Woman Quits Her Job Interview After Recruiter Says They Can’t Pay Her $21/Hour, Sparks A Debate Online
You put together your resume, craft the cover letter, and land a job interview. While it’s easy to get excited at this stage, simply walking through the door is only the beginning of the hiring process. The person across the table will ask you some difficult questions.
But TikToker Jayla was prepared for everything. And it was actually her own choice to walk away from the position. In a now-viral video, the woman says she turned down a manager job at Family Dollar after they couldn’t offer her $21 per hour.
This led to a discussion about fair wages and working conditions in the comments, and I gotta say, it’s quite empowering to see people standing up for themselves.
More info: TikTok
Meet Jayla, a woman who recently went on an interview for a manager job at Family Dollar
Image credits: kewljai
However, it didn’t work out
Image credits: Paul Sableman (not the actual photo)
If we were to take a look at the numbers, Jayla’s figure sounds more than reasonable. According to Salary.com, as of April 26, 2022, the average hourly wage for a retail store manager in the United States is $32, but the range typically falls between $27 and $41.
However, it’s worth keeping in mind that hourly rates can vary widely depending on many important factors, including education, certifications, additional skills, the number of years you have spent in your profession, and so on.
The company refused to pay her $21 per hour
ADVERTISEMENT
Generally, you do not want to allow your impulses to dictate the way you behave at a job interview.
To many people, negotiating their new salary is stressful because it’s something most of us do very rarely and have little experience with.
Andres Lares, a managing partner at Shapiro Negotiations Institute, thinks people are generally most concerned with feeling unprepared or worrying about an unpredictable outcome.
These nerves are normal and healthy, but it could help to think less about what you could lose in a negotiation and more about what you can do to prepare, Lares told CNBC Make It: “Even if you can’t get everything you want, it’s about doing everything you can to walk away knowing you’ve done your best.”
So Jayla simply got up and left
First of all, when and how you should bring up money during job interviews will depend on the situation. If the job description already lists the range, or if you’re confident about your number and have a lot of interviews lined up, you might bring it up in the first or second round, Octavia Goredema, an author and career coach, also explained to CNBC Make It.
You can ask the hiring manager to share their budget for the job, or you might be strategic about naming your desired range and tap into online resources and your professional network to get an idea of your absolute minimum salary, your desired target, and a stretch number you want to negotiate up to.
By the time you have that offer in hand, you have a lot of leverage to negotiate. “You wouldn’t be in this room or on this call if you couldn’t do that role. Recruiters wouldn’t have time to waste if they didn’t think you could deliver on it,” Goredema said. “Now we’re discussing not only what’s required of you, but what you’re looking for.”
She made a video about standing up for herself
@kewljai Don’t settle for less #fyp ♬ original sound – LoveJoyJai
If you find yourself in the same position as Jayla and HR makes you an offer that’s significantly lower than what you want, Lares said you need to point it out.
But it’s also important how you go about it. Leading with gratitude, for example, can make a difficult conversation more palatable. “Thanks for thinking of me for this role and sharing the pay. Unfortunately, that’s significantly lower than what I would have expected for this.”
Next, you can gauge whether they can be flexible on the offer. Remind yourself, and the other party, that a negotiation is working together to reach a compromise.
You can frame it something like this: “I want to be respectful and not waste your time, but I’m also interested and want to make this work. What’s the flexibility on pay?”
Of course, it’s also possible the hiring manager doesn’t understand your qualifications or years of experience. Politely remind them of your candidacy and ask along the lines of: “Is there a different title or level you’re hiring for that’s a better fit and aligns with my expected pay?”
It’s all about making the best of it!
And many people have been really supportive of her
Some, however, questioned the amount
After Jayla’s story went viral, she uploaded more videos to explain the situation
@kewljai You don’t have to be ignorant anymore, I’m here to help #fyp #latestagecapitalism #viral #spirituality #Totinos425 #healing ♬ original sound – LoveJoyJai
@kewljai #latestagecapitalism #fyp #viral #spirituality #healing #strike ♬ original sound – LoveJoyJai
Anyone can write on Bored Panda. Start writing!
Follow Bored Panda on Google News!
Follow us on Flipboard.com/@boredpanda!
1.1Mviews
Share on Facebook
Rokas is a writer at Bored Panda with a BA in Communication. After working for a sculptor, he fell in love with visual storytelling and enjoys covering everything from TV shows (any Sopranos fans out there?) to photography. Throughout his years in Bored Panda, over 235 million people have read the posts he's written, which is probably more than he could count to.
Read more »
Austėja is a Photo Editor at Bored Panda with a BA in Photography.
Read more »
Nobody ever says, "that CEO earning 351 times more than the average worker is driving up the prices for the consumer." More often they say, "But if you pay people more, then that extra cost gets passed along to the consumer." Oh hey - maybe if that CEO wasn't earning 351 times more than the average worker, and the average worker was being paid a livable wage, then the average worker could AFFORD TO PAY FOR NECESSITIES! Sorry about raising my voice. It's such utter BS when they say higher worker salaries cause higher prices. The prices could stay exactly the same if the people at the top of big companies didn't feel compelled to grab up so much.
