Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="HarryWarden" data-source="post: 5640164" data-attributes="member: 100171">ok I’m just going to try make my point one more time, it’s hard over text but I hope you can get itLet’s forget about the supporting yourself on part time argument. I’ll get back to that I’m just saying there shouldn’t be a pay difference for the same work for full time vs part time. That’s it.Your argument for supply and demand goes the other way too, hear me out By you saying you shouldn’t be able to support yourself on part time wage, thus artificially lowering the wage, you’re also making it harder to support a family on full time wage, and that’s exactly what’s been happening. So many people need two incomes, the husband and wife both working, just to support their family, it didn’t used to be like thatYou shouldn’t be artificially lowering the pay of peoples labor because you don’t think they shouldn’t be able to support themselves on those hours.I’m not here arguing saying “We need a wage for part timers that you can support a family off of!” I’m not even arguing that you should be able to live off just the part time necesarily. I’m just saying whether you’re doing warehouse work for 4 hours vs 8 hours, if youre a long time union worker it should be the same hourly rateThe only argument against that has been “you shouldn’t be able to support yourself off that” and it’s just strange logic to me. You’re advocating artificially lowering the wage of a union workers labor because you don’t want them to be comfortable.And I hope you can see this point as well, as I feel it’s very important. When you artificially lower the part time workers wage for doing the same job, it creates less of a demand for the company to create full time positions. Why would they create a full time warehouse position when they can pay 2 part time workers to do the same job for less cost?</blockquote>

Verification