I am not suggesting they engage in charity - I am explaining the gap in their current staffing practices that they can close to help with the issue the OP described.
concurrently, writing your MP to the effect of "my business is being severely impacted by the lack of action on housing - can your party table a plan to outlaw equity firms and corporations financializing the housing market, or risk losing my vote to a party that does?" may help.
unfortunately the big take away from your post is you probably need to examine adding $2-3/hour to start along all your positions and then go from there
Where was it stated that it pay related? How was this your "big take away"?
How did part time people run into such financial burdens after only 2 days of work?
concurrently, writing your MP to the effect of "my business is being severely impacted by the lack of action on housing - can your party table a plan to outlaw equity firms and corporations financializing the housing market, or risk losing my vote to a party that does?" may help.
When a business run's fairly, treats people with respect pays a livable wage and provides equal opportunities, benefits, above average vacation, sick time and misc. time off. Promotes open communication and where 99% of the employee's are content. I think we've done enough. I don't think I need to get involved in politics and the province as well. While we are disappointed by the attitude of these two younger people, it does not stop us from staying positive and continuing to look for more people to assist with our growth.
Listen, I'd would be ok with paying everyone 40 dollars an hour, but we'd be closed within a week.
the people leaving obviously tried out the work and decided that it wasn't worth the currency they would get in a return
you guys are making this an emotional thing, like "why should they have to get more $$$, why don't they WANT to work" when it's much simpler and likely purely economic
that you don't see the obvious "I need to compete to for better workers by paying more or giving some other tangible benefit" I can't understand
my reply isn't some bleeding heart pro labour speech, it's just honest feedback based on what you've posted
I do empathize with smaller business owners whos product or service they provide is primarily generated through paying low-skill or unskilled workers and marking up the results - these businesses will be hit hardest by inflation and the housing crisis because their bottom line is directly tied to how low they can pay employees and still retain them
the people leaving obviously tried out the work and decided that it wasn't worth the currency they would get in a return
you guys are making this an emotional thing, like "why should they have to get more $$$, why don't they WANT to work" when it's much simpler and likely purely economic
that you don't see the obvious "I need to compete to for better workers by paying more or giving some other tangible benefit" I can't understand
my reply isn't some bleeding heart pro labour speech, it's just honest feedback based on what you've posted
I don't disagree with anything you say. But to make a statement such as this without know the rate of pay in question and the work load is what concerns me. My other question would be why would someone agree to a wage only to realize 2 days later it was "not enough". To be honest I think you are over thinking my original post. You also missed my post where I stated that one left for another job, but as they never returned our calls/emails we'll never know the reason why.
I don't disagree with anything you say. But to make a statement such as this without know the rate of pay in question and the work load is what concerns me. My other question would be why would someone agree to a wage only to realize 2 days later it was "not enough". To be honest I think you are over thinking my original post. You also missed my post where I stated that one left for another job, but as they never returned our calls/emails we'll never know the reason why.
I don't need to know your current rate of pay to understand what is going wrong for you - in younger times I worked many a hard job and watched people try them out, and then leave when they realized the rate of pay didn't align with the difficulty - this is not unique to today's economy but we will certainly see it more often
if you're small you really don't have much choice - you can reduce the salary you pay yourself and distribute the difference to keep + hire new people, operate at reduced margins, or raise your prices - or some combination of these
you could always try it - hire some temps and pay them more, see if they stay
"you're overthinking my original post"
maybe - but your post is basically complaining about people "these days" - people haven't really changed
Construction worker is in good shape. Really hard to replace most of them. No matter how hard they try to build precisely there is a hell of a lot of build-to-fit that doesn't automate well at all.
Trucker should be good for a generation or more as self-driving is BS. The question there is do the lobbyists win the battle over the people analysing safety. Long-haul trucker automates well but from the highway ramp to destination should be done by humans for a long time.
Manual data entry should mostly disappear. I am shocked that gas/water are still read by somebody walking to every house with a meter. I expect the next generation will report at a distance.
