Can't Make This Up

[STTAB]

You do know that the left IS "Fantasy Land" right? They live in it and live by it.

I stated this a LOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNG time ago that these companies simply will not take a loss, and shouldn't.

I stated this a long time ago that these companies simply will not take a loss and that they will alter the price on products, lessen the amount of employees or lessen hours. At the end of the day their net profit will remain the same if they can help it. That makes it kind of about 700% obvious that either hours or # of employees was gonna change. That's business. You have the right to quit and seek employment elsewhere to your preference. If you don't like it, and you bitch and whine about it and your job, they have the right to fire you.

*Things are differently when under a bonafide contract, and even then you can be fired for cause. And no 15hrly job or less, likely comes with a contract that would matter. Almost every job is considered "at will" and that about covers that!
** A government employee receives different protections.

I have a friend who owns several McDonalds including the one closest to where I live. Last year when minimum wage went up he raised prices. Now the way he tells me when he figured prices he figured he himself would absorb 25% of the minimum wage increase and the rest he would pass on to customers in the form of higher prices.

To me, that is a responsible thing to do. But anyway we were talking about it one night and he told that per store the little over a dollar increase in the minimum wage cost him about $12K a year out of his own pocket. Now, on average he profits just over $200K per store - that $12K , so 5% of his profits went to a $1 an hour or so increase in the minimum wage. Imagine if it jumped from $9 to $15 you have to figure losing on 5% of profit for every $1 the minimum wage was increased based on actual numbers. meaning his profit per store would drop a further 30%. Now realize that profit is only in the year where nothing goes wrong. This year he had to tear a store completely down and replace it, as in McDoonalds Corp gave him two choices, tear the store down or lose his franchises. Now, he could have tore it down and just sold the land , he didn't have to put a new store in it's place, but ........... Anyway , that little endeavor cost him $7M by the time he demolished the store, moved most of the staff to other stores and paid them to work out of his own pocket to avoid destroying the labor rate at those other stores, and built a new store on the site.

Where do people like Noir think that $7M came from ? I can tell you where it came from, a bank loan. Dude didn't have $7M just laying around. So every month a portion of the profit that each of his stores makes is gonna guy right to the bank to pay on that loan.

But yes, the rich need to "pay their fare share" whatever the fuck that means.

[jimnyc]

Had another thread on him and being a liar just a few days ago. I see it hasn't changed yet!

Fact is = the man is a liar, like most democrats. He knows what the net profit needs to be (if you will) - so raises hourly to $15 (now anyway). Then adjusts accordingly, whether that be a loss of hours, lowering of employees... whatever it takes to meet the "profits" aka what he can pay max.

[STTAB]

Had another thread on him and being a liar just a few days ago. I see it hasn't changed yet!

Fact is = the man is a liar, like most democrats. He knows what the net profit needs to be (if you will) - so raises hourly to $15 (now anyway). Then adjusts accordingly, whether that be a loss of hours, lowering of employees... whatever it takes to meet the "profits" aka what he can pay max.

Exactly , if Bernie believed in what he was selling the Bernie Dopes, Bernie could easily afford to pay everyone of his campaign workers $15 an hour out of his own pocket, given that the campaign will last what 2 years? Bernie could easily afford that, but though he believes my friend should pay that out of HIS pocket, he most certainly does not believe that he Bernie should pay it out of HIS pocket.

[Abbey Marie]

Had another thread on him and being a liar just a few days ago. I see it hasn't changed yet!

Fact is = the man is a liar, like most democrats. He knows what the net profit needs to be (if you will) - so raises hourly to $15 (now anyway). Then adjusts accordingly, whether that be a loss of hours, lowering of employees... whatever it takes to meet the "profits" aka what he can pay max.

He’s married to a liar; makes sense...

[STTAB]

Hes’s married to a liar; makes sense...

Yeah you notice nothing ever came of that either. Democrats can truly break whatever laws they like with impunity.

[Kathianne]

It gets better!

https://hotair.com/archives/allahpun...bor-complaint/

Oh Yes: Bernie Sanders’s Campaign Hit With … Federal Labor Complaint

ALLAHPUNDITPosted at 7:21 pm on July 23, 2019


What can one say about this?

