That's how the rich get richer on the sweet and tears of the poor. Things haven't changed in thousands of years. The Romans used slaves to build their empire and so do today's rich executives.
Timmies fights min wage hike
- Thread starter poker
- Start date
Some district managers aren't as tight lipped as others. They tell store owners... who tell their managers... who tell....
Blh blah blah is soooo right....
You liberal pussies seem to think that hiking the minimum wage will so something other than help drive up prices & inflation... Which it WON'T....
Have you ever even considered the fact that some jobs simply aren't WORTH more money??? Adding to that if those jobs are all a person can get that THEY aren't worth more money???
I don't give a fuck if they're "Victims" of whatever or not.... The simple FACT is that a person's labour, like any other thing offered & paid for, is worth what others are WILLING to pay for it....
Seriously... If someone (minimum wageslave, unionist, etc) is REALLY WORTH more... then they will be able to either get a job that pays more or start their own business & get paid more..... If they're NOT, they DON'T. Fucking. Period.
If someone is worth more than whatever Timmies, etc is willing to pay then why are they working there????????
FORCING people to pay people inflated wages beyond what the job is actually worth does Numerous disservices to society... Companies forced to hike pay for menial jobs HIRE FEWER & heap more work on the few they can afford... If it gets too expensive to support overpaid employees the companies CLOSE or LEAVE... Tell me... what's your plan for when THAT happens???
Oh yes I forgot... Taxpayers who ARE worth more due to hard work, luck & ability foot the bill... Because WE'RE obviously not worth the money we EARN...
Fuck you.
where will we buy these indentured servants? will it be through private agenices or will it be some sort of liberal boondoggle?
Seiously it will get to the point again where we will have waaaay too many useless eater than even the most ardent wealth distributors can rob us to support...
There are 3 choices... manage the poor's NUMBERS.... Make use of them in an affordable way (eventually some form of slavery) or there WILL be a CULL...
So long as all the mouthpieces that "champion" the poor share their fate along with them.... whatever happens is cool with me
i cant recall being served at any Tim Horton,s, by 14 year olds...and regardless..do they have to spell correctly to give me my coffee...if spelling and simple arithmetic skills, and forming coherent sentences were the yardstick of wages..then sportscasters on TV, should be working for 12 thousand a year.............................sometimes i get a perverse joy out of insulting idiots on this discussion board..its a character flaw...so...big dogie you are a dickhead..
Wha? Please expand on that, will you?They need to cut back the wages so they can have more to send back to the Islamic front to fight the Jewish front.
Sounds like someone got promoted to the drive true window and the power is going to his head... have at it, call me any name you want if it makes you feel like a grownup?
b d
I'm totally with you on that.
Canadian management = suppressing wages/piling on more work for less pay.
In other words, dump on the powerless employees that actually do all the work instead of relying on the so called management to actually think up ways to boost efficiencies in the overall organisation.
Playing devil's advocate for Canadian Management:
With the economy the way it is, Management have to deal with responsibilities they normally don't have in their usual job description, due to downsizing, streamlining, etc.
Similarly, their hours have increased without a bump in pay.
With the economy the way it is, Management have to deal with responsibilities they normally don't have in their usual job description, due to downsizing, streamlining, etc.
Similarly, their hours have increased without a bump in pay.
If you decide to go that route, make sure management knows why. Otherwise, they may attribute the drop in business to other things.
Those that argue for a minimum wage & just assume that a company like Tim Horton's or Rotten Ronnie's can afford to pay a higher wage to thousands of employees without any reaction or consequences do not understand economics , investment theory or human nature
The number one responsibility of a corporation is to make a profit for its share owners, while providing its customers with a quality product or service and operating within the law.
The managements obligation to pay its its employees well and its obligation to act in an environmentally and socially favorable manner are negotiation points between the management and the owners
If the management is able to pay higher wages and satisfy the owners demands for profits then no problem
If the higher wages reduces profits significantly then they will have to raise prices or provide the owners with lower profits.
The latter option is not favorable & usually results in stock sell offs & if persistent, management changes.
The owners have thousands of stocks to chose from for their capital. So if Timmie's pays more to the Bovine Betty behind the counter & delivers less profit the owners look for a better return else where.
Do not forget hey are risking this capital and expect a return on their capital
From a business stand point it just does not make sense to pay thousands of employees $10-11 / hr if the the value of the work delivers is substantially less.
For an individual running a Timmie's (ie a franchisee) it may be the difference of tens of thousands of dollars every year.
Do not forget he is has put up capital to buy the franchise , fund the operation and is taking a risk that it will perform well in that specific location
He expects a return for the risk he is taking
What risk does Bovine Betty take?
Her time!
And if she could sell that elsewhere for more she would
The number one responsibility of a corporation is to make a profit for its share owners, while providing its customers with a quality product or service and operating within the law.
The managements obligation to pay its its employees well and its obligation to act in an environmentally and socially favorable manner are negotiation points between the management and the owners
If the management is able to pay higher wages and satisfy the owners demands for profits then no problem
If the higher wages reduces profits significantly then they will have to raise prices or provide the owners with lower profits.
The latter option is not favorable & usually results in stock sell offs & if persistent, management changes.
The owners have thousands of stocks to chose from for their capital. So if Timmie's pays more to the Bovine Betty behind the counter & delivers less profit the owners look for a better return else where.
Do not forget hey are risking this capital and expect a return on their capital
From a business stand point it just does not make sense to pay thousands of employees $10-11 / hr if the the value of the work delivers is substantially less.
For an individual running a Timmie's (ie a franchisee) it may be the difference of tens of thousands of dollars every year.
Do not forget he is has put up capital to buy the franchise , fund the operation and is taking a risk that it will perform well in that specific location
He expects a return for the risk he is taking
What risk does Bovine Betty take?
Her time!
And if she could sell that elsewhere for more she would
But I've noticed tme and time again that you can't spell. Simple stuff usually.
For example, you regularly write, "your" when you actually mean "you're"
So I would argue that people in glass houses scenario......
Some of you guys really make me laugh - larue, otb, mexi, the usual cast of characters. You all figure yourselves to be Warren Buffet or something, only you're poorer that WB because everyone else is eating your pie. YOUR PIE. How dare they eat your pie. If it was up to you, people would be working for a loaf of bread and some bologne week in week out.
I have no problem with people making as much as they can talk someone into paying them..... I just don't think it makes sense to pick an arbitrary number as a floor.....
This is an econ 101 level debate - if you can't see both sides perhaps you should check your (not you're) vision.....
OTB
It would not be bologne week in week out.
I am sure we could find some funds for a Christmas bonus in the form of some pimento loaf.
Or I am sure that employees would not be flogged at Timmie's for taking day old Tim-bits.
On a serious note, if you do not understand the concept of risk vs. reward, then you will probably never grasp the understanding of why companies can only pay people for the value they deliver.
What it costs people to live in a city or raise a family is their issue not their employers.
If bologne is all their services can buy them, then they had better like bologne
If they can not afford to live on the wage they are making, then they need to upgrade their skills so they can deliver more value and be compensated at a higher wage.
An employer owes his employees an agreed upon wage, not a defined standard of living