Worst part is how CEO salaries are decided. The industry has a "standard" amount but you never want a random joe as your top guy so you pay enough to buy them out of your competitor's hands. And it just keeps circling up like that and no one ever (basically) gets any lower than what they ask. Usually it's higher. And men get paid higher on average, so why don't we just go ahead and blame all CEOs but especially the male ones who keep it circling the tower?
Load More Replies...
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. I was with you until your last statement.
I was completely serious. Male CEOs get paid more, there are more of them, so we should not take their male-ness out of consideration when, if it were women causing the problem, their gender would be the first target and the largest part of the conversation. We never talk about the overwhelming maleness of school shooters, but if they were overwhelmingly women we would talk about their overwhelming femaleness
Really? Where have you been for the last decade? Males, white males in particular, have been the brunt of every finger pointing blame game under the sun for quite some time now...
In the last decade, this has been part of my research and work experience. I have access to the science (qualitative and quantitative) to back that up. Do you? Edit: I see you use the word "lefty" in conversation, so none of that matters to you. Go on about your day with your colon hat.
I would love to see the science to back that up. Based on my research and experience, there are a lot of variables not calculated in the overall "gap" in pay between men and women. And anyone reading articles or watching any form of main stream media knows that when a white male is the subject, it is made very well known and repeatedly mentioned. To deny this just shows blatant disregard and/or ignorance. The fact that I use "lefty" in conversation doesn't mean that science doesn't matter to me. Are you insinuating my political views are on the right based on my use of "lefty" and your baseless accusation that science doesn't matter to me? And why is it that no one really throws a fit when people accuse someone with opposing views as some wild right-wing term or a sarcastic term coupled with Trump supporter, Nazi, supremacist, etc. but if someone calls out "lefty" we're instantly assumed to be of low IQ and extreme arrogance? And your use of insult says a lot...
So true. I just read data on how ceo gets 350 times more. It's insane! I say give them paycuts. Better yet let's go to co-op and fire them across America. The only thing that I wasn't sure about is it is family dollar. They sell cheap stuff. Maybe go to different store? Then ask for 30.
Who are you to dictate paycuts to the CEO's of companies? I've got no love for CEO's who overpay themselves but it's up to them and how the company fares. If this lady has skills worth $21/hour then she needs to find a company that both needs those skills and can afford her rate. I don't respect her for making a big deal about blowing off a company like Family Dollar or any budget retailer. And if anyone thinks that CEO should take a paycut to raise all his employees salaries, (I do but don't particularly care) then organize talks to make the company employee/shareholder owned or something. Or work and shop somewhere else.
When did stating an opinion become dictating a direction forward? It's really not that deep but obviously something struck a nerve for you. What's that about?
Do you have anything logical or of substance to say at all? The only things you seem to be saying to people are petty insults and name calling. Typical lefty. So pathetic.
That's because most people don't understand simple math. The CEO of McDonald's earned 20 mil last year. Sounds like a lot of money they could spread around to the employees, right? Wrong. Give that $ to the workers and they would make an extra 5 cents per hour. And that ignores the fact that most of that 20 mil is stock options the CEO has to pay out of pocket for, can't be sold for years to come, is performance based and coats the company nothing. The high prices execs cost the company jack - the the workers is where the real cost is at.
You seem to just be upset that he's correct and you have no logical rebuttal... Lol
Thank you for having common sense! It seems pretty rare these days!
I'm really happy people start to wake up and understand their value, at the same time I'm sad it came so so late and it took a bloody pandemic...
That's one reason we're making so little. They are busy making everyone feel guilty for asking for pay they deserve. I think 2 things made this get worse before people started standing up for themselves: (1) credit started getting easier to get in the 80's/90's so people just racked up credit cards instead of asking for raises (2) women entered the workforce in even larger numbers so their salaries were a buffer for the family. Meaning most people didn't get desperate until recently. I'm really worried right now with the housing situation & the groceries going up.
Load More Replies...
I agree except for the part about women working. Women are always the scapegoats when it comes to the economy, lack of jobs, lack of pay, and everything bad happening to the world. It's another tactic at suppressing women and a distracting society away from the real issue.
Nah this is just a straight fact at the point when women entered the work force in numbers it was during the generation gaps when most children where in school so companies seeing a uptick in applicants just started hiring people for less $ an hour and targeted more desperate people like single mothers or more naive people like people applying for thier first job after high school/college to do the lower paying longer hour jobs like fast food/retail manager, warehouse workers, and people in shipping/receiving like trucking. It's literally the definition of capitalism if I can find someone/employee to do it for less $ why wouldn't I it has nothing to do with "Women" entering the workplace its still the same point of the people with money just being massive greedy d***s.
