Discussion Forum
Forum Home | Politics & Government | General Politics
Minimum wage laws creating employment nightmare for teens.
 by fredo on 6/19/2008 @ 9:54pm |
An army of young people is on the prowl. They're looking for work. Problem is, many of these first time workers don't possess good work skills and are not worth the state minimum wage which is about $8/hr. So how does the State of Washington deal with this problem? It doesn't. Thousands upon thousands of these would-be employees are sitting home playing video games and eating all the food in the refrigerator.
Wouldn't it be a good idea to put these youngsters on the payrolls at a more reasonable (from the employers perspective) wage, say $5 or $6? Teenagers couldn't get an apartment with this pay and they certainly couldn't start a family, but they could begin improving their skills and building some self confidence. The current minimum wage presents a hurdle that many entry level workers simply cannot clear. |
 by jenyum on 6/19/2008 @ 10:00pm | It costs 8.95 for a lunch these days, without tax and tip. It would be easier maybe if we just built shacks for unemployed people, housed them on large tracts of land, and used them for agricultural labor, buying and selling them as needed.
|
 by AngelaJossy on 6/19/2008 @ 10:25pm | My daughter is 16 and she was hoping to land her first real job this summer. She has put out several applications to no avail. I even helped her to make a resume - because even these minimum wage jobs are asking for them!
The trouble is, so many unemployed adults are settling for low paying jobs because its all they can get so the teenagers are squeezed out of the job market. Even I have been passed over for jobs that pay only $9.50 an hour despite my education and experience. I'm thinking of taking my guitar and rockin' a street corner. Busking would probably pay better than most day jobs right now. |
 by NineInchNachos on 6/19/2008 @ 10:28pm | send your teens to work in an Alaskan cannery for the summer.
They will learn something about life. |
 by ensie on 6/20/2008 @ 1:25am | Then don't hire them. Judging from the number of people job hunting right now you should have plenty of overqualified candidates.
Also - have you noticed that teenagers are also paying for expensive gas and the like? Why shouldn't they receive the same minimum wage as adults? |
by jenyum on 6/20/2008 @ 7:31am | I'm thinking of taking my guitar and rockin' a street corner. Busking would probably pay better than most day jobs right now.
The Farmer's Market was packed all day yesterday with kids blowing bubbles, and I still made my (customary) $7 in tips. |
by fredo on 6/20/2008 @ 9:07am | I proposed a solution to unemployed teens, so did NIN. Everybody else just restated the issue. Don't teenagers deserve a first job? |
by jenyum on 6/20/2008 @ 9:16am | I graduated from high school during a major recession in 91 and couldn't get a job then, either. Minimum wage was less than $5 an hour. Things are tough all over. Yes, teenagers deserve a first job, but lowering wages is not the answer.
At $6 an hour, $240 a week for a full 40 hour work week, less taxes, less gas money, you're left with very little to compensate for all that french fry oil in the pores. Honestly, given a choice I think most kids would stay home and play video games. For the kids who don't have a choice, those wages are, frankly, an insult. |
 by thriceallamerican on 6/20/2008 @ 9:23am | Hmmm...I'm not sure that I see this as directly being a problem with what minimum wage is, and rather a general problem with the economy. Businesses are hiring the people they need to do the job, and obviously in many sectors these jobs are in high demand, so of course they're going to people that are more qualified. To say that teenagers "deserve" a first job is asinine (especially since at some point they will get a job, and as such it will be their "first job")–is the implication that companies should just create positions, whether they need them or not, so that kids can get a summer job?
And really, if unemployment is high enough to cause problems with people finding jobs, a few teenagers not being able to find jobs may be the least of our problems. (Just to preemptively address this, I realize that many teens are working to save for college or support a child, etc., and these things are important, but most of them at least can still benefit from room and board courtesy of the 'rents, versus unemployed adults who likely have more expenses.) In a couple of years, we'll be hearing about all the places that can't find enough qualified workers. These things go in waves, and it has little to do with the minimum wage. In the meantime, buck up, kiddies, and welcome to life: sometimes it sucks. |
by fredo on 6/20/2008 @ 11:05am | The topic here isn't highly qualified workers. Undoubtedly, there is a shortage of these in many fields. Those of you who can't find work above $10/hr might want to review your skills. That could be the problem. The topic is how we can get teenagers into the workforce and whether the minimum wage law is interferring with their prospects.
