Awesome E-Mail of the Day

I'll risk slamming charges by adding you can replace the words "Amercian women" with "immigrants" in that last post, and it would be as true if not moreso.

The labor supply has widened at a pace quicker than labor demand.

Deal with the reality.

It's not about checkers and chess it's about the market reality of supply and demand with regard to labor. That's how wages are set.

Market wages are determined by labor supply and demand.

If someone is working a job for $15 / hr and somebody else is available to do the same job at the same rate, if the worker wants more money he can quit and get a different job because the employer has an alternative willing to step in and fill the role for the going rate. The employer is going to pay the lowest rate at which someone is willing to work the job.

This is all very basic stuff here.

Just like you people will go out and pay the lowest possible price for all that consumerist crap you buy that you think will make you happy.

jwcalla said:

Market wages are determined by labor supply and demand.

Click to expand...

Not in China. Market wages are dictated by the Grand Pubah of the Communist Party. Just like the value of their currency.

You seem unable to understand that a $15/hr job in America isn't a job at all, as long as Chinese sweatshops do the same job for $3/hr and our government is doing business with them. No company in their right mind is going to pay 5x as much for labor as they need to. It's as simple as that. Our labor force has been decimated as a direct result not of women or immigrants, but of a treasonous federal government who did the unthinkable and began emptying our treasury to Communist thugs.

It makes as much sense to blame American women and immigrants for our wage levels as to blame them for our trillion dollar annual trade deficit with China. One is not simply unrelated to the other. You keep explaining how checkers is played with no regard whatsoever for the opponent who's trying to play chess.

Minimum wage is really just a bandaid for larger problems inherent in the whole system. Since the 2008 crash, 95% of economic gains have gone to the top 1%. That's not recovery, that's just keeping the status quo. Even the new jobs being created to fill in the unemployment gaps are lower paying than they were on average. We're basically trying our best to head back to a feudal economic system under the guise of capitalism.

No surprise, Tyrel Oates has quit. But on his last day, he left a parting gift to the CEO and the rest of the board of directors (mostly because our email policy has changed which restricts us from CC'ing half the company).

http://www.businessinsider.com/tyrel-oates-leaves-wells-fargo-2015-4

SPARTAN VI said:

No surprise, Tyrel Oates has quit. But on his last day, he left a parting gift to the CEO and the rest of the board of directors (mostly because our email policy has changed which restricts us from CC'ing half the company).

http://www.businessinsider.com/tyrel-oates-leaves-wells-fargo-2015-4

Click to expand...

Thanks for the update on this.
It's always been like this, though; humans, what bastards they are.

He keeps trumpeting the line "$10k raise to non-exempt employees!" line, which would instantly diminish exempt salaries. In my team seniors, leads, and managers are exempt, and the front line techs are non-exempt. Doesn't make sense that one would instantly "earn" equal or more pay than their seniors and leads. Mr. Oates clearly didn't think this through as well as he thinks.

temujin987 said:

this is why the economy is stalling! corporations need cheap labor to be competitive so investors make even more money!

/end of capitalism rant

Click to expand...

Yup. My evil fortune 500 company has given me between $5k-$20k raises every year I've been here. I've doubled my starting salary in 5 years. It's about the position and job. Sadly, the customer facing people usually get paid the least because there are so many of them. Want them to earn more money? Don't complain and take your business somewhere else when the cost of their goods and services double.

i960 said:

They made over $21 billion last year in profits. They could easily afford this raise and then some. Hell, cut it in half and give everyone a $5k raise at a cost of $1B. That's chump change for a bank as large as Wells Fargo. A $5k raise would be about a 15% increase for the guy who sent the email. I'm guessing a large portion of their workforce makes a similar amount of money. It's high for a raise, especially one not based on merit, but I think it would be a good thing.

Click to expand...

beowulf7 said:

Define "everyone". I don't necessarily feel that way. My thought is the market (i.e., S&D) should determine what the CEO makes and what the entry level data processor makes.

