Dems don't like minimum wage?

[EvilMonkey]

http://www.thedailypage.com/features/docfe...hp?intdocid=187

 

The opening line says it all

A group that raises money for Democratic Congressional candidates uses a canvassing company that pays some workers submimium wage, in apparent violation of Wisconsin state law, to talk about the need to raise the federal minimum wage"

Isn't this the same party that had staffers slash tires of Republican campaign vans on election eve? Those wacky cheeseheads!

[juddling]

Maybe they work for tips?????????

 

[Texsox]

Evil, you own a business, how many times have *you* paid *yourself* less than minimum wage? I recall with my businesses, every once in a while I didn't even draw a check. I think about that when minimum wage comes up. There are a lot of small business owners out there working 100 hours a week for less than the min.

 

I did some of this type of work a jillion years ago. I was paid per "contact" and for some hours may have made less than the minimum, but some hours over the minimum. IIRC, I was not considered an employee, but an independent contractor. So judding, while not "tips", think more commission. And anytime there is commission/tips/piece work/pay for performance there is potential for abuse.

Once again proving that rich business owners will exploit workers for their own gain. Wouldn't it be fun to know the politics of the person who sets the pay scale and not the politics of their customers?

[EvilMonkey]

Evil, you own a business, how many times have *you* paid *yourself* less than minimum wage? I recall with my businesses, every once in a while I didn't even draw a check. I think about that when minimum wage comes up. There are a lot of small business owners out there working 100 hours a week for less than the min.

 

I did some of this type of work a jillion years ago. I was paid per "contact" and for some hours may have made less than the minimum, but some hours over the minimum. IIRC, I was not considered an employee, but an independent contractor. So judding, while not "tips", think more commission. And anytime there is commission/tips/piece work/pay for performance there is potential for abuse.

Once again proving that rich business owners will exploit workers for their own gain. Wouldn't it be fun to know the politics of the person who sets the pay scale and not the politics of their customers?

Many, many days the first few years did I go without pay. Drove Mrs. EvilMonkey crazy! But that is as the owner. I have never hired anyone for less than minimum wage. My press operator is one of the higher paid guys in mt area, because he is good. Even Juddling makes more than minimum from me (although not much more!). The company tried to use loopholes to pay its workforce less than the minimum wage. They are not selling anything, how do they get commission? And even if that is legal, that sure doesn't seem like a great way to treat the workers. You bring up a good point, that we don't know the politics of the company they hired. However, you know as well as me, that the party organizations tend to hire their own, usually someone with a party connection. Nepotism knows no party line. And for a party as deeply concerned about the lower & middle class, the poor working stiffs that make this country great, shouldn't they have taken a few extra moment's to make sure they weren't hiring slave labor? Walmart employees made more than these people.

Edited September 2, 2006 by EvilMonkey

[Texsox]

One job I had in high school was "x-dating" for an insurance agent. I took a phone directory and he paid me .10 for every person I spoke with who would confirm their info and when their car insurance expired. I am certain some hours I was psid less than minimum, especially when friends would stop by. I was alone in the office in the evening. I could see a similar wage scale here, and I believe it is what the US Census uses, $X per house. Work faster, earn more.

 

I am not necessarily defending that company, just offering some possible explainations. Most businesses fo not have the time or the interest to thouroughly check their suppliers labor practices, but you would think a political party would. Imagine if some company came in off the street and asked you for your employee records and other information like that before offering to place work with you. Most businesses would not hand that over.

[EvilMonkey]

One job I had in high school was "x-dating" for an insurance agent. I took a phone directory and he paid me .10 for every person I spoke with who would confirm their info and when their car insurance expired. I am certain some hours I was psid less than minimum, especially when friends would stop by. I was alone in the office in the evening. I could see a similar wage scale here, and I believe it is what the US Census uses, $X per house. Work faster, earn more.