One reason sandwiches cost 8.95 is because the minimum wage law makes the cost of operating a restaurant artifically high. I would rather see all the kids who want jobs get one even if means they would bring home as little as $240/wk (vs. $0). That amount might be insulting to an executive level person, but to a teenager who barely knows which end of broom does the sweeping it would be a chance to become part of the workforce. The alternative is do what has been suggested by some of the commentators, complain about how unfair the world is. |
 by scout on 6/20/2008 @ 1:31pm | Oh Man, I thought this said minimum "wedgie" laws - I need to get my eyes checked! |
by jenyum on 6/20/2008 @ 3:50pm | I am not comfortable with taking any category of worker and saying it is OK to pay them less than minimum wage.
I don't think the world is as full of privileged middle class teenagers who just need to have the option to work as might be apparent to some. There are plenty of 16-20 year olds who work for survival, and survival on 240 (minus taxes) a week is pretty grim. Also, we are taking categories of workers (and work) and saying: this is inherently of less value. Sure, you are working hard, harder than the average Cubicle Monkey, but it's OK to pay you less than even someone a few years older than you doing the same job, because of this arbitrary age factor. Also, if it were permitted to hire teenagers at a lower rate of pay, you'd be likely to see employers economizing by hiring them over older workers. Causing age discrimination on both ends of the spectrum. Bad, bad, all around. And still not pumping any more money into the economy. |
by fredo on 6/20/2008 @ 11:11pm | Jen-I may be wrong, but I get the idea you don't have much experience with unemployed teens.
Angie gave a good example of a teen (her daughter) who can't find a job. Your advice to her seems to be "stay home & play video games rather than suffer the indignity of an inferior wage package." How encouraging. If you have a solution to the problem of high teenage unemployment, I didn't glean it from your postings. My proposal is not without drawbacks (some of which you mentioned) but its tangible and could help the situation. Regarding the inequitable nature of work-that's been present in the employment world since forever. The least rewarding and least desired jobs are always going to go the entry level employee. That's why they call it entry level. High achievers move up, low achievers keep doing entry level work or get fired. |
 by Frinklin on 6/20/2008 @ 11:50pm | Jen-I may be wrong, but I get the idea you don't have much experience with unemployed teens.
Regardless of the truth of that statement, it has exactly what do to with anything? |
by Frinklin on 6/20/2008 @ 11:50pm | Angie gave a good example of a teen (her daughter) who can't find a job. Your advice to her seems to be "stay home & play video games rather than suffer the indignity of an inferior wage package." How encouraging.
Yes, nearly as encouraging as you smugly claiming that Angela's daughter is somehow unworthy of minimum wage law protection due entirely to her age. Now, I'm sure your idea springs purely from altruistic reasons, and not because this would give you as a business owner an entire class of worker whom you could legally pay less than minimum wage. |
by ensie on 6/20/2008 @ 11:57pm | The idea of minimum wage is to create a fair working wage for the worker, typically the entry level worker without experience.
Moving to create a teenage underclass of worker isn't a solution. Teenagers that are doing the same work that an adult would do deserve to be paid the same wage. |
 by escaping slave on 6/21/2008 @ 7:21am | Minimum wage is simply a bar to jump over and that's it. It provides nothing, but the bare minimum, and that's only if you're able to jump over that bar. And who set that bar? Beaurocrats.
