Posts
It must have sounded like a good idea. It appealed to low
income voters, thus, to a leading Democratic Party constituency. The policy
proposal was simple: government would mandate a higher minimum wage. Great
news. Everyone would be getting a raise. Everyone would take home more money.
We already know that New York restaurants responded to the
city’s own minimum wage law by cutting back on employees and on employee hours.
Obviously, the whole boondoggle shows why government should not run the labor
market.
Heck, even Amazon, owner of Whole Foods, has responded to
the minimum wage hike by reducing employee work hours. Duh… who could have
imagined such a thing?
The Daily Wire has the story (via Maggie’s Farm):
The
dream of the $15 minimum wage was finally realized among Amazon employees after
the company caved to mounting pressure and implemented it company-wide on Nov.
1. But according to a new report, the improved wages aren't working out as many
employees had hoped at Amazon's Whole Foods grocery store chain.
The
Guardian reported Wednesday that employees at Whole Foods, which
Amazon purchased back in 2017, have experienced a dramatic drop in schedule
shifts since the raised wages were introduced.
Along
with the new $15 minimum wage for the entry-level positions, some higher-level
Whole Foods employees have also enjoyed a $1 to $2 increase in hourly wages,
the outlet notes. It all sounds good — until employees' schedules are taken
into account. Since the wage increase in November, Whole Foods employees say
they've experienced "widespread cuts that have reduced schedule shifts
across many stores, often negating wage gains for employees," The Guardian
reports.
The
employees, speaking on condition of anonymity "for fear of
retaliation," revealed to the outlet that they've seen an average of about
a 30% reduction in hours per week for part-timers and about a 10% reduction for
full-timers.
An
Illinois-based worker told The Guardian, "My hours went from 30 to 20 a
week," after the $15 minimum wage hike.
Did you notice, this story comes to us from a British
newspaper, The Guardian? As you know, it is not a right wing newspaper, incidentally.
In Maryland management has also reduced employee hours:
A
Maryland-based employee told the paper their regional manager has ordered that
all full-time employees suffer a four-hour reduction per week to 36 hours,
making the raise "pointless" because people are actually "losing
more than they gained" as a result of fewer hours worked. An Oregon-based
Whole Foods employee cited a similar policy of reducing full-timers from 40 to
just 36 or 38 hours per week.
Fewer hours at work… if, that is, you still have a job. What
could go wrong when politicians decide to pay off their voters with someone
else’s money?
5 comments:
Leftists want to feel good. Doing good takes effort, and they shun meaningful work. It’s so much easier to virtue signal with other people’s money, damn the consequences, than to achieve real results. Next the leftists will use the legislature to demand the number of hours the employees must receive. It always ends in a bigger government and less freedom.
If the work could have been done in less hours all along, why were these companies paying for more hours than they needed in the first place?
David Foster
chicagoboyz.net
Politicians don't pay employees of companies. They also don't have to deal with payrolls or employees or serving the public.
As usual, Lefties overvalue labor, just as they do knowledge (college) and mass transit (light rail). All this is very expensive, but the Tooth Fairy leaves money under every pillow.
Minimum wage = minimal workers.
I recall the CEO of Starbucks, Schulz, virtue signalled for $15 min wage, and then cut his full time baristas hours to part time to avoid providing them the mandatory health care benefits he no doubt also virtue signalled for.
Post a Comment