What do you think about companies raising prices to pay the newer minimum wage?

[JoshBB]

I kinda see it as counter-productive tbh, if every company raises their prices then essentially the minimum wage becomes too low again.

It's especially annoying because a lot of these companies have profits in the millions, surely it wouldn't hurt to have a small reduction in profit to pay workers fairly?

What do you think can be done about this?

[kirklancaster]

I agree with your 'Counter Productive' comment, and also that 'something' needs to be done to stop this predictable farce.

Many SME's simply cannot afford to absorb this but - as you say - there are a hell of a lot of other companies who have multi-million pound profit margins and they SHOULD be prevented by law from hiking up the cost of their goods/services simply as a sneaky way of compensating themselves for being forced to pay their workers a fairer wage.

I have not much time Josh because I'm in and out (plastering) so cannot discuss this comprehensively, but I have been employed, self-employed and an employer, and I always paid my employeees above the min imum wage or 'going rate' because I have worked for peanuts when employed.

In brief; I actually think that the answer is for the Government to draft new legislation which COMPELS employers of a certain size (to be ascertained) to make all employees shareholders. If a company grows into a multi-million pound entity then it is with the aid of its workforce so it seems fair to me that the workforce should enjoy a fair share of the rewards of that success.

[Crimson Dynamo]

businesses are run for profit and not care about things such as this.

the skill is doing it but not blabbing on that you are going to do it

I wonder about their PR agencies I really do

[bots]

The market dictates what a company can charge for its goods and services. If its highly desired and availability is sparse, the price will be high.... that's a world market. The market also dictates on the same basis what an individual will earn (taking in to account any mandatory minimums)

If a company were to ignore those market forces and exceed what its customers were prepared to pay, they wouldn't be able to employ as many people as they woudnt sell as many of their product/service.

[Cherie]

I kinda see it as counter-productive tbh, if every company raises their prices then essentially the minimum wage becomes too low again.

It's especially annoying because a lot of these companies have profits in the millions, surely it wouldn't hurt to have a small reduction in profit to pay workers fairly?

What do you think can be done about this?

A lot of companies will turn to the under 25s to avoid paying this

[JoshBB]

I agree with your 'Counter Productive' comment, and also that 'something' needs to be done to stop this predictable farce.

Many SME's simply cannot afford to absorb this but - as you say - there are a hell of a lot of other companies who have multi-million pound profit margins and they SHOULD be prevented by law from hiking up the cost of their goods/services simply as a sneaky way of compensating themselves for being forced to pay their workers a fairer wage.

I have not much time Josh because I'm in and out (plastering) so cannot discuss this comprehensively, but I have been employed, self-employed and an employer, and I always paid my employeees above the min imum wage or 'going rate' because I have worked for peanuts when employed.

In brief; I actually think that the answer is for the Government to draft new legislation which COMPELS employers of a certain size (to be ascertained) to make all employees shareholders. If a company grows into a multi-million pound entity then it is with the aid of its workforce so it seems fair to me that the workforce should enjoy a fair share of the rewards of that success.

Tax Relief for small companies so that they can pay the new wage would be a wise move I think, with proper vetting of course so we know they're legitimate and not just aiming to evade tax.

A lot of companies will turn to the under 25s to avoid paying this

Could be very bad. While Under 25s could then get jobs, it means that their wages won't be enough to pay the bigger cost of living.

I don't know what can be done, but we can't just let the free market dictate because it's proven not to work for working class families

[Kizzy]

Not very well thought out this minimum wage thing is it, am I surprised that it's the largest companies with the biggest profit margins bleating? No.

[Livia]

Tax Relief for small companies so that they can pay the new wage would be a wise move I think, with proper vetting of course so we know they're legitimate and not just aiming to evade tax.


Taxpayers already support businesses by topping up people's salaries with tax credits and other 'in work' benefits. Taxpayers are also funding plenty of people who don't work, many who haven't worked for a long time. Why should taxpayers also be required to underwrite businesses enabling them to pay less?

