An honest question about increasing the minimum wage.

[WillowTree]

If the minimum wage is raised to $12.00/hour, what happens to the employee who's been with the company for several years and is now making $12.00/hour. Does that person get a 65% raise, as well, to make it fair to that person? I mean, shouldn't everyone be raised commensurately? I know for sure that if I had been working for a company for 5 years and had moved up the income ladder by being a good employee and gaining more experience so now making $11.50 or $13.00/hour and then suddenly they raised the minimum wage to $12.00 and I didn't get a similar increase, I'd be plenty pissed that after 5 years I'm not making any more than the kid with no experience who got hired last week.

So now the 5-year employee is making a little less than $20/hour. Shouldn't the 8-year employee who's heretofore been making $20/hour also get a similar raise?

Shouldn't a raise in the minimum wage for the lowest end of the pay scale also result in an equal increase for those farther up the ladder? Wouldn't it have to be that way to be fair to everyone else?

BTW, this isn't a post-and-run. I need to be offline for a little while, but I will be back because I sincerely want to know what others' thoughts are about this.

And thanks in advance for the input.

And have a great weekend!

And STAY WARM!!

[alc]

1. depends on the employer

I know a few employer's who have a pay policy that includes regular raises. But when they have to pay someone more initially (e.g. to match another offer) that person doesn't get raise for a while (years of no or lower raises than others).

So I can imagine a "long-time" employee currently making $12, another currently making $11, and another new hire who would have been $7.50. They'll all be $12 for the next 6 months (assuming that's the raise cycle). Then the one who was at $12 will go to $12.50. The $11 will go to $12.25. And the new hire will be $12 for a long time. In other words, it will be "unfair" initially but work out over a year or two.

Unions expect the ripple to raise salaries of just about everyone eventually but it won't be an instant increase for everyone.

[Boom Sound 416]

2. That's a rather difficult set of laws to enforce

Where does the scale end. They are plenty of folks who make 50 - 65 an hour. How would a 65% increase on them effect the rest of the company?

[upaloopa]

3. The minimum wage sets the ground floor .

Above that the employer sets the wage.
If someone doesn't get a raise it is not the fault of the minimum wage blame the employer

[Boom Sound 416]

5. Agreed

I took from the OP - what are the means to create or enforce such a standard

[Armstead]

4. The Minimunm Wage is supposed to be a "floor"

It's a level that wages are not supposed to go below.

The chain-reaction affect you mentioned is not necessarily inevitable. Bringing the lowest up does not automatically mean everyone else HAS to get a raise too. Depends on the job, their productivity, etc. Maybe they deserve a raise too.

MOST IMPORTANT, if something like that does happen, it would be a necessary but short term disruption. Most forms of progress involve some adjustments. an

[moparlunatic]

6. No different than Union

scale. I've been a member of Operating Engineers for 27 years and all our drivers get the same wage. Whether you've been there 1 year or 27. When we get raises everybody gets one.

[quaker bill]

7. generally what has happened

is that folks near the minimum see raises as well to reduce "wage scale compression". The impact generally declines for those increasingly above the minimum, and tapers to very little or nothing by the time you get to 2X minimum. In short there is some compression because the bottom gets closer to the middle, but usually the wage scale remains more rewarding for those with more experience.

[WillowTree]

8. I'm back. And I appreciate the feedback.

I think I get it. Thanks to all who replied.

Now, at the risk of repetition, STAY WARM!