employees

Why Should We Fight For a Livable Minimum Wage?

Even though the focus is off of him these days, during Bernie Sanders's run for presidency, one of the things we heard over and over was, "raise minimum wage, raise minimum wage!" In fact, one of the Vermont Senator's most applauded proposals was raising national minimum wage from its current amount of $7.25/hr to $15/hr. Numerous officials have argued $15 is the bare minimum for an actual livable wage, the current minimum ($15,000 annually) falling well below the nation's poverty standard for a family of four ($23,000 annually). Across the board this election politicians were reticent to support enacting a federal living wage. In fact, a 2013 Gallup poll found that 76% of Americans support raising minimum wage, so why isn't it happening? We wanted to track why minimum wage was such a big deal among Bernie Sanders supporters, the history behind minimum wage, and what an increase could mean for you and the rest of America.

Minimum wage was not enacted in America until 1938 (pretty late when you consider New Zealand first passed a law concerning the matter in 1894 and the U.K. passed one in 1909). It came about as part of the passage of the Fair Labor Standards Act by Franklin D. Roosevelt, who, in bringing America out of The Great Depression, passed a host of bills that today's Republicans would probably deem "socialist." It may surprise you to read that, when adjusted for inflation, the 1968 minimum wage worker made around 10.75 an hour—much more than today's minimum wage worker.

Below is a tracking of each minimum wage increase in America (courtesy of Time.com):

October 1938 (FDR): $0.25/hr ($4.15/hr in 2014 dollars)

October 1939 (FDR): $0.30/hr ($5.05/hr)

October 1945 (Truman): $0.40/hr ($5.20/hr)

January 1950 (Truman): $0.75/hr ($7.29/hr)

March 1956 (Eisenhower): $1/hr ($8.61/hr)

September 1961 (Kennedy): $1.16/hr ($8.97/hr)

September 1963 (Kennedy): $1.25/hr ($9.56/hr)

February 1967 (Johnson): $1.40/hr ($9.80/hr)

February 1968 (Johnson): $1.60/hr ($10.75/hr)

May 1974 (Nixon): $2/hr ($9.49/hr)

January 1975 (Ford): $2.10/hr ($9.13/hr)

January 1976 (Ford): $2.30/hr ($9.47/hr)

January 1978 (Carter): $2.65 ($9.51/hr)

January 1979 (Carter): $2.90/hr ($9.34/hr)

January 1980 (Carter): $3.10/hr ($8.80/hr)

January 1981 (Carter): $3.35/hr ($8.62/hr)

April 1990 (Bush): $3.80/hr ($6.82/hr)

April 1991 (Bush): $4.25/hr ($7.30/hr)

October 1996 (Clinton): $4.75/hr ($7.08/hr)

September 1997 (Clinton): $5.15/hr ($7.51/hr)

July 2007 (GW Bush): $5.85/hr ($6.61/hr)

July 2008 (GW Bush): $6.55/hr ($7.12/hr)

July 2009 (Obama): $7.25/hr ($7.80/hr)

As far as developed countries go, the U.S. is tied with Japan for lowest minimum wage compared to average worker's wage. For example, Australia's minimum is $17.29 an hour, while France's is $12.25.

While largely ignored by Washington's politicians, there haves been advances on the local level regarding minimum wage. L.A. pledged to gradually increase its minimum wage twice over the next few years, reaching $15 by 2020. Seattle will reach $15 in 2017. While San Francisco currently employs the highest minimum wage in the nation, at $13/hr.

Hillary Clinton has publicly come out in support of a federal $12 minimum wage, and $15 one where it makes "economic sense. She clarified this position on her website:


It's clear that the federal minimum wage is not at all in parallel with the finances it takes to live and work in America, proven by over 20 states having higher minimum wages than the federal level. It's argued that an increase would be too much of a strain on big business, the fast food industry being the biggest employer of minimum wage workers, but a study said an increase to $15 would only increase the price of Big Mac by 17 cents.

Related Articles Around the Web
PayPath
Follow Us on

Don't Respond to That Email Right Away

Time is something that none of us have, yet somehow we feel constantly obliged to respond to an email the minute it is sent. Our inboxes turn into our lives, and if we don't respond right away, they'll get lost in the ether. There's the 24-hour rule, where you have to get to all of your emails withi...