[joeysteele]

Not very well thought out this minimum wage thing is it, am I surprised that it's the largest companies with the biggest profit margins bleating? No.

Me neither Kizzy, for me they are just plain greedy.

Also when has this present David Cameron led Conservative party ever really fairly and correctly thought things out over the last 5 years.

[Kizzy]

Well done Lidl!

'Lidl has said it will pay 9,000 of its UK workers at least the full living wage from next month as the first major high street name to embrace the higher pay campaign.

The German-owned supermarket chain said the move represented an average pay rise of £1,200 per year for thousands of staff, with all UK employees receiving at least £8.20 an hour in England, Scotland and Wales and at least £9.35 in London. It currently pays £7.30 an hour outside London and £8.03 in London.'

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/sep/18/lidl-to-pay-9000-staff-the-full-living-wage

[Crimson Dynamo]

Well done Lidl!

'Lidl has said it will pay 9,000 of its UK workers at least the full living wage from next month as the first major high street name to embrace the higher pay campaign.

The German-owned supermarket chain said the move represented an average pay rise of £1,200 per year for thousands of staff, with all UK employees receiving at least £8.20 an hour in England, Scotland and Wales and at least £9.35 in London. It currently pays £7.30 an hour outside London and £8.03 in London.'

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/sep/18/lidl-to-pay-9000-staff-the-full-living-wage

Yes, links nicely with my PR comment

Lidl PR working well here

[Kizzy]

Yes, links nicely with my PR comment

Lidl PR working well here

Or...... they are simply being responsible employers?

[kirklancaster]

Just as with a country's Fiscal Position - If the money is there then fine. If it isn't then we are left with that sad old Chinaman; No Kwan Doo.

[Cherie]

Are Lidl going to take a profit hit? Or will their prices go up

[Kizzy]

Does it matter? You're a real raincloud of doom sometimes Cherie :laugh:

[arista]

Yes Costa Coffee will raise prices
to cover the Wage increases
they have stated a few weeks back.


Only Lidl
will increase wages
but not put prices up.

Keeping all the Ex Tesco Customers


Josh its very normal to pass it it on so we pay more

[lostalex]

i remember paying 50 cents for a soda out of a vending machine. I remember paying under a dollar for a gallon of gas. Inflation is crazy...

[user104658]

Yes Costa Coffee will raise prices
to cover the Wage increases
they have stated a few weeks back.


Only Lidl
will increase wages
but not put prices up.

Keeping all the Ex Tesco Customers


Josh its very normal to pass it it on so we pay more
It's normal but it's retarded. Wages go up and hand in hand, the cost of living goes up, making the money in your pocket worth less than it was before wages went up. So no one is actually any better off at all.

[Cherie]

Does it matter? You're a real raincloud of doom sometimes Cherie :laugh:

It's normal but it's retarded. Wages go up and hand in hand, the cost of living goes up, making the money in your pocket worth less than it was before wages went up. So no one is actually any better off at all.

....:cloud:

[user104658]

i remember paying 50 cents for a soda out of a vending machine. I remember paying under a dollar for a gallon of gas. Inflation is crazy...
Quit whining Alex - you can still get a gallon of the stuff for under $3 if you shop around. In the UK a gallon of unleaded is (in US dollars) $7 - 8 and has been over $9...

That's not inflation, that's the US's history of massively subsidising oil product prices which is starting to lessen. Your gas was artificially cheap, in the same way that our cows milk is...

[lostalex]

Quit whining Alex - you can still get a gallon of the stuff for under $3 if you shop around. In the UK a gallon of unleaded is (in US dollars) $7 - 8 and has been over $9...

That's not inflation, that's the US's history of massively subsidising oil product prices which is starting to lessen. Your gas was artificially cheap, in the same way that our cows milk is...

well it was much more expensive a few years ago...it's actually come down in the past year, significantly. Also the US should have cheaper gasoline, because we have all the refineries. even though other countries have plenty of crude oil, the US has lots of refineries, so it makes sense that we can get it for cheaper because there's less transportation required for the final product. Canada has a huge amount of oil, but they have no refineries.

also because of fracking, and natural gas being more available, people don't have to use oil for that anymore. so there is much more crude oil on the market, and much more natural gas on the market.

and i'm not whining! i don't even have a car! so i don't care much about gasoline prices. I care more about parking prices, because with my friends i always pay parking costs, since they are driving, and parking costs are outrageous! I've paid 15 dollars for just 2 hours of parking!

