0
reply
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#39
Report 1 week ago
#39
(Original post by Skyeye)
I'm now an 'ancient' - life has flashed by in a blink of an eye - When I needed certain specific things, like carving wooden signs, I would go to a large government funded organisation where disabled people were employed. They did a really good job. The National Trust bought their goods - it couldn't have been very profitable - I don't know whether it still exists, but it should do and the disabled people working there felt a great sense of achievement.
Maybe such places are still sponsored by the government - Google knows everything - ask Google!
Do you mean places like the old "workshops for the blind". My grandpa used to manage one before he retired, they gave great operthnities for disabled people.. I don't know if they still exist either, I only know that the one he specifically worked in was closed down a few years after he retired
0
reply
Skyeye
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#40
Report 1 week ago
#40
No blind people! Sign making and engraving - but also other functions which intelligent disabled people could do - services people wanted and bought.
They were crafts and skilled jobs enabled by a purpose built environment supporting disabled people - they could learn a craft and were assisted with sourcing materials, machines etc. I can't see anything like it online, but as a customer many years ago, I was quite impressed.
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
Do you mean places like the old "workshops for the blind". My grandpa used to manage one before he retired, they gave great operthnities for disabled people.. I don't know if they still exist either, I only know that the one he specifically worked in was closed down a few years after he retired
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Business Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (42)
16.03%
The paper was reasonable (130)
49.62%
Not feeling great about that exam... (58)
22.14%
It was TERRIBLE (32)
12.21%

Watched Threads

View All