quote:

---

SWIFT CURRENT, Sask. -- The owners of a Burger King have been ordered to pay $1,500 to a former employee who says he was fired because his father works as a labour standards officer. Scott Byers, who was 16 when he started work at the restaurant in 2001, told the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal he was sworn at, humiliated and ultimately fired because of his father's job.

Byers told the tribunal he took issue with scheduling at the restaurant and had concerns about overtime soon after his employment started, and told a manager his father was a labour standards officer.

He said the manager told him that "people who challenge the policies of the restaurant don't last long at the job." Days later, the same manager made him clean the washroom and invited staff to watch.

The restaurant claimed it fired Byers because he used vulgar language.

---

[ 20 March 2005: Message edited by: Mike Keenan ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Papal_Bull:
That is nothing new at all. When I first started working where I do now (nearly 3 years ago), I noticed that A) we never get 5 hour paid breaks (but we've found ways around that) B) we lack various safety protocols and measures (again, we've found ways around that) C) raises and promotions are based on nationality and neopotism and favouritism (I'm the most senior worker in my area, yet some of the new guys come in making a dollar more than me...I've not found a way around this...).

---

In the three years you've been working at your job, has it not occurred to you that there might be a connection between 'A' and 'B'?

To speak plainly, you boast of defrauding your employer of five hours of work, daily -- yet you continue to dishonestly accept your paycheque under false pretenses.

How does this differ from any other kind of theft? It doesn't.

You brag about being thief who steals from his employer -- and then you have the gall to complain that newer employees are being paid more. What I can't understand, is why you haven't been fired a long time ago.

quote:

---

Bosses are going to find ways to make money, challenge workers rights and generally attempt at all given oppurtunities to shaft their employees.

---

Here's a bit of a newsflash: you live in a free country. You are not obligated to continue working for an employer, if you feel the circumstances of the arrangement don't suit you. You are free to quit and find more agreeable employment any time you like, without notice. So why haven't you done that? Does dishonesty come more easily than a job hunt? Or are there just not that many openings available to thieves?

[ 20 March 2005: Message edited by: PereUbu ]

PB is not defrauding his employer out of five hours of work. PER DAY.

HE is being denied by his employer the legislated paid break he is entitled to after a certain number of hours of work.

quote:

---

we never get 5 hour paid breaks

---

Reads to me like he's complaining he doesn't get a five-hour paid break.

The wording is sufficiently awkward, I suppose it could possibly be taken either way.

quote:

---

Here's a bit of a newsflash: you live in a free country. You are not obligated to continue working for an employer, if you feel the circumstances of the arrangement don't suit you. You are free to quit and find more agreeable employment any time you like, without notice. So why haven't you done that? Does dishonesty come more easily than a job hunt? Or are there just not that many openings available to thieves?

---

Ignoring the fact that this little outburst was based on PU not understanding something....sheesh, what a weakling you are, PU. Someone abuses an explicit contract and you suggest the person should just suck it up?

quote:

---

Originally posted by PereUbu:

Reads to me like he's complaining he doesn't get a five-hour paid break.

The wording is sufficiently awkward, I suppose it could possibly be taken either way.

I'll come back to it, should "Papal Bull" wish to clarify what he meant.

---

quote:

---

The wording is sufficiently awkward, I suppose it could possibly be taken either way.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by audra trower williams:
You really think McDonald's can't afford to pay people more?

---

McDonald's pays more than any other fast food restaurant. Around here, I beleive the full-time starting wage is about $8-8.25/hour.

And yes... if the employees really put effort into keeping the restaurant as clean as possible, getting the order right and making them as fast as possible while still keeping the quality good; then McDonald's could pay the employees more.

quote:

---

Here's a bit of a newsflash: you live in a free country. You are not obligated to continue working for an employer, if you feel the circumstances of the arrangement don't suit you. You are free to quit and find more agreeable employment any time you like, without notice.

---

Ah yes, the grand dishonest dream: what free society we live in--where most of our economy is under the dictatorial thumb of unsustainable sweatshops that suck billions of dollars out of the economy in wealth created by other people and blackmail them with it.

Don't stand up for your rights on the job and demand a bigger more sustainable chunk of the wealth you create by demanding better wages, opportunities, benefits, safety, fair and due process etc., let alone ask for a say in running the business you work in? Why that's utopian communistic thinking!