[user104658]

well it was much more expensive a few years ago...it's actually come down in the past year, significantly. Also the US should have cheaper gasoline, because we have all the refineries. even though other countries have plenty of crude oil, the US has lots of refineries, so it makes sense that we can get it for cheaper because there's less transportation required for the final product. Canada has a huge amount of oil, but they have no refineries.

also because of fracking, and natural gas being more available, people don't have to use oil for that anymore. so there is much more crude oil on the market, and much more natural gas on the market.

and i'm not whining! i don't even have a car! so i don't care much about gasoline prices. I care more about parking prices, because with my friends i always pay parking costs, since they are driving, and parking costs are outrageous! I've paid 15 dollars for just 2 hours of parking!
Yeah me either to be fair, wife is learning because there's only one bus every two hours from the tiny village I live in. I'd pay £10+ a litre, merrily, just to have a car at this point to be honest.

[lostalex]

Yeah me either to be fair, wife is learning because there's only one bus every two hours from the tiny village I live in. I'd pay £10+ a litre, merrily, just to have a car at this point to be honest.

oh yea, that's sucks to be out in the country with no reliable transportation. I live in a major city and we have good bus service, but even that is a pain in the ass, and i hate riding the bus, mostly because of the crazy idiots that ride it too.

I will tell you though, UBER is amazing. SO many people are against Uber for many reasons, and i can sympathize, but i have to be honest, having Uber and Lyft has made life so much easier for me. I love it. I hate the fact that the big Taxi monopolies are trying to crush Uber.

[Kizzy]

....:cloud:

Yes I appreciate that we may not feel the benefit, there are lots of variables to business costs it's not all wages costs for everything only ever go one way. It's the same when the govt say we're raising the threshold for tax but also raise VAT.
The difference here is it's putting the responsibility on the employer to ensure that work pays, working and still being reliant on a benefit to be able to meet living costs is the major difference with the living wage.
As there is increasing stigma attached to claiming a benefit in work as well as out the more people that are able to earn enough to function without state support the better.

[Cherie]

Yes I appreciate that we may not feel the benefit, there are lots of variables to business costs it's not all wages costs for everything only ever go one way. It's the same when the govt say we're raising the threshold for tax but also raise VAT.
The difference here is it's putting the responsibility on the employer to ensure that work pays, working and still being reliant on a benefit to be able to meet living costs is the major difference with the living wage.
As there is increasing stigma attached to claiming a benefit in work as well as out the more people that are able to earn enough to function without state support the better.

And when they reach a certain level they lose their top up tax credits so it all evens out :shrug: I agree work should always pay more than benefits though

[Kizzy]

And when they reach a certain level they lose their top up tax credits so it all evens out :shrug: I agree work should always pay more than benefits though

Isn't the thinking behind the minimum wage increase specifically to lift people out of the threshold to claim WTC, especially as the threshold has been slashed?
Working should mean that you are reliant on wages as living costs as opposed to top ups definitely.

[lostalex]

Isn't the thinking behind the minimum wage increase specifically to lift people out of the threshold to claim WTC, especially as the threshold has been slashed?
Working should mean that you are reliant on wages as living costs as opposed to top ups definitely.

what are you talking about?

working means nothing more than valuing yourself. you decide that you will give away a certain amount of hours of your life. You are only worth what someone is willing to pay for those hours of your life. Obviously people with more rare skills are worth more, people with no skills are worth less. i don't see the problem.

if you spend all day doing nothing, and not improving yourself, then why would you expect someone to value your skills. If you spend your time learning skills and acquiring talents, then of course you will be paid highly.

I don't understand the concept that all people should be paid highly if they have no unique talents or skills.