Click to expand...

It's a rigged game. Boards of directors made up of CEOs of other corporations vote each others' salaries. Would you allow a group of a bunch of bank tellers from multiple banks vote to what their salaries should be? But that's how CEO pay is calculated.

schizrade said:

Don't argue with people that cannot do math. You will never win because they cannot do math.

Click to expand...

You're assuming economics is a zero-sum game. It's not, otherwise, there could never be growth. Increasing demand by increasing pay can see the funds come back via higher growth. See: Henry Ford.

LeninGHOLA said:

That said, capitalism is wonderful. It can't sustain itself without the average person having a decent amount of purchasing power.

Click to expand...

This

jwcalla said:

According to the US government there is no inflation. If you see inflation, economic contraction or unemployment, those are all things you're completely imagining according to the official stats from the hallmark of integrity that is the fine statesmen we've asked to represent us.

Wages not keeping up over the past few decades is 100% a result of the expanding labor supply. That's just how the world works. There were major social and political revolutions that encouraged and allowed that to happen, and here we are. I know we all want to think it's as easy as some cartoonish Montgomery Burns-like character being a greedy SOB, but wages respond to supply and demand just like everything else in the market.

Click to expand...

That's part of it, but it isn't purely that simple. The power of labor has been completely destroyed in this country, and you can't say that isn't a part of the plan. Businesses currently complain that they can't find enough qualified people to do their jobs, yet they won't train anymore. News flash: people never sprung from the ground prepared to do a million specialized tasks. You used to have to help people train to get there.

SPARTAN VI said:

He keeps trumpeting the line "$10k raise to non-exempt employees!" line, which would instantly diminish exempt salaries. In my team seniors, leads, and managers are exempt, and the front line techs are non-exempt. Doesn't make sense that one would instantly "earn" equal or more pay than their seniors and leads. Mr. Oates clearly didn't think this through as well as he thinks.

Click to expand...

So you wouldn't back his pay increase as it would likely give you leverage to increase your own? Kind of petty, I would say.

The robots thread earlier this week - soon enough, all jobs will be more cheaply done with robots, and I wonder where all the jobless people cheering this trend on in this thread will be then. I make good money, due to hard work but also some good circumstances, but that doesn't mean I'm blind to the systemic issues we have.

SPARTAN VI said:

He keeps trumpeting the line "$10k raise to non-exempt employees!" line, which would instantly diminish exempt salaries. In my team seniors, leads, and managers are exempt, and the front line techs are non-exempt. Doesn't make sense that one would instantly "earn" equal or more pay than their seniors and leads. Mr. Oates clearly didn't think this through as well as he thinks.

Click to expand...

So, since you are not getting a raise, nobody else should?

Why not instead you endorse Mr. Oates cause, applaud their efforts and when/if they do finally get that raise, you can then base negotiate your own on the fact that your higher level of responsibilities should earn you more than the people that report to you.

TwistedAegis said:

So you wouldn't back his pay increase as it would likely give you leverage to increase your own? Kind of petty, I would say.

Click to expand...

DocFaustus said:

So, since you are not getting a raise, nobody else should?

Click to expand...

I didn't say that.

I thought that it's pretty obvious that what may seem like ripples in a pond to Oates would actually create waves. If WFB adjusts non-exempt employee's earnings, you're pretty much restructuring the pay scale for most, if not all, of the company.

First, I need to dispell any assumptions that exempt status means our income is vastly higher than non-exempt. Personally, I'm making about $5k more than I did when I was non-exempt, but work many more hours. So I'm not going to sit around here in a leadership role with experience and credentials while junior team members match or exceed may pay. I would leave, push for an increase, or take a demotion. Pretty obvious, right? Oates math does not even come close to this reality.

But no, I don't back Oates. I believe that if I'm not paid what I'm worth, I'll find work with a company who agrees (or is closer) with my valuation. And yes, I do work for Wells Fargo.