People have been noticing their worth and value and what they're getting paid long before the pandemic. People were told if you don't like it change careers, go back to school, learn a skilled trade, you're not supposed to stay in a minimum wage job. No one listened. Business owners are rapidly turning their business into companies and companies are rapidly taking over all of society. Companies are treated as non-human entities, separate from the owners personal responsibility (if you sue a company or the company goes bankrupt it doesn't affect the owners personal credit and finances). Companies are created so the brand takes priority over everything, including the well-being of the public, the environment and the employees. Think of HR as the guardians of the company. They say it's good for "competition" but what competition? Independent businesses are their competitors. Why? What is so threatening about a mom and pop business. That is the real mystery.
It's not all the business owners though. A lot of people, especially boomers, criticize the younger folks for asking for more, even though boomers had unions & a better minimum wage, lower house prices, cheaper college, etc.
That's a gross generalization. My mom is in the boomer generation and she sees how bad the economy is and how tough it is to get a job and keep a job. Yeah, they have very out of date views on things, but as a xennial, I'm thinking "wtf just happened to the world?" too. Boomers weren't all that better off. Not all of them were in unions and owned houses, had better pay, and had the opportunity and means to go to college. None of the elders in my family went to college. Every one of them struggled with something. The ones that had bought and paid off houses weren't always earning their money honestly, as I've been hearing down the grapevine through other family. I even just learned that a house we used to live in was rented, not bought, and rented cheap. But when you're a kid parents just didn't talk about the household budget, show us their finances and reveal much. Our parents weren't truthful and now we're learning the hard way.
Don't put unions on too high of a pedestal. They are the reason for the demise of most of the domestic manufacturing jobs. Everything from cars to socks. Find one that was made start to finish in the United States. You'd be hard pressed to do so. Unions are to blame. When it became more profitable to move operations over seas due to the ever increasing demands of unions companies did so in large numbers. That's why the made in China mark is so prevelant.
Absolutely NOT true. Unions are the reason we had a strong vibrant middle class back when unionization was common. The decline in union membership over the last few decades tracks with the decline in the American middle class during the same time frame. Employers will ALWAYS seek out cheaper labor wherever they can find it. And OF COURSE a third world country like China is going to have cheaper labor than a first world country like the U.S. Organized labor has nothing to do with that.
Just a thought, but you may have misunderstood what the older generation was saying. The message I received from them wasn't of criticism, but rather life advice. They told me not to expect everything all at once. I graduated college and thought I should have a $400k home and a fancy car, but after talking to my grandparents, I released they had that stuff because they worked for years to get there. So I too must work up to those luxuries.
I apologize if I offended you or anyone else. I was only expressing how I received the messages. Which was not of criticism. If you don't mind me asking, you say father bought his first house at 21, but how nice was the house? My grandfather bought his first house when he was early twenties, but it wasn't fancy and needed a lot of work, which my grandparents did themselves.
Don't apologize for your valid opinions. No one has a right to not be offended. If someone is offended by your opinions they can pound sand. They would have two problems; getting mad and getting over it. My parents bought their first home in the early 60's. By bought, they took out a mortgage that they didn't finish paying for about 20 years. It was about $20k and about 800 square feet. No ac in south Tampa. I remember my dad putting in a window shaker in the late 70's and we thought we were in heaven. My parents worked hard for many years and did without things they needed to provide us with things we wanted. We were not rich, lower middle, but we never knew it. My two siblings and I all had new bikes. We all had the latest fad thing to fit in at school and didn't understand the sacrifices our parents made for us. Now with kids of my own I understand what they endured. I am so grateful I shared my gratitude with them before they passed.
Tru dat. House in 1950's and 60's cost 2 to 3 years salary. Now, it's 20 to 30 times that. It has become obscene, this highly Distorted System of Capitalism, which is why it's dying, in life support, in end stage, essentially collapsing under it's own weight. And, when that happens, we Proles and Serfs and Plebs will of course suffer the most. Unless we show up on a Unified Front, take back not only the Commons BUT our rights to the most basic needs of human life, i.e., housing, healthcare, food, & so forth. The Power is indeed in the Powerless 99%; and the 1% need to be shown that theirs is an illegitimate claim to excess property ownership, hoarding wealth, and buying up the friggin politicians - morally bankrupt and ethically vacuous that they are - those p******g Sociopaths!
If they have worked for it they have every bit of right to it. Claims of Hoarding wealth usually come from those who have not been taught how to earn, save and spend wisely. These are usually also the ones who want that wealth taken and given to all. That isn't right no matter the amount made by a person. A person should earn, keep what they earn and here is what is often missing no matter the level of wealth be it a $100 or a $100million: look around yourself and treat those around you as you want to be treated.
Housing prices depend greatly on geographic location. Which is based on the principles of supply and demand. If someone chooses to live in the same expense neighborhood, then they should expect to pay 30 times their salary. There are however, many neighborhoods where the cost of living is more manageable. Matter a fact, my house cost half my annual salary, but then again not many people want a live in the middle of midwest nowhere surrounded by corn fields.
