English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

12 answers

I don't think that the provision should get approved to start with.

If voters get off their computer chairs and get out and start getting involved by calling, writing, and faxing their congress critters, it isn't going to be approved.

2007-03-18 07:43:22 · answer #1 · answered by Toe the line 6 · 4 2

Most American workers should be so lucky to get the "prevailing wage" by federal standards. Wal-Mart would be out of business if they were required to meet that standard. The Davis-Bacon Act clearly has resulted in an increase cost to government and is not always administered fairly.

The best method of determining the cost of labor is to let the market operate freely and without restrictions. In this case the market is already out of balance because illegal workers are paid less (big business likes this) which drives down wages.

The real question is should a guest worker program that undermines American workers be approved at all; if the prevailing wage is good enough for immigrants why not all Americans?

2007-03-18 08:35:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Prevailing wage. Otherwise it is CLEARLY an economic benefit to the employer to use guest workers to undercut American workers.

But I think we are getting ahead of ourselves.

Folks, there is a lot of confusion on this subject because it looks like they are getting a better deal than our workers by getting prevailing wage. However, remember how the provision works. The employer has to show they could not get American workers at whatever the wage is. If it is minimum wage for a construction job, how many Americans will show up? If it is PREVAILING wage for a construction job, how many Americans will show up?

If Americans show up, in theory, they can't bring in the foreign worker.

See the difference?

2007-03-18 08:10:15 · answer #3 · answered by DAR 7 · 4 1

I agree with DAR on this one. Business has even abused the minimum wage deal. Businesses used to want people with experience or even some education. Or experience and education made it possible for you to make more money. In some semi-skilled or trade jobs ect.....you start minimum wage now and it doesn't matter if you've had 25 years of experience or anything else. I can't tell you how hard it's been to deal with the fact that everytime I change a job....I'm starting out at the bottom everytime. My dad used to say....we all have to pay our dues. And we do. But I've paid them over and over and over again. It's sad that I could START at a job with my education at 12+ per hour with benefits and other perks in the 70's and 80's and now it's a minimum wage job. I might get a second look because of the education and experience but it doesn't pay up where it counts....money. I've worked for a place where I was up to a higher level and the outlet closed. Being a former employer of the main company would mean that if they hired you within a certain period of time they would start you at your last pay. These guys would wait 1-2 days past that limit so they could put you back at the bottom. It's a game.....I've played it and tired of doing it. If they don't go up...it brings us all down when CHEAP is the motivating factor.

I was doing well and moved to a "right to work" state which ment if you could do the job...you could do it without an education when it used to be a job where an education was required. There are so many people out there in positions that are working with you and are going through the motions and don't have a clue what they're doing. Too many where children are dying in a dentist chair because the "assistant" has no education on any warning signals or training for an emergency but can sit with the patient and watch. For what? Heck most don't know.....you have therapy assistants doing things to you and they don't know why.....they just know how to operate the machine and simple answers to give you. If the education isn't important then why have people spend money for degrees when they are useless? Why want educated people for a job when all that's required for pay is that of a drone?I've seen jobs listed for a legal secratery...GED required. Heck that used to be a big paying job that required alot more than a GED!
Heck.....I even did a stint in construction. But I would never consider myself a builder. Assistant manager positions that required some degree in business or something....is now becomming a "key holder" position. All the responsibilities, none of the education and a whole 25 cents above the prevailing wage. Talk about dummy down. Remember when you went to a cosmetic counter and the woman there actually had a cosmetic license and was paid accordingly? Or you went to electronics and people actually could answer a question? Or you went to the fabric section and could actually talk to someone who knew more than how to use scissors and a yard stick? I can't tell you how upset it makes me to go to places and spending hard earned money and an idiot who can't make change is "helping me". When I go to a home improvement area....I expect to be able to ask basic questions and get an answer. Not...ugh...don't know there's the glue. Gee....see that....found it all on my own too. I miss people who actually knew what they were doing.....not everybody that gets an education is guarenteed a top notch job....but darn their education and experience should count for something beyond the bottom of the barrel.

2007-03-18 09:05:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

It's easy to tell those who've never had employees before (in a skilled trade). If you pay them a fair wage for a good job in return for loyalty, your search (for competent employees) is over. If you screw them over, they'll leave and it will be you that is desperate. A family relationship develops even with temporary lay-offs in slow times. You never know what's on the bench in the union, and you're continuously starting over. You can request former employees to return, but odds are, they're out. The good ones usually are, and the dregs are always available. The choice is yours, a familiar hand, or perpetually drawing blind. The only way around this was to hire double the amount you need for the first day, and keep the best of the lot for the remainder of the job. Don't tell me this doesn't happen, I was the one who did it for many years. You end up with two mental lists. Acceptable & only in desperation or never again. I'm not anti-union, and I'm also not pro everything they did/do/will do either. If you're an employer, it's still all about getting your monies worth. If you can't make a profit ... what's the point of taking on all the risk, stress, debt, payment, permits, insurances, taxes & responsibility? You don't work for just the exercise either.

2016-03-29 05:18:26 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

They should receive at least the minimum wage or higher based on their experience and the prevailing wage in that market.

They are human beings just like we are.

2007-03-18 11:06:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

nope.

the minimum wage is the law.

employers should not be able to avoid paying a fair wage by hiring guest workers.

2007-03-18 07:47:29 · answer #7 · answered by nostradamus02012 7 · 2 2

How about no wage. No amnesty, and No guest worker.

2007-03-18 08:33:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

A market wage - the same as they get now.

2007-03-18 07:46:42 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 3

they should get min wage.Let's give a living wage to our law obeying citizens instead!

2007-03-18 08:13:13 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

fedest.com, questions and answers