Employers are supposed to be the ones to set the wages, not the government. Employers are supposed to be the ones who decide who they want to work for them or not, not the government. No matter your age, if you don't have experience, skill, and training, jobs are that much harder to get. Unfortunately kids don't learn skills nowadays, and they don't get training or experience until it's time to work. The problem is they sit for 8 hours a day on their asses "learning" what the government tells them to learn (think WASL)...and then they can't get jobs. Hmmm. |
by jenyum on 6/21/2008 @ 7:41am | I don't know about the WASL, but those kids sher should get offa my lawn. Kids these days...
Look, life is outrageously expensive right now and the minimum wage ought to at least have some small correlation to the rate of inflation, although it has never actually been run that way on a federal level. This is not grandpa giving the kids a $20 bill and patting them on the head. We're talking about work, and the absolute minimum you should be permitted to pay someone to do it. In your part of town Fredo, I'd imagine some of the merchants could afford to take on a teenager or two at $8 an hour, or not, but that's their choice. Let's not make life even harder for the working poor of other neighborhoods and communities because that seems like too much money to pay your neighbor's kid. |
by fredo on 6/21/2008 @ 8:30am | Lots of passion in these postings.
Creative thinking on the subject of teen unemployment...not so much. Frinklin@ for the record, I never claimed that Angie's daughter didn't deserve the protection of the law. Please reread the postings. My position is to repeal or refine the minimum wage laws to help teens. You didn't weigh in on the subject of high teen unemployment rates. What's your recommendation? Footnote: I believe Washington state has the highest minimum wage rate in the country. How's that working? |
by fredo on 6/28/2008 @ 10:11am | Here's some new information which might breathe some life into this discussion. Unemployment rates for teenagers (US)range from 18% to 85% depending on the geographical area you're looking at. I expect this is the rate for teenagers actively seeking work and does not include discouraged teens who have given up.
Isn't it important to get these people excited about adulthood and the working world? Or would it be better to erect some sort of government barrier to employment which could truncate the ambitions of millions of our most impressionable young people? My position: young people must be given the opportunity to work if they so desire. According to this morning's Tribune, Bill Gates career in computers started as a dumpster diver trying to retrieve discarded computer manuals. Imagine if Bill had found out that dumpster diving paid less than minimum wage. |
by AngelaJossy on 6/28/2008 @ 11:45am | The government is never going to lower minimum wage. Just like inflation - its a one way street. Teenagers do have one advantage though. They can work under the table without breaking the law. They can do yard work, babysitting, dog walking, computer troubleshooting (many of them are much more adept at computers than adults now days) and lots of other odd jobs without the government picking their pocket. |
 by FunkomaVintage on 6/28/2008 @ 11:52am | If Bill Gates had found that dumpster diving paid less than mini* wage.....that's Bill's problem. He had a passion. And an ability to copy other people's work. And a rich family. It's never a surprise if a Trustfundian makes it big....it's news if they don't make it big.
I didn't like the jobs most kids do so.....I Made A Job. I babysat once. I cleaned house once. For money. Then I put my other "talents" to work and made a job. I'm still doing it. Hey, kids don't deserve a job. Kids deserve learning, and time to explore their talents. I hope the ones who need a job, can find one. If they put their thinking caps on....they can babysit, they can clean house, pick up poop, dog-walk, paint mailboxes, mow lawns, plant petunias, embroider hippie jeans, hang tapestries as the headliners for VW buses, peel potatoes, serve sno-cones.....all of which I did before the age of 14. Some helpful suggestions there Fredo. If business owners can't hire one teen part-time, oh well. That would be a micro-business...like me! Other than that ..what Jen said, et al. It's is sooooo well-proven that minimum wages set "high", benefit our society, rather than destroy it. Money moves around and filters through. What would Claire's be without teen's wages earned at Orange Julius? eh? I'm my long years of work experience, it is often the richest who whine the most about minimum wage while paying the least possible amount for their gardeners, nannies and house-cleaners.....all jobs I have had, and were replaced by an immigrant who would work for less. Just saying. So don't worry. wow this is long. My interest is in Labor Studies among other things. Yes, I do agree this country needs a good old-fashioned jobs training program. They work. |
by fredo on 6/29/2008 @ 12:06pm | Let's see. The minimum wage is a critical tool that should not be tampered with. But teens can work under the table for less. That sounds oddly...inconsistant.