I've lived my entire life in Florida. With retirement on the horizon places like you describe sound better and better.
I've lived in the midwest my whole life. Closest neighbors being over a mile down the road. Not too far, but far enough that I never see them. I couldn't imagine living in a city. The low cost of living is just an added bonus.
What value? She didn't list anything of value in the post. In fact, she implied she's not easy to work with. Stood up and declining is not how you handle that situation. She could have asked, "how much were you thinking?" And then decided on her next play. Clearly she has zero negotiating skills. Not a person I'd want as a manager.
I actually agree here. Unless there was a lot of story left out we have no idea if the amount asked for was quantified. It is one thing to know your worth and stand up for oneself but it is rude to stand up and declare, well good luck with that, and walk out. Learning to interview effectively is highly missing from so many.
This had nothing to with interviewing techniques. As the article clearly stated, it was a case of the clueless employer being unwilling to come even close to paying the fair market rate for the job in question. The employer flat-out refused to pay more. So what else is the employee to do but to cut her losses and end the discussion? The woman here did nothing wrong -- this is all on the stingy employer who is unwilling to pay a decent wage.
News flash a 1500 dollar check today is only 250 dollars in 1970..... Lets fix inflation. Oh wait. We cant cause we would have to take money out of circulation so more gold goes to each bill and then. Theres more debt in the world than money and so many people now. Half the world wouldn't have enough money for everybody cause the populations exploded since the 70s. We literally let them put us in a state where collapse is the only outcome eventually. Inflation will either get us or not having enough money for the world as its more valuable with less bills going around.
And its funny cause an average new car used to cost 3,000 dollars in 1970 in, 1930 a new car was 600 dollars. Look at it now 40 years later. Whats the next 30 look like.
You should be sad that, undoubtedly, someone else took the job for whatever Family Dollar offered. That's why they don't pay $21/hour.
And they get what they pay for. Our local Family Dollars are a disgusting mess & even when they can get deliveries, they don't have enough staff to put them on the shelves. I've given up on going there even though it's faster sometimes because half the aisles are blocked with boxes to be shelved & there's one person working in the whole store. I don't know when corporate America is going to figure out that if they don't pay people a living wage, the people can't buy their stuff.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
People are just lazy and greedy because of covid free money.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
And apparently impeachments not for an America being run into the ground as they openly lie and say racist c**p making it policy as they say half of america is racist.... But we know our self worth right.... Don't even know its the people that should be the ones impeaching not government themselves. So. Let him lose billions in weapons, still in office, run a semi dictatorship, still in office, down talk most Americans and drive up cost of living by giving us free stuff. That printed money has a debt that gets made with it thats up to 10 times more than whats printed and its called profit added to the national debt. They laughed whole heartedly at the joke about how high prices are made at that comedians performance. Like does the country just assume they are stupid and don't know what it is they are doing. Courts holding onto illegal and unconstitutional part of Obama care that it ruled was unconstitutional.... When do the people actually vote leaders out of office???
I love that she just ended the interview when she knew her needs wouldn’t be met. Why waste anyone’s time?
Why waste the applicant's time? I do not care about the interviewer's time.
Load More Replies...
I've seen a couple of stories, here and elsewhere, where someone applies for a job because the listing specifically states, "Starting pay is $X/yr or $X/hr." They have a seemingly great interview for an hour, and at the end, Intnerviewer tells Applicant, "Oh, btw, your starting pay will be $MuchLowerFigure." "Really? The listing said it would be $MuchHigherFigure.." "Well, that's only if you stay with the company for at least a year, and if we're happy with your performance. Starting pay is definitely $MuchLowerFigure." "Hmm. I resent that you made me waste my time. Good luck finding someone who'll work for $MuchLowerFigure, cuz it ain't gonna be me."
Which is why you won't get hired. Why wouldn't you care about your potential co-worker's time?
Because often the person doing the interviewing is the person who decided to not list the salary in the first place which means they already decided to potentially waste the time of the person they are interviewing. And even if that's outside their control... you're just wasting the company's time, not the individual interviewer's time (they are still getting paid to do the interview). So yeah... we shouldn't really care too much about "wasting" the time of interviewers. They're wasting their own time by pulling this bs
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
You liberal Democrats never do care about anything except yourself
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
How did she know they wouldn't be met? Because they didn't say "okay sure, 21 it is" the very first time she said thats what she wanted? Props to her for actually saying how much she wanted, but that's all she gets props for. Because she sure didn't put in any effort to get what she wants. If I were interviewing her and she just got up like that without even trying to make her case, I wouldn't even want her working there anyways. She may feel like she's deserving or worth $21 or more, but she's not entitled to it.
$21 was scraping the bottom of the barrel for salary for that position. Anything less would be insulting. Honestly $21 was her being incredibly generous.
