Govt assault on young 'uns continues

[mashman]

Did you feel "worth less than another human being" ?
I certainly did not. I was gratefull to learn and accepted my learning and the time it took came at an expense to my employer.
All jobs pay more the longer you stick a them. Ya dont get 100k right out of school.

Im self emplyed now and hope to employ a driver soon.
I'll take on a young un witha license and no experience if they're cheaper cause they're gonna cost me money while they learn.
A 20 odd year old with some miles under thei belt will be worth more straight away.

Sure there are exceptions, and its a minimum wage not a maximum and the youth rate aint mandatory.

Many generations of workers have climbed the ranks through age and experience based pay structure...some young uns need some hardening up rather than namby pamby equal rights shit.

To a degree yes. I could do exactly the same job as those who were on considerably more money than I was. I would have felt more valued if I had been getting paid like for like, or even close. Fortunately I was having a shitload of fun and didn't care enough to chase the money rainbow at the expense of my happiness. So from a financial perspective I was taken advantage of and felt like I was worth less. That doesn't mean that I wasn't greatful to learn.

To a degree I agree that some jobs pay more the longer you stick at them, but certainly not all.

Namby pamby equal rights shit? I've always found it amusing that you can pay someone less because of their age irrespective of skill level etc... I'd hardly say that valuing a person based on their contribution was namby pamby.

[Zamiam]

Simple question mashman - How many people have you ever employed? And if you have how many school leavers?

I have always paid someone for the job they do so have NEVER paid minimum wage BUT it does mean I have OVERPAID people.

[mashman]

me, i started on youth rates, $4.10 an hour if i remember correctly in 1995, at New World Papakura, i think if got a pay rise about 2 months in, as i turned up all the time, did what i was told and used my head when needed, which was not the norm with every kid they employed, i have had a few jobs since then and are pretty sure every employer would take me back, i don't think any of them exploited me, but i have seen some poeple in most jobs that were not worth the money they were getting paid, not matter how low, and most of them did not stay long,

I would say at 16 i still was not worth what i am worth an hour now, i did not have the skills i picked up over the last 14 years of full time work,
how many 16 year olds have you employed? and did all of them meet your expectations straight away?

I'm not saying that they should be paid 100k off the bat... but I do believe that they should be paid enough to be able to support themselves off the bat... rent, bills etc... I can understand why some would be underwhelmed enough not to put in the effort. What is it people like to say, pay peanuts get monkeys . To that end I'd say that if those kids who are "lazy" were paid better, with an explanation of why they were being paid better, then employers would likely get a better performance out of them. I say that because there are plenty of 20/30/40/50 yr olds I've come across with a shit work ethic and primarily because they're focussed on how much they're being paid.

I have employed none, not directly. Does that mean I don't qualify to have an opinion . I have "mentored" a few straight out of Uni and have worked with YTS kids and they were pretty much of a much.

[madandy]

To a degree yes. I could do exactly the same job as those who were on considerably more money than I was. I would have felt more valued if I had been getting paid like for like, or even close. Fortunately I was having a shitload of fun and didn't care enough to chase the money rainbow at the expense of my happiness. So from a financial perspective I was taken advantage of and felt like I was worth less. That doesn't mean that I wasn't greatful to learn.

To a degree I agree that some jobs pay more the longer you stick at them, but certainly not all.

Namby pamby equal rights shit? I've always found it amusing that you can pay someone less because of their age irrespective of skill level etc... I'd hardly say that valuing a person based on their contribution was namby pamby.

I see your point and agree that age and skill aren't mutually exclusive but in the work I've done they practically are and so paying a young un less is, I beleive entirely acceptable.
What, at age 16 were you equally skilled at as someone years moreexperinced?
Also, this is not a compulsary scheme and those whose contribution at their workplace is equal to or greater than other workers should be remunerated acordingly.