Except that it’s the greatest day in American political history, I mean.


Am I still an atheist after reading it? I don’t know. I just. don’t. know.

Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-Vt.) 2020 presidential campaign has been hit with an unfair labor practice complaint alleging illegal employee interrogation and retaliation against staffers.

The July 19 complaint to the National Labor Relations Board, filed by an unnamed individual in Indiana, was posted to the agency’s website late July 22. It comes as tense negotiations between the Sanders campaign and the union representing staffers recently boiled over publicly. The Washington Post reported July 23 that unionized organizers for the campaign had won a pay raise and reached a compromise to reduce the hours of some workers.

A copy of the charge has not yet been made public, but the agency’s July 22 docket lists five potential violations of the National Labor Relations Act. The charge also alleges that the campaign unlawfully discharged an employee, modified a labor contract, and engaged in illegal discipline.

Illegal employee interrogation, eh? On the one hand, Bloomberg notes that anyone can file a complaint with the NLRB. Conceivably this could be nothing more than baseless mischief-making by a political enemy aiming to capitalize on public attention to Team Bernie’s labor troubles lately, knowing that righties like me are going to snuggle this story like a new puppy. File the complaint, generate the bad headline, and trust that no one will be paying attention when it turns out a month from now that there was nothing to it. Damage done.

But there’s also this recent quote from Bernie himself when he was asked about not paying his field organizers an (average) $15 hourly wage, which of course he believes should be the statutory minimum as a matter of national policy:

“It does bother me that people are going outside of the process and going to the media,” he said. “That is really not acceptable. It is really not what labor negotiations are about, and it’s improper.”

So management was mad at labor for leaking to the press, and now here’s a complaint claiming that managers interrogated employees illegally and even retaliated against them. Hmmm.

We’re like two days away from Bernie sending in Pinkerton goons to crack heads.

Actually, and alas, the fun we’ve been having with the Sanders campaign’s labor problems seems to be ending. Top officials reached a deal with the union this afternoon to boost the pay of field organizers to $42,000 per year in return for extending the work week from five days to six — with an important caveat:

The deal would extend the workweek from five days to six days. But it also would clarify that the expected hours worked each week would be 50. The changes would mean that if the organizers are working 50-hour weeks, then they would make an annual salary equivalent to more than $15 per hour, which Sanders has said for years should be the federal minimum. But if they work longer hours, which the union said could happen, even voluntarily, then the equivalent hourly rate could drop below that threshold.

Sounds to me like all they did here was give everyone a raise in exchange for labor agreeing to maintain the fiction that they’re only working 50 hours a week on average going forward. That solves everyone’s political problem by producing an average hourly wage greater than $15, but in reality, now that they’re coming into the office six days a week instead of five, they’re going to end up working more than 50 hours weekly “voluntarily.” They were already working an average of 60 before this dispute began, in fact.

Maybe private employers could use that dodge if and when they get stuck with a national $15 hourly minimum wage. Workers get $15 an hour for their first 30 hours, say, and then the next 10-20 after that consists of “volunteering.” Sounds like a plan.

[Abbey Marie]

[hjmick]

According to Newsweak...


On Thursday evening, The Washington Post reported that some members of Sanders' campaign have been lobbying to raise their wages. Field organizers say they make a salary of $36,000 annually but work 60 hours per week, which is an average of $13 per hour.

Unionized workers planned to send a letter to campaign manager Faiz Shakir which read that "many field staffers are barely managing to survive financially, which is severely impacting our team's productivity and morale." Some employees, they said, had even left the campaign as a result of the low pay.

In a statement provided to Newsweek, Shakir said that the campaign has been in discussions about pay structure changes with the United Food & Commercial Workers Local 400, the union representing the organizers.

"We look forward to continuing those discussions and obviously are disappointed that some individuals decided to damage the integrity of these efforts before they were concluded," Shakir said. "As these discussions continue, we are limiting hours so no employee is receiving less than $15 for any hours worked."

