A question for business owners...

This is a simple question that, hopefully, will receive some honest answers from those of you who employ people making the current minimum wage. If the government were to repeal all of the minimum wage laws in the U.S. what would you consider to be fair living wage for new hires with little or no experience? Would you keep hiring people at the same wage as you do now, or would you decrease/increase wages? Considering the fact that minimum wage jobs are called that because employers pay the lowest possible wages allowed by law, how would the removal of those laws affect your decisions regarding what fair pay is?

I am addressing this to business owners, not those who think they know what business owners would do in this situation, but the actual owners themselves. Please take the time to consider the question and give an honest answer if you choose to respond.

If I were an employer I would hire the most qualified people for the least I could.

If I were a skilled worker seeking employment I would seek the highest possible income.

Therein lies the equilibrium, (supply v. demand in Econ 101), not determined by any one person, but by the aggregate median.

It's democracy with money but democrats hate it.
Republicans, also...

It would have no affect on wages at my company. I haven't paid minimum wage in 25 years. I have been in business 33 years as of last month. The key to business isn't government control, but treat your people and customers fairly and don't spend money foolishly.

a reply to: Nickn3

That is respectable.

But some businesses can't afford to do the same as yours has.

If the government implemented a 10% raise for all US employees, would you have a plan to follow through with that?

Say in the next fiscal year?

originally posted by: Nickn3
It would have no affect on wages at my company. I haven't paid minimum wage in 25 years. I have been in business 33 years as of last month. The key to business isn't government control, but treat your people and customers fairly and don't spend money foolishly.

Best answer I've seen.

I usually hire unskilled workers but I am opposed to a minimum wage and I pay the minimum I can.

a reply to: mOjOm

Can it be former business owners?

I used to own my own business and I employed at minimum wage.. who I hired were mom's looking for a bit of cash while their kids were in school (those all had husbands who provided the main income for the household) and teenagers after school.

To me, those are the one's who look for the minimum wage type jobs, they have either parents who provide the main income, or a spouse..

Anyone with a family to support, usually tries for higher paying jobs. I owned a laundry and dry cleaning business, and there was no one in my employ who was the main bread winner of their house..

I think in those types of jobs, the minimum wage we have now is sufficient to start, and ALL employers, myself included, gives pay raises to people who stay any amount of time and is a good employee.. one of the ladies who worked for me made 3 dollars an hour above the minimum wage even though I hired her at minimum, because she was reliable and indispensable to me..

But quite frankly, the small businesses aren't rich.. the owner makes enough to support themselves, and the rest has to go into the business for equipment repairs and upgrades, insurance, taxes, supplies and much more.. most small business owners just don't make that much.. I ended up as freinds with most of my employees who stayed around (the kids did a lot of quitting after a month or two.. but the women who worked while their kids were in school usually stuck around..)

I lived on about the same as the manager of a business makes..the rest went into the business, and if I had to raise wages or pay additional taxes I could not have stayed in business.. I made just enough, and that was it.

I used to take my daughter to work with me, to avoid so much cost in day care and to spend time with her, since I was at the business from open to close, 7 days a week most weeks..

(which is why I don't own my own business today.. the hours were hell..)

a reply to: mOjOm

For a new employee with no experience, I pay minimum wage rounded up to the nearest dollar for the first month or two until they show me what they can do. After that, if they show basic math skills , reliability, and a good work ethic, I bump it up two or three dollars. Otherwise, I wish them good luck in their future endeavors.

If there were no minimum wage to use as a guideline, I would ask some other business owners in the area what they pay and go from there.

If anyone know someone looking for work in the Portsmouth, VA area, let me know. I'd kill for a good seamstress right now. It seems like the ability to use a sewing machine is becoming a lost trade. I could also use a general go-to guy. I have to work weekends and turn away business because I don't have the manpower to handle it, and I hate that.

a reply to: mOjOm

Well, despite the question being obviously loaded, I will attempt to explain why it is moot.

Minimum wage laws discourage employment. That is important to recognize as it directly affects the youngest, poorest and least educated among us.

The question is not, "will you drop wages if the minimum wage restriction is lifted".

The question is, "will you hire more people if your business has survived the culling and market deterioration caused by interventionist minimum wage laws? Will the unemployed youth still be around to fill those positions or is the damage permanent?"

