Can’t speak for Amazon, but from someone I know who works at Costco, when the entry-level wage increases, everyone up the pay scale also get increases. It makes sense that the same would happen at just about any company, else those higher-wage earners would get disgruntled and move elsewhere.
That’s why government mandated minimum wages are inflationary. Let the business decide the wages it will pay, and let the market decide if that employer will attract/keep/lose employees.
The same has been said about Wal-Mart employees. And other big employers.
Time to revisit our government programs that might be too generous.
And when it’s all done, the more experienced workers are now living closer to the entry level wage.
Are people actually arguing against rising wages and corporations not relying on government social spending to supplement their profits?
Is that what is actually going on right now?
No. I’m against government meddling as happened in this case.
No idea-but the theory that an independent senator would have any leverage over Amazon in this case is baffling. It doesn’t pass the sniff test.
Maybe he’s just a persuasive guy-but the notion that he threatened them or something doesn’t add up.
What is meddling about it?
It seems that if a company is offering someone full time employment and that company is not paying enough for the employees to not have to rely on government social programs while being wildly profitable then the taxpayers should be reimbursed.
From the article in the op.
“The decision comes weeks after Sanders introduced harsh legislation that sought to impose a 100% tax on Amazon and other large companies for all government subsidies received by their full-time employees”
How’s that math work out for you.
Since when do businesses buckle at the mere introduction of legislation? If that were the case, this would be a much different country.
I think it’s a lot more likely they decided to raise wages after all the blowback they’ve been receiving lately for harsh working conditions that have been reported. The article says it happened, AFTER, not BECAUSE OF.
Let me help you:
Bezos literally says what I said above. And he’s also lobbying to raise the federal min wage. The article of this Administrator post doesn’t say what their own article does, and the article doesn’t support the idea that it was Sanders’ doing-just that it happened after.
Roll back the ever-expanding, over-generous government definitions of “need”, and the government will no longer be spending on full-time employed citizens.
In a tight labor market, employers that under-pay will lose workers to employers that pay adequately.
What you are describing is government incentivizing lower wages.
Define “overly generous”
Whatever allows a full-time employee to qualify for government programs.
That really doesn’t say much.
If a corporation doesn’t pay its full time employees enough to afford food and housing and has to rely on government programs then it seems very strange to get upset about the government programs.
It would make more sense to tsk tsk the corporation for prioritizing the profit margin over the well being of the employees.
Personally I would love to see stronger labor unions in this country. That would solve a lot of these issues.
Apparently this week they do.
Subsistence living is too generous? Guess we need full time workers being homeless now?
You guys that are arguing class envy and minimum wage are really barking up the wrong tree. You’re being played and dont even realize it.
How are “we” being played?
What is the downside of Amazon being pressured to increase their wages?
You’re fighting for scraps and crumbs. And now that 1 company is increasing wages by a few measly dollars you’re declaring a huge victory while Amazon scores a publicity coup and laughs all the way to the bank.
I believe the term is useful idiot.
I am certainly not declaring a “victory”… I am just commenting on what seems to be a negative reaction to a company raising their wages.
As I said before. I think that supporting more labor unions would fix a lot of problems with low wages.
so how much should they have increased the wages?