I worked in the bolded industry hence my hate boner for technically inept boomers. The reason our energy industry is so technically behind is because upper management is risk adverse, old, and has no reason to change because oligopoly industry.
Humans driving will cease to exist. I don't know when, but it simply makes sense from so many angles (safety, speed, complexity, costs.)
Construction worker is admittedly a far fetched but at the very least....those massive machines operated by people will eventually be operated via program.
Reason I believe the above is because I know how to do a lot of it: if I know, then others know how to as well.
I don't need to know your current rate of pay to understand what is going wrong for you - in younger times I worked many a hard job and watched people try them out, and then leave when they realized the rate of pay didn't align with the difficulty - this is not unique to today's economy but we will certainly see it more often
if you're small you really don't have much choice - you can reduce the salary you pay yourself and distribute the difference to keep + hire new people, operate at reduced margins, or raise your prices - or some combination of these
you could always try it - hire some temps and pay them more, see if they stay
"you're overthinking my original post"
maybe - but your post is basically complaining about people "these days" - people haven't really
This I don't know. We're not gonna get blocked because "we don't know how." We'll get blocked because multiple industries will die so it'll get lobbied lol
This I don't know. We're not gonna get blocked because "we don't know how." We'll get blocked because multiple industries will die so it'll get lobbied lol
I don't know about that logic. I entirely agree about lobbying. I agree that highway driving can be safely automated. Driving on public roads with automation safely is a hell of a long way off (but inevitable eventually). It is far too easy for automation to go wrong and few checks in place to deal with it when it does. When it's snowing, do all automated vehicles just park until the weather clears?
I don't know about that logic. I entirely agree about lobbying. I agree that highway driving can be safely automated. Driving on public roads with automation safely is a hell of a long way off (but inevitable eventually). It is far too easy for automation to go wrong and few checks in place to deal with it when it does. When it's snowing, do all automated vehicles just park until the weather clears?
I don't know about that logic. I entirely agree about lobbying. I agree that highway driving can be safely automated. Driving on public roads with automation safely is a hell of a long way off (but inevitable eventually). It is far too easy for automation to go wrong and few checks in place to deal with it when it does. When it's snowing, do all automated vehicles just park until the weather clears?
Limited Data
The way we operate now, at best, is information being shared between cars of the same make (Tesla will probably do this if they don't already.) The ideal solution is where the road itself becomes a "smart road" with all cars connecting to an API, relaying information back and forth. There's no blindspots this way. There are network for this already (VANET protocols.)
People
In the above model, every car could also theoretically talk to each other. They can signal their intent (aka. that basic maneuver a bunch of us fail to do when driving, me included lol), which can cause other cars to react accordingly. The more real humans you allow to drive, the bigger chance of **** hitting the fan because humans = chaos in a very ordered system.
Third, actually scary reason, is hacking but I'll leave that out because everything is getting hacked anyway and that'll hopefully solve itself.
In the case of adverse weather events.....I'd argue using the model above is feasible to drive through it due to infinite information. The above assumes the cars are programmed to understand where maximum traction is in any given scenario. I don't think we're there yet but it'll come...it's just taking information and throwing it at something.
I see a future where we just "Uber" a driverless car regularly. The cars would be maintained through automation as well. Would be cool if see this in our life time!
I don't disagree with anything you say. But to make a statement such as this without know the rate of pay in question and the work load is what concerns me. My other question would be why would someone agree to a wage only to realize 2 days later it was "not enough". To be honest I think you are over thinking my original post. You also missed my post where I stated that one left for another job, but as they never returned our calls/emails we'll never know the reason why.
Could you tell us how much you were paying and a worker's typical day? I'm asking because I worked at Starbucks in another life and it became painfully apparent to me I was being paid minimum wage to deal with more verbal abuse than an office worker ever would and the work was physically much harder.
Are you hiring people who think? If so, you might need to go more stupid. I'm not even kidding sadly.
What do you do with the chronic loser? Someone that has zero initiative or worth ethic? We aren't allowed to cull the herd.
