babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » labour and consumption   » Québec minimum wage to reach $8.50 in May

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Québec minimum wage to reach $8.50 in May
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 13 December 2007 10:34 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Quebec to hike minimum wage

quote:
Quebec's minimum wage is going up by 50 cents an hour next May — the biggest increase in the rate since 1975.

Labour Minister David Whissell announced in Quebec City Thursday that more than 250,000 workers will get $8.50 an hour as of May 1, 2008.

For a person who works 40 hours a week at the minimum wage it will mean an extra $1,000 a year in gross income.


Barring other hikes elsewhere, this increase will put Québec above all other provinces and tied with Nunavut (source). The Atlantic provinces and Saskatchewan are the only ones still paying less than $8.00.

There's still a long way to go to $10.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
500_Apples
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12684

posted 13 December 2007 06:01 PM      Profile for 500_Apples   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Overall, good news. One thing that's been consistent throughout the years in this province, as other social policies have suffered, is steady increases on the level of inflation in the minimum wage. I remember my minimum wage times and without a doubt, if the mw was 5$/hour, some of those bosses would have paid 5$ an hour. I might not have been able to pay for books or reading glasses. A high minimum wage but not too high is a limit on exploitation by mandating a minimal wealth transfer to those at the bottom.

quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

There's still a long way to go to $10.

Is there any reason to support a $10 minimum wage other than the fact we have ten fingers and use a base-ten number system?


From: Montreal, Quebec | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 13 December 2007 07:26 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by 500_Apples:
A high minimum wage but not too high is a limit on exploitation by mandating a minimal wealth transfer to those at the bottom.

I think that's basically right. ETA: Well, there's actually much more to the minimum wage than that, but I've posted it so often I'm getting finger fatigue.

quote:
Is there any reason to support a $10 minimum wage other than the fact we have ten fingers and use a base-ten number system?

We have 20 digits if you count feet. Don't razz me, or I'll raise you to $20!

[ 13 December 2007: Message edited by: unionist ]


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 13 December 2007 08:35 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by 500_Apples:
. Is there any reason to support a $10 minimum wage other than the fact we have ten fingers and use a base-ten number system?

There is no one particular reason. Our governments are entirely free to raise min wage above $10 dollars CDN per hour, or $00001010 per hr (base 2), or $0100000101.01000000000000000000000 dollars CDN per hour (32 bit single precision signed IEEE-754) as is the case in several other rich countries with lower child poverty rates than Canada. If the feds were serious about child poverty in Canada, this is one of the free market mechanisms at their disposal in preventing low wage poverty. In fact, our stoogeocrats are entirely free to use their fat heads as something other than just hat racks.

[ 13 December 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
huberman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14076

posted 02 January 2008 12:15 PM      Profile for huberman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
A higher min. wage is necessary, but it still won't stop offshoring of jobs. The key is to raise the min. wage not on an hourly basis, but on a monthly or annual basis, and close the door to prevent corporations from offshoring jobs.

An increase to $10 an hour from $9.50 or $8.50 isn't very helpful if your employer only gives you 10-12 hours of work a week, and then reduces your hours arbitrarily. We need minimum annual or monthly income and the door closed to sweatshop made goods.


From: NAFTA | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged
2 ponies
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11096

