Jobs and wages

The Washington Times Weekly - - Letters To The Editor - Jack Ly­don Stod­dard, Wis­con­sin

The last few years we have had to again lis­ten to some of our politi­cians talk­ing about in­creas­ing the min­i­mum wage.

An­other song is that ev­ery­one de­serves a “liv­ing wage.” This brings up a num­ber of ques­tions. When a per­son en­ters the la­bor arena, they mostly have lit­tle ex­pe­ri­ence. The em­ployer has to be­gin the train­ing of th­ese, mostly young, per­sons. From this en­try level ex­pe­ri­ence they should gain ex­pe­ri­ence that will en­able them to im­prove their skills and in­crease their value to an em­ployer and in­crease their earn­ings.

If a per­son is not in­ter­ested in im­prov­ing their skills and stay in their en­try-level po­si­tion, why should they earn more for do­ing this en­try level job? The re­sults of this in­crease would be ad­di­tional costs for the prod­uct, lower em­ploy­ment for the en­try level job seeker and ser­vice qual­ity de­creases.

The al­ter­na­tive to this in­fla­tion-caus­ing rule would be to struc­ture a pro­gram that would al­low the en­try-level em­ployee to have help im­prov­ing their knowl­edge and skills by get­ting help in go­ing to school dur­ing their time off from work.

Why should an in­crease in salary be given to a per­son that will not put the ef­fort into im­prov­ing their own skills?

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.