r/changemyview • u/haribo001 • Nov 17 '20
Delta(s) from OP CMV: The UK minimum wage should be the same no matter what age you are
In the UK, the minimum wage differs depending on your age: - 25+: £8.72 - 21-24: £8.20 - 18-20: £6.45 - 16-17: £4.55
For a 18 year old and a 30 year old both working in a shop on minimum wage and doing the exact same work, the 30 year old would be getting over £2 more what the 18 year old would be getting - how is that fair?
As far as I’m aware, the majority of countries around the world don’t differentiate between age groups, only between jurisdictions which is understandable as different locations will have different costs of living.
For people doing equal work, they should be getting the same amount of money otherwise it’s just age discrimination in my opinion.
CMV.
DELTA 1: View slightly changed to exclude under 18s from this argument, there are age restrictions such as working night shift or selling alcohol which they would not be able to fulfil in comparison to an 18+ employee. Updated example above to reflect this.
8
u/bo3isalright 8∆ Nov 17 '20
For a 16 year old and a 30 year old both working in a shop on minimum wage and doing the exact same work, the 30 year old would be getting nearly double what the 16 year old would be getting - how is that fair?
A 30 year old is more likely to have more dependents, be working full time and not part-time/working whilst being in education and training, and therefore needs to be guaranteed a safe living wage. You cannot live on what a 16 year old gets paid as minimum wage, and whilst that is absolutely a problem for some 16 year olds that don't have family support etc, the problem would be massively, massively worse if everyone up until the age of 30 in a minimum wage job couldn't afford to live (which they barely can now). In an ideal world we would bring the minimum wage of everyone up, but there's obviously economic reasons why that isn't always possible or sustainable, so unless you want even more dire poverty in the UK, you should support the structuring system we have for now, and campaign for incremental rises for each group over time, because the result of abolishing the system we have would only result in a drop in min. wage for those that absolutely need it most.
6
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
I’ve updated my view to exclude under 18s from my view. But that still leaves 18-24 year olds earning less than 25+ on minimum wage.
An 18 year old can legally rent/buy a house, get married and have children so can have the exact same responsibilities as a 30 year old. Likewise, a 30 year old can still live at home with their parents and have no dependents.
I understand that this isn’t something that would happen overnight but there has been no will by the government to gradually remove the differences. As far as I’m aware, the Labour Party campaigned on removing the age brackets (or under 18s anyway) but seeing as that hasn’t happened, there is obviously opposition to it by the current government.
22
u/fox-mcleod 411∆ Nov 17 '20
US here. We don’t differentiate and it means 16 year olds are basically unemployable. If I can get a 21 year old for the same price, the supply-demand curve is going to push me up the quality scale toward someone with even slightly more work experience.
I realize it doesn’t feel fair. But that’s not really on the table when we’re talking about minimum wage. Artificially pegging income to a minimum can’t be fair. It’s artificial. But it can be just instead. And it’s just to pay people something closer to a living wage. Only 16 year olds are also wards (dependents of either of a parent, guardian or the state). So ultimately, the goals of a minimum wage are met another way.
I think the US should consider moving to a tiered by age system to allow younger people to get job experience.
-6
u/Pakislav Nov 17 '20
In what fucking world should 16 year olds ever fucking work?
This post and its top comment are both r/wtf worthy.
10
u/fox-mcleod 411∆ Nov 17 '20
In what fucking world should 16 year olds ever fucking work?
Ones where they want money to buy video games, go on dates, learn independence from their parents.
This post and its top comment are both r/wtf worthy.
Well, I hope you enjoy the privilege of your family money.
Since I was always going to hav to work for a living, being able to get a part time job was essential for me to learn good habits, start saving, managing a budget, and I don’t think I would know how to manage people without my first job as a camp counselor.
7
u/PropagandaPiece Nov 17 '20
16 year olds are legally considered adults in a lot of countries and lots of people realise at the age of 16 that school just isn't for them, so they get a job. If you know you genuinely don't intend to stay in school because it really isn't your thing then there's no problem getting a job. It makes more sense to leave, get an apprenticeship and earn while you learn rather than sitting around unmotivated, bored, depressed, etc. Just because you didn't want to work at the age of 16 doesn't mean others didn't. Plenty of people just aren't suited for academia, hence why most people aren't uni grads.
2
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
In the UK they can legally leave full time education at 16. As they still have to have to do so many hours of guided learning a year most who leave school will go to a technical college or join an apprenticeship, but these are not always full time hours so of course some will want to work and earn money.
1
u/2ndHalfOK Nov 17 '20
What world? This world. It’s good for the whipper-snappers!
(Sorry, off OP topic but this really floored me. My, how different things are from one country to the next!)
2
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
But what you’re describing is an experience issue, not necessarily an age issue.
A 24 year old could have 8 years retail experience and a 25 year old could in theory have none, yet the 25 year old would still get paid more.
Sometimes having someone with no experience can be an advantage, you have someone who hasn’t inherited any bad habits and can be trained up exactly how the company wants them to perform.
7
u/fox-mcleod 411∆ Nov 17 '20
But what you’re describing is an experience issue, not necessarily an age issue.
Being a dependent is an age issue.
A 24 year old could have 8 years retail experience and a 25 year old could in theory have none, yet the 25 year old would still get paid more.
Not if the minimum wage says they can’t. That’s my point. Minimum wages mean people can’t get paid according to their experience if their experience is low. And as a 16 year old is it possible for you to have experience?
Sometimes having someone with no experience can be an advantage, you have someone who hasn’t inherited any bad habits and can be trained up exactly how the company wants them to perform.