Nope. Just quit your job, put what little economic security you might have in jeopardy and go try to be the same old wage slave for some other corporate bureaucracy.

Oh, BTW, if you quit your job without giving sufficient notice, as set by the boss, the company can withhold certain parts of your pay. Just keep that in mind.

quote:

---

Does dishonesty come more easily than a job hunt? Or are there just not that many openings available to thieves?

---

It seems the situation described at this particular McDonalds outlet is the standard display of demoralization, self-contained dissatisfaction, lack of input in making the job happen and the natural resentment you find most non-union firms--especially low-paying go-nowhere outfits like McDonalds.

Then again, our whole capitalistic economy is based on various forms of thievery by various privileged parasitic cliques and lobbies ripping off workers and consumers and hiding the money.

quote:

---

Employers can't afford to pay high wages for half-assed work.

---

This is the usual dogma of corporate apologists. Who decides what "half-assed" work is? The people on the job site doing the work and dealing with the risks and problems there, or some overpaid ivory tower corporate bureaucrat or over-priced consultant who never does the job and isn't held accountable for the results?

For most corporate establishments, the latter is the case, including at McDonalds, and that is why things are often so screwed up.

quote:

---

You really think McDonald's can't afford to pay people more?

---

Exactly. A $30 Billion a year operation based mostly on sweatshop wage conditions, that don't pay enough for people to significantly re-invest in the economy, is nothing more than a big drain on the economy. Period.

If it paid more, it would likely get more investment of workers' labour skills and productivity, as well as re-circulating more money back into the economy via higher wages leading to greater consumer spending power.

quote:

---

But if it's a bunch of 16 year old kids who barely clean anything, mess up the orders all the time, and take forever to do anything, then paying them $18/hour is a recipe for bankruptcy.

---

Yep, them kids are just plain stupid ain't they? We should just let McDonalds and similar tyrannies pay them shyte and suck billions of dollars year out of the economy off of their labour while putting as little resources into training, education and apprenticeships as they can.

Skipper, you do realize that the reason outfits like McDonalds want to hire 16-year old kids is that they don't have to pay them sustainable wages or invest in extensive training since those kids aren't expected to be working there for long periods of time or invest in the job as a career.

I don't patronize McDonalds or Burger King. But when I used to, years ago, I noticed the places weren't exactly super clean. Know what? Nobody seemed to care, since most folks were in and out of there in a hurry, so it didn't matter that much to them. That's a key feature in the "fast food" industry. That's how come firms like this can get away with it.

quote:

---

This is the usual dogma of corporate apologists. Who decides what "half-assed" work is? The people on the job site doing the work and dealing with the risks and problems there, or some overpaid ivory tower corporate bureaucrat or over-priced consultant who never does the job and isn't held accountable for the results?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PereUbu:

Here's a bit of a newsflash: you live in a free country. You are not obligated to continue working for an employer, if you feel the circumstances of the arrangement don't suit you. You are free to quit and find more agreeable employment any time you like, without notice. So why haven't you done that? Does dishonesty come more easily than a job hunt? Or are there just not that many openings available to thieves?

[ 20 March 2005: Message edited by: PereUbu ]

---

Leaving an "unsatisfactory" job situation is often easier said than done, especially if you are either very young or without a good deal of experience or education. Certainly, I worked in "unsatisfactory" work environments periodically, especially as a teenager, and finding a new job could be a challenge. Add to that the factor of having short stints on your resume makes you look like a poor risk as an employee. Also a bad reference from an employer, whether it is a fair one or not, can affect one's ability to change jobs.

quote:

---

Exactly. A $30 Billion a year operation based mostly on sweatshop wage conditions

---

Hehe. "Sweatshop conditions"? Sure, minus the minimum wage, the forced double shifts, the lack of safety equipment or procedure, the 12 year old labourers, the violence and intimidation, and the sweat.

quote:

---

as well as re-circulating more money back into the economy via higher wages leading to greater consumer spending power.

---

You don't think the money a young person earns at a part time job ends up back in the economy? I doubt they're tying their money up in bonds.

quote:

---

Skipper, you do realize that the reason outfits like McDonalds want to hire 16-year old kids is that they don't have to pay them sustainable wages or invest in extensive training since those kids aren't expected to be working there for long periods of time or invest in the job as a career.