Funkoma@ You claim that minimum wages set "high" benefit society and it's "well-proven". Could you please link me to this information? I don't see how this could be proven. Teen unemployment rates are unacceptably high and that is proven. Furthermore, if a high minimum wage is beneficial, then why don't we try $10, $20, $50 dollars an hour? Wouldn't this be even more beneficial, or is $8 the magic number? |
 by AP on 6/29/2008 @ 1:32pm | ..young people must be given the opportunity to work if they so desire.. I am speechless. Life is tough all over. Teenagers must be given.. nothing. It's up to the individuals and the people who conceived them to work through this problem. It is not the responsibility of government, nor my responsibility to come up with a solution to the job shortage for young people. Honestly, I'm way more concerned about the potholes on my street than the teenage job market. Much like rising gas prices finally curbing automobile use, this scenario may eventually lead to a handle on population growth. Maybe people will stop having 2.4 kids per household? That would help, right? It might take 16 years before the effects are realized, but I can be patient if I really put my mind to it. |
by ensie on 6/29/2008 @ 11:49pm | "...why not set it at $10, $20, $50...?"
Minimum wage was originally set in order to feed a certain sized family at the poverty level. It's been raised over the years to try to keep pace with inflation, but has done a pretty crap-ass job of it. I defy anyone to house, clothe, and feed a family of four on $8 an hour. But I digress, as I stated before, creating an underclass of teenage workers isn't a solution. |
by fredo on 6/30/2008 @ 1:37pm | Minimum wage was originally set in order to feed a certain sized family at the poverty level. The irony is that in a global marketplace the cost of providing for a family is not a consideration. It's only a consideration when the employer cannot locate the workforce outside the US. The result: America is now a workplace for low paid service workers and goodbye middle class.
Does this mean the US doesn't have a role to play in eliminating poverty? Certainly not. I just don't see minimum wage laws doing a very good job of eliminating poverty or unemployment. They do seem to be pretty useful at giving the electorate a warm and fuzzy feeling. |
 by intacoma on 6/30/2008 @ 2:06pm | blogging has made me rich, maybe they should try that you can blog from the public library. get that money! |
by intacoma on 6/30/2008 @ 2:07pm | also if you work hard you can make around 40k with ebay |
by Mofo from the Hood on 6/30/2008 @ 3:06pm | The American worker, as a producer of goods, has been so devalued in the global economy that quite nearly the only role left to play is that of consumer.
It may be a long time if ever that import tariffs will secure and stabilize the U.S. economy. Many countries of the world which had formerly exported raw materials to U.S. production sites and then imported back final products are now countries that have their own state-of-the-art sustainability infrastructure including production technology. Reduction of demand for products externally in foreign markets and saturation internally in U.S. markets is a complex system problem, and so wages in the U.S. may never again provide the standard of living which was possible following World War Two. Economic conditions then in terms of communication and manufacturing technologies and sources of raw materials and geographic barriers was a one-time unrepeatable event in history. The real danger on the horizon is if the promoters of a Global Government triumph in their efforts to supercede the U.S. constitution by U.N. treaties and force of law. If the U.S. loses its sovereignty then U.S. citizens will have far more to concern themselves with than miniumum wage laws. U.S. citizens could lose their freedom, security, and use of private property. |
by AngelaJossy on 6/30/2008 @ 4:41pm | Speaking of consumerism, have you seen this?
The Story of Stuff www.storyofstuff.com/ |
by escaping slave on 7/4/2008 @ 8:35am | The real danger on the horizon is if the promoters of a Global Government triumph in their efforts to supercede the U.S. constitution by U.N. treaties and force of law. If the U.S. loses its sovereignty then U.S. citizens will have far more to concern themselves with than miniumum wage laws. U.S. citizens could lose their freedom, security, and use of private property.
