Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

The state's commissioner of labor is expected to sign an order declaring a $15 minimum wage solely for fast food workers, which they define as a company with more than 30 chain locations where customers order and pay for food at a counter.

This has already brought up two separate grievances among the population. First, the small business owners who are not billion dollar corporations but still seem to fit the bill's definition of fast food.

{ Laura Jankowski, who owns a chain of Tropical Smoothie cafes on Long Island, said she had already raised prices to offset the increase in the state minimum wage that took effect last year. Though she was not certain that the new wage rules would apply to her businesses, she feared customers would complain at paying much more than $4.99 for a 24-ounce drink.

Most likely, she said, she would have to make do with fewer workers, all of whom she said were high school or college students working part-time. “It really is going to come to less people,” Ms. Jankowski said by telephone from her cafe in Port Jefferson Station. “What I envision is cutting labor, hiring less people, having less people per shift.” }

The second complaint comes from workers in other industries.

{ Already on Wednesday afternoon, some retail workers in Manhattan were wondering, what about us? “We deserve it, too,” said Mary Gomes, 51, who works at a Duane Reade drugstore, where she said she earned $9.20 per hour.

Brittany Thomas, 20, who works at a Lady Foot Locker store, said it would not be fair to raise wages only for fast-food workers given that “there are a lot of jobs that require more work than serving food.” }

Before posting your basic bitch opinions on the increase, please also consider that all of these service jobs could be so easily replaced by robotic technology that requires no paycheck at all. Is that something wage advocates need to consider when pushing for increased? Do major corporations have an obligation to employ people over technology, when it comes down to the bottom line? If McDonald's went to self-checkouts and the only employees in store were a manager and one or two to keep up with food prep (which could also be easily automated in the fast food industry), does a $15-25 minimum wage for the few humans left make up for all the displaced individuals overall?

This is the angle I'd like us to approach the topic from, rather than "yes/no ultimatum wage changes".

I wonder what jobs were previously paying more than fast food workers but now will be paying less? Obviously a 25 dollar minimum wage is too high, seeing as how some careers bank on that hourly wage. The part that really twitches my eyebrows is how the order only applies to one industry.

""Do major corporations have an obligation to employ people over technology, when it comes down to the bottom line? If McDonald’s went to self-checkouts and the only employees in store were a manager and one or two to keep up with food prep (which could also be easily automated in the fast food industry), does a $15-25 minimum wage for the few humans left make up for all the displaced individuals overall?""

A major conundrum, given how one current state of the world is Overpopulation. Less jobs, less income flow, less economic flow altogether. I'm positive robotic technology would benefit the corporations which can make it economically feasible. But I'm also positive doing so will not benefit the economy for the simple reasons above.

Do major corporations have an obligation to employ people over technology, when it comes down to the bottom line?

No, since the same logic could be applied to anything. Do farmers have an obligation to use combine harvesters when they could instead hire 30 people to manually pick the food? Do car manufacturers need to manually build each car with no automation or machinery? Does everyone need to give up the internet and go back to typewriters and postal mail so the paper industry and post office don't have to suffer?

…does a $15-25 minimum wage for the few humans left make up for all the displaced individuals overall?

Honestly, I think they should be paid less than the current workers would be paid. Currently, fast food service workers have to do quite a lot (cook, clean, take orders, prep the food, etc.), which could justify higher wages. If robots do 70% of the work, why should they get paid more for doing less?

Freakenstein said:

But I’m also positive doing so will not benefit the economy for the simple reasons above.

They said this when the windmill was invented. They said this when the steam engine became commonplace. They said this when the first car building robots were seen. As certain industries become more advanced and automated, better jobs are created to replace the lost jobs.

The alternative is we stagnant our technological advances for the sake of keeping people in dead end, usually back breaking jobs so they can scrap out a living.

Before posting your basic bitch opinions on the increase, please also consider that all of these service jobs could be so easily replaced by robotic technology that requires no paycheck at all.

If you've got a robotic waiter that can deal with customers better then a human being I'd love to see it.

{ As certain industries become more advanced and automated, better jobs are created to replace the lost jobs. }

Economic reports say there aren't being better jobs created, and there definitely are more qualified people than there are jobs.

2 out of the 3 industries showing significant growth are also the easiest to automate.

On top of that, more people than ever can only find part-time work, despite seeking full-time employment.

& the number of people overall in the labor force is rapidly tanking.

The technology is improving farrrr more quickly than we can keep up with it, as is 1st world population (not talking about the birth rate).

Does it have to be a waiter?

Japan Robot Hotel Ready to Welcome Its First Human Guests

{ From the receptionist that does the check-in and check-out to the porter that's an automated trolley taking luggage up to the room, this hotel in southwestern Japan is "manned" almost totally by robots to save labor costs. }

edit: oh wait here's one with robo-waiters anyway:

This restaurant replaced humans with robot waiters

{ A restaurant owner in China is opting to save on employee wages by forgoing traditional servers and using robots instead.

The eatery, located in a shopping mall in Ningbo, a city in China’s northeastern Zhejiang province, has become a big tourist draw with its futuristic waitstaff. The automated bots take orders, and even speak to customers with a 40-phrase Mandarin Chinese vocabulary.

Each robot costs over $9,400, but owner Lu Dike insists that he is still saving money over the long term. }

So let me get this straight… they're willing to raise the minimum wage for fast-food workers, but not for grocery baggers, convenience store janitors, etc.? It's like how they have full gay/lesbian protections but next to no trans protections. New York always does things halfway.

""New York always does things halfway.""

Or goes completely ass-backwards

Well to be fair, it's probably easier to increase wages for one industrial sector at a time rather than all of them at once.