Local community college wants to cut flight instructor pay.

[Jim Logajan]

The local paper has an article about the local community college that
wants to cut the pay of its flight instructors:

http://www.registerguard.com/news/2007/04/10/b1.cr.lccpilots.0410.p1.php?section=cityregion

Among other tidbits, I was surprised to see this:
"Flight technology is popular, with about a dozen instructors and more
than 100 students. The demand for pilots is so strong that most students
get jobs soon after completing the degree and flight hour requirements."

[Robert M. Gary]

On Apr 10, 7:38 pm, Jim Logajan > wrote:
> The local paper has an article about the local community college that
> wants to cut the pay of its flight instructors:
>
> http://www.registerguard.com/news/2007/04/10/b1.cr.lccpilots.0410.p1....
>
> Among other tidbits, I was surprised to see this:
> "Flight technology is popular, with about a dozen instructors and more
> than 100 students. The demand for pilots is so strong that most students
> get jobs soon after completing the degree and flight hour requirements."

If CFIs are willing to work for less than it would be irresponsible to
continue to pay them above market with tax payer's money. If they
would be paying below market they will be sitting there with no CFIs.

-Robert, CFII

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> On Apr 10, 7:38 pm, Jim Logajan > wrote:
>> The local paper has an article about the local community college that
>> wants to cut the pay of its flight instructors:
>>
>> http://www.registerguard.com/news/2007/04/10/b1.cr.lccpilots.0410.p1....
>>
>> Among other tidbits, I was surprised to see this:
>> "Flight technology is popular, with about a dozen instructors and
>> more than 100 students. The demand for pilots is so strong that most
>> students get jobs soon after completing the degree and flight hour
>> requirements."
>
> If CFIs are willing to work for less than it would be irresponsible to
> continue to pay them above market with tax payer's money. If they
> would be paying below market they will be sitting there with no CFIs.
>
> -Robert, CFII


I agree with you Robert and they may well end up with no instructors but
this is really not a lot different than a grad student teaching an undergrad
class. Also, if the CFIs are under the union agreement they may well be
being paid over the market rate.

One thing that leads me to think this may well be the case is the fact they
have "more than 100 students" and are losing $150,000/yr. That's in the
neighborhood of $1,500 per student/year. Either they are undercharging for
the service are they are poorly managing the program. Hardly a first for
either higher education or flight schools.

[Al G[_1_]]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Apr 10, 7:38 pm, Jim Logajan > wrote:
>> The local paper has an article about the local community college that
>> wants to cut the pay of its flight instructors:
>>
>> http://www.registerguard.com/news/2007/04/10/b1.cr.lccpilots.0410.p1....
>>
>> Among other tidbits, I was surprised to see this:
>> "Flight technology is popular, with about a dozen instructors and more
>> than 100 students. The demand for pilots is so strong that most students
>> get jobs soon after completing the degree and flight hour requirements."
>
> If CFIs are willing to work for less than it would be irresponsible to
> continue to pay them above market with tax payer's money. If they
> would be paying below market they will be sitting there with no CFIs.
>
> -Robert, CFII
>

Assuming instructors of equal skill & motivation, I agree. I have seen
situations where a highly motivated & experienced staff was rapidly replaced
with 500 hour wonders, that would work for less. The school was out of
business in a year.

Al G

[Maxwell]

"Al G" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> On Apr 10, 7:38 pm, Jim Logajan > wrote:
>>> The local paper has an article about the local community college that
>>> wants to cut the pay of its flight instructors:
>>>
>>> http://www.registerguard.com/news/2007/04/10/b1.cr.lccpilots.0410.p1....
>>>
>>> Among other tidbits, I was surprised to see this:
>>> "Flight technology is popular, with about a dozen instructors and more
>>> than 100 students. The demand for pilots is so strong that most students
>>> get jobs soon after completing the degree and flight hour requirements."
>>
>> If CFIs are willing to work for less than it would be irresponsible to
>> continue to pay them above market with tax payer's money. If they
>> would be paying below market they will be sitting there with no CFIs.
>>
>> -Robert, CFII
>>
>
> Assuming instructors of equal skill & motivation, I agree. I have seen
> situations where a highly motivated & experienced staff was rapidly
> replaced with 500 hour wonders, that would work for less. The school was
> out of business in a year.
>

My last BFR I drew a expert with about 250 hours, and man what an
experience. Much tougher than my check ride years ago. From now on I'm
checking THEIR logbook before the commiting to any dual.

