If Walmart Paid Its Employees a Living Wage, How Much Would Prices Go Up?

Domingo Halliburton

Handmade in USA
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
12,616
Reputation
1,370
Daps
15,451
Reppin
Brooklyn Without Limits
This assume equal bargaining power and that individuals are not accepting those wages out of economic coercion. This is exactly the logic that used to be used to protect child labor laws, ridiculous work weeks and low benefits. People need to stop using the term "willing" and start using the term "have to." People are not in a position to negotiate for their wages. That would require collective action in instances such as these. Recognition of this fact is the entire basis of labor unions.

wouldn't this imply that every company out there would just offer minimum wage?

I think it's just simple supply and demand. You have a big supply of high school kids willing to do the job at minimum wage.
 

No1

Retired.
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
30,712
Reputation
4,899
Daps
68,751
wouldn't this imply that every company out there would just offer minimum wage?

I think it's just simple supply and demand. You have a big supply of high school kids willing to do the job at minimum wage.
No, it means what it says. That individuals are being paid what companies want to pay them, not what they would be willing to work for if we had a stronger collective bargaining regime that evens out the playing field. Just because you lack equal bargaining power does not mean that companies will pay you the smallest salary possible (how would this get them skilled workers that need college-level education and beyond), but besides that, the current regime is a result of collective bargaining. Just like how minimum wage and child labor laws defined the workforce formally, the labor movement also brought about informal changes that still effect how organizations run. Even companies that were not unionized offered greater benefits because they did not want to deal with unions.
 

Domingo Halliburton

Handmade in USA
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
12,616
Reputation
1,370
Daps
15,451
Reppin
Brooklyn Without Limits
No, it means what it says. That individuals are being paid what companies want to pay them, not what they would be willing to work for if we had a stronger collective bargaining regime that evens out the playing field. Just because you lack equal bargaining power does not mean that companies will pay you the smallest salary possible (how would this get them skilled workers that need college-level education and beyond), but besides that, the current regime is a result of collective bargaining. Just like how minimum wage and child labor laws defined the workforce formally, the labor movement also brought about informal changes that still effect how organizations run. Even companies that were not unionized offered greater benefits because they did not want to deal with unions.

sure and I'm not denying unions have done good things for workers but again...a lot of it can go back to supply and demand. less supply and demand for some highly skilled professional = higher wages.
 

acri1

The Chosen 1
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
24,471
Reputation
3,898
Daps
108,286
Reppin
Detroit
wouldn't this imply that every company out there would just offer minimum wage?

I think it's just simple supply and demand. You have a big supply of high school kids willing to do the job at minimum wage.

:usure:

The average age of a retail worker is 37.

And people still don't seem to be acknowledging the burden Walmart is putting on taxpayers by not paying their employees enough to get off of food stamps.
 

88m3

Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
89,262
Reputation
3,727
Daps
158,957
Reppin
Brooklyn
By Bryce Covert on April 11, 2014 at 8:38 am

1,807Share This 285Tweet This
"Walmart Prices Would Rise By Pennies If It Paid Workers More Than Poverty Wages"

Share:

Share on email
walmart.jpg

CREDIT: AP

Walmart prices would go up by mere pennies if it were to pay all of its workers enough to live above the poverty line, according to an analysis by Marketplace and Slate.

In a video, they explain that Walmart employees consume billions in food stamps each year, but raising their wages to a point where they wouldn’t need them anymore would only increase prices by about 1.4 percent:

A single mother working at Walmart is eligible for food stamps if she makes less than $20,449 a year. Industry analysts put the average wage for cashiers at $8.81, or for someone who works typical retail hours of 30 a week, 50 weeks a year, $13,215 a year. Raising that single mom’s wages to $13.63 an hour, however, would push her to a point where she no longer qualifies for food stamps. Doing that for all of its employees would cost the company $4.8 billion a year. Yet if it passed the entire cost on to consumers, it would raise prices by 1.4 percent, making a $0.68 box of macaroni and cheese cost just a penny more.

The video also notes that doing this would save the country millions in spending on food stamps. It notes that in Ohio, for example, as many as 15 percent of Walmart employees use food stamps, meaning that all workers consume about $300 million each year. That sum would no longer have to be spent if its workers simply made more. Including food stamps, Walmart workers at single store consumer around $1 million in public benefits each year.

Researchers have come to similar conclusions. Ken Jacobs, chair of the Labor Center at the University of California, Berkeley, estimated that raising the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour would add $200 million to the company’s labor costs. If it passed the entire cost on to consumers, it would increase the price of a $16 item by a penny.

It’s also worth noting that the company could very well decide not to pass the cost on to its shoppers. Jacobs estimates that while some of it might be passed through in higher prices, it’s probably not going to be 100 percent. That’s at least in part because a higher wage means more money for its workers to spend in its own stores, which would increase its sales. The company even told Bloomberg it was considering supporting a minimum wage hike because it would give its customers additional income, although it warned it hasn’t made any decisions on its support. A $10.10 minimum wage would mean $31 billion more in earnings for nearly 17 million people across the country.

It could also raise wages for its workers with the $7.6 billion it currently spends on buying back shares of its own stock and ensure they all make over $25,000 a year, a level demanded by workers who have repeatedly gone on strike. It gets little value out of the stock buybacks.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/04/11/3425609/walmart-prices-food-stamps/
 
Top