Interesting article. Here is an issue that should be addressed but I don't think our Government and/or Private sector can solve optimally.

Wages/Productivity 

I would be interested in seeing a graph on compnay profit % and wage growth %. I think thats more meaningful that trying to correlate productivity increases (with its many causes)to wage growth. 

I would be interested in seeing a graph on compnay profit % and wage growth %.

Min wage hasn't moved in a while..You really need a graph for that? 

Corporations are making record profits, Imp. 

Very interesting article- I believe employers will pay an employee more when they perform well. They don't want to lose them. Pay ing everyone more discourages excellence and education. 

I believe employers will pay an employee more when they perform well.

They will pay more if/when there is a shortage of people with the desired skill sets. 

Is that a problem ritewing? 

I think there's already a problem with that- a lot of people don't take pride in their work, and it reflects in their job performance- they'd make more if they performed better- 

I just wonder why he thinks it is a problem that people pay more for rarer skill sets?

That's the whole point--you obtain a skill set that makes you in demand in the workforce.

(I wish I had understood that earlier.) 

It's really a very simple concept. Too bad so many don't get it. 

That's not necessarily true. Some companies pay low wages for mediocre results.
Sometimes, it's too expensive to pay for quality.
In addition, the phrase "over qualified" is said for a reason.
It has nothing to do with production and everything to do with wages paid.
RWK is correct as it relates to shortage of qualified employees. 

You're not really disagreeing with me-if you're mediocre, and hired for that reason, you shouldn't complain about lower wages- 

That's the whole point--you obtain a skill set that makes you in demand in the workforce.

Many skill sets are now globalized. Where the job market is no longer defined by a geographic location.

People in other countries can now fulfill a businesses requirements at a much lower wage/cost. This brings down wages here in this country.

Labor is also less of an input in production due to technology/automation.

I can see where this country must solve the education challenges or we will become a second rate power.

Maybe...If you have the grades and choose a high demand field then the education should be made very affordable for the individual.

A productive person has a high return/payback to our society. 

Is that a problem ritewing?


It is when it becomes Nothing But Captialism meaning money, profits, and greed first; people second if at all. Corproations used to care about their employees. Today they don't give a sh!te. 

Corproations used to care about their employees.

I don't that was ever the case. The power of unions grew in the 20th century and assisted in extracting productivity gains into wages for the employees.

That is no longer the case. 

If you choose a high demand field, and your grades are very good, you can probably win a scholarship, or grant- there are also student loans- part of success is knowing what field is in the most demand- and making sure you have qualities that are better than mediocre- I was the best at what I did, and I was paid accordingly- it's not rocket science, although that would be good, too- 

Hillary Clinton paid $300,000 to explain what ails the middle class

This was actually a pretty good discussion. 

I don't that was ever the case. The power of unions grew in the 20th century and assisted in extracting productivity gains into wages for the employees.That is no longer the case.



I wasn't talking about union workers. I was referring to office employees. Corporations I worked for used to care and it was obvious by the way they treated the employees. Sure profits mattered also but so did employees. 

Employees still matter, if they're productive- companies don't mistreat people who are making them money- because they'll leave and go to work for someone else- 

Sorry I wasn't clear - apparently I can't read a book, eat lunch, and engage in a conversation simultaneously.

Many people who give maximum output and effort are still paid mediocre wages by their employers.

You say if they performed better they'd get paid better, and that's not necessarily true. Countless employees are stagnant in their jobs as far as pay and growth is concerned. I'm speaking strictly as a recruiter who deals with job seekers on a daily basis. 

I will agree that USUALLY employers won't mistreat employees who are making them money.
But even the most productive employees risk losing their jobs for a variety of reasons.
At the end of the day, money matters and employees don't. There is always someone willing to work for less money. 

companies don't mistreat people who are making them money-



Many employees don't actually make a company money. Fail on the dragon.



because they'll leave and go to work for someone else-

You obviously haven't been out in the workplace for a long time. 

Many people who give maximum output and effort are still paid mediocre wages by their employers.


^^^THIS 

They can always find another job, if they're that good- it happens all the time. However, if their maximum output is still mediocre, then you can see the problem. 

Many employees don't actually make a company money. Fail on the dragon.

LOL......... you failed to understand what what dragon said.

What does an employee do for a company if ultimately their productivity doesn't create profit for the company? 

Corporations are making record profits

If a company is growing, in terms of raw dollars, a company will make record profit every year. 

Many people who give maximum output and effort are still paid mediocre wages by their employers.

Because they don't have a skill that is in high demand. 

My point- joey, of course I've been in the workplace- I think you're just too young, at 12, to understand grown up threads- why don't you talk about masterbation, and LYFAO? 

What does an employee do for a company if ultimately their productivity doesn't create profit for the company?

An employee either generates revenue, develops product or avoids expense greater than their cost. 

Many people who give maximum output and effort are still paid mediocre wages by their employers.

Yes! All in the name of the bottom line. With the labor mkt as it is. There is plenty of supply and not enough demand. People are expendable. 

People are expendable.

Generally, they are the largest controllable cost. 

Without even asking, I'll bet Emp, given the opportunity to hire a person with excellent credentials in oil ans gas would hire him in a minute- ( and, of course, obvious ambition) 

hire a person with excellent credentials in oil ans gas would hire him in a minute

Yep, even at the expense of someone else. 

Of course! You'd get rid of someone mediocre, and that's why you're the boss and Joey isn't- 

Maximizing profitability is what I get paid to do. Its not personal its just business. 

Many highly skilled people are still paid wages lower than the industry standard and/or what they're worth.

For example, I know of a specific division at a g/o company who are now paying incoming employees $6/hr MORE than the current employees - these guys are all on the same even playing field, with the exception of the older employees having more experience and qualifications specific to the company and job. Newer, less experienced guys are making more, so no, it's not always true that the better you perform the more you make.

Another example is the military - in times of downturn, it is often the more experienced, decorated, and senior guys that are let go first. Granted, it's often a choice, but financially it's easier to keep the junior guys.

I freelance in the g/o and tech industries and it's been a real eye opener, for sure. 

What someone is worth is what the highest bidder is willing to pay. 

There are mitigating circumstances for those instances- companies don't want to pay all those benefits for older employees plus higher wages, when they won't be working that much longer- and the military-well, that's government for you-I will say it's unusual to hire newbies and pay more than experienced professionals- it makes no sense, when they can hire at a lower rate- 

I will say it's unusual to hire newbies and pay more than experienced professionals- it makes no sense,

Unless you are using a back door method to cull the older ones from the work force.