[Robert M. Gary]

On Apr 11, 8:35 am, "Al G" > wrote:
> "Robert M. Gary" > wrote in ooglegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 10, 7:38 pm, Jim Logajan > wrote:
> >> The local paper has an article about the local community college that
> >> wants to cut the pay of its flight instructors:
>
> >>http://www.registerguard.com/news/2007/04/10/b1.cr.lccpilots.0410.p1....
>
> >> Among other tidbits, I was surprised to see this:
> >> "Flight technology is popular, with about a dozen instructors and more
> >> than 100 students. The demand for pilots is so strong that most students
> >> get jobs soon after completing the degree and flight hour requirements."
>
> > If CFIs are willing to work for less than it would be irresponsible to
> > continue to pay them above market with tax payer's money. If they
> > would be paying below market they will be sitting there with no CFIs.
>
> > -Robert, CFII
>
> Assuming instructors of equal skill & motivation, I agree. I have seen
> situations where a highly motivated & experienced staff was rapidly replaced
> with 500 hour wonders, that would work for less. The school was out of
> business in a year.
>
> Al G- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Yep, just like any business. Assuming the school doesn't want to "go
out of business" they will only pay as much as is required to get the
level of skill their business requires. Anything beyond that is
welfare.

-Robert

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote
>
> If CFIs are willing to work for less than it would be irresponsible to
> continue to pay them above market with tax payer's money. If they
> would be paying below market they will be sitting there with no CFIs.
>

Attitudes like that is why unions were formed.

A professional working a full day should make a decent living, not a welfare
living.
--
Jim in NC

[Newps]

Morgans wrote:


>
>
> Attitudes like that is why unions were formed.
>
> A professional working a full day should make a decent living, not a welfare
> living.



No. You are worth what somebody is willing to pay. Don't like it?
Move. Unions didn't come into existence because of low pay but
primarily because of working conditions.

[Mxsmanic]

Newps writes:

> No. You are worth what somebody is willing to pay. Don't like it?
> Move. Unions didn't come into existence because of low pay but
> primarily because of working conditions.

It's not that simple. Sometimes a heterogenous labor pool can include people
who are willing to work for less than a subsistence wage, competing with
people who cannot afford to do so. The former pull down wages for the latter,
causing problems. And the former are not really being paid a living wage, so
it's not necessarily a fair arrangement. Unions sometimes protect against
this as well.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Robert M. Gary]

On Apr 11, 10:14 am, "Morgans" > wrote:
> "Robert M. Gary" > wrote
>
>
>
> > If CFIs are willing to work for less than it would be irresponsible to
> > continue to pay them above market with tax payer's money. If they
> > would be paying below market they will be sitting there with no CFIs.
>
> Attitudes like that is why unions were formed.
>
> A professional working a full day should make a decent living, not a welfare
> living.
> --
> Jim in NC

Attitudes like that is what brought us the Soviet Union, Cuba, and
China. If there are qualified people who want to teach there so bad
that they are willing to work there for less than living wage (which
is what grad students do all the time), then it is irresponsible to
spend taxpayers (or owner's) money paying them more. If you raise the
wage above market you just end up with a waiting list of CFIs who
cannot work there because someone already got that "uniion gig", even
if he's willing to work there at reduced rate for the experience. i.e.
if you screw up supply/demand you end up with waiting lists, ever see
a bread line in Russia???

-Robert, MBA

[Robert M. Gary]

On Apr 11, 12:27 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Newps writes:
> > No. You are worth what somebody is willing to pay. Don't like it?
> > Move. Unions didn't come into existence because of low pay but
> > primarily because of working conditions.
>
> It's not that simple. Sometimes a heterogenous labor pool can include people
> who are willing to work for less than a subsistence wage, competing with
> people who cannot afford to do so. The former pull down wages for the latter,
> causing problems. And the former are not really being paid a living wage, so
> it's not necessarily a fair arrangement. Unions sometimes protect against
> this as well.