This has already happened. The Patriot Act has happened, twice now. We have no private property because we don't own land even if we pay it off (if you pay taxes it's not yours). We also don't have private property because we don't buy anything with real money, only Federal Reserve Notes, which are only IOUs, not real money....so we really own nothing, unless paid for with metals (real money). And armed forces serve under UN command and have for many years. Going back to an economy post WWII isn't the answer, as that was all Fiat based too. |
by fredo on 7/4/2008 @ 10:57am | ES@ These are great issues. I was only trying to get a dialogue started about helping teens get a chance at a job.
Too many people are overconcerned with the wage the teens will earn. Employment is so much more than just pay. Employment makes people feel valued, gives them a sense of self worth, in other words, a feeling that they are on a career path. Unemployed people sit around and complain about how miserable the world is and their self esteem takes a huge hit. If you fail frequently in life you begin to feel like a failure. Yes, teens do deserve a chance to work. |
by AngelaJossy on 7/4/2008 @ 11:43am | I'll hire some teens right now if they are willing to work. Why are there no neighborhood boys pushing lawn mowers down the street looking for yard work jobs anymore? I need mowing, raking and weed-eating. Send me your Lakewood teenager and I'll put him/her to work. Mine won't touch a lawn-mower to save her life and all her male friends claim allergies. Bunch of lilly-livered cumquats! |
by Mofo from the Hood on 7/4/2008 @ 12:37pm | Hey lady, what's the goin' rate for mowin' lawns these days. If you got a lawn mower, maybe I can help. |
by escaping slave on 7/5/2008 @ 9:08am | Mine won't touch a lawn-mower to save her life and all her male friends claim allergies. Bunch of lilly-livered cumquats!
You've hit the nail on the head. Many kids today do not want to work, period, end of story. Who knows the reason. Maybe the parents give them everything; maybe they think they don't work until they have a college degree; maybe they think someone else will take care of them if they can't work; maybe they've been raised to not care about having a work ethic because someone else will take care of them, as they've seen happen to their parents; maybe they have no work ethic because their parents pawned them off to schools that taught them nothing other than how to pass a test and invested no time in giving their children a work ethic. It varies for everyone and I've heard many reasons/excuses for why peoples' kids don't work. If people don't want to work, they won't. If people want to work, they will find a way. What does it come down to? People have to want it, like anything else. Fredo - you stated, Employment makes people feel valued, gives them a sense of self worth... A dog feels the same way when you give him something to do. So employment does not necessarily equal being valued or even feeling valued. It's not about employment, but about doing something to make one feel they have value, and that doesn't always have to have money attached to it. |
by FunkomaVintage on 7/5/2008 @ 10:58am | fredo.....google is your friend. What... are you lazy? Wanna read some info on minimum wage.....do the work to find it. I do know lots of kids who work....and many who wanna intern in my shop! I do know lots of kids who are lazy. Mmm, just like the grownups. Issues....check out Take Back Your Time....google it.
Oh, yeah, you can make bunches of $$ on ebay. Swap Meet at Starlite. And I double dog dare anyone who thinks the minimum wage is too high...spend a year working it.....then tell me about it. |
 by Twisty on 7/5/2008 @ 12:07pm | "One reason sandwiches cost 8.95 is because the minimum wage law makes the cost of operating a restaurant artifically high."
I disagree. Sandwiches can be had for much less in places where the leases are less expensive. Paying $8-9 for a $4-5 lunch has a lot more to do with where you by it, than it does with the wages of the person who makes and serves it. If the kids aren't worth the pittance that the state says we have to pay them, then go bitch at their parents and teachers. But don't gripe about laws that prevent business operators from (over) exploiting people. |
by escaping slave on 7/5/2008 @ 12:53pm | Twisty - You are correct. It does depend on where one goes. Doesn't anyone notice that the newer the facility, the higher the prices? Want a good sandwich at a good price? Go to MSM. It's not all fluff when you walk in, but the food is good and the people work hard for the service they provide.