I work for things and enjoy the fruits of my labour. I worked for my house, bikes and boats. Others would be just as happy stealing a bike, boat or car, living in a squat.
Harris's workfare was a good idea but unworkable. Do you want peaches slammed into a basket by someone who didn't care whether they made it to market or not?
A totally hooked drug addict knows he /she has X hours to get a new fix or their body goes ape. They need $ to get that one fix. They live by the hour. How do you incentivize them?
A better question might be "How do we stop the de-incentivization?"
There is an element of the population that while perfectly capable of taking on a level of personal responsibility, simply don't. I'm not including anyone who is disabled, I do include able bodied disenfranchised persons who refuse to take on basic personal responsibility. I don't believe society need to do more than provide health care and basic needs (which does not include booze and smokes).
Disabilities that prevent one from working are not the issue, I believe we take care of their basic needs as well.
What I'm talking about are the 20 or 22 resumes we got few weeks ago from applicants who did not respond to an interview request. Some had returned email, or voice mail boxes that were not provisioned - IMHO they simply were not interested in work.
The challenge with getting able bodied people to actively engage in the workforce is challenging when they are happy on the dole. There are a few easy steps.
1) Reimagine the way we look at employment/unemployment. Rather than using the numbers collecting public benefits to measure unemployment, lets look at unfilled workforce opportunities. In times like now, 8% of the population is unemployed yet 100% of the employers I know are having difficulty filling unskilled jobs. If employers are unable to fill positions AND unemployment is above 4%, then unemployment benefits appear to be a disincentive to work.
2) Rethink the way we treat the long term unemployed. If a person is unemployed for an extended or multiple extended periods when employment levels are high, make mandatory full day training or working internships a requirement for drawing pogie. Provide a clear path and guidance to skilled or semi skilled positions for those who have had difficulty developing themselves. If they refuse, cancel benefits.
3)
Remember this. 6 years ago millennials became the dominant force in federal politics, politicians and electorate - it was their voting block that brought in the current regime.
Since being elected, the govt you elected has added more public debt than all govts combined in the last 150 years. And the forecast isn’t rosy.
Boomers and GenX are getting good more goodies from millennials than they ever gave themselves. Since millennials are starting to be the core taxpayers, they will end up servicing the debts - not their parents.
Thanks! GenX appreciates your generosity, I sure boomers do too!
Dignity was a big issue when I worked in France. Part of that was reducing any stigma of being unemployed since, contrary to opinion from the right, most people want to be employed. So if you were unemployed you could purchase cut price tickets for the cinema etc.
Could you tell us how much you were paying and a worker's typical day? I'm asking because I worked at Starbucks in another life and it became painfully apparent to me I was being paid minimum wage to deal with more verbal abuse than an office worker ever would and the work was physically much harder.
Are you hiring people who think? If so, you might need to go more stupid. I'm not even kidding sadly.
Paying 20% over minimum wage for part time warehouse work (no experience). Picking, packing etc. Nothing overhead or more that 30 pounds. Maybe 20 orders a day with a team of 6 full time staff. While I didn't point this out earlier (as I didn't think it was important) this was in Quebec and neither candidate could speak English, this severely limits what and where they can work. At this point I can see a clear divide between peoples point of view as well as who has real world experience and those who just has opinions.
Could you tell us how much you were paying and a worker's typical day? I'm asking because I worked at Starbucks in another life and it became painfully apparent to me I was being paid minimum wage to deal with more verbal abuse than an office worker ever would and the work was physically much harder.
Are you hiring people who think? If so, you might need to go more stupid. I'm not even kidding sadly.
We pay 50% above min wage. 7:30-4 M-F schedule. Full dental & medical benefit plan, pension plan, paid sick days, 3 weeks vacation after 3 years, 4 after 10. Great career advancement opportunities
Our retention rate is near 100% over the last 10 years.
Very hard to find employees. We’re not hiring today, but it took 5 mos to find 3 solid entry level staff, we gave up on summer students.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