Benefits? 401k, vacation, personal leave, sick pay, stock options... nope just went with 21 bucks and didn't get an immediate yes so flew the coop. Pay her $21 with nothing else. That's what she wanted. Good tunnel vision.
She did make her case, she explained her cost and her experience. They want to play games.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
What game? They were blunt. She didn't even inquire what they were willing to pay... Bad negotiator = bad manager. The store got lucky when she left.
Why inquire ? She was blunt she ask for what she wanted period. Plenty of companies will pay assistance managers 21 a hr. I did the same thing until I got to $24 a hour. Do not settle all you do is accept low pay and hold everyone else down cause they know done pour soul with kids needs the money and will accept anything. To bad more people are not in her position to day no and move on cause than we wouldn't have to accept low pay. Keep it moving
Why WOULDN'T you inquire? There is a LOT more to compensation than just an hourly wage. Also, sure you did.
No amount of "benefits" can make up for less than $21/hr for that job. As has been said numerous times already, $21 WITH benefits is WAY less than the average pay for that job. She was actually underselling herself here already. Especially for a job that is in demand where most companies would consider hiring a position like that for $21 to be a steal. The company got greedy... that's all there is to it.
You can’t negotiate some places. $21 is well below retail manager standard. Theres also a thing called cost of living
Why negotiate for less than $21? Especially when $21 is already WAY less than the average pay for that job which is in demand. She was already being generous with that offer. The interviewer f****d up the negotiation... not her. Most companies would consider $21 to be a steal for that job.
It's not even a salary position. It's hourly. Everyone here is acting like she is going to be a non exempt employee with power. To be a real manager you have to manage a region. Seriously, if you think the skills needed to run a single cookie cutter store like that are worth $21 an hour, you haven't had a real job. That's more than a lot of people make with a whole lot more responsibility.
He's right, ask for $25 settle for $21. Aim higher, meet in the middle. If they won't budge then move on.
If you want a certain wage, everything about your interview needs to say, I'm worth this and more. Maintain professionalism if you want to be paid like one. You definitely don't have to settle. What you do need to do is finish that interview and make yourself look, sound and feel your worth and more to the point that once you leave you have made that potential employer really stop and think. This is what gets call backs. This is what gets you the wage you deserve. In this market employees may have the upper hand but if they act a fool than they will remain unemployed.
How did she know her salary demands wouldn't be met? Because they flat-out said so, that's how. Go back and read the article.
Nobody ever says, "that CEO earning 351 times more than the average worker is driving up the prices for the consumer." More often they say, "But if you pay people more, then that extra cost gets passed along to the consumer." Oh hey - maybe if that CEO wasn't earning 351 times more than the average worker, and the average worker was being paid a livable wage, then the average worker could AFFORD TO PAY FOR NECESSITIES! Sorry about raising my voice. It's such utter BS when they say higher worker salaries cause higher prices. The prices could stay exactly the same if the people at the top of big companies didn't feel compelled to grab up so much.
Worst part is how CEO salaries are decided. The industry has a "standard" amount but you never want a random joe as your top guy so you pay enough to buy them out of your competitor's hands. And it just keeps circling up like that and no one ever (basically) gets any lower than what they ask. Usually it's higher. And men get paid higher on average, so why don't we just go ahead and blame all CEOs but especially the male ones who keep it circling the tower?
Load More Replies... I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. I was with you until your last statement.
I was completely serious. Male CEOs get paid more, there are more of them, so we should not take their male-ness out of consideration when, if it were women causing the problem, their gender would be the first target and the largest part of the conversation. We never talk about the overwhelming maleness of school shooters, but if they were overwhelmingly women we would talk about their overwhelming femaleness
Really? Where have you been for the last decade? Males, white males in particular, have been the brunt of every finger pointing blame game under the sun for quite some time now...
In the last decade, this has been part of my research and work experience. I have access to the science (qualitative and quantitative) to back that up. Do you? Edit: I see you use the word "lefty" in conversation, so none of that matters to you. Go on about your day with your colon hat.
I would love to see the science to back that up. Based on my research and experience, there are a lot of variables not calculated in the overall "gap" in pay between men and women. And anyone reading articles or watching any form of main stream media knows that when a white male is the subject, it is made very well known and repeatedly mentioned. To deny this just shows blatant disregard and/or ignorance. The fact that I use "lefty" in conversation doesn't mean that science doesn't matter to me. Are you insinuating my political views are on the right based on my use of "lefty" and your baseless accusation that science doesn't matter to me? And why is it that no one really throws a fit when people accuse someone with opposing views as some wild right-wing term or a sarcastic term coupled with Trump supporter, Nazi, supremacist, etc. but if someone calls out "lefty" we're instantly assumed to be of low IQ and extreme arrogance? And your use of insult says a lot...
So true. I just read data on how ceo gets 350 times more. It's insane! I say give them paycuts. Better yet let's go to co-op and fire them across America. The only thing that I wasn't sure about is it is family dollar. They sell cheap stuff. Maybe go to different store? Then ask for 30.