As far as preventing businesses from exploiting people, notice people line up to be exploited? They can choose to not work at Wal-Mart or somewhere else, but yet they choose to stand in line and fill out an application. So why punish the business when it's the people who can't say no to being exploited? |
by fredo on 7/6/2008 @ 10:59am | The subject of "exploitation" has been mentioned.
An employer hopes to marry the labor he is purchasing to the raw materials he has available and sell the result at a profit. I would like to point out that the employer pays for the labor even if, in the end (as in the recently reported case of General Motors), there is no profit. People are not being exploited because they happen to be the employees in an employer/employee relationship. What's so great about the US is that anyone regardless of income or social status is free to establish a business, hire employees if he so chooses, and work towards the goal of a profitable lifestyle. The minimum wage law works best when employment levels are relatively high and stable (not 2008) and inflation is under control (not 2008). All its doing for us now is marginalizing the value of our unemployed youth. |
by escaping slave on 7/6/2008 @ 3:11pm | What's so great about the US is that anyone regardless of income or social status is free to establish a business, hire employees if he so chooses, and work towards the goal of a profitable lifestyle.
Fredo, on this point you should talk to hemp and marijuana farmers, as well as prostitutes, drug dealers (including MDs and pharmacists), and anyone else choosing to make a living in a way they choose that the government doesn't agree with. How free are they to do their business? I question the "value" of some of these "unemployed" youths. People on here have openly admitted they have kids who don't do work around the house....and they wonder why kids don't work? Look in the mirror and ask yourself that question if you're one of those people wondering that. Minimum wage laws and inflation are man made, so this is orchestrated. Get rid of both and you're a couple steps closer to solving the problem. Getting rid of the Fed, which creates our inflation problems, would do wonders! |
by AngelaJossy on 7/6/2008 @ 3:24pm | For the record: I didn't say my daughter wouldn't work - only that she won't go near a lawnmower. |
by fredo on 7/6/2008 @ 5:56pm | ES@ Good points. Of course freedom doesn't mean you're free to do whatever you want. I would not encourage teens to engage in prostitution or drug dealing.
The "value" of unemployed youths can easily be determined, but not with minimum wage laws in place. The market will determine this value. Children of the entitlement generation IN GENERAL are worth considerably less than minimum wage. We can't tell what they're worth unless the minimum wage laws are eliminated or modified. The posters who mentioned odd jobs kids used to do and could still do are really encouraging a sort of underground economy that probably pays less than minimum wage. Those of you who want an underground economy but want employers to be forced to offer a minimum wage should explain how the underground economy pays them minimum wage and takes care of the FICA responsibilities (social security, medicare, disability income). Please be consistant. |
by escaping slave on 7/6/2008 @ 6:25pm | Of course freedom doesn't mean you're free to do whatever you want.
I beg to differ there also. According to Black's Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition: Free: Unconstrained; having power to follow the dictates of his own will. Not subject to the dominion of another. So freedom is being free to do whatever one wants, period. It's not harming others or the property of others that's the key to enjoying your freedoms. Of course, you do have the freedom to destroy other peoples' property, but the owners of that property also have their rights to take you out if you're harming them or their property. If I'm doing something in my house and not harming anyone else, who is it hurting besides me? And why do you care if it isn't hurting you? Not encourage kids to engage in prostitution or drug dealing. Well, what's a barista at Starbucks? What is Starbucks (a.k.a. Soma)? It's coffee, which contains caffeine, which is a drug. The medical examiner will list it as a drug in your system when you die. So how is that not dealing drugs? Craigslist has lots of ads from people who need kids, or anyone, willing to do odd jobs for cheap. Underground economies are great, and they're created thanks to governments and their standards and controls. As a teenager who can't vote, where's the incentive to get a job where your boss will take taxes that you don't have a say in? Get a job that pays under the table and develop a work ethic - something that's priceless and you can use the rest of your life. And never file a W2...ever! |
| Post Reply: |