Its a namby pamby social disease to pay all workers equally regardless of skill or experience or to raise kids beleiving they are of equal monetary value regarless of age or skill. Earn it and be rewarded.

[mashman]

Simple question mashman - How many people have you ever employed? And if you have how many school leavers?

I have always paid someone for the job they do so have NEVER paid minimum wage BUT it does mean I have OVERPAID people.

None as mentioned in the post above this one. Does that mean I have absolutely no clue?

Fair enough and onya... shame everyone doesn't do the same.

[Zamiam]

I have employed none, not directly.

Will defend your right to your opinion even if I don't agree with it. That being said the above quote shows that your opinion is that of someone who has no experience on the topic in question. Yet another EMPLOYEE type telling EMPLOYERS they know better.

[scott411]

I'm not saying that they should be paid 100k off the bat... but I do believe that they should be paid enough to be able to support themselves off the bat... rent, bills etc... I can understand why some would be underwhelmed enough not to put in the effort. What is it people like to say, pay peanuts get monkeys . To that end I'd say that if those kids who are "lazy" were paid better, with an explanation of why they were being paid better, then employers would likely get a better performance out of them. I say that because there are plenty of 20/30/40/50 yr olds I've come across with a shit work ethic and primarily because they're focussed on how much they're being paid.

I have employed none, not directly. Does that mean I don't qualify to have an opinion . I have "mentored" a few straight out of Uni and have worked with YTS kids and they were pretty much of a much.

not saying you dont deserve and opinion, but i have been there on both sides, the carrot theory works but with most things in life you have to earn it first, not get given it then told you need to do so much to keep it, i have given pay rises in as little as a month, yet some kids took longer to learn, and this goes for 20 year olds as well, in fact i have had young guys over take the people that started 2 year ahead of them because they put the work and effort in,

the truth is that since they dropped the youth rates down to only 3 months, the youth unemployment rate has sky rocketed when compared to the normal unemployment rate, the GFC and the economic turndown had made it worse than it would have been in the good times, and you have had a number of employers here telling you that it is not worth the risk to give someone a chance when you can take less of a risk with someone older, you can choose to believe us, or not, i know i am not alone in feeling this way,

[mashman]

I see your point and agree that age and skill aren't mutually exclusive but in the work I've done they practically are and so paying a young un less is, I beleive entirely acceptable.
What, at age 16 were you equally skilled at as someone years moreexperinced?
Also, this is not a compulsary scheme and those whose contribution at their workplace is equal to or greater than other workers should be remunerated acordingly.

Its a namby pamby social disease to pay all workers equally regardless of skill or experience or to raise kids beleiving they are of equal monetary value regarless of age or skill. Earn it and be rewarded.

I agree that they shouldn't get 100k off the bat, but as posted earlier, they're hardly getting paid enough to make their own way. I understand the idea behind the hard yards, but even those who have it "easy" have to do the hard yards. Why make it even harder by paying them less just because you can?
Dodging school, stacking shelves, managing/processing/validating the stock arrivals, turning up for work, putting a roof on a house, tying knots, mending creels, driving boats, fuckin up royally and pretty much anything I turned my hand to and all within a relatively short space of time. My point is that 16yr olds aren't useless, so why do we persist in treating/paying them as though they are?

And the opposite has created what? Certainly not a society that I'd be proud of touting at any intergalactic board meeting . I never said irrespective of skill or age for that matter, but I believe that they are worth minimum wage or a trip to the dole. This financially penalising them because they are considered to be all but useless doesn't wash in my naive little book and does more damage than good in regards to character building. Start valuing them and perhaps they'll start valuing their contribution?

[mashman]

Will defend your right to your opinion even if I don't agree with it. That being said the above quote shows that your opinion is that of someone who has no experience on the topic in question. Yet another EMPLOYEE type telling EMPLOYERS they know better.

so for the last 20+ years I've been absolutely blind as to what it takes to run a business? Interesting evaluation and not one I am prepared to agree with.