Who are you to dictate paycuts to the CEO's of companies? I've got no love for CEO's who overpay themselves but it's up to them and how the company fares. If this lady has skills worth $21/hour then she needs to find a company that both needs those skills and can afford her rate. I don't respect her for making a big deal about blowing off a company like Family Dollar or any budget retailer. And if anyone thinks that CEO should take a paycut to raise all his employees salaries, (I do but don't particularly care) then organize talks to make the company employee/shareholder owned or something. Or work and shop somewhere else.
When did stating an opinion become dictating a direction forward? It's really not that deep but obviously something struck a nerve for you. What's that about?
Do you have anything logical or of substance to say at all? The only things you seem to be saying to people are petty insults and name calling. Typical lefty. So pathetic.
That's because most people don't understand simple math. The CEO of McDonald's earned 20 mil last year. Sounds like a lot of money they could spread around to the employees, right? Wrong. Give that $ to the workers and they would make an extra 5 cents per hour. And that ignores the fact that most of that 20 mil is stock options the CEO has to pay out of pocket for, can't be sold for years to come, is performance based and coats the company nothing. The high prices execs cost the company jack - the the workers is where the real cost is at.
You seem to just be upset that he's correct and you have no logical rebuttal... Lol
Thank you for having common sense! It seems pretty rare these days!
I'm really happy people start to wake up and understand their value, at the same time I'm sad it came so so late and it took a bloody pandemic...
That's one reason we're making so little. They are busy making everyone feel guilty for asking for pay they deserve. I think 2 things made this get worse before people started standing up for themselves: (1) credit started getting easier to get in the 80's/90's so people just racked up credit cards instead of asking for raises (2) women entered the workforce in even larger numbers so their salaries were a buffer for the family. Meaning most people didn't get desperate until recently. I'm really worried right now with the housing situation & the groceries going up.
Load More Replies... I agree except for the part about women working. Women are always the scapegoats when it comes to the economy, lack of jobs, lack of pay, and everything bad happening to the world. It's another tactic at suppressing women and a distracting society away from the real issue.
Nah this is just a straight fact at the point when women entered the work force in numbers it was during the generation gaps when most children where in school so companies seeing a uptick in applicants just started hiring people for less $ an hour and targeted more desperate people like single mothers or more naive people like people applying for thier first job after high school/college to do the lower paying longer hour jobs like fast food/retail manager, warehouse workers, and people in shipping/receiving like trucking. It's literally the definition of capitalism if I can find someone/employee to do it for less $ why wouldn't I it has nothing to do with "Women" entering the workplace its still the same point of the people with money just being massive greedy d***s.
People have been noticing their worth and value and what they're getting paid long before the pandemic. People were told if you don't like it change careers, go back to school, learn a skilled trade, you're not supposed to stay in a minimum wage job. No one listened. Business owners are rapidly turning their business into companies and companies are rapidly taking over all of society. Companies are treated as non-human entities, separate from the owners personal responsibility (if you sue a company or the company goes bankrupt it doesn't affect the owners personal credit and finances). Companies are created so the brand takes priority over everything, including the well-being of the public, the environment and the employees. Think of HR as the guardians of the company. They say it's good for "competition" but what competition? Independent businesses are their competitors. Why? What is so threatening about a mom and pop business. That is the real mystery.
It's not all the business owners though. A lot of people, especially boomers, criticize the younger folks for asking for more, even though boomers had unions & a better minimum wage, lower house prices, cheaper college, etc.
That's a gross generalization. My mom is in the boomer generation and she sees how bad the economy is and how tough it is to get a job and keep a job. Yeah, they have very out of date views on things, but as a xennial, I'm thinking "wtf just happened to the world?" too. Boomers weren't all that better off. Not all of them were in unions and owned houses, had better pay, and had the opportunity and means to go to college. None of the elders in my family went to college. Every one of them struggled with something. The ones that had bought and paid off houses weren't always earning their money honestly, as I've been hearing down the grapevine through other family. I even just learned that a house we used to live in was rented, not bought, and rented cheap. But when you're a kid parents just didn't talk about the household budget, show us their finances and reveal much. Our parents weren't truthful and now we're learning the hard way.
Don't put unions on too high of a pedestal. They are the reason for the demise of most of the domestic manufacturing jobs. Everything from cars to socks. Find one that was made start to finish in the United States. You'd be hard pressed to do so. Unions are to blame. When it became more profitable to move operations over seas due to the ever increasing demands of unions companies did so in large numbers. That's why the made in China mark is so prevelant.
Absolutely NOT true. Unions are the reason we had a strong vibrant middle class back when unionization was common. The decline in union membership over the last few decades tracks with the decline in the American middle class during the same time frame. Employers will ALWAYS seek out cheaper labor wherever they can find it. And OF COURSE a third world country like China is going to have cheaper labor than a first world country like the U.S. Organized labor has nothing to do with that.