 

I am not necessarily defending that company, just offering some possible explainations. Most businesses fo not have the time or the interest to thouroughly check their suppliers labor practices, but you would think a political party would. Imagine if some company came in off the street and asked you for your employee records and other information like that before offering to place work with you. Most businesses would not hand that over.

You should see some of the crap they want to know when I try to get government contracts! Man, suprised they don't want to know sperm count! On a serious note, I can see the Dem party reasonably asking and seeking info on whether or not the people that they will be hiring to canvas about minimum wage are at least making that.

[Heads22]

It's Wisconsin.

[DrunkBomber]

I really dont care about minimum wage. Unless youre 16, if you cant make more then minimum wage then you have issues that hypicritical liberals wont be able to help.

[Balta1701]

I really dont care about minimum wage. Unless youre 16, if you cant make more then minimum wage then you have issues that hypicritical liberals wont be able to help.

Yeah, because it's 100% the fault of the workers that all of the new jobs in this country pay wal-mart wages. (Half sarcasm)

Edited September 4, 2006 by Balta1701

[mr_genius]

Yeah, because it's 100% the fault of the workers that all of the new jobs in this country pay wal-mart wages. (Half sarcasm)

 

the only way to raise wages is to let 59 million more illegal immigrants into the country. then give them amnesty.

 

yea, that'll do it. democrats are so smart.

[Balta1701]

the only way to raise wages is to let 59 million more illegal immigrants into the country. then give them amnesty.

 

yea, that'll do it. democrats are so smart.

Well, Bush is going to need troops for his Iran and Syria invasion debacles somewhere.

 

(Ok, I'll end the mean-spirited sarcasm now if you do )

[mr_genius]

Well, Bush is going to need troops for his Iran and Syria invasion debacles somewhere.

 

 

haha, touche.

 

[DrunkBomber]

Good employees arent cheap and cheap employees arent good.

[Texsox]

Good employees arent cheap and cheap employees arent good*.

 

*Does not apply to non profits where all employees are cheap.

 

What some companies do not "get" is that they can attract better employees, and it isn't just by opening the checkbook a little wider. Working conditions, benefits, and treating the employees like adults will attract some excellent employees who value these things. Sometimes it is cheap or free stuff that makes the difference.

[juddling]

*Does not apply to non profits where all employees are cheap.

 

What some companies do not "get" is that they can attract better employees, and it isn't just by opening the checkbook a little wider. Working conditions, benefits, and treating the employees like adults will attract some excellent employees who value these things. Sometimes it is cheap or free stuff that makes the difference.

Actually, I believe they are SUPPOSED to be called not-for-profits, since a good number of them do indeed make profits. MAybe thats how they make the profit?

[NorthSideSox72]

Actually, I believe they are SUPPOSED to be called not-for-profits, since a good number of them do indeed make profits. MAybe thats how they make the profit?

Do you have any sort of proof of anything more than isolated incidences of not-for-profit companies making a profit? And by profit, for this purpose, it means money that does NOT go to the target audience or plowback into expansion or infrastructure.

[DrunkBomber]

I wasnt talking about not for profits or work conditions really. If you dont like the work conditions somewhere, you dont have to work there. Sure, they might be able to pay less if they have very favorable conditions but thats not the point I was getting at. I was referring to my belief that if you are over 16 and are mentally capable you should be able to find a job for more then minimum wage. Iwas also responding to how hypicritcal that it was that a liberal orginization protesting about raising minimum wage hired a company to make their signs or whatever that paid their employees under minimum wage. Seems more like a place for them to start boycotting then hiring. There are so many causes these days that worrying about all of them that dont effect you can be exhausting, and minimum wage doesnt effect me so I dont care.

[BigSqwert]

...and minimum wage doesnt effect me so I dont care.

How compassionate.

[EvilMonkey]

And by profit, for this purpose, it means money that does NOT go to the target audience or plowback into expansion or infrastructure.

Why not? If they MADE the money that they then spend on expansion, etc, it was PROFIT. Just because they take the profit and use it to further their cause does not mnake it any less of a profit.