Political policy has no place in economic theory and will always achieve the same results, overall negative.

a reply to: mOjOm
I am self-employed, but at this point I don't have anyone working for me. In the past however, I have hired and fired more people than I can count. I have always started with minimum, or just above, and given raises to those who earn them. But respect is the most important thing an employer can give to anyone working for them.

a reply to: mOjOm

"a fair living wage", is where I get pissy with you types. Why do people think they're entitled to a "living wage" for doing a job that doesn't envolve any skills?

I have several employees and everyone of their wages are different. No job is equal and folks need to learn that. Just because I give you 40 hours a week employment, does not mean you can retire with a nice pension.

The vast majority of my employees make a good wage, as they're skilled trades. The ones sweeping floors, taking out trash, washing vehicles or doing errands make ten bucks an hour and that's all that job will pay. No offense, but if you want better pay, get a better job! I'm not forcing anyone to work a 10 dollar an hour wage, I'm offering that position though and that job will always be there. If you want a better wage, I offer that oppertunity, if you're okay with doing minimal work for the wage you accepted when hired, I'm cool with that too.

My good friend is a dish washer. He's been there since we were in high school. Mind you, we're both pushing 40. Why in the hell does he deserve a "living wage"? He's an idiot thats washed dishes for 20 years. He could move up the chain and become a cook or manager, but he's happy washing dishes. FFS, what kind of "living wage" should a 40 year old guy that refuses to better himself make?

You make it sound like business owners are evil for paying minimum wage. Some jobs pay just that and if you don't like it, better yourself. Or be like my 40yo dishwasher buddy that lives in his parents basement because "the man" is holding him down.

Sorry for the rant, but when folks talk "living wage" crap, I want to kick kittens and punch bunnies! Working 40 hours a week is not enough to warrent you a living wage.

as a former industrial / commercial electrical repair shop owner. i would have to say the same or maybe lower.
reason being that in the field i was in was very diversified, we repaired just about anything electrical. power tools, electric motors from the smallest fractional hp to the hundreds of hp, welders all types, generators, motors starters / variable feq drives, commercial kitchen equipment. we had to be able to do full service in some instances, that meant able to pull wires, repair engines gas and diesel, plumbing, even do minor construction / remodel which always seemed to turn out to be major. plus many other skills that were needed.

if i hired any one that wasn't skilled in some of those areas, that meant i or one of my people had to train them. which in order to train some one to be able to work on their on, depending on what i hired them for, could take a year or more. then if they moved on up to more complicated equipment more training. plus then certain manufacturers required you to to send people to school to be certified. also certain work, the state and county required a licensees, which also meant that someone had to go to school. then you had disloyal employees, and competition that would leave after you trained them and the competition hire them to save themselves money.

at one point i had employees that were paid from minimum wage $ 7.35 to 14.50.

the above was just some of what the expenses of dealing with employees, and by no means all of it.

a reply to: mOjOm

I would have paid them less if I could have. I was paying 10 an hour. It's was a dirty job, but lots of driving and not too demanding physically. The quality of applicants was always terrible. I didn't advertise the pay. My only good employee got arrested for smuggling. I don't know what, on his time. My worst crashed my van into a Mercedes and never told me. Then claimed unemployment when he was fired. I had to close up shop.

a reply to: Nickn3

I am the lowest paid employee in my business. My highest waged employee makes $22 an hour, plus bonuses, profit sharing, and benefits. My other 7 employees range between $15 on up. We give $1.00 hour raise every year. I have never paid anyone minimum wage. I have had my business since 1996.

I understand the value of my employees and keep them happy.

I am not worried.

a reply to: mOjOm

The only logical and responsible answer to your question is to let the market dictate wages. If my competition is paying X, then I would want to pay X+1. There would be competition to offer the best pay, and attract employees. In today's world of government controlled wages, there is no difference between McDonald's and Burger King from an employment perspective, because they are both minimum wage jobs (or slightly higher). Both companies can pay what they pay and use the minimum wage law as a scapegoat. Get rid of the law, and then both companies would have to attract employees, and based on what they offer they would find quality employees.

The other side of this coin is that our services industry is founded on the minimum wage, and then that expands out to other industries. McDonald's, as with any other for profit business bases their earnings forecast on many different metrics including how much labor will cost, and then sets their prices accordingly to accommodate the return their share holders expect. That is the bottom line in any for profit industry. If the cost of labor goes up, the cost of the goods and services that labor provides will ALWAYS go up, because the share holders will still demand the same rate of return. If taxes go up, prices go up. If labor costs go up, prices will go up. If the cost of supply goes up, price goes up, etc...