Why is it not fair to employ someone at a rate that they agree to????
Some people work for things other than just money (flight time for
instance).

-Robert

[Little Endian]

> cannot work there because someone already got that "uniion gig", even
> if he's willing to work there at reduced rate for the experience. i.e.
> if you screw up supply/demand you end up with waiting lists, ever see
> a bread line in Russia???

The only case where I support tax payer funding is for GA related
expenses. Even though I hate the "long lines" on final at my GA
airport I just grin and bear it. ;-)

[Maxwell]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Newps writes:
>
>> No. You are worth what somebody is willing to pay. Don't like it?
>> Move. Unions didn't come into existence because of low pay but
>> primarily because of working conditions.
>
> It's not that simple. Sometimes a heterogenous labor pool can include
> people
> who are willing to work for less than a subsistence wage, competing with
> people who cannot afford to do so. The former pull down wages for the
> latter,
> causing problems. And the former are not really being paid a living wage,
> so
> it's not necessarily a fair arrangement. Unions sometimes protect against
> this as well.
>

Have you ever been a union member?

[John Galban]

On Apr 11, 10:14 am, "Morgans" > wrote:
>
> A professional working a full day should make a decent living, not a welfare
> living.

That would be nice, but you have to keep in mind that entry level
jobs often pay a low wage. Flight instruction is an entry level job
in the airline pilot field. The position is mostly populated by
people building time in order to move to the next rung on the
ladder.

You can get qualifications for the job in less than a year, and
there are large numbers of people who are thusly qualified that will
do the job almost for free. This is not what most people think about
when they think of "a professional".

Don't get me wrong. I have a great respect for flight
instructors and the sacrifices they make, but I also realize that they
are in it for the experience and will drop flight instruction as soon
as the first freight dog job comes along.

True professional flight instructors do exist. I know several of
them. They charge about triple what the time builder charges and it's
worth it. The ones I know make a pretty good living from it. I've
never heard onen of them complain about low wages.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[gatt]

"Jim Logajan" > wrote in message
...
> The local paper has an article about the local community college that
> wants to cut the pay of its flight instructors:
>
> http://www.registerguard.com/news/2007/04/10/b1.cr.lccpilots.0410.p1.php?section=cityregion
>
> Among other tidbits, I was surprised to see this:
> "Flight technology is popular, with about a dozen instructors and more
> than 100 students. The demand for pilots is so strong that most students
> get jobs soon after completing the degree and flight hour requirements."

ROTFL!

Also "To do that, students typically enroll in an aviation bachelor's
program at Oregon State University and take jobs at Lane as flight
instructors. They earn money and log flight hours while finishing their
upper-division courses."

As a graduate of Oregon State University, I'm curious as to why I've never
seen an "aviation program" this side of AFROTC.

-c

[Mxsmanic]

Robert M. Gary writes:

> Why is it not fair to employ someone at a rate that they agree to????

Because some people benefit from other income, and others don't. A student
who still lives with Mom and Dad may be able to work for nothing, but if he
does so, that eliminates a position for someone who can only work for enough
money to support himself. There are lots of occupations in which this dynamic
applies, and it drives salaries so low that some people must live in poverty.

> Some people work for things other than just money (flight time for
> instance).

Nobody does that if he must support himself with the work.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Mxsmanic]

Maxwell writes:

> Have you ever been a union member?

I'm not sure.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Maxwell wrote:
>
> My last BFR I drew a expert with about 250 hours, and man what an
> experience. Much tougher than my check ride years ago. From now on I'm
> checking THEIR logbook before the commiting to any dual.

I look at a tough BFR as a good thing.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Maxwell writes:
>
>> Have you ever been a union member?
>
> I'm not sure.
>

Noone cares anyway, fjukkktard



Bertie

[Maxwell]

"B A R R Y" > wrote in message
t...
> Maxwell wrote:
>>
>> My last BFR I drew a expert with about 250 hours, and man what an
>> experience. Much tougher than my check ride years ago. From now on I'm
>> checking THEIR logbook before the commiting to any dual.
>
> I look at a tough BFR as a good thing.

With an experienced instructor it can be, but doing things like working
weight and balance without a calculator is a bit much. And that was just the
beginning.

