California fast-food workers’ minimum wage win stirs up old economic debate
California fast-food workers’ minimum wage win stirs up old economic debate
Business groups claim hard-fought $20 hourly wage victory will cause reduced hours, layoffs and price hikes – critics say otherwise
Business groups claim hard-fought $20 hourly wage victory will cause reduced hours, layoffs and price hikes – critics say otherwise
As fast-food workers celebrated a pivotal wage increase to $20 an hour in California last week, an old economic debate was awakened by business groups and others claiming the increase will wind up hurting workers through reduced hours and layoffs, hurt customers with price hikes, and harm the franchise owners of fast food restaurants.
Their critics are not so sure.
The hard-fought wage increase to $20 an hour from California’s current minimum wage, $16 an hour, was a compromise to initial demands of $22 an hour with annual wage increases. Representatives of fast-food workers and the fast food industry came to a deal to avoid what would have been a costly ballot initiative over the passage and signing of the California fast food sector bill last year.
“Frontline workers like me organized, went on strike, and fought to pass a historic law that raises our wages and gives us a seat at table with some of the biggest fast food corporations in the world,” said Anjelica Hernandez, a McDonald’s worker in Los Angeles for nearly 20 years. “Even though we are the engine of a billion-dollar industry, too many of us struggle to keep with rent, our bills and the rising cost of living.”
Ah yes the classic "are working class people humans?" Debate.
Yalls standards are fucking LOW. And many if yall have kids. You would think that would light a fire under someone's ass to make the world a good place to exist.
Did you ask your unborn child if they wanted to be exploited cradle to grave before you had that unprotected sex? No, because having kids isn't about the kids at all... it's about you you youuuu.
Dredging up an old article because this argument is also old:
McD's workers in Denmark are paid $22/hr + 6 wks paid vacation.
One argument that is frequently brought up against the raising of the minimum wage to $15 is the suggestion that it will have a knock-on effect and the prices at affordable fast-food restaurants such as McDonald's and Taco Bell will also substantially increase.
In rebuke, many use the price of a Big Mac in Denmark as proof that such claims are unwarranted. On social media, a number of Twitter users state that the cost of a Big Mac is around $5.15, compared to $4:80 in the U.S.—even with the vastly different staff wages.
https://www.newsweek.com/minimum-wage-15-denmark-big-mac-mcdonalds-1573414
This argument has always been absolutely ridiculous. McDonald’s doesn’t set prices based on their costs. McDonald’s sets their prices based on what people are willing to pay. Why would they charge $4.80 when people would be willing to pay $5.15? That would be an extra $.35 profit if they charged more with no increase in costs.
While this means that there will be less profits, the worst case scenario is that fast food places determine that they can’t make profits and will shut down. They’ll use this as an excuse to bump their prices to more than compensate for their lost profits.
Remember, prices arent simple functions of cost. The business owner isn't tabulating costs to produce a product, and then adding a standardized profit markup to determine price. Generally it works in reverse. A business owner introducing a new product into a market is competing with the prices already in the market. If your product is of similar quality, you're not gonna sell your product for much higher than that market price, no matter how much it costs you to make. Instead, you increase your profit margins by reducing costs as much as you can. Like say, fighting against legislation like this to pay your workers less.
Now, there probably will be some price increases from this, same as there was from the pandemic, because people will expect to pay more because they think that's how prices work. But they can only get away with so much increase, anyone that keeps prices low gets an advantage over the competition.
Also, the threats of reduced hours and layoffs is a pretty empty threat. Again, employment isnt a simple function of cost. Business owner isnt budgeting a set amount of earnings to hire with. An employee is there to handle customer demand. If you don't have the employees to handle the demand you're getting, you're losing sales. Especially in fast food where consistency is so important to customer retention. If you're short on fry cooks and have to turn down a bunch of customers hoping to get fries with their meals, they're gonna go elsewhere eventually. But they also dont want more employees than they need to meet that demand, thats eating into the profit margins. This is why fast food workers get so stressed, employers try to meet the most demand with the lowest amount of labor cost. Again, there might be some temporary layoffs and hour reductions as employers try to stretch their labor even thinner, until they realize they were already stretched to the limit and have to hire back.
Exactly. In Econ class we used the elasticities of supply and demand to see who “paid” for the tax or additional costs. Business owners will try to push it off if they can, but because of prices people are willing to pay, they often eat a large portion out of profit.
Things are never as simple as econ classes make you believe.
Business groups claim hard-fought $20 hourly wage victory will cause reduced hours, layoffs
David Card was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for showing that this isn't true.