Sanders' 2020 campaign was the first to unionize in March 2019. The union then made an agreement with the campaign that field workers were to be paid $36,000 annually. The contract, which began on May 2, also provides platinum level health care, paid vacation, sick leave and other benefits...

Bernie Sanders Campaign Responds to $15 Minimum Wage Controversy with Better Hours for Staff


So from what I gather from the Newsweak article, campaign workers were being paid a salary, not an hourly wage. In most cases, salaried employees are not eligible for overtime, but usually have to put some OT in for the job. Also, in most cases, salaries are negotiated and/or agreed to prior to employment. So we have a bunch of people who agree to do a job, for a set wage, then want a new deal when they find out how hard the job is (getting Bernie elected).

No sympathy from me. Who wants to bet the majority of them are millennials?


What was it Richard Attenburough's John Hammond said to Wayne Knight's character Dennis Nedry in Jurassic Park?

I don't blame people for their mistakes. But I do ask that they pay for them.


In context, Nedry was complaining about the money he agreed to in his contract to set up the computer systems for Jurassic Park.

[SassyLady]

Yes you do.
If the campaign has X to pay in wages, and they increase the wage per hour, but decrease the hours worked so that the total wage bill is still X then that’s good for staffers.

But without knowledge of the cut in hours relative to hourly increase in pay we have no idea if the staffers are better of, about the same, or worse of.

How much work is not getting done due to reduction in hours Noir? Boss is still paying same amount in wages but getting less production. How long can a business operate under those conditions?

[Noir]

How much work is not getting done due to reduction in hours Noir? Boss is still paying same amount in wages but getting less production. How long can a business operate under those conditions?

If your business isn’t profitable without staff “volunteering” to do 20 hours a week more than they’re salaried then your business being operable is just an illusion that your staff are paying the price for to sustain.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Well, if I was feel the bern Bernie, I'd just close up shop and retire and enjoy the rest of my life, after I took care of my legal problems, because he got the shaft from the DNC last prez election, and now this, this time. As if he stood a chance anyway, regardless, he's toast now.

[jimnyc]

Pay less for longer hours - people WILL take others places, especially recent grads, unemployed and seniors.

Pay more for less hours, and bring automation.

Pay no one in some places, bring in automation. <--- that would be my preference if an owner that could achieve as much.

---

Employees that cannot make do with what they accepted originally are FREE to fuck off and find employment elsewhere to their liking, and a business owner can run his business as he chooses - not how employees demand. And if one HAS to bring in some more hours as a result, and now higher paid folks are getting hours back - LOWER benefits across the board. The employees with lesser hours - make them now PT and cut out all benefits except for breaks and a few sick days, maybe 5 per year TOPS if me. Problem solved, most idiots gone. If anyone going forward has an issue, they too can follow the other - people WILL gladly take their jobs. And start investing in automation!

[jimnyc]

Litttle 'ol messy hair socialism weakboy is getting what he deserves. People are SO SO STUPID as not to get the basics AND that THEY are not in charge.

And not to mention, this scenario is different than most. The overwhelming majority, jobs like McDonalds, you ain't getting salary, and already not getting more than 20-30 hours per week - and THOSE are the weak dolts that then make demands.

Look at the first thing in bold - that is how almost all liberals, lefties, democrats operate, FACT.



Bernie Sanders Deserves His Comeuppance in the Minimum Wage War

Sen. Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign was just disrupted by campaign workers demanding the same $15 per hour Sanders demands government force all employers to pay.

It serves him right.

Years ago, the activist group ACORN faced the same problem. After fighting for a higher minimum wage, they tried to convince a judge they should be granted an exception when paying their own workers, since they were involved in such important and productive work.

Government telling employers what to pay people creates nasty side effects.

Five years ago, Seattle won fame by becoming the first American city to mandate a $15 per hour minimum.

"Fifteen in Seattle is just a beginning. We have an entire world to win! Solidarity!" vowed City Councilmember Kshama Sawant.

New York state and many cities followed in Seattle's footsteps.

But now the results from Seattle are in:

Some people who already had jobs are being paid more. They're the winners under the new law.

But the losers are needier people: people who are looking for jobs.