Just a thought, but you may have misunderstood what the older generation was saying. The message I received from them wasn't of criticism, but rather life advice. They told me not to expect everything all at once. I graduated college and thought I should have a $400k home and a fancy car, but after talking to my grandparents, I released they had that stuff because they worked for years to get there. So I too must work up to those luxuries.
I apologize if I offended you or anyone else. I was only expressing how I received the messages. Which was not of criticism. If you don't mind me asking, you say father bought his first house at 21, but how nice was the house? My grandfather bought his first house when he was early twenties, but it wasn't fancy and needed a lot of work, which my grandparents did themselves.
Don't apologize for your valid opinions. No one has a right to not be offended. If someone is offended by your opinions they can pound sand. They would have two problems; getting mad and getting over it. My parents bought their first home in the early 60's. By bought, they took out a mortgage that they didn't finish paying for about 20 years. It was about $20k and about 800 square feet. No ac in south Tampa. I remember my dad putting in a window shaker in the late 70's and we thought we were in heaven. My parents worked hard for many years and did without things they needed to provide us with things we wanted. We were not rich, lower middle, but we never knew it. My two siblings and I all had new bikes. We all had the latest fad thing to fit in at school and didn't understand the sacrifices our parents made for us. Now with kids of my own I understand what they endured. I am so grateful I shared my gratitude with them before they passed.
Tru dat. House in 1950's and 60's cost 2 to 3 years salary. Now, it's 20 to 30 times that. It has become obscene, this highly Distorted System of Capitalism, which is why it's dying, in life support, in end stage, essentially collapsing under it's own weight. And, when that happens, we Proles and Serfs and Plebs will of course suffer the most. Unless we show up on a Unified Front, take back not only the Commons BUT our rights to the most basic needs of human life, i.e., housing, healthcare, food, & so forth. The Power is indeed in the Powerless 99%; and the 1% need to be shown that theirs is an illegitimate claim to excess property ownership, hoarding wealth, and buying up the friggin politicians - morally bankrupt and ethically vacuous that they are - those p******g Sociopaths!
If they have worked for it they have every bit of right to it. Claims of Hoarding wealth usually come from those who have not been taught how to earn, save and spend wisely. These are usually also the ones who want that wealth taken and given to all. That isn't right no matter the amount made by a person. A person should earn, keep what they earn and here is what is often missing no matter the level of wealth be it a $100 or a $100million: look around yourself and treat those around you as you want to be treated.
Housing prices depend greatly on geographic location. Which is based on the principles of supply and demand. If someone chooses to live in the same expense neighborhood, then they should expect to pay 30 times their salary. There are however, many neighborhoods where the cost of living is more manageable. Matter a fact, my house cost half my annual salary, but then again not many people want a live in the middle of midwest nowhere surrounded by corn fields.
I've lived my entire life in Florida. With retirement on the horizon places like you describe sound better and better.
I've lived in the midwest my whole life. Closest neighbors being over a mile down the road. Not too far, but far enough that I never see them. I couldn't imagine living in a city. The low cost of living is just an added bonus.
What value? She didn't list anything of value in the post. In fact, she implied she's not easy to work with. Stood up and declining is not how you handle that situation. She could have asked, "how much were you thinking?" And then decided on her next play. Clearly she has zero negotiating skills. Not a person I'd want as a manager.
I actually agree here. Unless there was a lot of story left out we have no idea if the amount asked for was quantified. It is one thing to know your worth and stand up for oneself but it is rude to stand up and declare, well good luck with that, and walk out. Learning to interview effectively is highly missing from so many.
This had nothing to with interviewing techniques. As the article clearly stated, it was a case of the clueless employer being unwilling to come even close to paying the fair market rate for the job in question. The employer flat-out refused to pay more. So what else is the employee to do but to cut her losses and end the discussion? The woman here did nothing wrong -- this is all on the stingy employer who is unwilling to pay a decent wage.
News flash a 1500 dollar check today is only 250 dollars in 1970..... Lets fix inflation. Oh wait. We cant cause we would have to take money out of circulation so more gold goes to each bill and then. Theres more debt in the world than money and so many people now. Half the world wouldn't have enough money for everybody cause the populations exploded since the 70s. We literally let them put us in a state where collapse is the only outcome eventually. Inflation will either get us or not having enough money for the world as its more valuable with less bills going around.
And its funny cause an average new car used to cost 3,000 dollars in 1970 in, 1930 a new car was 600 dollars. Look at it now 40 years later. Whats the next 30 look like.
You should be sad that, undoubtedly, someone else took the job for whatever Family Dollar offered. That's why they don't pay $21/hour.