 

Big religion is a not-for-profit 'corporation', and I do believe that they make a profit. Otherwise, how could to afford to pay off all priest-abused kids? They take in more than they spend (usually), and some have investments, property holding and other things to help fund their activities. At the end of the day, if they have more than they spent, they made a profit. Yes, there are MANY that do not make profits, nor do they seek to do so such as the Red Cross and Better Business Bureau, but there are alot that do make money. Most 'foundations' were started with a grant or a trust set up to provide continual funding for the organization. The Ford Foundation was set up with Ford Co. stock and is partially funded by the profits from the stock and other investments the foundation makes. http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/funderPr....asp?fndid=5176

The Ford Foundation derives its income solely from investments in international securities and does not accept contributions from any other source. As of September 2004, the Foundation had assets valued at more than $10 billion and a grant budget of over $500 million per year.

Looks like some damn nice profits to me.

[Texsox]

I'm not certain if it matters here but there are not for profit groups (example a Country Club's Men's Golf Association) then there are not for profit charities. 501©3.

 

Most charities are trying to build endowments and use the income from the endowment to fund operations. For example my local Boy Scout Council has an endowment of just over 1,000,000. Money was donated to this fund with the understanding that the principle would not be used, just the interest.

[DrunkBomber]

How compassionate.

Ive got enough stuff to deal with and worry about that being concerned with how much an underqualified person makes at their job. Especially when its only a matter of change. If you are really that concerned about donate the money you use for the internet to help them.

[mr_genius]

Ive got enough stuff to deal with and worry about that being concerned with how much an underqualified person makes at their job.

 

a healthy minimum wage helps the economy and tends to lower crime rates, therefore it probably does affect you.

 

not all of the working poor are in their particular employment situation because they are lazy or whatever.

Edited September 6, 2006 by mr_genius

[Steff]

Ive got enough stuff to deal with and worry about that being concerned with how much an underqualified person makes at their job. Especially when its only a matter of change. If you are really that concerned about donate the money you use for the internet to help them.

 

 

You may want to educate yourself on how wages effect you, your family, and your daily way of life. Your comments are extremely ignorant.

[southsider2k5]

Why not? If they MADE the money that they then spend on expansion, etc, it was PROFIT. Just because they take the profit and use it to further their cause does not mnake it any less of a profit.

 

Big religion is a not-for-profit 'corporation', and I do believe that they make a profit. Otherwise, how could to afford to pay off all priest-abused kids? They take in more than they spend (usually), and some have investments, property holding and other things to help fund their activities. At the end of the day, if they have more than they spent, they made a profit. Yes, there are MANY that do not make profits, nor do they seek to do so such as the Red Cross and Better Business Bureau, but there are alot that do make money. Most 'foundations' were started with a grant or a trust set up to provide continual funding for the organization. The Ford Foundation was set up with Ford Co. stock and is partially funded by the profits from the stock and other investments the foundation makes. http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/funderPr....asp?fndid=5176

Looks like some damn nice profits to me.

 

Are you familiar with the term "endowment"? Because by siting assets, that is probably all you have said. Unless you have something that also shows how much they have given away, and spent on other expenses, you haven't shown a single penny of profits in your post.

[Texsox]

By the way, these people were on commission. And guess what, as anyone on commission will attest, there are many hours you do not make minimum wage and other hours you make 100X the minimum wage. From the same article . . .

But the terms of employment appear similar, including the stipulation that "A canvasser who does not meet quota will not receive base pay and will instead be paid" a percentage of what he or she collects. The handout specifies that Grassroots Voter Outreach pays a 30% rate to those who do not make quota; Jones and former Madison employees of Grassroots Campaigns say they received a rate of 47%, which could and sometimes did amount to less than minmum wage.

 

So it was pay for performance. People who went to work for the company knew the plan and were probably attracted to the prospect of bigger paychecks.

 

Now, I'd have a bigger problem with such a large chunk of my donation going to expenses.