posted 02 January 2008 01:13 PM      Profile for 2 ponies   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I’m not clear on how you arrived at the implication that raising the minimum wage sufficiently is going to cause a decrease of jobs being moved offshore. A higher minimum wage will likely result in more jobs being moved offshore; I’m not stating this to justify keeping the minimum wage low, on the contrary I feel it should be higher. My understanding of offshoring is that it’s an easy way for companies to lower their costs rather than addressing other aspects of the business that can increase productivity. A lot of companies that don’t offshore aren’t doing so because they’ve managed to get some sort of handout from the taxpayer (e.g. hundreds of millions in tax deferrals and/or government investment in a new auto plant) or they’re found a way to increase productivity. Increases in productivity are often achieved by including workers in the process (well duh, the workers know their jobs, so given a chance to improve how the job is done it’s highly likely that they’ll have some valuable input). A lot of productivity changes require investments that companies are too cheap, short-sighted and obtuse to make. Too many North American companies are focused on the short term financial statements for numerous reasons; e.g. stock markets tend to respond to quarterly reports and short-term forecasts, managers who are likely to base business decisions on their bonus are also more likely to make decisions that improve the bottom line in the short-term such as discontinuing an operation, trying to increase cash flow, making financial investment decisions that increase accounting income, but don’t necessarily improve the solvency of the company, etc. My convoluted point is that our companies are too focused on the wrong things. In all my years of studying, reviewing cases, etc I don’t recall coming across any large North American companies that have made a “paradigm-shift” in terms of how they plan – i.e. planning for long-term profitability. Also, it’s difficult to find companies that make large investments in training their employees.

How is it that there are only 50 best companies to work for in Canada, for instance? The perks that these companies are offering aren’t terribly innovative or rocket science either; e.g. having onsite daycares, days off for family responsibilities, offering top-ups to parental benefits, adjusting work hours to accommodate personal schedules (such as family responsibilities). Some of these non-direct/non-cash benefits are as important as minimum wage to a lot of people; e.g. health & dental benefits – particularly for families. Having a liveable wage is certainly the most important, if you don’t make enough to pay the rent, you’re out on the street, or cramped in with some kind person if you’re really lucky.

Huberman: it almost sounds like you’re talking more about some kind of guaranteed minimum income rather than a minimum wage. They’re not the same thing – they’re actually very different. I like the idea of a ban on sweatshop made goods. My only question is what should the minimum standards be in determining what is not a sweatshop? I’m not being argumentative, I would just like to hear some ideas from people as a basis to start thinking about the principle in more detail.


From: Sask | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
huberman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14076

posted 02 January 2008 01:41 PM      Profile for huberman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
A raise in the min. wage is a good thing and must be done.

My point is that we are constantly seeing a decrease in full-time jobs, and an increase in precarious, temp and part time jobs with no benefits and inconsistent hours worked per week.

A raise in the min. wage does not have the same effect it did 20 or 30 years ago when jobs were more likely full time, unionized and included benefits.

Therefore, in this new age of offshoring and precarious work (8 hours this week, 14 hours next week, 0 the next week etc.) what we need is a guaranteed monthly/annual income. You cannot live on $10/hour if you can only get part time work or other precarious work (3 month contracts) as is the norm now.

And the door needs to be closed to offshoring to sweatshop economies because a raise in the min. wage may also push a company offshore to reduce costs.


From: NAFTA | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged
bruce_the_vii
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13710

posted 02 January 2008 03:51 PM      Profile for bruce_the_vii     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
One of the things that is helping out with the bad employment prospects is people drop out of the labour force. I took a close look at the labour force statistics for cities in Canada and in the last deep recession all 27 surveyed cities had more people drop out of the work force than say they were unemployed. The point is the people that need work, even a minimum wage job, can find a job because so many people just stay home. So while some people are working at jobs with these variable part time hours the most needy can do better. It's a work out.

Also be reminded Quebec is an immigration province and considers that the problem is finding enough people to fill the jobs available. They import about 50,000 people a year. Exporting jobs is actually a solution, sending the sweat shop work to more needy economies.

[ 02 January 2008: Message edited by: bruce_the_vii ]

[ 02 January 2008: Message edited by: bruce_the_vii ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 03 January 2008 11:51 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by bruce_the_vii:
One of the things that is helping out with the bad employment prospects is people drop out of the labour force

Makes it easier to sweep them under a statistical rug for the sake of political expediency. The ideology works better this way.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 04 January 2008 05:43 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Chinese workers now entitled to minimum wages, severance pay

quote:
"The Government making the most concerted effort to protect workers' rights is China," said Auret van Heerden, Geneva-based head of Fair Labor Association, which monitors work conditions in 60 countries. That "goes against the conventional wisdom that China is leading the race to the bottom."

From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca