What is Pay rate for Tesco's per hour?

markprest

Golden_Anemone wrote: »

1. Is there a rule in your book that says I can only post opinions that disagree with you? If so perhaps you would let the rest of us see your rules cos some of us often use this forum for general discussion rather than mere argument.

2. What on earth in what I wrote suggests that I see what you wrote as a personal attack? I do not and have never worked for one of the big supermarkets.

Good luck in getting the argument you seem to be determined to start! Personally I don't care enough. :rotfl:

Wow. Clearly you do care or you wouldn't have written any of that!

If I misread your post, I apologise. But your reaction? Why would I want you to 'only post opinions that disagree with you?' That makes absolutely no sense.

Where's the argument? I intend to stop using minimum wage retail giants and said why. If you're happy to use such stores, that's fine. Who's stopping you? I'm not happy to use them and I won't. It isn't the end of the world. Nobody got hurt. It's just someone making a personal choice.

Jesus!

I'm done.

A.L.D.A

highrisklowreturn wrote: »

Those 19th century mill owners built the greatest world empire ever created.

No they didn't. The foundations of the British Empire were built a lot earlier than that. Colonies, piracy, trade, slave trade, banking, able diplomats, wars and manufacturing all played their part.

I am not exactly left wing when it comes to economics, but from what little I know of history, many Empires fall because of over powerful vested interests looking after themselves. Now there are arguments to be had about what constitutes a vested interest now!

Generally for countries to prosper they must be able to create wealth and most of the population must feel a sense of belonging and of benefiting in some sense.

Even Henry Ford realised that for him to sell cars people had to have enough money to buy them. I have spent a while in a country where most people had no surplus income. It was a good lesson on what we want to avoid. No surplus income means no services, no restaurants, no cafes, no demand for goods or services, fewer shops, less jobs, dire poverty etc.

Of course paying ourselves more than we earn does not work either. I thing rather than attacking the low paid we need to ask why we are uncompetitive in many sectors and IMO it has a lot to do with costs imposed by government by tax and legislation rather than pay. There is also the question of currency values, but that is a tangled web.

A.L.D.A

2sides2everystory wrote: »

We seem to do things differently in the UK, don't we? We all have to be dumbed down to highrisklowreturn's idea of average global humbleness and fight our way out of that to the top of some stinking corporate heap if we can. It's character building or something like that [IMG]file:///C:/Users/Alan/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.gif[/IMG]

Don't we just, they were even able to sell nonsense like 'consumer lead growth', and living on the income from overseas investment. I think the problem with this country is a failure to realise what is needed to encourage new businesses, and business expansion here. Government is taking an increasing slice of a shrinking cake, and the only way out is to expand the wealth producing sectors. To do that would require a fundamental shift in policy and many unpopular decisions. I probably agree in many ways with Highrisklowreturns, but would direct my criticism at our various governments and councils who see businesses as some sort of cash cow to milk, and on whom to off load all sorts of costs and responsibilities.

With regards private shops, worth remembering that the people working long hours and getting poor pay (often below minimum wage) are the owners and their families. We should be encouraging these people, but instead we have a rate system that taxes not on earnings and ability to pay, but on property value, legislation on employment, disabled access, pensions etc etc etc that applies equally to them as it does to businesses employing thousands. It is not just competition that is forcing them to close, our government is actually assisting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2sides2everystory

highrisklowreturn wrote: »

...socialist platitudinal waffle.

My goodness, a double lesser Googlewhack - now that is significant

highrisklowreturn

A.L.D.A wrote: »

Don't we just, they were even able to sell nonsense like 'consumer lead growth', and living on the income from overseas investment. I think the problem with this country is a failure to realise what is needed to encourage new businesses, and business expansion here. Government is taking an increasing slice of a shrinking cake, and the only way out is to expand the wealth producing sectors. To do that would require a fundamental shift in policy and many unpopular decisions. I probably agree in many ways with Highrisklowreturns, but would direct my criticism at our various governments and councils who see businesses as some sort of cash cow to milk, and on whom to off load all sorts of costs and responsibilities.

With regards private shops, worth remembering that the people working long hours and getting poor pay (often below minimum wage) are the owners and their families. We should be encouraging these people, but instead we have a rate system that taxes not on earnings and ability to pay, but on property value, legislation on employment, disabled access, pensions etc etc etc that applies equally to them as it does to businesses employing thousands. It is not just competition that is forcing them to close, our government is actually assisting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I agree with everything you have said. Our economy could sky-rocket if we slashed tax across the board and cut public services to a bare minimum.

We also need to get over the idea that economic slumps are intrinsically bad for society - they arn't. Indeed one of the reasons people think they are is because in contemporary society there has been a total breakdown of non-material values which would otherwise ease people through tough economic times. What we're going through today is nothing like what people went through in Ireland in the 30s or even the 50s; but listening to some on here and elsewhere you would assume it's the end of the world.

Derivative

If my local store paid sub minimum wage I'd buy there to get the cheapest products possible.

Not my problem. If stores aren't paying enough to their employees, then said employees should up sticks and go elsewhere.

2sides2everystory

EdgEy wrote:

If my local store paid sub minimum wage I'd buy there to get the cheapest products possible.

Sure you would - cheapest razors to tear your face, cheapest processed food to stuff it with and let your stomach digest, cheapest shoes to let your feet decide whether it's raining or not. No, it's not like that is it?

You are right of course Edg, its all blindingly obvious because when you think about it rationally you can save shed-loads if said employees stick around and on behalf of a grateful caring employer sell you the good stuff which the business model of course permits the employer to garner all the time those loyal employees keep on turning up for peanuts. They can only afford cheap razors cheap food and cheap shoes themselves, but it doesn't matter, does it? They'll not be wanting anything better now will they? They just wouldn't know what to do with the extra money if they were paid a proper wage. Might even not buy stuff but instead pay off their PayDay Loans for once. Then what? The economy might really shrink.

Nah, you're right. Far better that the people who understand how money works actually receive most of it so that those who appreciate real quality get to afford it.

Amazed I didn't think of it sooner. Thanks guys :rotfl:

Derivative

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Sure you would - cheapest razors to tear your face, cheapest processed food to stuff it with and let your stomach digest, cheapest shoes to let your feet decide whether it's raining or not. No, it's not like that is it?

You are right of course Edg, its all blindingly obvious because when you think about it rationally you can save shed-loads if said employees stick around and on behalf of a grateful caring employer sell you the good stuff which the business model of course permits the employer to garner all the time those loyal employees keep on turning up for peanuts. They can only afford cheap razors cheap food and cheap shoes themselves, but it doesn't matter, does it? They'll not be wanting anything better now will they? They just wouldn't know what to do with the extra money if they were paid a proper wage. Might even not buy stuff but instead pay off their PayDay Loans for once. Then what? The economy might really shrink.

Nah, you're right. Far better that the people who understand how money works actually receive most of it so that those who appreciate real quality get to afford it.

Amazed I didn't think of it sooner. Thanks guys :rotfl:

I'm sorry? This reads a bit like a rant.
I just want cheap products. I'll shop wherever I can get the cheapest stuff that actually works, with regards to food. Broccoli is broccoli. I don't buy processed.

They'll not be wanting anything better now will they? They just wouldn't know what to do with the extra money if they were paid a proper wage. Might even not buy stuff but instead pay off their PayDay Loans for once. Then what? The economy might really shrink.

If you're working in a job that's not paying you enough, go and get a better one. If you can't, then your perception of "not enough" might need adjusting downwards a bit.

Not difficult really, is it?

I'm not really sure where payday loans come into it.

2sides2everystory

EdgEy wrote: »

If you're working in a job that's not paying you enough, go and get a better one. If you can't, then your perception of "not enough" might need adjusting downwards a bit.

Not difficult really, is it?

That's what I said, wasn't it?

I said it was far better that the people who understand how money works actually receive most of it so that those who appreciate real quality get to afford it.

I am sure the guy that took the photo in your avatar slot was thinking exactly the same thing 43 years ago.

A.L.D.A

Worth remembering that many on low pay can claim benefits. So the reality is that we the tax payer can end up subsidising the employees wages in many businesses!

To me this is wrong, because just how much does that subsidy actually cost by the time the tax to pay is collected, the application for benefit processed etc. Too many are are earning less than what we consider necessary to live on and that in turn is costing us a fortune to step in and rectify.