The direct result of the NDP's $15 minimum wage proposal

[Queen K]

Both of you are right to a degree. Only I know LPN nurses covered in tattoos and they say, "you should see the Dr.'s sleeves."

It's the education behind the person, behind the tatts. And very funny Rwede, coming up with the "best case scenerio" for unemployment.

[Even Steven]

It's the education behind the person, behind the tatts.

If you have education - for sure. Or willingness to work. Or nice manners. If you have nothing else to show besides tats, it's a rather sad situation.

[Queen K]

Yes, I have to agree 100%. But it's not the tats. The guy in Rwede's meme may not fit Rwede's empire, but he may fit in his own or someone elses. That's my point.

[Urban Cowboy]

Could you give some color as to why this is? I am actually interested. Is it because they are covered in tattoos and piercings? Or what?

Usually something to do with being on time for job interview/scheduled shift. Or every other word is "F... this" and "I'm offended!!!!"

These people don't fit into the workforce for sure.

Or they show up for work day one, and first question is when's vacation?

[rustled]

Min wage job, back to school, find a career path that is in demand. Get paid more.

I understand why people make simplistic statements like this one because it's true and really the only way to get ahead. However, there ARE people who do all the right things and simply don't fit into society the right way and have massive problems being hired. Yes, these people are the minority, but they still count as part of BC's economy. And this is exactly why I want minimum wage raised - because such people aren't earning these promotions that come so easily to others.
...

So it would appear that because you have difficulty earning anything more than minimum wage, you're okay with backing a policy that will ensure a lot of people who are low income earners will have their hours cut, and that people like my sister will be far less likely to be hired at all. Those people still count as part of BC's economy, too, (at least they should!), but for the moment let's pretend they don't exist, and think only of the people who are stuck at minimum wage.

You're banking on keeping all the hours you currently have, but at a higher rate, if the minimum wage skyrockets.

That's quite a gamble, though, isn't it? Isn't it more likely your hours will be cut, too?

[JollyGreenBully]

Could you give some color as to why this is? I am actually interested. Is it because they are covered in tattoos and piercings? Or what?

If you're actually being serious and this isn't a a set up for something then, I'd answer by saying basically any mental health issue. Here's one such example:

http://www.disabilitybenefitscenter.org/disability-work/panic-attacks

When you suffer a panic attack, you may not be able to do much of anything physically. If your panic attacks occur frequently, this can make it impossible to perform any kind of physical labor or maintain employment that requires physical labor. In some cases, while panic attacks are not dangerous in and of themselves, a panic attack can create an unsafe situation in a work environment.


Do you really see someone with such an issue moving up the ladder like the majority of people? If he / she finds *exactly* the right employer who is understanding then possibly. If the person is able to eventually overcome the issue then possibly. I'd argue the person would be stuck near minimum wage for quite a long time, if not forever. I guess the person could take business courses and open a business or something, but that might take years and years while working for minimum wage and being told the reason for no raises is due to laziness or non-existent tattoos.

[Queen K]

It's an honest question Rustled, at what point do we sacrifice the many for the few? JGB, seriously. You ask questions all the time and I see people side step them and you call on the side stepping. Rustled has brought up questions too.

I hold two positions on the matter to be valid, it's a tough place to be in. Help me out, how would you answer Rustled?

[rustled]

Could you give some color as to why this is? I am actually interested. Is it because they are covered in tattoos and piercings? Or what?

If you're actually being serious and this isn't a a set up for something then, I'd answer by saying basically any mental health issue. Here's one such example:

http://www.disabilitybenefitscenter.org/disability-work/panic-attacks

When you suffer a panic attack, you may not be able to do much of anything physically. If your panic attacks occur frequently, this can make it impossible to perform any kind of physical labor or maintain employment that requires physical labor. In some cases, while panic attacks are not dangerous in and of themselves, a panic attack can create an unsafe situation in a work environment.


Do you really see someone with such an issue moving up the ladder like the majority of people? If he / she finds *exactly* the right employer who is understanding then possibly. If the person is able to eventually overcome the issue then possibly. I'd argue the person would be stuck near minimum wage for quite a long time, if not forever. I guess the person could take business courses and open a business or something, but that might take years and years while working for minimum wage and being told the reason for no raises is due to laziness or non-existent tattoos.

I'd suggest this person is probably eligible for a disability designation.

That's the responsibility of various levels of government, along with the contractors we fund through our taxes to assist with various support programs.

Putting this on the plate of all employers is the wrong solution to the problem, and will only lead to other problems.

[Queen K]

But that's not up to us to decide and on an open forum.

[rustled]

But that's not up to us to decide and on an open forum.

No, of course not. But if this were my family member, I wouldn't be pushing for a significant raise in the minimum wage, thinking that would be the best way to support him/her. Instead, I'd be supporting them through the process of finding more appropriate supports via the most appropriate channels.

The disability designation ensures the basics are covered, and allows the person to earn additional income if they're able. It reduces their tax burden. Much more importantly, though, that designation provides access to a wide range of community supports beyond the financial ones.

If the designation requirements can't be met, I'd be seeking other community supports.

We cannot reasonably expect employers to take full responsibility for people with mental health issues. That's our collective responsibility as a society, through the social safety net.

Employers are already responsible for keeping the lights on to ensure their employees have a job to come to. Several of us have provided examples of employers who have included a significant level of social responsibility, and good on them for doing so. Let's not expect all employers to do all the heavy lifting, though. Applying the wrong solution to the problem generally causes different problems.