---

Under a different plan, who would be?? If McDonald's (or any other fast food joint) tripled their wages, would regular adults leave the usual career streams to become counter jockeys at a Mickey D's? To me that's like suggesting that if the money were a bit better, you'd babysit, or bag groceries at the local Sobeys.

The wages aren't relatively low because McDonald's is evil. They're relatively low because putting a hamburger and an order of fries into a bag, and making change from a till just isn't all that tough, physically or intellectually. That makes it a great transition job. Work at it for a while and move up to something a little more challenging and better paying, and with some valuable experience on your resume.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:

Under a different plan, who would be?? If McDonald's (or any other fast food joint) tripled their wages, would regular adults leave the usual career streams to become counter jockeys at a Mickey D's?

---

quote:

---

Hehe. "Sweatshop conditions"? Sure, minus the minimum wage, the forced double shifts, the lack of safety equipment or procedure, the 12 year old labourers, the violence and intimidation, and the sweat

---

Hey, what are you laughing at? These conditions appear to be quite common in the service sector. BTW, the minimum wage and the usual lack of benefits, seniority rights and fair grievance procedures in these types of outfits I think accurately classify them as sweatshop conditions.

quote:

---

You don't think the money a young person earns at a part time job ends up back in the economy? I doubt they're tying their money up in bonds.

---

Of course it does. That's my whole point. If you pay them the scraps they get now, that's a whole lot less money that goes back into the economy. Less rents. Less money for tuitions. Less money for consumer and retail investments. Less recreational investments, etc.

quote:

---

If McDonald's (or any other fast food joint) tripled their wages, would regular adults leave the usual career streams to become counter jockeys at a Mickey D's? To me that's like suggesting that if the money were a bit better, you'd babysit, or bag groceries at the local Sobeys.

---

There are no Sobey's where I live. That's for you Eastern types.

Besides that, your scenario is pretty whacko. First, people who have invested their time and money and skills into getting a trade or profession and have managed to find decent steady work in their chosen field with relatively good pay and benefits are not very likely to walk away from this in order to take what would still likely be a lower paying (although much higher than now) job like you mention that doesn’t motivate or interest them.

But I think you know this.

Second, historic economic trends show that when lower end wages, like the McDonald's variety, rise, start paying benefits, offer trade and skill advancement, etc, it has a similar effect on the whole economy over time. This is a very good thing because history shows that living standards rise when this happens.

So don't just draw some whacko conclusion that kitchen staff at Burger King is going to earn as much as a dentist.

quote:

---

The wages aren't relatively low because McDonald's is evil. They're relatively low because putting a hamburger and an order of fries into a bag, and making change from a till just isn't all that tough, physically or intellectually.

---

No professor, that's not why McDonalds pays the low rates it pays. Evil is a moral judgment, but that's not necessarily why it pays so low either.

It's because they aim their hiring toward younger people with few skills and little market savvy. People who largely expect, because they are repeatedly told, that these are just temporary stepping stone jobs to something better when they go to school and get a trade, etc. So, these young folks don’t invest a lot of confidence, long-term goals or real interest in the job, since it pays low and they're not expected to stay there long.

That’s how McDonalds gets away with this low pay crap.

How tough the job can be, as you and I both know from working in such places, is not a consideration as to how much it pays. You surely remember, as you describe, just how tough and physically and mentally taxing those jobs can be.

Rather, it is the fact that, especially nowadays during what is largely permanent hard times, there is a large supply of low-skilled youth labour out there to exploit. If that's supply was to suddenly decrease in some way--like say youth started to get more organized and educated about these things--McDonalds and similar firms would have to consider raising the pay and improving the conditions.

The fact is these mega-corporations in the service industry (McDonalds, Wal-Mart, Burger King, etc.) do serious damage to the economy by refusing to pay more sustainable wage rates, basic benefits and long-term training. The low wages they pay do not allow for people to freely re-circulate money. This robs markets of much needed consumer investments that keep our economy going.

His business works for a few reasons. There is only one location, so he has more control over who gets hired. Anyone can go work at a typical fast food joint, but I sincerely doubt you can just walk into Peter's and get hired on the spot. And after you do get hired, do you really think the boss would tolerate you slacking off for $16/hour? Kids like Charlie who make a point of being mediocre wouldn't keep their jobs for very long.

quote:

---

You surely remember, as you describe, just how tough and physically and mentally taxing those jobs can be.