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Maxwell wrote:
> "B A R R Y" > wrote in message
>
>> I look at a tough BFR as a good thing.
>
> With an experienced instructor it can be, but doing things like working
> weight and balance without a calculator is a bit much. And that was just the
> beginning.


Oh... Needlessly difficult. <G>

He wouldn't let you use a calculator?

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

B A R R Y wrote:
> Maxwell wrote:
>> "B A R R Y" > wrote in message
>>
>>> I look at a tough BFR as a good thing.
>>
>> With an experienced instructor it can be, but doing things like working
>> weight and balance without a calculator is a bit much. And that was just the
>> beginning.
>
>
> Oh... Needlessly difficult. <G>
>
> He wouldn't let you use a calculator?


A real life flight, huh? Jeez, if I need to work a weight and balance, then I
need a calculator. Just like if I need to fly, I need an airplane. Working all
those numbers in my head isn't real life. I'd **** it up for sure.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

"Newps" > wrote in message
. ..
>
>
> Morgans wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>> Attitudes like that is why unions were formed.
>>
>> A professional working a full day should make a decent living, not a
>> welfare living.
>
>
>
> No. You are worth what somebody is willing to pay. Don't like it? Move.
> Unions didn't come into existence because of low pay but primarily because
> of working conditions.

Why didn't they come into existence during the pre-Industrial Revolution era
when working conditions REALLY sucked?

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

On Apr 11, 10:14 am, "Morgans" > wrote:
> "Robert M. Gary" > wrote
>
>
>
> > If CFIs are willing to work for less than it would be irresponsible to
> > continue to pay them above market with tax payer's money. If they
> > would be paying below market they will be sitting there with no CFIs.
>
> Attitudes like that is why unions were formed.
>
> A professional working a full day should make a decent living, not a
> welfare
> living.

Supply and demand/market rate.

Or is reality to harsh for you?

Why can't everyone be a movie star or pro athlete?

[Andrew Sarangan]

On Apr 10, 10:38 pm, Jim Logajan > wrote:
> The local paper has an article about the local community college that
> wants to cut the pay of its flight instructors:
>
> http://www.registerguard.com/news/2007/04/10/b1.cr.lccpilots.0410.p1....
>
> Among other tidbits, I was surprised to see this:
> "Flight technology is popular, with about a dozen instructors and more
> than 100 students. The demand for pilots is so strong that most students
> get jobs soon after completing the degree and flight hour requirements."

I teach aviation at a local community college, but I am also a regular
faculty at a larger university on a different discipline. From my
experience, I agree with the comment that "flight instructors aren't
faculty in the usual sense". Faculty have to demonstrate intellect,
creativity and insights, none of which are required from a CFI. That
doesn't mean CFIs cannot have all these qualities, but merely holding
a CFI certificate does not demonstrate those qualities. The only exam
they have to take are multiple choice and the questions are known
ahead of time. CFIs range from high school drop-outs to astronauts and
scientists, so it is difficult to consider them as a single
professional group.

The article is confusing in one aspect. They say "students get jobs
soon after completing the degree and flight hour requirements", yet
they say graduating students are not qualified for the airline
industry without additional training and experience. It sounds like
the jobs the students are getting are not in the airline industry, and
if that is true, it is not a very attractive claim.

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> From my
> experience, I agree with the comment that "flight instructors aren't
> faculty in the usual sense". Faculty have to demonstrate intellect,
> creativity and insights, none of which are required from a CFI.

From what we're seing in academia, those qualities are not needed for
faculty, either.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
> On Apr 10, 10:38 pm, Jim Logajan > wrote:
>> The local paper has an article about the local community college that
>> wants to cut the pay of its flight instructors:
>>
>> http://www.registerguard.com/news/2007/04/10/b1.cr.lccpilots.0410.p1....
>>
>> Among other tidbits, I was surprised to see this:
>> "Flight technology is popular, with about a dozen instructors and
>> more than 100 students. The demand for pilots is so strong that most
>> students get jobs soon after completing the degree and flight hour
>> requirements."
>
> I teach aviation at a local community college, but I am also a regular
> faculty at a larger university on a different discipline. From my
> experience, I agree with the comment that "flight instructors aren't
> faculty in the usual sense". Faculty have to demonstrate intellect,
> creativity and insights, none of which are required from a CFI. That
> doesn't mean CFIs cannot have all these qualities, but merely holding
> a CFI certificate does not demonstrate those qualities. The only exam
> they have to take are multiple choice and the questions are known
> ahead of time. CFIs range from high school drop-outs to astronauts and
> scientists, so it is difficult to consider them as a single
> professional group.
>
> The article is confusing in one aspect. They say "students get jobs
> soon after completing the degree and flight hour requirements", yet
> they say graduating students are not qualified for the airline
> industry without additional training and experience. It sounds like
> the jobs the students are getting are not in the airline industry, and
> if that is true, it is not a very attractive claim.

