3 ms·
Rising gas prices mean we can lower wages to keep employees? Outside of the moral implication, this doesn't even logically make sense. People are already faci
by darth_avocado 5y ago
Rising gas prices mean we can lower wages to keep employees?
Outside of the moral implication, this doesn't even logically make sense.
People are already facing higher costs, if you pay them lower, they will not work for you, because you know, commuting to work at your place will eat into the budget.
- juancb 5y agoThose with exploitative mindsets have learned over time that it's easier to take advantage of those who they see as weak and desperate.
- 22c 5y agoSee also: employees on a sponsored work visa
- mistrial9 5y agoa 7-11 franchise in New York USA was convicted of modern slavery, using a non-citizen laborer and adding unpaid hours and duties.. iir
- darth_avocado 5y agoYou can’t get sponsored work visa for applebees unless you’re doing it illegally. You either get it for high skill industries or farm labor, no other employment.
- 22c 5y agoNot suggesting you would get a sponsored work visa from Applebees (although maybe at Applebees corporate) but I am suggesting that there are companies which take advantage of people who are on a work visa because those people on a work visa "need the job" in order to stay in the country.
- sour-taste 5y agoMany people will have no choice, they're force to work wherever they can at whatever wage they can get.
- V-eHGsd_ 5y ago> Outside of the moral implication, this doesn't even logically make sense. If I'm reading his point correctly ... He's saying there _was_ an employment crunch, and companies were competing with each other for employees by raising wages. He supposes that an increase in gas prices means that people need more money, so there are more employee hours "to go around". Therefore, companies don't need to compete as much with each other to attract employees, so they can go back to not paying as much.
- awa 5y agoI think the point was since the stimulus money has stopped they don't have to compete with the government and with inflation these folks will need to find a job.
- ashtonkem 5y agoThis reeks of motivated reasoning on behalf of the manager, as this analysis makes absolutely no sense.
- ffggvv 5y agothere is a point that with inflation, people who thought they could retire are now realizing they are going to need more money and having to unretire.
- throwaway0a5e 5y agoThe logic only works because we're coming out of a period where workforce participation fell off a cliff. Rising CoL because of energy and inflation -> people need the jobs more badly -> more labor available -> reduce wages And before anyone tries to score a few easy points building a strawman, I'm just explaining the logic. I'm not endorsing it or saying it's ethical.
- jabbany 5y agoThe idea is that they think of themselves as a labor monopsony. They are foreseeing an increase in supply (due to higher living costs forcing more people into the labor market, either those not previously working or those who are now taking on second jobs) and thus plan to accordingly reduce the price (wages). The main fault in their reasoning is the belief that higher living costs necessarily results in more people getting into the labor market. At some point the marginal benefit to a worker becomes zero or negative, where higher living costs can actually result in a reduction in the labor pool. Whether we are at that point though, is not known yet without more information about the localized economy.
- elliekelly 5y agoThey’ll also eat at Applebee’s less. This exec seems really out of touch with who the typical Applebee’s customer is and how much money they earn.
- maxerickson 5y agoThey are assuming the long time soft labor market that existed a couple years ago (vs the tight labor market that actually exists). Maybe out of habit or something?