---

True. But we also knew that we had no marketable skills coming into our first job, and we knew that the minute something preferable opened up, we were outta there. And if the wages had been a bit better I'd certainly have been happy, but it wouldn't have made me loyal to my employer. I'd still take off if a better job presented itself.

quote:

---

The low wages they pay do not allow for people to freely re-circulate money.

---

I think that when we're talking about the 16-20 year old crowd, we're mostly talking about people who don't have the entire financial weight of their existence on their shoulders. I think most teens take their part-time job money and buy an iPod, not pay property tax. Similarly, when service sectors hire seniors, that job supplements their pension; it's not the only thing between them and an income of zero.

As I see it, an employer can go one or the other of the two ways: provide a good wage and hope that attracts excellent employees, support those employees and hope this translates into a reciprocal commitment from the employee

or...

Pay low wages but make getting employment relatively simple, accept that turnover will be high as people find better options, and let the experience on the resume be the perk rather than full dental (which many McD's employees probably get from their parents' coverage anyway).

[ 21 March 2005: Message edited by: charlieM ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:

Both are affected. I don't know first hand what it's like at the burger joints, but I work as a short order cook. My opinion of half-assed work is that the people who stand around and watch me work, take half-hour smoke breaks, or sleep for a couple hours of their shifts are not exactly value-for-money for my employer.

It affects me because it makes my job harder. It affects the corporate guys because messed-up orders and taking too long to make them costs money. And when the numbers aren't as good as they should be, it's their job at risk.

---

quote:

---

As I see it, an employer can go one or the other of the two ways: provide a good wage and hope that attracts excellent employees, support those employees and hope this translates into a reciprocal commitment from the employee

---

So, the only reason an employer should treat their employees well is if the employee agrees not to leave the company for a long time?

How does this explain all the well paid and mobile professionals out there? Should they be paid low wages and no benefits since they aren't very loyal either?

quote:

---

I'd rather go to Wendy's where a vegetarian can actually get a meal

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
Papal, I work 8 hour shifts without a scheduled "break". Instead, we use our discretion and relax a bit during the slow times. It works better that way.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
Papal, I work 8 hour shifts without a scheduled "break". Instead, we use our discretion and relax a bit during the slow times. It works better that way.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
[drift]Peter's sucks. I'd rather go to Wendy's where a vegetarian can actually get a meal.[/drift]

His business works for a few reasons. There is only one location, so he has more control over who gets hired. Anyone can go work at a typical fast food joint, but I sincerely doubt you can just walk into Peter's and get hired on the spot. And after you do get hired, do you really think the boss would tolerate you slacking off for $16/hour? Kids like Charlie who make a point of being mediocre wouldn't keep their jobs for very long.

And it's also a novelty with a following. It may not last, and I know for sure that it would never work on a large scale.

---

Well, a few points. First off, only a few ever get hired at Peter's, because his staff is very loyal. Geez, he pays a living wage for flipping burgers!!! The turnover is almost nil, and employees stay for a long time. The few that do get hired work hard, but I believe your point about the Charlies of world being mediocore and getting paid poorly for it is ass-backwards - that is, I believe many people put little into their work because they are paid very poorly, not the other way around.

quote:

---

Originally posted by charlieM:

It's all abotu preference, i see how that system is reasonable, but ultimately they aren't giving you a break if there is no work to do. like at mcdonalds, at slow times they tell you to go on your break, and that makes perfect sense. I just don't like it takes away the meaning of a break, although i don't see a solution.

---

Huh? What is taking away from the meaning of a break? The fact that you're not actively ignoring work that needs to be done? I don't understand what you mean...

quote:

---

But we also knew that we had no marketable skills coming into our first job, and we knew that the minute something preferable opened up, we were outta there.

---

But Magoo, this is what I'm trying to get at. You in many ways were in a captive market that has few employment options--the ideal cheap labour force that bosses depend on to exploit.

Having few marketable skills, not much work experience and probably not much market savvy or understanding of your rights are the main things that make so many people targets for low-wage anti-union sweatshop firms.

Just because someone has few marketable skills doesn't legitimize them being paid unsustainable wage rates, forced to work under unsafe or unhealthy conditions, denied their rights under employment standards, putting up with nepotism or discrimination, etc.