I can't get back into the original article but didn't it say something about
the CFIs got their AA and were getting their BAs at another school? As I
mentioned this is awfully like a grad student teaching undergrad students.
And I don't know of any of them that are in the union that reps the
professors at a university.

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
> Working all
> those numbers in my head isn't real life. I'd **** it up for sure.
>
As would I! <g>

I screw up deposit slips all the time...

[Mxsmanic]

Matt Barrow writes:

> From what we're seing in academia, those qualities are not needed for
> faculty, either.

Faculty members just need credentials and a willingness to follow the
politically-correct line.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Maxwell]

"B A R R Y" > wrote in message
t...
> Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
>> Working all those numbers in my head isn't real life. I'd **** it up
>> for sure.
>>
> As would I! <g>
>
> I screw up deposit slips all the time...

He basically just sat back and collected his time while testing my long
division skills. But that was only the beginning. He was about 25, had 250
hours. We wasted more than two hours on the oral, 95% of which I will never
use. Much more of a test than a discussion or instruction.

I knew I had problems when I handed him my original certificate from 1972
and he looked real puzzled and said, "is this really a pilots license".

[Andrew Sarangan]

On Apr 12, 12:00 pm, "Matt Barrow" >
wrote:
> "Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
>
> oups.com...
>
> > From my
> > experience, I agree with the comment that "flight instructors aren't
> > faculty in the usual sense". Faculty have to demonstrate intellect,
> > creativity and insights, none of which are required from a CFI.
>
> From what we're seing in academia, those qualities are not needed for
> faculty, either.

Actually, those qualities are required in order to become a tenured
faculty, and it is evaluated by peers outside the institution. But
some institutions may not enforce these standards. On the other hand,
CFI's are not expected to demonstrate those qualities at any point in
their career.

One big difference is, most people in academia will not be able to
survive without innovation and creativity. But in flight instruction,
we are trained to follow procedures, exactly as written, such as POH,
FARs, and FAA documents. A pilot who displays 'creativity' is quickly
branded as risky or stupid. As a result, many misconceptions get
passed down generations without anyone challenging them.

[Peter Dohm]

>
> "Maxwell" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
> >
> > I knew I had problems when I handed him my original certificate from
1972
> > and he looked real puzzled and said, "is this really a pilots license".
> >
>
>
"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
...
> You could have really ****ed him off if you said, "No, sonny, that's a
pilot
> CERTIFICATE."
>
> Jim
>
One of the long time Wings hosts in southern Florida frequently made a point
of that difference.

Peter

[Jim Logajan]

"Peter Dohm" > wrote:
> "RST Engineering" > wrote:
>> You could have really ****ed him off if you said, "No, sonny, that's
>> a pilot CERTIFICATE."
>
> One of the long time Wings hosts in southern Florida frequently made a
> point of that difference.

If there was a difference, it seems to be getting blurred because even the
FAA is starting to use "license" as a synonym for "certificate" as
evidenced by some of the main pages on their web site, where they are
starting to use the terms interchangeably; for example:

http://www.faa.gov/pilots/

"Licenses & Certificates

* Change Your License Information
* Get a Copy of Your License"

And:

http://www.faa.gov/pilots/become/

"What is the first step to becoming a pilot?

Decide what you want to fly. FAA’s rules for getting a pilot’s license
(certificate) differ depending on the type of aircraft you fly. You can
choose among airplanes, gyroplanes, helicopters, gliders, balloons, or
airships. If you are interested in flying ultralight vehicles, you don’t
need a pilot’s license."