And they get what they pay for. Our local Family Dollars are a disgusting mess & even when they can get deliveries, they don't have enough staff to put them on the shelves. I've given up on going there even though it's faster sometimes because half the aisles are blocked with boxes to be shelved & there's one person working in the whole store. I don't know when corporate America is going to figure out that if they don't pay people a living wage, the people can't buy their stuff.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
People are just lazy and greedy because of covid free money.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
And apparently impeachments not for an America being run into the ground as they openly lie and say racist c**p making it policy as they say half of america is racist.... But we know our self worth right.... Don't even know its the people that should be the ones impeaching not government themselves. So. Let him lose billions in weapons, still in office, run a semi dictatorship, still in office, down talk most Americans and drive up cost of living by giving us free stuff. That printed money has a debt that gets made with it thats up to 10 times more than whats printed and its called profit added to the national debt. They laughed whole heartedly at the joke about how high prices are made at that comedians performance. Like does the country just assume they are stupid and don't know what it is they are doing. Courts holding onto illegal and unconstitutional part of Obama care that it ruled was unconstitutional.... When do the people actually vote leaders out of office???
I love that she just ended the interview when she knew her needs wouldn’t be met. Why waste anyone’s time?
Why waste the applicant's time? I do not care about the interviewer's time.
Load More Replies... I've seen a couple of stories, here and elsewhere, where someone applies for a job because the listing specifically states, "Starting pay is $X/yr or $X/hr." They have a seemingly great interview for an hour, and at the end, Intnerviewer tells Applicant, "Oh, btw, your starting pay will be $MuchLowerFigure." "Really? The listing said it would be $MuchHigherFigure.." "Well, that's only if you stay with the company for at least a year, and if we're happy with your performance. Starting pay is definitely $MuchLowerFigure." "Hmm. I resent that you made me waste my time. Good luck finding someone who'll work for $MuchLowerFigure, cuz it ain't gonna be me."
Which is why you won't get hired. Why wouldn't you care about your potential co-worker's time?
Because often the person doing the interviewing is the person who decided to not list the salary in the first place which means they already decided to potentially waste the time of the person they are interviewing. And even if that's outside their control... you're just wasting the company's time, not the individual interviewer's time (they are still getting paid to do the interview). So yeah... we shouldn't really care too much about "wasting" the time of interviewers. They're wasting their own time by pulling this bs
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
You liberal Democrats never do care about anything except yourself
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
How did she know they wouldn't be met? Because they didn't say "okay sure, 21 it is" the very first time she said thats what she wanted? Props to her for actually saying how much she wanted, but that's all she gets props for. Because she sure didn't put in any effort to get what she wants. If I were interviewing her and she just got up like that without even trying to make her case, I wouldn't even want her working there anyways. She may feel like she's deserving or worth $21 or more, but she's not entitled to it.
$21 was scraping the bottom of the barrel for salary for that position. Anything less would be insulting. Honestly $21 was her being incredibly generous.
Benefits? 401k, vacation, personal leave, sick pay, stock options... nope just went with 21 bucks and didn't get an immediate yes so flew the coop. Pay her $21 with nothing else. That's what she wanted. Good tunnel vision.
She did make her case, she explained her cost and her experience. They want to play games.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
What game? They were blunt. She didn't even inquire what they were willing to pay... Bad negotiator = bad manager. The store got lucky when she left.
Why inquire ? She was blunt she ask for what she wanted period. Plenty of companies will pay assistance managers 21 a hr. I did the same thing until I got to $24 a hour. Do not settle all you do is accept low pay and hold everyone else down cause they know done pour soul with kids needs the money and will accept anything. To bad more people are not in her position to day no and move on cause than we wouldn't have to accept low pay. Keep it moving
Why WOULDN'T you inquire? There is a LOT more to compensation than just an hourly wage. Also, sure you did.
No amount of "benefits" can make up for less than $21/hr for that job. As has been said numerous times already, $21 WITH benefits is WAY less than the average pay for that job. She was actually underselling herself here already. Especially for a job that is in demand where most companies would consider hiring a position like that for $21 to be a steal. The company got greedy... that's all there is to it.
You can’t negotiate some places. $21 is well below retail manager standard. Theres also a thing called cost of living
Why negotiate for less than $21? Especially when $21 is already WAY less than the average pay for that job which is in demand. She was already being generous with that offer. The interviewer f****d up the negotiation... not her. Most companies would consider $21 to be a steal for that job.
It's not even a salary position. It's hourly. Everyone here is acting like she is going to be a non exempt employee with power. To be a real manager you have to manage a region. Seriously, if you think the skills needed to run a single cookie cutter store like that are worth $21 an hour, you haven't had a real job. That's more than a lot of people make with a whole lot more responsibility.
He's right, ask for $25 settle for $21. Aim higher, meet in the middle. If they won't budge then move on.
If you want a certain wage, everything about your interview needs to say, I'm worth this and more. Maintain professionalism if you want to be paid like one. You definitely don't have to settle. What you do need to do is finish that interview and make yourself look, sound and feel your worth and more to the point that once you leave you have made that potential employer really stop and think. This is what gets call backs. This is what gets you the wage you deserve. In this market employees may have the upper hand but if they act a fool than they will remain unemployed.
How did she know her salary demands wouldn't be met? Because they flat-out said so, that's how. Go back and read the article.
110
278