(The study (PDF warning))
What was special about this research that won the guy the award?
According to Card:
the thing that has really influenced the field is the idea of looking for these pivotal events or things that have happened that could potentially inform our theorizing and understanding of the world.
That is to say, they actually looked at real world examples and compared (meaning they actually included evidence in their reasoning) rather than assuming it must be so based on neoclassical economic assumptions.
I'm not sure most people understand how neoclassical economics is based on "arm chair general" style models largely divorced from reality.
And how horrible an ideology it really is to have had infiltrate every aspect of western life and culture.
The more I look at it, the more I see how a large part of our current societal issues can be laid at the feet of this ideology masked as science.
"Mechanical" models that have a veneer of legitimacy have certainly compromised peoples' view of reality. See also views of traffic that treat it like a liquid, so politicians keep advocating for "just one more lane" despite induced demand being proven close to a 100 years ago.
Yeah, it’s pretty clear that this increase in wage will bump up the end cost of ordering at these restaurants but like… it’s by such a small margin where anyone complaining about it is a massive dork.
Big Mac is 30 cents more expensive so staff can get paid (closer to) a living wage. That’s a very fair trade off for the American people
Big Macs could have their prices slashed AND workers get more wages IF the execs at the top werent lining their pockets
With as much as prices have gone up anyway, I'd be happy to pay a pittance more so workers can earn better wages. Problem is I guarantee if Big Macs go up $.30, only a dime is going to workers.
Business groups claim hard-fought $20 hourly wage victory will cause reduced hours, layoffs and price hikes
That's not a claim, that's a threat. Whether or not that happens is completely up to them since their real before creative bookkeeping profits are astronomical enough that they can easily pay workers upwards of $25/h without doing any of the things they're threatening.
Regulations and enforcement of same are so lacking, though, that they're able to make good on that threat without being fined to the tune of even a thousandth of the amounts they steal from their workers.
Either way, fuck "business groups" that exist only to further enrich the already rich at the expense of everyone else.
Their critics are not so sure.
Oh my fucking god, FUCK that wording so hard. "Not so sure" is their way of playing down the strength and validity of the counter-arguments. God I hate the news.
And honestly, that’s the one thing we could’ve drawn from them calling them critics. Like no shit, thanks, I get that critics disagree can you please give us actual commentary.
Won’t someone please think of the billionaires and their investors?!?!?
Business groups claim hard-fought $20 hourly wage victory will cause reduced hours, layoffs and price hikes – critics say otherwise
If someone says that this will reduce hours, and cause layoffs, you know that they are bullshitting.
Why would they add to minimum wage increase and reduce their profit? Might as well declare bankruptcy.
As for prices, they usually are set not by how much it costs to produce something, but how much a customer will pay. They might increase prices if they are below the cost of production, but again they are dictated by the customer. If they can't the business would go bankrupt.
They didn't mention about going out of business, so it is kind of clear that this is a lot of hot air and they really just comparing about earning less.
There's one thing I didn't mentioned related to employees. It is automation that could replace them. The thing with that is that whenever they can, those companies would do that anyway.
Workers aren't choosing their hours though so yes they can have reduced hours. The supervisor might also be told to do with less manpower. Its like how when you go to a small boba or coffee shop and there is 1 person doing everything.
As for automation that is almost 100% going to happen and is already happening. From automated server to burger flipper to drive thru attendant it's all being tried.
You're talking as if they weren't working with minimum staff already. If they could cut staff more (even without this change) they would do so already.
As for automation that is almost 100% going to happen and is already happening. From automated server to burger flipper to drive thru attendant it's all being tried.
Yeah, but again, this would happen with or without minimum wage increase. For the owners even if they would have to pay $6/hour that would still make them complain that it is too much.
What politicians should work on is to introduce tax on automation, and all the income from it should go toward UBI.
"Our merchants and masters complain much of the bad effects of high wages in raising the price and lessening the sale of goods. They say nothing concerning the bad effects of high profits. They are silent with regard to the pernicious effects of their own gains. They complain only of those of other people.”
― Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations
Business groups claim they suckin deez nutz
just like everything else in the US now there will be a select few states with high pay even at fast food
meanwhile the same job is only paying $7.25 an hour in other states
in the US it like a dystopian future that uses a demographic lottery to hand out what rights and pay you will have
see the US is the greatest country you make a high salary and these citizens will revote these people back in meanwhile their neighbor is making half that and told he should have voted better
presidents are always supporting states rights over federal even Biden who has lazily left to the states to decide while touting how well their economic policies are doing
this leaves the citizens even the ones not allowed to vote at fault for their issues and divides the populace against each other