I’d rather get low pay than no pay. It’s quite hard for teenagers to get jobs in a lot of places and this would make it harder
I remember getting 5 euro an hour when I was 14 during th summer I used to do 12 hour shifts.. And I was happy to get it. I
Funny one. Why hire a 16 year old when I can hire a more mature 20 year old for the same money?
There would need to be some incentive to employ teenagers so they can gain experience etc.
I think it should still be lower as it helps young people get employed and get experience, the margin between it and the standard minimum wage should just be far smaller.
>It claimed the rates are based on false assumptions that the under-20s are “subsidised” by their parents.
Most people under the age of 20 are still residing at home. Which is the biggest subsidy of all.
Edit: this thread is gas. The amount of downvotes have gone through the roof since 9am for anyone who isn’t fully supporting an increase in wages.. Haha.
If they do the same job as everyone else, they should get the same pay. If they’re paid less, it’s discrimination
If you can’t pay older people less as it’s ageism, you can’t have double standards for young people
Customer would end up paying more its that simple supermacs is going nowhere
Younger workers lack the maturity and commonsense of their older peers. That’s just a fact of life – growing up and aging. Yeah, you’ll always find some teenagers who are mature for their age, but they’re usually the exception, not the norm. If you’ve worked with teenagers, then you’ll know that management has to spend more time guiding and overseeing them.
But that’s OK, because they’re young, they’re learning, and the company is paying them less.
It’s a trade-off.
I can’t see why a company would pick a teenager over an older, more mature person if they have to pay them the same rate. I know for a fact that the HR manager I previously worked with would just stop hiring youngsters altogether, as she found them to be more “work”.
Spot on. If they do the same job they should get the same pay. Pretty simple imo.
The problem is that this will lead to there being a fair amount less jobs for these younger workers. A lot of these jobs are given to people they know out of kindness – giving your nephew or friends son a job ferrying drinks around on quiet weeknight evenings at a pub for example.
If we accept the consequences make the change, it’ll mean a decent number of young people will miss out on that useful experience.
It’s what Cllr. Clegane said; “Fair wages for fair work.”
An hour is an hour, whether you are 16 or 36.
Businesses will just hire more on experience. Why the hell would a company hire someone with zero experience. So less and less younger workers will have summer and part time jobs.
What gobshite thought it was a good idea to pay young people less for doing the same work. It is discriminating and sends the wrong message. It is bad for morale, mental health and productivity.
Makes sense. Equal pay for equal work. If you’re going to pay them less, they need to have less/easier duties specifically outlined in the job description.
One of my early jobs paid people less depending on age regardless of experience or time in the company.
You were on trainee wages that went up every year on your birthday.
It was shite and we all complained but know one could really do anything.
One day I was training in a new guy who was 5 months older than me. Despite me being there for two years he made more oer hour than I did just because of his age.
I left the company a month later.
It’s exploitation. Plain and simple.
Never should’ve existed in the first place. That and the disgraceful discount on wages for hospitality staff.
Get rid of both and have a minimum wage for all, applied equally.
Whatever about the U18 rate the over 18 (& u20) sub rate is discrimination.
This just makes it more difficult for teens to get employed, seems like a bad idea to me.
Supermacs
Now stop retail from keeping you on a trainee wage(below minimum) for a year.
22 comments
I’d rather get low pay than no pay. It’s quite hard for teenagers to get jobs in a lot of places and this would make it harder
I remember getting 5 euro an hour when I was 14 during th summer I used to do 12 hour shifts.. And I was happy to get it. I
Funny one. Why hire a 16 year old when I can hire a more mature 20 year old for the same money?
There would need to be some incentive to employ teenagers so they can gain experience etc.
I think it should still be lower as it helps young people get employed and get experience, the margin between it and the standard minimum wage should just be far smaller.
>It claimed the rates are based on false assumptions that the under-20s are “subsidised” by their parents.
Most people under the age of 20 are still residing at home. Which is the biggest subsidy of all.
Edit: this thread is gas. The amount of downvotes have gone through the roof since 9am for anyone who isn’t fully supporting an increase in wages.. Haha.
If they do the same job as everyone else, they should get the same pay. If they’re paid less, it’s discrimination
If you can’t pay older people less as it’s ageism, you can’t have double standards for young people
Customer would end up paying more its that simple supermacs is going nowhere
Younger workers lack the maturity and commonsense of their older peers. That’s just a fact of life – growing up and aging. Yeah, you’ll always find some teenagers who are mature for their age, but they’re usually the exception, not the norm. If you’ve worked with teenagers, then you’ll know that management has to spend more time guiding and overseeing them.
But that’s OK, because they’re young, they’re learning, and the company is paying them less.
It’s a trade-off.
I can’t see why a company would pick a teenager over an older, more mature person if they have to pay them the same rate. I know for a fact that the HR manager I previously worked with would just stop hiring youngsters altogether, as she found them to be more “work”.
Spot on. If they do the same job they should get the same pay. Pretty simple imo.
The problem is that this will lead to there being a fair amount less jobs for these younger workers. A lot of these jobs are given to people they know out of kindness – giving your nephew or friends son a job ferrying drinks around on quiet weeknight evenings at a pub for example.
If we accept the consequences make the change, it’ll mean a decent number of young people will miss out on that useful experience.
It’s what Cllr. Clegane said; “Fair wages for fair work.”
An hour is an hour, whether you are 16 or 36.
Businesses will just hire more on experience. Why the hell would a company hire someone with zero experience. So less and less younger workers will have summer and part time jobs.
What gobshite thought it was a good idea to pay young people less for doing the same work. It is discriminating and sends the wrong message. It is bad for morale, mental health and productivity.
Makes sense. Equal pay for equal work. If you’re going to pay them less, they need to have less/easier duties specifically outlined in the job description.
One of my early jobs paid people less depending on age regardless of experience or time in the company.
You were on trainee wages that went up every year on your birthday.
It was shite and we all complained but know one could really do anything.
One day I was training in a new guy who was 5 months older than me. Despite me being there for two years he made more oer hour than I did just because of his age.
I left the company a month later.
It’s exploitation. Plain and simple.
Never should’ve existed in the first place. That and the disgraceful discount on wages for hospitality staff.
Get rid of both and have a minimum wage for all, applied equally.
Whatever about the U18 rate the over 18 (& u20) sub rate is discrimination.
This just makes it more difficult for teens to get employed, seems like a bad idea to me.
Supermacs
Now stop retail from keeping you on a trainee wage(below minimum) for a year.