The fact that a person, whoever it is, is working and creating a large amount of marketed wealth, as in someone working for McDonalds or some similar firm, then they should be entitled to a reasonable return of that wealth based on their investment of the time and labour in the job. They should also have the right to negotiate what exact amounts those might be as in the form of a union.

quote:

---

And if the wages had been a bit better I'd certainly have been happy, but it wouldn't have made me loyal to my employer. I'd still take off if a better job presented itself.

---

No disagreement there. But if the pay had been higher and the conditions somewhat better, it would have given you more time to consider your options, look around and make plans, maybe even save some money, etc., like it would for most people. In other words, your life would have been, at least in an economic sense, better.

Now if in addition to better pay and benefits, the job offered training, apprenticeship or other advancement skills, that might give your the option of considering staying with that firm to pursue a trade of interest. In other words, you would have had more serious options, which gives you greater freedom of choice and security.

quote:

---

I think that when we're talking about the 16-20 year old crowd, we're mostly talking about people who don't have the entire financial weight of their existence on their shoulders. I think most teens take their part-time job money and buy an iPod, not pay property tax.

---

Largely true, although there is a growing sector of working poor (thanks to falling wages overall) where kids can't just rely on their parent’s' incomes to carry them through. That’s a severe problem.

But again, as said, so what if the kids are at home and don't pay rent or property taxes. Higher paying jobs would give them more buying power, more saving power and, like said, more options and freedom of choice.

If these service jobs paid better, youths could have more money for post-secondary schools, that could ease funding problems, reduce barriers to access, alleviate tuition concerns and maybe even lead to less reliance on strapping student loans. It could even allow them to save money for the future, like to buy a house.

If they offered some basic benefits, like health care coverage, they wouldn't have to worry about paying health care premiums once they turn 19.

If they offered training or advancement opportunities, youth could get a trade right there via apprenticeship programs, etc.

They just use the money to buy iPods or CDs, that's more people buying iPods and CDs, which translates into more manufacturing and retail jobs (hopefully better paying ones too). This is not to say that I'm encouraging more cheap retail junk either. I'm just saying that the greater chunk of the wealth that these workers create that goes back to them translates into a more prosperous economy.

And please remember, we're not talking about some tiny mom-pop single outlet outfit constantly on the verge of bankruptcy where the lousy-paid employees make about as much as the proprietor because there no market to sustain it.

The service industry, like most others, is dominated by huge mega-corporations that exert such an influence on the labour market that they can force wages to stay low, thereby hurting the whole economy, not just the affected workers. That has to change.

quote:

---

Here's a question: if your employer offered to increase your wage by 50% in exchange for you promising to stay with the company for the next 10 years, would you?

---

Interesting question. It would depend on other things in addition to the pay, as in what I would be doing over the time, what else would be expected, and what other guarantees or benefits, if any, were involved. It would also matter on what my family would want (especially it if involves changing locations or other major shifts in lifestyle).

But in my case it's a theoretical issue. I have been working in a union position in the same industry for almost 20 years, got a Journey ticket and a technical degree and considerable seniority with further advancement if I want it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Papal_Bull:

We get yelled at for slacking during the down times if the big wigs are on the floor. We aren't even allowed to talk when they are around But, after you work there for a year or so, they really stop caring.

---

been there. i worked in a gorcery store last summer and when we had no customers, we were supposed to (a) clean (b) stock shelves or (c) retrieve carts from the parking lot.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ethical Redneck:

The fact that a person, whoever it is, is working and creating a large amount of marketed wealth, as in someone working for McDonalds or some similar firm, then they should be entitled to a reasonable return of that wealth based on their investment of the time and labour in the job.

---

I agree. Except that the investment of time and labour in being a fry jockey is not exactly stellar.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ethical Redneck:

No disagreement there. But if the pay had been higher and the conditions somewhat better, it would have given you more time to consider your options, look around and make plans, maybe even save some money, etc., like it would for most people. In other words, your life would have been, at least in an economic sense, better.

---

Yeah, so? I wouldn't eat at a restaurant that charged $25 for a typical burger* and fries just so that the 16 year old who scooped my fries into the box can buy a new car.

