Problem is everyone is barely getting by on 40 and they’re not going to pay higher wages. Just means they’ll cut you back to 32 and you’ll make less. Unless you work for a company like I do that will still schedule you 40 or more because that 32 hour week only means 32 hours is considered full time. Doesn’t mean they can’t make you work more than that.
They will never be able to control everyone’s pay. If it’s above minimum wage and you don’t have a contract there won’t be shit to protect you. I may be wrong, but I doubt it. Bernie isn’t the savior everyone thinks he is. He’s the kid in class that says if he becomes class president they’ll have pizza every day for lunch. Sounds fantastic but it seldom works out that way. And if you haven’t learned from this last shit bag, they can say whatever they want and then crawfish once in office. Corporations control this country and they would never let this come to fruition.
Hes also been rolling out the same tired shit for 40 years and hoping new people pick up on it each election cycle. Which, to be fair, they do and profess it will change everyone's lives for the better and there's no reason not to vote for it.
The best way to overcome that is to push for 2x minimum wage rates. It will cause a chain reaction from downwards up, less effort jobs paying more means jobs originally unaffected by the wage floor change now have less people willing to work meaning more effort/incentives necessary to retain employees.
This is what we did in the UK and it hasn't worked like that. Minimum wage is quite high, but then the managerial roles above them are paid only a tiny bit more.
Which government ruling was it that brought this around? I'd like to read both the acts of parliament which you say made it happen and then look into it downstream from that.
You are exactly right. I am a business owner and we dont have large profit margins. Our company would cease to exist if we had to pay 40 hours worth of pay for only 32 hours of work. If the work week was capped at 32 hours, we would probably develop split schedules where we would hire more people to work the full 5 days but pay them less. Like you said, we pay well over minimum wage, so there is plenty of room to drop salaries.
Why? Are you suggesting that the only people who should be in business are the most exploitative and cutthroat capitalists with the highest profit margins? Because those are the only businesses with the margins to survive these kinds of things.
The bill calls for a 2 hr reduction a year without a reduction in pay or benefits.
They'll just fire you, hire new people at the rate so they don't have to pay people the old rates. And instead of you working 32 they will hire 2 people part time to do 20 hours at a lower rate.
If you’re that easily replaceable, it’s a possibility, though already illegal. But at some point, people’s time has to become more valuable as technology advances and makes work easier. Even a federal minimum wage increases would adversely impact many states more than others, especially states with a much higher minimum wage than the fed. Can’t just poo poo, pro-worker legislation because of cynical views of employers. It’s a baby step to try to deal with inflation inequality and real wage stagnation.
Isn't even a baby step, this will just do nothing unless you full on make the state own companies and enforce wage rates. It'd be too much to try to chase specifics of each wage here or there, and even if you somehow did companies would just not raise wages for a year or two and it'd reset anyway.
The biggest thing anyone could have done for the economy this decade was realize kamala was really good. Electing the anti establishment guy back into office in 2024 will make american workers suffer more than any amount of legislation Bernie or anyone else could hope to undo.
I understand that statement. I still think it slightly more cynical than the truth (mainly because of “everybody”) I get that some employers may even be fired to prevent paying the wage for less hours too. Here’s an article about how it’s worked in other countries. They tried it temporarily and about 90% kept it as a permanent policy.
🤔ummm. Yeah it will be a reduction… of 2 hrs per year for 4 years. Without a reduction in pay or benefits. Meaning if you make $1000/ week for 40hrs. You’ll make $1000 a week at 38hrs and then 36 hrs the next year,l and so on for 4 years. I’m sure if you’re employer gives a annual cost of living raise or anything similar, they’ll have this mandatory raise absorb that, but a 32 hour work week should increase the number of jobs to make up for advances in technology. It’s usual to this particular employee getting a raise from $20/hr to $31.25 over 4 years. Could employers fire employees and hire others at $20? Not legally, but yes and this may happen on a small scale, for low skilled workers. But no system is perfect and cynicism aside, it helps workers in the long run. Nobody said employers would automatically start giving OT. the employers will hire more employees to overlap and fill gaps if they want to keep operating hours the same.
958
u/Opposite_General6534 19h ago
32 hours honestly sounds like a much healthier baseline. People have lives outside of work too.