Don't Respond to That Email Right Away

Time is something that none of us have, yet somehow we feel constantly obliged to respond to an email the minute it is sent. Our inboxes turn into our lives, and if we don't respond right away, they'll get lost in the ether. There's the 24-hour rule, where you have to get to all of your emails within a day, but are there exceptions?

You may think that responding right away gives you a competitive edge. It could mean you are always on top of everything and you don't let anything go by unnoticed or unacknowledged. This is great, but there are a few problems that can arise based on this philosophy.

The sender could think your task took zero effort.

Even if it did, valuable work is recognized by the time it takes to complete it. If someone wrote a book in one day, you'd have a hard time believing it was any good. And if it was, well, you have us fooled.

You could make an (embarrassing) mistake.

We all know that rushing to get things done makes us more vulnerable to mistakes. We're not just talking typos, but what happens if you accidentally send a message to the wrong person with confidential information in it? What happens if you're badmouthing your coworker and hit "send" instead of "delete"?

You could come up with a better answer if you wait.

For emails that require thought, you should milk it within reason. If you're asked for an opinion or recommendation, putting a lot of time into it will make the requester think that you've really taken the task seriously. If you whip off a dinner recommendation in five seconds, you may come up with a better place twelve minutes later.

Here's how to combat the email immediacy issue.

Give an estimated delivery date.

You don't have to have projects done within the day that they are assigned. Respond that you will get it done by this date. Then flag it to put in your Priority file.

Give yourself follow-up reminders.

If you're thinking about how to respond to an email but are wrapped up in another task, mark it as unread and enter a follow-up reminder on your calendar.

Send "I'm still thinking about it" emails in the interim.

Without going overboard, if you're still thinking about an issue and are worrying that the sender thinks you've completely dropped the ball, send a courtesy email that says you're still thinking and you're nearly finished. Remind them that the time you take to formulate a response is valuable. That's what they're paying you for.

Having your inbox up all the time can distract you from getting your other tasks done. So deal with email at a few specific points throughout the day.

It's not an emergency. It's just email. Take your time.

Related Articles Around the Web

Does Your Small Business Need Innovative Recruitment Technology?

A friend of mine was telling me about his experience doing tech interviews. Programming tests. Engineering interviews, program this based on this design. Personality interviews, what adversity have you faced, give an anecdote, what about challenges? Entire days are spent, multiple rounds. For almost everyone involved, it is worth it. Companies like Google and Facebook know that almost 80% percent of employee turnover starts from a bad hiring decision and with so many options, employees easily feel dissatisfied with the first company they find and, instead, want to find the one that fits. That's why they've become among the best places in the world to work for.

But not every business starts out with legions of professional recruiters or even the office space. Almost 70% of small businesses in the UK do not have a single member of their staff dedicated to finding the kinds of talent that make the difference between "that's a cool idea" and the next AirBnb. Without the people, it's just a talking point and a few unhappy investors. With the wrong people, it'll just become someone else's idea.

And that's a void that a host of new innovative recruitment technology companies like Sonru, LaunchPad Recruits or InterviewStream are trying to fill. Since people no longer look for jobs in the Yellow Pages, there's no reason your hiring department (especially if that's just you) to be stuck in the Middle Ages. Forget relying on emails or antiquated personality quizzes—innovative recruitment technology puts you in command of smart data-driven recruitment tools that give you access to a pool of millions of people all over the world to find the right fit for your brand.

Just like you wouldn't want a lawyer operating on you in the hospital, every company needs the right people to carry out their mission. At one of the newest of the recruitment technology innovators on the marketplace, LaunchPad Recruits, businesses can select the interview questions that matter most to their brand and use sophisticated recruitment tools to screen hundreds of possible applicants. Applicants respond through video assessments and the best are sent to you to review. After that, the program uses powerful analytic software to measure everything from communications skills to particularized cultural aptitude. Company culture is brand power, nonprofits need the caring hearts who can't avoid looking the other way, and venture capital firms need people whose lifeblood lives on the bottom line. Innovative recruitment technology gives small business the opportunity to connect with applicants before the hiring process even begins, creating the kind of workforce that's behind every optimal workplace.

Related Articles Around the Web