A person does not have the right to a livable wage. They have a right to have the same opportunity as anyone else to earn a livable wage, or better. What they do or do not do with said opportunity is their problem. If fast food workers get $15 an hour, for an unskilled position that anyone could do, then how much of a raise should a skilled position get? Entry level jobs in the IT industry start out at $10-13 an hour, and that is with a 4 year degree and a certification, so then to offset the massive raise in wages for unskilled fast food workers, how much should the IT entry level position be adjusted? $25 an hour? $30? Once all wages catch up and adjust, then the cost and price of everything will adjust as well, and the cost of living will be relative to the wages that are paid, just as they are now. The moral of the story is this... it doesn't matter what wages are, because they will always remain relative to the cost of supply. The minimum wage worker struggles now, and they will still struggle if their pay doubles , triples, etc... because cost of living will raise as well.

a reply to: OptimusSubprime

Great explanation.

The hidden costs of regulated employment and the direct taxation (or confiscation) of the meager resulting wages is insulting.

Eliminate the federal income tax completely for an immediate boost to real income at the citizen level, usually between $5,000-20,000 annually. The states would then have to make up the slack and compete with each other for productive populations.

First off, thank you to those who understood and took the time to give an honest response.
Secondly those who are so paranoid and suspicious of everyone's motivations, @#*!# you! I am not a TYPE and this was not a loaded question.
It so happens that I am on the fence about the whole minimum wage issue. I recognize that raising the minimum wage makes staying in business difficult for small companies, unless they raise prices, which cancels any benefit the employees would have gained from it. I also recognize the fact that there are jerk employers that can't comprehend the difference between a living wage, meaning a wage upon which someone can live, and a job that provides a retirement pension.

If you are working a full time job, no matter what it is, you should be able to feed, clothe and house yourself comfortably. If the job you are doing isn't necessary to the business, why does the job exist? If it is necessary and the employee does the job well, they deserve to be paid enough to live on.


I am actually a proponent of a "maximum wage". The premise is that a business owner cannot earn profits at a ratio of 1,795:1 in relation to their employees. Instead of a minimum wage, which allows employers to pay their employees the least amount possible with no incentive to increase it even when their profits go up, they would be required to maintain a ratio of say 50:1 between their highest and lowest paid employees. That way as profits go up so do wages. It would encourage employees and employers alike to care about their jobs, since the better the business does the better they do. If you are interested, here is some more information.

Lastly, to those of you who are the type of employers who recognize and reward the value of your employees, GREAT JOB! I wish there were more of you out there.

a reply to: OpinionatedB

I just read the op not all the responces. I own a small business and to be fair all my employees make more than min wage. Unfortunately for me I haven't taken a salary scince the down turn in 08.(yeah my wife hates me) I personally think for my area the single kids in there twentys I hire do pretty well off of 9.50 an hour. We are in a small poor town in southwest va so cost of living is real low. The older more skilled workers don't live posh but I keep them in the 25k-30k range. I know they would like more but none have ever left me for a better paying job. I don't know the answer but I do know if it went over ten an hour I would close the doorsl.

a reply to: Xstokerx

Good for you for doing good by those you employ. I do truly hope your wife doesn't hate you for your business choices. She should actually love more for your kindness to others.

But you make a good example in how they system is built to bleed those who have little to feed those who have everything. As a small business you are left to handle everything on your own, do good by your employee's, support you and your family, play by all the rules, break no laws and still make a profit if possible.

But what about them, you know the big guys. How on earth can they make it?? So many employee's to support so maybe they can't afford a raise for their employee's either. But you see, unlike the small business owner they get lot's of help.

The 8 Biggest Corporate Welfare Recipients in America

8. Nike — $2.03 Billion
7. Royal Dutch Shell — $2.04 Billion
3. Intel — $3.87 Billion
1. Boeing — $13.18 Billion

But I'm guessing you don't see any Gov. dollars coming your way to help pay for your business like these guys. I don't think they are having trouble making a profit either so why are companies who are already making huge profits still getting subsidies in the billions??

Personally, I've never hired anyone at minimum wage.

I've always paid a buck or two over the minimum wage standard. The reason being is because I've always found that if you offer the bare minimum as a wage starter, you tend to attract more fly-by-night type of applicants.

Just my own anecdotal viewpoint.