*- assuming they have the good sense to serve veggie bugers. Lousy Peter's.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ethical Redneck:

Now if in addition to better pay and benefits, the job offered training, apprenticeship or other advancement skills, that might give your the option of considering staying with that firm to pursue a trade of interest. In other words, you would have had more serious options, which gives you greater freedom of choice and security.

---

quote:

---

Huh? What is taking away from the meaning of a break? The fact that you're not actively ignoring work that needs to be done? I don't understand what you mean...

The difference for me is that sometimes I end up having to make an order or two during the time I'm trying to take a break. But that minor annoyance is better than making people wait an extra half hour for their food.

---

quote:

---

The wages aren't relatively low because McDonald's is evil. They're relatively low because putting a hamburger and an order of fries into a bag, and making change from a till just isn't all that tough, physically or intellectually. That makes it a great transition job. Work at it for a while and move up to something a little more challenging and better paying, and with some valuable experience on your resume.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
angrymonkey, how would you like to be in a restaurant and have to wait an extra hour for your food because the cook was on aa 30 minute break, then had to catch up on a number of other orders before he even gets to start yours?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by charlieM:

If you owned the business it is an entirely different story. As a "McDonald's Employee" i could care less if customers sit around waiting for me to get off my break. I don't care if they buy their five dollar meal or not. By the time the restaurant notices it needs to downsize because it isn’t making enough revenues due to long breaks, I’ll be gone due to the high turn-over rate.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by charlieM:
That obviously may seem like selfish thinking, but McDonald’s is the real selfish one in the battle, not the exploited employee.
If this were my dad’s restaurant that puts food on the table, I’m going to work harder. So what does that mean? It means that big corporations like McDonald’s need to make their employees feel need, not easily expendable.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
Well faith, just be glad you didn't decide to make a career there if it's just too hard for you to walk around and move objects under 1kg.

---

hey, gir, you would have to move stuff 30-50 lbs (13.16-22.68 kg) in that job. i know 'cause i applied to my local kfc last summer and on the application it states that that is a necessary ability for the job. no, it's not a highly skilled job, but grunt work is required. it's not like you just stand there and say "can i take your order?" or push a broom around once in a while.

[ 22 March 2005: Message edited by: ShyViolet417 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShyViolet417:

hey, gir, you would have to move stuff 30-50 lbs (don't know how many kgs that is...sorry) in that job. i know 'cause i applied to my local kfc last summer and on the application it states that that is a necessary ability for the job. no, it's not a highly skilled job, but grunt work is required. it's not like you just stand there and say "can i take your order?" or push a broom around once in a while.

---

Perhaps I spoke too soon... never worked at KFC or any burger/taco joint like that. But I do currently work as a cook, and it is not physicially tiring like that. Standing still for that long would be hell, but I'm always walking around or sitting so it's not that bad.

And yeah I understand that jobs like that suck. That's the nature of the job though. That's why people go learn skills to get other kinds of jobs, or even stay on the job and put some effort into it so that they get promotions.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:

Perhaps I spoke too soon... never worked at KFC or any burger/taco joint like that. But I do currently work as a cook, and it is not physicially tiring like that. Standing still for that long would be hell, but I'm always walking around or sitting so it's not that bad.

And yeah I understand that jobs like that suck. That's the nature of the job though. That's why people go learn skills to get other kinds of jobs, or even stay on the job and put some effort into it so that they get promotions.

I'm sorry, but no matter how you slice it, being a simple fry jockey for a full career is a waste of potential for most people. It is therefore absurd to expect the businesses to provide huge benefits and high wages in order to keep the good people in the bottom positions. It's just not worth it for either party.

---

well, i haven't worked in fast food either, because i took a job at a grocery store. i thought that would be better. and, yeah, the standing part is hell (i was a cashier). i had a 6 hour shift my first day, and by the time i got home, i couldn't even stand up straight and i was walking funny. you do get used to it after a while though.

yep...that's why i tried to build up my speed when scanning and bagging, never skipped work, and was usually punctual when arriving and coming back from break. that's why, even when i had people spit at me, throw their groceries (happened once!), or chew me out for things i couldn't control (like we didn't sell a certain item or were out), i would keep smiling as sweetly as i could and tell them to have a great day. and it worked...no one ever complained about me to the management and when we went in the other day the assistant manger told me i'd better come back this summer. and that job sucks, honestly, and i ahve no intention of getting a carerr out of it. but...it gets me work experience and money, two things that i need right now. as for effort, well, i like to think that you get what you put in.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:

When I was young, I worked on a "chip wagon": a panel truck, with a large propane griddle and two large deep fryers in the back. We received no general or fire safety training, no food safety training, we had no air conditioning (not even a fan), and at the end of each night we were expected to lift a fryer basin with 5 gallons of hot oil (fry bits still sizzling in it) and pour it into a large bucket through a funnel. Needless to say, we had no union. And we sure as hell didn't make $8.25 an hour. Such is the nature of being a young person with no experience, needing a part-time job.

