2 ms·

As someone else pointed out, it would be far far less than 21%, since labour is not the only cost of production. A 21% increase in labour costs doesn’t mean tot

As someone else pointed out, it would be far far less than 21%, since labour is not the only cost of production. A 21% increase in labour costs doesn’t mean total costs go up by 21%. > Literally still more than some other jobs, and meanwhile by this math you're getting paid while you're asleep or drinking with your friends. This is big “a pizza party is good compensation for overtime” energy, my guy. If you’re AT work you’re working.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago
> As someone else pointed out, it would be far far less than 21%, since labour is not the only cost of production. A 21% increase in labour costs doesn’t mean total costs go up by 21%. > Labor accounts for half of the costs The margins aren't 10.5% either, and they can't go below the market rate of return or the farm shuts down because the land and equipment is worth more than it generates. Which it was already so close to before this happened that many of them already have. This isn't Apple, it's a farm. > If you’re AT work you’re working. Slogans-as-hard-rules that don't take into account context is why labor laws consistently hurt workers. Can you see why a worker might prefer this arrangement to one in which they're paid e.g. $12/hour for 40 hours, and are consequently upset at having it be prohibited?
- kennywinker 3y ago
  > > Labor accounts for half of the costs The actual quote is: > Labor accounts for half of the costs, he says Unless he shows me his books, I’m not gonna believe that on just his word. Neither should you. > The margins aren't 11.5% either Again, I’d have to see his books before I concluded that the margins didn’t leave room for a <11.5% raise in labour costs. Remember - it would be less, since as he said only the most skilled cutters are earning +$30/hour.
  - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
    > Labor accounts for half of the costs, he says "He" is the farmer. Who else would even know? > Again, I’d have to see his books before I concluded that the margins didn’t leave room for a <11.5% raise in labour costs. Books are just spreadsheets. They contain no authentication. You don't trust his word but you trust him to give you accurate numbers? We don't need some specific farmer's accounts to know which businesses have low margins. Farming is a notoriously competitive industry with razor-thin margins because the product is a fungible global commodity. > Remember - it would be less, since as he said only the most skilled cutters are earning +$30/hour. The 21% increase comes from paying 50% more for 30 of 70 hours, (0.5 x 30)/70 = 21%, the same percentage regardless of the base hourly wage. But it's actually worse than that, because for the overtime hours it's a 50% increase. Which is why they immediately get cut.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

> As someone else pointed out, it would be far far less than 21%, since labour is not the only cost of production. A 21% increase in labour costs doesn’t mean total costs go up by 21%. > Labor accounts for half of the costs The margins aren't 10.5% either, and they can't go below the market rate of return or the farm shuts down because the land and equipment is worth more than it generates. Which it was already so close to before this happened that many of them already have. This isn't Apple, it's a farm. > If you’re AT work you’re working. Slogans-as-hard-rules that don't take into account context is why labor laws consistently hurt workers. Can you see why a worker might prefer this arrangement to one in which they're paid e.g. $12/hour for 40 hours, and are consequently upset at having it be prohibited?

kennywinker 3y ago
> > Labor accounts for half of the costs The actual quote is: > Labor accounts for half of the costs, he says Unless he shows me his books, I’m not gonna believe that on just his word. Neither should you. > The margins aren't 11.5% either Again, I’d have to see his books before I concluded that the margins didn’t leave room for a <11.5% raise in labour costs. Remember - it would be less, since as he said only the most skilled cutters are earning +$30/hour.
- AnthonyMouse 3y ago
  > Labor accounts for half of the costs, he says "He" is the farmer. Who else would even know? > Again, I’d have to see his books before I concluded that the margins didn’t leave room for a <11.5% raise in labour costs. Books are just spreadsheets. They contain no authentication. You don't trust his word but you trust him to give you accurate numbers? We don't need some specific farmer's accounts to know which businesses have low margins. Farming is a notoriously competitive industry with razor-thin margins because the product is a fungible global commodity. > Remember - it would be less, since as he said only the most skilled cutters are earning +$30/hour. The 21% increase comes from paying 50% more for 30 of 70 hours, (0.5 x 30)/70 = 21%, the same percentage regardless of the base hourly wage. But it's actually worse than that, because for the overtime hours it's a 50% increase. Which is why they immediately get cut.