6 ms·

No, the Pizzeria paying the driver ensures that the driver gets paid.

by nezza-_- 12y ago

snotrockets 12y ago
That's the problem is: most Pizzerias don't. Or don't pay a living wage.
- protomyth 12y ago
  "Or don't pay a living wage." Why does every job have to pay a "living wage"? Almost all the pizza delivery folks I knew were doing it part-time for extra cash. Pizza delivery is not a long term career. This notion that every job is a career job is just silly and is detrimental to our youth trying to pick up extra cash and some experience.
  - jackvalentine 12y ago
    Because it's so, so easy to get trapped in a cycle of endless below-livable jobs just to support yourself. My personal belief, and I'm more than willing to pay more for goods and services to support it, and I live in a country where we have a liveable minimal wage, is that every job if worked 40 hours should be enough for a very modest, but not totally hopeless life. You also then have time off to use to improve yourself via school or some other way. If you're working back-to-back jobs 80 hours a week that pay nothing you have zero time for yourself, zero time for good planning and zero time to attend any kind of classes. Being poor and desperate impairs your ability to think, plan and change yourself{1}. 1: http://psych.princeton.edu/~psych/psychology/research/shafir/pubs/PovertyImpedesCognitiveFunction.pdf http://psych.princeton.edu/~psych/psychology/research/shafir... Edit: the thread is too long for me to reply to the responses below. What an unfortunate design HN, as the "right of reply" has effectively been stripped from me.
    - protomyth 12y ago
      > Because it's so, so easy to get trapped in a cycle of endless below-livable jobs just to support yourself. That's an appeal to emotions and has nothing to do with the argument. > My personal belief, and I'm more than willing to pay more for goods and services to support it, and I live in a country where we have a liveable minimal wage, is that every job if worked 40 hours should be enough for a very modest, but not totally hopeless life. You also then have time off to use to improve yourself via school or some other way. You are more than willing to pay more, but the very people you talk about who need cheap goods and services to stretch a budget don't have that extra money. The forcing of every job to be "living wages" removes a part of the labor force that is willing and able (due to parents or other income) to provide services for less money. Removing part-time, dependent labor from the the market increases the costs of goods and services for everyone and screws poor people. You might feel better, but it has a detrimental effect. > If you're working back-to-back jobs 80 hours a week that pay nothing you have zero time for yourself, zero time for good planning and zero time to attend any kind of classes. This is a different issue. This is the disappearance of full-time, low skill jobs. There are many factors including changing laws that have impacted this area. Our current bad economy and companies preparing for changes in health care laws are two. Worsening the situation by raising the minimum wage is only going to get more people fired / hours reduced or speed automation (McDonald's self ordering machines). Doing something to help people get an education or training is one thing, eliminating a whole class of workers that make goods and services cheaper is a problem. I remember the paper, and remember a negative reaction, but do not have time to read and find my sources on it again.
      - Already__Taken 12y ago
        How is your fist point an appeal to emotions there's nothing evocative at all. If you have multiple below living wage jobs you've still a fixed amount of time in the day you can work just now you're being paid less for when you do work AND have higher transportation costs by definition. Maybe job security is an advantage as you won't get fired from everything all at once. You keep repeating how the suggestions will make things more expensive for poor people. We're suggesting to pay poor people to not be poor.
        12y ago
    - ehsanu1 12y ago
      > the thread is too long for me to reply to the responses below. What an unfortunate design HN, as the "right of reply" has effectively been stripped from me. You can probably reply now. IIRC, there is a delay in the reply link being available for long threads, as a very blunt measure to reduce fast/long back and forth arguments.
  - Ollinson 12y ago
    I don't know where you live but most of the food delivery people in my major US city are at least over 30, many even in their 50s. Lots of immigrants too. For unskilled labor a career might be a job.
- eru 12y ago
  Why work for them?
  - jacalata 12y ago
    Are there not job trees??!
- robryan 12y ago
  This may be because of an expectation of tips though? If the tips dried up they would be forced to move that pay to the persons wage.
  - snotrockets 12y ago
    That would work if workers and employers were equals. They don't. That's why you need strong unions: they tip the scales to a more equal balance of powers.