---

Magoo - did you have to walk to this job? Say, twenty-five miles or so? Uphill both ways, through six feet of driving snow?

quote:

---

Magoo - did you have to walk to this job? Say, twenty-five miles or so? Uphill both ways, through six feet of driving snow?

---

Although if your employer doesn't provide you with one of those funny pressure mat thingies to stand on, they're lousy. Even the non-union grocery stores with the worst reputations do that around here (well, at least the big chains, possibly not for the mom-and-pop corner stores).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
Ah. But you see Shy, if you're not breaking their eggs and spitting on their change, you're being exploited by some rich greedy capitalist bastard. You try to do a good job, you collaborationist scum!

Although if your employer doesn't provide you with one of those funny pressure mat thingies to stand on, they're lousy. Even the non-union grocery stores with the worst reputations do that around here (well, at least the big chains, possibly not for the mom-and-pop corner stores).

There was an original topic I think... oh yeah the kid who got fired from BK. Not much to say on his case specifically, except that he should take a complaint to the employment stadrards office. (No, not his dad, I mean go through the standard process)

---

well, i guess i'll have to keep being a suck-up then, won't i?

you mean the thing that looks like thick black rubber bubble wrap? i had one, but it kept migrating and they took it away around 8:30-9ish every night. it was nice when i had it though...but it doesn't stop your feet,back, and legs from aching (better it though than w/o!)

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShyViolet417:

you mean the thing that looks like thick black rubber bubble wrap? i had one, but it kept migrating and they took it away around 8:30-9ish every night. it was nice when i had it though...but it doesn't stop your feet,back, and legs from aching (better it though than w/o!)

---

What? They actually send people to come around and steal the mats out from under you?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:

What? They actually send people to come around and steal the mats out from under you?

And yeah it doesn't stop legs from getting tired, but like walking it helps. And I admit that I look forward to relaxing at home after work. Yet I don't feel as if I am somehow being abused by my employer when the clock is running...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShyViolet417:

um, i didn't think i was being abused, though, maybe i'm misunderstanding you. i think i probably am...

---

quote:

---

It was directed at Ethical Redneck and anyone else who thinks that owner profit is theft from the worker.

---

Well, Gir Draxon. In fact if the owners themselves are not workers playing a direct role in the production and creation of the wealth, have no accountability to those they work with and don't participate in re-investing in the economy like workers do, then, well, yep, it pretty much is theft.

It's one of the biggest problems with our economy that leads to all sorts of other problems: poverty, unemployment, oppression, corruption, greed, abuse of positions of power and confidence, etc.

As for hurling abuse, that seems to be a pretty common thing around here, especially from the corporate apologists, neo-conservative capitalists, anti-union flakes and other fringe political clubs.

The point is that mutual respect is the key. Employers should respect their employees, that is true (this is why the BK guy is a total sh*thead). But why shouldn't they expect something more of their employees than the bare minimum for what they get paid? Why should employees not try to do their jobs such that the business doesn't go under?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
Well faith, just be glad you didn't decide to make a career there if it's just too hard for you to walk around and move objects under 1kg.

So let me get this straight: YOU are the one who looks out for number one, but the person who manages a McDonald's cannot, in fact they must bend over backwards for your benefit out of the goodness of their hearts. Never mind everything they have to lose... Why don't you try putting yourself in the shoes of the person trying to make a living by attempting to make a profit from selling $1.50 burgers while their employees don't give a shit...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by faith:
The people that own the place pay minimum or close to minimum wage and they hire young hard working pretty girls for a reason , they generate profits with their efficiency and bring in the customers with their smiles.

---

The people that own the place pay minimum or close to minimum wage and they hire young hard working pretty girls for a reason , they generate profits with their efficiency and bring in the customers with their smiles.