[mashman]

not saying you dont deserve and opinion, but i have been there on both sides, the carrot theory works but with most things in life you have to earn it first, not get given it then told you need to do so much to keep it, i have given pay rises in as little as a month, yet some kids took longer to learn, and this goes for 20 year olds as well, in fact i have had young guys over take the people that started 2 year ahead of them because they put the work and effort in,

the truth is that since they dropped the youth rates down to only 3 months, the youth unemployment rate has sky rocketed when compared to the normal unemployment rate, the GFC and the economic turndown had made it worse than it would have been in the good times, and you have had a number of employers here telling you that it is not worth the risk to give someone a chance when you can take less of a risk with someone older, you can choose to believe us, or not, i know i am not alone in feeling this way,

It's not that I don't believe you and I have noted the employers and their feelings towards potential employees and fully understand the reasoning behind why you guys make the decisions you do in the best interests of your business... obviously there's a but coming, if employers are all going to hold out for someone older because of the risk factor, then how is a couple of K per year going to change that risk? coz that seems to be what it boils down to, cashflow v's some excuse

I have no issue with pissing in the wind... seems you get a better quality of education by doing so, however it isn't appreciated by many for some reason

[scissorhands]

Pharking ageist bastards

I started on 40% of a tradesman wage, and did a similar[or greater] output, after my tradesman set me up to go

Young people are healthier and fitter..... old people should be paid less

[madandy]

I agree that they shouldn't get 100k off the bat, but as posted earlier, they're hardly getting paid enough to make their own way. I understand the idea behind the hard yards, but even those who have it "easy" have to do the hard yards. Why make it even harder by paying them less just because you can?
Dodging school, stacking shelves, managing/processing/validating the stock arrivals, turning up for work, putting a roof on a house, tying knots, mending creels, driving boats, fuckin up royally and pretty much anything I turned my hand to and all within a relatively short space of time. My point is that 16yr olds aren't useless, so why do we persist in treating/paying them as though they are?

And the opposite has created what? Certainly not a society that I'd be proud of touting at any intergalactic board meeting . I never said irrespective of skill or age for that matter, but I believe that they are worth minimum wage or a trip to the dole. This financially penalising them because they are considered to be all but useless doesn't wash in my naive little book and does more damage than good in regards to character building. Start valuing them and perhaps they'll start valuing their contribution?

They've had the same minimum wage as adults for a few years now...havent they?

I think theres no point debating that a yoof can stack a shelf or tiea knot or nail iron to a house aswell as the next adult but when talking of higher skill employment they have a way to go.

[mashman]

They've had the same minimum wage as adults for a few years now...havent they?

I think theres no point debating that a yoof can stack a shelf or tiea knot or nail iron to a house aswell as the next adult but when talking of higher skill employment they have a way to go.

Heh, there are some adults, according to the misleading media, who get paid less than minimum wage too.

As someone mentioned earlier, they're highly unlike to be earning 100k, or even 40k off the bat, but that doesn't mean that just because they can only tie knots, bang in nails or stack shelves exactly the same as the "older" guys that they should get paid less purely on age. They're still pulling their weight on the balance sheet after all. Sure there are plenty of skilled jobs that require training, certification etc... and yes I believe in time served etc... I just can't accept paying someone less than minimum wage because they are young. Fair enough, to a degree if it's performance related, but not if they are of equal skill level. It's almost as though we're hearing that because we are older, that we should be entitled to more money irrespective of the skills required to do the job.

[mashman]

Young people are healthier and fitter..... old people should be paid less

I'd be worth every cent of that

[Berries]

I used to scrape slices of human brain off the floor in the pathology labs at less than minimum wage. I cleaned toilets, swept floors, planted plants and fitted shops. I poked automatic letter stuffing machines on 12 hour night shifts seven days on no days off all at less than minimum wage. It is the price you pay for being young and if it doesn't make you want to better yourself then, well, I guess you must like it.