[Kizzy]

what are you talking about?

working means nothing more than valuing yourself. you decide that you will give away a certain amount of hours of your life. You are only worth what someone is willing to pay for those hours of your life. Obviously people with more rare skills are worth more, people with no skills are worth less. i don't see the problem.

if you spend all day doing nothing, and not improving yourself, then why would you expect someone to value your skills. If you spend your time learning skills and acquiring talents, then of course you will be paid highly.

I don't understand the concept that all people should be paid highly if they have no unique talents or skills.

I'm discussing the thread topic Alex.

[lostalex]

I'm discussing the thread topic Alex.

i'm distracted by the magnificent angelica houston.

[JoshBB]

what are you talking about?

working means nothing more than valuing yourself. you decide that you will give away a certain amount of hours of your life. You are only worth what someone is willing to pay for those hours of your life. Obviously people with more rare skills are worth more, people with no skills are worth less. i don't see the problem.

if you spend all day doing nothing, and not improving yourself, then why would you expect someone to value your skills. If you spend your time learning skills and acquiring talents, then of course you will be paid highly.

I don't understand the concept that all people should be paid highly if they have no unique talents or skills.

I don't understand this logic at all tbh.

If someone works full-time, they should be able to live a relatively comfortable life and not fear that they can't pay the bills. Shouldn't be based on "unique talents or skills".

[bots]

I don't understand this logic at all tbh.

If someone works full-time, they should be able to live a relatively comfortable life and not fear that they can't pay the bills. Shouldn't be based on "unique talents or skills".

You are correct. At a minimum, it is everyone's basic right to be able to earn enough from full time employment to be comfortable. After that, the considerations of supply and demand come in to effect.

[empire]

the fact that new labour under Blair made the poor poorer, makes no change in today's tory party, because they continued the legacy after the last tory government, for 13 years, labour ripped off the working man, and just added the bigger line for unemployment, broken britain, and greedy companies who want workers on poor wages, 16 to 24 year olds, get paid really poorly, why a large amount of them won't vote,

[Kizzy]

the fact that new labour under Blair made the poor poorer, makes no change in today's tory party, because they continued the legacy after the last tory government, for 13 years, labour ripped off the working man, and just added the bigger line for unemployment, broken britain, and greedy companies who want workers on poor wages, 16 to 24 year olds, get paid really poorly, why a large amount of them won't vote,

I suppose Thatcher was a benevolent soothing maternal darling of a leader? :/

[user104658]

what are you talking about?

working means nothing more than valuing yourself. you decide that you will give away a certain amount of hours of your life. You are only worth what someone is willing to pay for those hours of your life. Obviously people with more rare skills are worth more, people with no skills are worth less. i don't see the problem.

if you spend all day doing nothing, and not improving yourself, then why would you expect someone to value your skills. If you spend your time learning skills and acquiring talents, then of course you will be paid highly.

I don't understand the concept that all people should be paid highly if they have no unique talents or skills.

That's very American Dream Alex but what you have to understand, I suppose, is that the gulf between avaiblable wages and the cost of living in the UK is much higher than in the US. Even if you are right and it's true that people should be paid proportionately to what they have to offer - which I accept to an extent - the other issue is that even at the very bottom end of that scale, people have to be paid enough to be able to sustain themselves. We have a big "problem" with "in work benefits" (money paid by the government to people who are actually in full time employment) because, quite simply, full time employment on minimum wage is not enough to cover rent, utilities and food. There needs to be a sustainable baseline.

There's a temptation to say "well people should just improve themselves and then they'll have more blah blah" but no matter how many people do that, there still needs to be a sustainable low-wage work force that can afford to live. Highly-paid surgeons can't operate without cleaning staff, Law firms can't keep their doors open without receptionists... etc.

[lostalex]

i disagree. the fact is companies were using cheap labor to make the product artificially cheap. now people will have to pay the fair price. If it's a good product people will buy it no matter what, rich and poor people will buy it any price. If it's a good product it should be sold for what it's worth.

Slave labor is never okay, and paying people less than their worth is slave labor.