If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
So Auckland council is looking at following the capital's example paying its people the "living wage". This is after WCC have admitted that it will cost jobs to implement.
Is paying 10 people an extra $160/wk while making 1 person redundant a positive move over all?
So Auckland council is looking at following the capital's example paying its people the "living wage". This is after WCC have admitted that it will cost jobs to implement.
Is paying 10 people an extra $160/wk while making 1 person redundant a positive move over all?
the living wage is a poorly thought out concept that don't attempt to look at the costs associated. Start wiTh a cost of living assessment, then allocate an hourly rate (min) required to deliver on the cost of living. But wait if the labour component of anything in the basket of goods that made up the original cost of living assessment goes up to erm... The living wage, the cost of living goes up requiring the living wage to be increased. In XLS speak it becomes a circular reference ...
the only way to increase wages is to improve output either produce more in the allocated time or produce something of higher value in the allocated time - if you achieve that you are entitled to a higher wage...
If you do the same thing this year as last year why do you think you should get paid more for it?
1 side of goff's mouth says the extra wage bill will be covered by "efficiencies"
the other side is threatening ratepayers for a 16% hike in rates, after this year's promised 2.5% hike, and all only a couple of years after len's 9.9%
Originally posted by Don't believe the HypeView Post
the living wage is a poorly thought out concept that don't attempt to look at the costs associated. Start wiTh a cost of living assessment, then allocate an hourly rate (min) required to deliver on the cost of living. But wait if the labour component of anything in the basket of goods that made up the original cost of living assessment goes up to erm... The living wage, the cost of living goes up requiring the living wage to be increased. In XLS speak it becomes a circular reference ...
the only way to increase wages is to improve output either produce more in the allocated time or produce something of higher value in the allocated time - if you achieve that you are entitled to a higher wage...
If you do the same thing this year as last year why do you think you should get paid more for it?
By the same token then if the minimum wage reduced the cost of living would reduce and everyone would be better off?
Valuing a persons output is difficult. Is an aged care worker worth more than just above the minimum wage?
By the same token then if the minimum wage reduced the cost of living would reduce and everyone would be better off?
this is a question around standard of living and expectations relating to standard of living. You could create an argument to support lower wages delivering lower cost of goods resulting in more jobs in NZ therefore more employment etc - but that would require the assumption that labour costs are the only barrier to NZ business ... The reality is there are many elements other than labour costs that make NZ uncompetitive globally an obvious one is OH&S standards that are higher than competing manufacturing locations.
Valuing a persons output is difficult. Is an aged care worker worth more than just above the minimum wage?
its is not actually that hard to value a persons output, it requires a bit of thinking, operational discipline and clear management and direction. It is a critical element of any successful business/commercial operation. The bigger question is what is the delineation between public service and business. Where something is considered a business output is required to be measures.
In your example of aged care a private operator is running a business, like it or not, and as such there is ways to measure output. In an industry like this there is a tricky balance between but customer service measures might form part of the output metric
Originally posted by Don't believe the HypeView Post
this is a question around standard of living and expectations relating to standard of living. You could create an argument to support lower wages delivering lower cost of goods resulting in more jobs in NZ therefore more employment etc - but that would require the assumption that labour costs are the only barrier to NZ business ... The reality is there are many elements other than labour costs that make NZ uncompetitive globally an obvious one is OH&S standards that are higher than competing manufacturing locations.
So the same argument applies both ways - wages up or down.
NZ likes to think we are a developed country - we are.
But unfortunately we are a low wage developed country with high wage aspirations of quality of life.
So the same argument applies both ways - wages up or down.
NZ likes to think we are a developed country - we are.
But unfortunately we are a low wage developed country with high wage aspirations of quality of life.
developed yes, advanced no... Aspirations - well when your aspirations aren't in line with your abilities you can bet disappointment follows...
I had aspirations of being a pro golfer but with an ability to rarely crack 100 I had a hard time dealing with the fact I couldn't get a regular spot on the pro tour!!
We're not living in a circular economy. The majority of businesses are part or fully foreign owned and most products are imported. Foreign borrowing keeps increasing.
Increasing wages before balancing the local economy will only increase the speed of the out flow of cash.
Comment