this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
1406 points (97.4% liked)
Work Reform
9964 readers
22 users here now
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Downvoting you, because you are mischaracterizing the article content.
The first half of it describes how she started there and the regular positions she had, before she moved up and into the teaching position she has at corporate office, which is similar to the teaching position she had before; both are of a teaching.
From the article...
How TF am I mischaracterizing it? The teacher in this story got a pay bump by taking a marketing job with Costco corporate, not by working in the warehouse. The headline implies that she got a raise by working for her local Costco. That's misleading.
Well then in that case your reading comprehension is pretty bad.
The article also describes how she worked in the bakery.
My reading comprehension is fine. Do you understand the difference between the headline and the article?
To recap, my critique is that the headline obscures the real story -- that she got a raise by getting a corporate job. "Works at Costco" clearly implies working at a store, not corporate.
So you agree the headline is a lie because she was not making 50% more by switching to work at Costco but by finding a job with vertical promotion possibilities and getting a corporate job using her degree which few would be able to follow in her footsteps cause their is limited positions.
She took a pay cut to work on her feet all day.
This is a recruiter article bragging about how much better it is to work for Costco and they try to make the pay cut seem like not a big deal when there is vastly different perks and benefits.
At 60 hours a week she was making 15.06/hr as a teacher. Base pay at 18.50 is a raise.
School teachers often get physically and verbally abused by both parents and students, with the abusers getting little to no reprocussions. In a corporate environment that would get you fired or arrested.
Yes. But that's not how salaries are determined. Based on that teachers and front-facing retail workers would be the highest paid jobs
Except that we have education requirements for teachers, and retail will hire just about anyone.
The reason teachers aren’t paid well is because we have a culture of funding public services like absolute shit. So despite low supply and high demand for teachers, we just keep adding more and more kids to each teacher, and giving them less and less supplies to work with. While letting wages stagnate.
People need to stop applying free-market thinking to our public services.
My school district is one of the few that pays a competitive wage to be private industry to their teachers in the U.S. The local teacher unions are extremely strong and have had numerous strikes over the years.
They unionized the non-certificated staff and they have gone on strike as well.
This past summer they were getting 100+ applicants for every open teacher position. Every open position is filled easily.
I assume not a conservative state, and in an area with affluent people?
West coast with a mixed demographic. About 50% of the district qualifies for reduced or free lunches. About 1/3 of the schools are title 1.
Just because its obvious doesn't mean its not also bullshit.
Education is the single most important thing affecting a societies longevity and well-being. If the people responsible for that education aren't able to support themselves, it erodes the very foundation of the country.
Whether or not it affects the bottom line of an investment firm may be an important metric to you but it doesn't necessarily mean what's best for everyone.
Thats what most capitalists do, and is how we got into this mess in the first place.
Maybe stop looking at what makes the greatest fiscal value and you might start seeing why people are complaining about.
And the first half of the article? When you keep describing again and again is the latter half.
The whole article is about somebody's career profession change and advancement, not just change.