Should you receive a pay rise to match minimum wage increase?

Deleted member 66701

D

Deleted member 66701

Yes, and it should be more like a 300% pay rise. Then maybe better candidates will run. The pay is utterly poultry compared to CEOs of private companies.

Reduce the pay of CEO's.

There, problem solved.
 

Deleted member 66701

D

Deleted member 66701

There will be a massive rise in cost for service industry stuff like catering, eating out, soft fruit and veg that's labour intensive and pub prices etc.

Say goodbye to cheap food and drink as the owners pass the wage hike onto the customers instantly...

Manufacturing/production shouldn't go up too much as its all machinery and robotic bread making machines :p

Even if we said a 15% min wage increase = 15% increase in product retail cost (which it wouldn't for reasons explained above), those types of things you listed usually only account for around 25% of an average households expenditure, so that's only a resultant 3.75% increase in household expenditure - hardly a "massive" increase.

Jesus, it's like people on this forum failed thier GSCE maths!
 
Soldato
Joined
6 May 2009
Posts
19,916
It's absolutely true, unfortunately , due to little known legislation, they are well within their rights to pay you in the equivalent value of banana Angel delight.

The exchange rate of Angel delight to GBP is not fantastic.

:D

£5.43/kg at Tesco. I actually wouldn't mind getting paid an hour a day in Angel Delight!
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Feb 2004
Posts
14,309
Location
Peoples Republic of Histonia, Cambridge
Your family member is correct. But only if you're on the minimum wage.


Part of me considers that shockingly expensive for what it is. The other, much larger part of me, wants to spank fifty quid on ten kilos of butterscotch.

Angle Delight is not what it used to be. You don't need to set in the fridge any more, it's not the same.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Feb 2006
Posts
9,582
Yes, and it should be more like a 300% pay rise. Then maybe better candidates will run. The pay is utterly poultry compared to CEOs of private companies.
Although I would have a cadet in there about having to actually be in parliament and such like.

I don't recall any companies having 650 CEOs?

I'd support a 200% rise in MP salary if they reduced the number down to 325.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
76,634
I knew you would have responded by saying that. The answer is a MPs job is very different to a CEOs job.

The answer to that is, it's a very hard and demanding job and to get quality you have to pay for it, we currently don't. The pay is utterly rubbish, meaning you get the ones who want to do it for self righteous reasons, who are the worst people to have in said positions.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Feb 2006
Posts
9,582
The answer to that is, it's a very hard and demanding job and to get quality you have to pay for it, we currently don't. The pay is utterly rubbish, meaning you get the ones who want to do it for self righteous reasons, who are the worst people to have in said positions.

Do you think the typical candidate would improve with increased pay? I reckon there are a lot of poor quality MPs and some good ones. Would you support my proposal of half the MPs and double the pay?
 
Man of Honour
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
76,634
Do you think the typical candidate would improve with increased pay? I reckon there are a lot of poor quality MPs and some good ones. Would you support my proposal of half the MPs and double the pay?

How are you going to half the mps. And no I wouldn't. It would mean doubling the size if the constitutions. And even less expertise to help run the country and even less time per person to contact their mp.

And yes in the long term I think the quality would improve.
The low wages means pretty much no one successful will do it. The pay is so low most people could get close to it.
If you want the best you have to pay, and the pay isn't even CEO level, it's barely standard mid manager level.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Feb 2006
Posts
9,582
How are you going to half the mps. And no I wouldn't. It would mean doubling the size if the constitutions. And even less expertise to help run the country and even less time per person to contact their mp.

And yes in the long term I think the quality would improve.
The low wages means pretty much no one successful will do it. The pay is so low most people could get close to it.
If you want the best you have to pay, and the pay isn't even CEO level, it's barely standard mid manager level.

Yes doubling constituent sizes. I'd say it was closer to senior manager (and obviously below director/executive level). I'd say that is what we have now and I'm not sure we need more then that for the average MP? Once you are given a job (and more responsibility) you get more pay too.

How many companies have 75 million employees?

An MP does not have 75 million employees. What is it about 50,000 constituents?
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
32,618
There will be a massive rise in cost for service industry stuff like catering, eating out, soft fruit and veg that's labour intensive and pub prices etc.

Say goodbye to cheap food and drink as the owners pass the wage hike onto the customers instantly...

Manufacturing/production shouldn't go up too much as its all machinery and robotic bread making machines :p

Not really, as has been shown time, and time, and time again,throughout the world, repeatedly. The emptily evidence simply doesn't support such scaremongering.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
3,687
Location
Sussex
Not really, as has been shown time, and time, and time again,throughout the world, repeatedly. The emptily evidence simply doesn't support such scaremongering.
But it does though, hasn't the cost of living increased in the citys of china, india and the like as wages have gone up, places that used to be cheep to get things made and have call centres in have moved on as costs have risen.

Putting wage costs up will put prices up, there is no chance that companies are going to take a hit on profits.
 
Back
Top Bottom