No, the Pizzeria paying the driver ensures that the driver gets paid.

snotrockets 12y ago

That's the problem is: most Pizzerias don't. Or don't pay a living wage.

protomyth 12y ago
"Or don't pay a living wage." Why does every job have to pay a "living wage"? Almost all the pizza delivery folks I knew were doing it part-time for extra cash. Pizza delivery is not a long term career. This notion that every job is a career job is just silly and is detrimental to our youth trying to pick up extra cash and some experience.
- jackvalentine 12y ago
  Because it's so, so easy to get trapped in a cycle of endless below-livable jobs just to support yourself. My personal belief, and I'm more than willing to pay more for goods and services to support it, and I live in a country where we have a liveable minimal wage, is that every job if worked 40 hours should be enough for a very modest, but not totally hopeless life. You also then have time off to use to improve yourself via school or some other way. If you're working back-to-back jobs 80 hours a week that pay nothing you have zero time for yourself, zero time for good planning and zero time to attend any kind of classes. Being poor and desperate impairs your ability to think, plan and change yourself{1}. 1: http://psych.princeton.edu/~psych/psychology/research/shafir/pubs/PovertyImpedesCognitiveFunction.pdf http://psych.princeton.edu/~psych/psychology/research/shafir... Edit: the thread is too long for me to reply to the responses below. What an unfortunate design HN, as the "right of reply" has effectively been stripped from me.
  - protomyth 12y ago
    > Because it's so, so easy to get trapped in a cycle of endless below-livable jobs just to support yourself. That's an appeal to emotions and has nothing to do with the argument. > My personal belief, and I'm more than willing to pay more for goods and services to support it, and I live in a country where we have a liveable minimal wage, is that every job if worked 40 hours should be enough for a very modest, but not totally hopeless life. You also then have time off to use to improve yourself via school or some other way. You are more than willing to pay more, but the very people you talk about who need cheap goods and services to stretch a budget don't have that extra money. The forcing of every job to be "living wages" removes a part of the labor force that is willing and able (due to parents or other income) to provide services for less money. Removing part-time, dependent labor from the the market increases the costs of goods and services for everyone and screws poor people. You might feel better, but it has a detrimental effect. > If you're working back-to-back jobs 80 hours a week that pay nothing you have zero time for yourself, zero time for good planning and zero time to attend any kind of classes. This is a different issue. This is the disappearance of full-time, low skill jobs. There are many factors including changing laws that have impacted this area. Our current bad economy and companies preparing for changes in health care laws are two. Worsening the situation by raising the minimum wage is only going to get more people fired / hours reduced or speed automation (McDonald's self ordering machines). Doing something to help people get an education or training is one thing, eliminating a whole class of workers that make goods and services cheaper is a problem. I remember the paper, and remember a negative reaction, but do not have time to read and find my sources on it again.
    - Already__Taken 12y ago
      How is your fist point an appeal to emotions there's nothing evocative at all. If you have multiple below living wage jobs you've still a fixed amount of time in the day you can work just now you're being paid less for when you do work AND have higher transportation costs by definition. Maybe job security is an advantage as you won't get fired from everything all at once. You keep repeating how the suggestions will make things more expensive for poor people. We're suggesting to pay poor people to not be poor.
      - 12y ago
  - ehsanu1 12y ago
    > the thread is too long for me to reply to the responses below. What an unfortunate design HN, as the "right of reply" has effectively been stripped from me. You can probably reply now. IIRC, there is a delay in the reply link being available for long threads, as a very blunt measure to reduce fast/long back and forth arguments.
- Ollinson 12y ago
  I don't know where you live but most of the food delivery people in my major US city are at least over 30, many even in their 50s. Lots of immigrants too. For unskilled labor a career might be a job.
eru 12y ago
Why work for them?
- jacalata 12y ago
  Are there not job trees??!
robryan 12y ago
This may be because of an expectation of tips though? If the tips dried up they would be forced to move that pay to the persons wage.
- snotrockets 12y ago
  That would work if workers and employers were equals. They don't. That's why you need strong unions: they tip the scales to a more equal balance of powers.