News   Jul 15, 2024
Sculptural Pre-Cast Panels Now Adorning ANX near Dupont Station
 660     3 
News   Jul 15, 2024
Resubmitted Agincourt Condo Proposal Bumps Height, Reduces Parking
 814     1 
News   Jul 15, 2024
News Roundup for July 15, 2024
 616     0 

2018 Ontario Provincial Election Discussion

TransitBart said:
That is true. But a small proportion of the total orders are taken there. And there is the fact that most orders now cost them nothing to take.
Click to expand...

It depends where, really--the financial district McCafe standalones are, naturally, likeliest to have disproportionate McKiosk traffic. OTOH the till is essential for the scruffier McCafe Rewards hoarder demo...
 
Based on this, I have a good idea for funding transit.

Let's add a tax onto all mortgages. Assume the current mortgage rate is 3%. 0.5% of that would go directly to the government to fund transit.

Banks would have 2 choices
  1. Charge customers an extra 0.5% (bringing the rate to 3.5%). This may cause hardship to the individual or the economy.
  2. Swallow the extra cost because the banks make money anyway.
I am sure that any bank could have foreseen this policy being enacted, should have planned for it, and would gladly accept the extra expenses. If they can't accept it, they shouldn't have been in business in the first place.
 
Why are people here feeling sorry for Tim Hortons' franchisees? These people make millions of dollars, are part of the 1%. Even if they didn't sign up for having to pay their employees an extra couple bucks an hour, they can afford it - and if they can't, there is a long line of people willing to become Tim Hortons' franchisees who would take over in a heartbeat. It's also a bad business decision to be vocal (and essentially whining) because there are many people who will just stop visiting/shopping at your store, because they see it as corporate greed. THere's a reason why the more environmentally friendly, newer, trendier, (high profit) companies are staying mum on this, they understand that their customers want to shop at a place that treats their employees well and does some good in the world.
 
I think only right-wing boot lickers are going to bat for Tim Horton's. Or attacking the minimum wage increase in general.

Wynne has the power to partly solve this issue. Can't they legislate paid breaks? I was surprised to find out that it wasn't already the case.
 
narduch said:
I've used those kiosks. They are slow and tedious.

What I've noticed is most customers would still rather line up and get served by a human.
Click to expand...
The order comes faster from the kiosk because you can get in and out faster. You can have a paid for order in the kitchen in 60s. I'd have said the split is about 50/50 for how people choose to place their order.
 
narduch said:
I think only right-wing boot lickers are going to bat for Tim Horton's. Or attacking the minimum wage increase in general.

Wynne has the power to partly solve this issue. Can't they legislate paid breaks? I was surprised to find out that it wasn't already the case.
Click to expand...
I was surprise about the coffee breaks. I have always got one paid 10 minute break in the morning and one in the afternoon.
I think very few people (if any) actually get paid for lunch though.
 
I'm not concerned about franchise owners. I'm concerned about the workers that will be let off or not hired. It is the thoughest job I ever had, I did it once and could not continue anymore due to the combination of it being minimum wage and being highly highly difficult and challenging working environment. I would only say that there is a reason why franchises employ Filipinos, Canadian kids like myself can't do it, especially not for minimum wage.

Ultimately, I cannot be upset about the hike. The fact of the matter is, the existence of a minimum wage is not defendable from an economic perspective, it doesn't do anything but hurt an economy and competition. There is a reason why the Scandinavian countries, smart as they are, have eliminated the minimum wage. Of course though, they have the social safety nets in place and we do not, so eliminating it is not an option for us. While it is not an option, we need to have periodical increases in minimum wage to correspond with the raising cost of living and inflation, and we were overdue for a hike.
 
TransitBart said:
The order comes faster from the kiosk because you can get in and out faster. You can have a paid for order in the kitchen in 60s. I'd have said the split is about 50/50 for how people choose to place their order.
Click to expand...
It is quicker but there are some flaws. If you have to order half sugar or half cream or something in your coffee, then the kiosk machine doesn't give you the option so you must go to the the counter and order.

The other thing is, personally I am a germophobe when it comes to public things like railings and posts on subway cars and buses. The kiosk machine for me is just a giant germ panel that I have no intention of touching unless I really must. If given the option, I go to the front counter.
 
BurlOak said:
I was surprise about the coffee breaks. I have always got one paid 10 minute break in the morning and one in the afternoon.
I think very few people (if any) actually get paid for lunch though.
Click to expand...
I believe lunch breaks are legislated. I think you are entitled to a half hour unpaid lunch if you work over 6 hours.
 
WislaHD said:
I. There is a reason why the Scandinavian countries, smart as they are, have eliminated the minimum wage. Of course though, they have the social safety nets in place and we do not, so eliminating it is not an option for us. While it is not an option, we need to have periodical increases in minimum wage to correspond with the raising cost of living and inflation, and we were overdue for a hike.
Click to expand...

The only problem w/this statement is its only true in the most literal sense. Denmark and other Scandinavian countries DO have minimum wages; much higher than what we see here.

Its merely that they aren't set by the government.

Unionization is comprehensive and in many cases mandatory, and labour negotiations are carried out on a sectoral basis.

All of those sectoral labour agreements, including those governing retail workers in large stores and chains have minimum wages
 
BurlOak said:
I was surprise about the coffee breaks. I have always got one paid 10 minute break in the morning and one in the afternoon.
I think very few people (if any) actually get paid for lunch though.
Click to expand...

The Employment Standards Act provides for a 30m meal break (unpaid) for anyone working a shift of 5 hours or longer.

There is no provision for 'coffee breaks' paid or otherwise.

Though, by agreement, between employee and employer the 30m break can be split into two 15m breaks.

* there is an exception, in that if you are not permitted to leave the property during your break, or if you must be available to work during your break, you must be paid.

This is why security guards typically get paid meal breaks as they can't leave the property and still considered on-the-job during breaks.

******

In the real world, most employees are salaried, not hourly.

Salaried employees get de-facto paid meal breaks because their pay check is fixed and their breaks whether fixed or negotiable don't really affect pay.

Hourly staff, in my experience, most often get 30m paid breaks, if they consistently work an 8 hour shift x 5 days per week. Put another way, a F/T hourly typically gets 37.5 paid hours per week.

********

I happen to sponsor the view that if someone is working a de facto 40-hour week, they ought to get 40 hours of pay.

This isn't merely generosity, it addresses a reason businesses, especially retail often eschew full-time, salaried staff, because part-timers even at the same
hourly wage, earn less, and often don't get 'benefits'.

Address these two issues and businesses no longer have an artificial incentive towards part-time employment.

A shift to greater full-time employment tends to result in greater productivity and lower payroll taxes too.

But its long been a business-school doctrine to avoid F/T staff if only to thwart unionization.
 
Northern Light said:
The only problem w/this statement is its only true in the most literal sense. Denmark and other Scandinavian countries DO have minimum wages; much higher than what we see here.

Its merely that they aren't set by the government.

Unionization is comprehensive and in many cases mandatory, and labour negotiations are carried out on a sectoral basis.

All of those sectoral labour agreements, including those governing retail workers in large stores and chains have minimum wages
Click to expand...
Yah, there is that too. Funny how they managed to have a minimum livable salary without government intervention. Having a shortage of workers (a 'problem' they have over there) helps for maintaining that system too.

Bottom line is, we would need a drastic systemic change in this country in order for the elimination of minimum wage to happen. Lacking such a change, we are stuck with it and with periodic increases of it.

(My personal idealistic vision is for eliminating minimum wage with the implementation of universal basic income. That is still decades off though, probably.)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top