After Seattle raised its minimum wage to $15, entry-level job growth stalled. Job growth continued in the rest of Washington state but not in Seattle.

The $15 minimum helped some people while hurting even poorer people.

"It's presented by minimum wage advocates as a win-win ... no negatives," complains a skeptical Erin Shannon of the Washington Policy Center in my latest video.

Shannon points out the negatives. For example, stores that once hired inexperienced kids and trained them, giving them valuable starter experience, stopped doing so once Seattle raised its minimum wage.

"Politicians," one store owner told my video producer, "have no sense whatsoever about what it means to small businesses like us."

Today, for companies with more than 500 workers, Seattle's minimum wage is $16 per hour.

It's as if the politicians never learned about supply and demand. They think prices can be set wherever government decrees, with no consequences.

But there are many bad consequences.

Twenty-year-old Dillon Hodes understands that. He's a winner of the video-making contest run by my charity, Stossel in the Classroom. Hodes saw what happened to his friend when the Kroger she worked at raised its minimum wage to $12 an hour.

"She was getting paid $12 an hour, but slowly, they started cutting her days, her hours. She was (eventually) regulated to only working on Sundays. That's because she was young and inexperienced," explains Hodes. "She's worth the world to me, but she wasn't worth $12 to Kroger."

The $12 minimum wage took away her job. How much more damage will a $15 minimum do?

Rigel Nobel-Kosa, another sitc.org video contest winner, pointed out that many high employment "countries such as Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland" have no minimum wage laws.

They do not end up with impoverished workers making a penny an hour. Wages, like all prices, are a function of supply and demand. Switzerland has much less unemployment than the U.S.

Esther Rhodes won our high school essay contest, pointing out that America's first minimum wage laws were racist. At the time they were passed, blacks were more likely to be employed than whites. Blacks were paid less -- but they had jobs.

Congressman Miles Clayton Allgood, D-Ala., then said he hoped a minimum wage law would stop "cheap colored labor in competition with white labor."

So, explains Rhodes, although Americans now think a minimum wage was meant to help the neediest people, "it was meant for the opposite: to keep the poor and the minorities from getting jobs!"

She also understands that the law now makes it harder for her to get a job.

"I'm 14," says Rhodes. "My labor wouldn't be worth $15 an hour!"

All government's workplace rules have nasty unintended consequences.

If only the politicians were as smart as the sitc.org kids.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politic...imum-wage-war/

[STTAB]

"If only the politicians were smart"

No need for that, just keep the voter base stupid and they won't realize that they are being led by crooks and scam artists.

[hjmick]

If your business isn’t profitable without staff “volunteering” to do 20 hours a week more than they’re salaried then your business being operable is just an illusion that your staff are paying the price for to sustain.

First, we're not really talking about a business. We're talking about an election campaign.

Second, do you really think that these people agreed to take the jobs without knowing what was expected of them? If they did, well, they're all idiots.

Third, they didn't start asking for more money until after they unionized and their union masters told them they needed more money.

Fourth, in a real business being a salaried employee comes with some perks, like not having to use your PTO for a sick day. Being on salary also comes with certain responsibilities, like opening the business, supervising employees. Being on salary also comes with certain expectations, like putting in extra hours to get the job done or meet certain goals. The trade off is usually something called "comp days", days off that don't require the use of PTO. Your "idea" that a business isn't "operable, or profitable, if the salaried staff has to put in extra time is extremely naive and uninformed.

Though in this case, I'm certain Bernie's "business" is destined to fail.


You know, there was a time when a person took a job and did their best work possible because to do otherwise would be tantamount to theft, theft from the employer. As long as a person received a paycheck, they owed their employer their best work. That's how I was raised, that's the contract I made with myself when I took the few jobs I've had. It pays off... in raises, bonuses, privileges, respect, and trust. You don't see that kind of attitude in the majority of people of your generation. They want it all, and they want it now. They don't want to work for it, they feel entitled to it. I hope I'm not alive to see the outcome of that attitude and I am happy I raised my kids better than that.


Finally, these Sanders campaign workers aren't getting anymore money, just fewer hours. If they didn't make it with the money they were making before their hours were cut, how are the going to make it now? The money is the same...