[Peter Dohm]

"Jim Logajan" > wrote in message
.. .
> "Peter Dohm" > wrote:
> > "RST Engineering" > wrote:
> >> You could have really ****ed him off if you said, "No, sonny, that's
> >> a pilot CERTIFICATE."
> >
> > One of the long time Wings hosts in southern Florida frequently made a
> > point of that difference.
>
> If there was a difference, it seems to be getting blurred because even the
> FAA is starting to use "license" as a synonym for "certificate" as
> evidenced by some of the main pages on their web site, where they are
> starting to use the terms interchangeably; for example:
>
> http://www.faa.gov/pilots/
>
> "Licenses & Certificates
>
> * Change Your License Information
> * Get a Copy of Your License"
>
> And:
>
> http://www.faa.gov/pilots/become/
>
> "What is the first step to becoming a pilot?
>
> Decide what you want to fly. FAA's rules for getting a pilot's license
> (certificate) differ depending on the type of aircraft you fly. You can
> choose among airplanes, gyroplanes, helicopters, gliders, balloons, or
> airships. If you are interested in flying ultralight vehicles, you don't
> need a pilot's license."

Admittedly, the guy is a "grey beard"--or would be if he didn't keep shaving
it off.

Peter

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

"B A R R Y" > wrote in message
t...
> Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
>> Working all those numbers in my head isn't real life. I'd **** it up
>> for sure.
>>
> As would I! <g>
>
> I screw up deposit slips all the time...

And that's just the date...

[Maxwell]

"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
...
> You could have really ****ed him off if you said, "No, sonny, that's a
> pilot CERTIFICATE."
>

Hey Jim, good to see ya.

Yeah, I should have, he was a real Poindexter. Next time I'm going to shop
very carefully. I have had too many BFRs that were really good experiences,
and well focused on my needs. The last one just wasn't one of them.

[Robert M. Gary]

On Apr 11, 8:56 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Robert M. Gary writes:
> > Why is it not fair to employ someone at a rate that they agree to????
>
> Because some people benefit from other income, and others don't.

And that is the gov'ts fault?? You propose to punish those that don't
need the extra income by turning them away because others have taken
the job at above market rates. Anytime the rates are above market,
someone will be left in the cold because supply/demand are out of
wack.


> > Some people work for things other than just money (flight time for
> > instance).
>
> Nobody does that if he must support himself with the work.

So?? Some don't need the income to support themselves. In the end each
person needs to choose what their minimum salery they are willing to
work for?

-robert

[Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Matt Barrow writes:
>
>> From what we're seing in academia, those qualities are not needed for
>> faculty, either.
>
> Faculty members just need credentials and a willingness to follow the
> politically-correct line.
>

What, and come out of their bedrooms once in a while? Stating in your
bedroom and playing video games?
That's not a political stance, fjukktard.




Cretin


Bertie

[Robert M. Gary]

On Apr 11, 8:56 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Robert M. Gary writes:
> > Why is it not fair to employ someone at a rate that they agree to????
>
> Because some people benefit from other income, and others don't. A student
> who still lives with Mom and Dad may be able to work for nothing, but if he
> does so, that eliminates a position for someone who can only work for enough
> money to support himself. There are lots of occupations in which this dynamic
> applies, and it drives salaries so low that some people must live in poverty.

Yea, punish those rich kids living with mom and dad for wanting to
work for experience. Make sure the jobs are all filled up when he goes
to apply. Gees, you socialists have no idea what you are really
saying.

-robert

[Robert M. Gary]

On Apr 11, 2:53 pm, "Maxwell" > wrote:
> "Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Newps writes:
>
> >> No. You are worth what somebody is willing to pay. Don't like it?
> >> Move. Unions didn't come into existence because of low pay but
> >> primarily because of working conditions.
>
> > It's not that simple. Sometimes a heterogenous labor pool can include
> > people
> > who are willing to work for less than a subsistence wage, competing with
> > people who cannot afford to do so. The former pull down wages for the
> > latter,
> > causing problems. And the former are not really being paid a living wage,
> > so
> > it's not necessarily a fair arrangement. Unions sometimes protect against
> > this as well.
>
> Have you ever been a union member?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

He lives in a socialist country, the union is the govt.

-Robert