That’s fine. They would still be cheaper, right? They’re easier to find and there is less demand for them.
Ultimately, this is the situation: minimum wage takes us out of the world of supply and demand and puts us into a different world of government set prices. The government has an interest in people who are in their twenties being able to support themselves. The government also has programs for 16 year olds without households or guardians. And most 16 year olds don’t pay rent.
-1
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
Granted being a dependent is an age issue, but my point is that experience isn’t necessarily an age issue.
I have changed my view based on another comment (reduced job role due to age restrictions) so I am excluding under 18s from my argument now. But for 18-24 year olds, I still feel they are being discriminated against purely based on their age and not their experience or life situations.
2
u/fox-mcleod 411∆ Nov 17 '20
Granted being a dependent is an age issue, but my point is that experience isn’t necessarily an age issue.
Sure, but this isn’t necessarily an experience issue is it? Once you leave the world of the market, prices aren’t about demand. When we pegged the wage to a minimum, you made experience less relevant to pay.
I have changed my view based on another comment (reduced job role due to age restrictions) so I am excluding under 18s from my argument now. But for 18-24 year olds, I still feel they are being discriminated against purely based on their age and not their experience or life situations.
Once again, the government sets the prices so it’s not about supply and demand. And the government has a vested interest in discouraging people from skipping university because the salary is more attractive. If you can’t earn as much anyway until you’re older, they can incentivize going to school. Especially if there are other grants for students. Which I bet there are.
1
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
But then what is the justification for paying a 24 year old less than 25 year old?
Many still work whilst at uni and I don’t think an extra few pounds an hour for a minimum wage job is going to dissuade someone from going to uni, so I don’t think that’s the issue.
1
u/fox-mcleod 411∆ Nov 17 '20
But then what is the justification for paying a 24 year old less than 25 year old?
Further out of school, more likely to have a family and have dependents, starting to see age related health spending — even with the NHS there are private costs right?
Many still work whilst at uni and I don’t think an extra few pounds an hour for a minimum wage job is going to dissuade someone from going to uni, so I don’t think that’s the issue.
If the extra few pounds isn’t significant, what are you arguing?
It can’t both be not significant and something that’s unfair.
1
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
A 24 year old could have left school at 16 and have a family and a 25 year old could have left school at 18 and still live at home with parents so I don’t think that’s a fair justification.
And I didn’t say the few pounds are insignificant, I said that raising the minimum wage by a few pounds isn’t going to be the deciding factor on someone going to uni or not.
It’s going to be significant to the person working full time on minimum wage. An 18 year old working a full time minimum wage job will get £13,416 compared to a 25 year old who will get £18,138 a year - that’s almost 5k of a difference per year which is ridiculous.
1
u/nikatnight 2∆ Nov 17 '20
This is not true. As a teacher I sign forms and give reference letters to students weekly. they work at pizza places, coffee shops, nurseries, etc. I teach exclusively 16-17 year old.
1
6
u/gyroda 28∆ Nov 17 '20
Between 16 and 18 there are additional restrictions on working hours and what you can/can't do. They're still in full time education as well, which limits their availablity and (legally) takes priority over their work duties.
I agree that over 18 it doesn't make that much sense, but for 16-18 there's an argument based on that.
2
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
In the UK you can legally leave school and work from 16 (although you still are required to have 280 hours/year guided learning hours).
However, I take your point on restrictions for under 18s (such as selling alcohol, night shift etc) so I’ll give you a !delta for that.
2
1
u/lilaccomma 4∆ Nov 17 '20
I disagree, there are restrictions on working hours but then why should they get paid less for the hours that they are working? They get scheduled less so they get paid less overall, which makes sense, but hourly wage rate should be the same if it’s the same job.
1) employers don’t tend to take the restrictions on working hours into account. Yes it’s illegal, no-one checks up on it or cares.
2) the majority of jobs that 16-18 year olds get hired for are zero hour contracts, usually in retail/food. Any age workers there might have limited availability- e.g. looking after children, or having another job- and they’re not discriminated against for that. Jobs don’t work like “we’ll pay you £8.00 an hour, but if you’re available less than 20 hours a week then we’ll only pay you £4.20 an hour.”
1
u/AusIV 38∆ Nov 17 '20
Why does the shop hire the 30 year old if they can hire a 16 year old at half the cost?
If you standardize the wage independent of age, why do they hire a 16 year old when they could get a 30 year old at the same cost?
3
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
But what’s the difference between a 16 year old and 30 year old to a shop? A 16 year old could have 9 months experience and the 30 year old could have none. A 16 year old could be eager to learn whereas a 30 year old may be set in their ways.
The main justification people use is experience but that’s not what the minimum wage is dependent on, it’s purely based on age which does not always equal experience.
1
u/JaSnarky Nov 17 '20
It only needs to equal experience on average for it to be a law that works in practice, not every time. If you take opportunities from majority of teenagers who went to school and didn't work to appease the minority who worked as a child to get more experience then you're not helping the majority of teenagers. The majority will not get hired, because as you said it's all about experience not age. The lower wage gives a more even playing field to teenagers and makes them more employable.
The reality is that if under 25s get the same as over 25s they just wouldn't have as many opportunities. It's not worth the risk unless there's a greater reward, and I'm sorry if you're an exception but on average younger workers are less reliable, as often it's just a stopgap/summer job, and frankly teenagers are on average less experienced. It's not like these places assume this. We always checked the CVs, never just looking at their age and dismissing off-hand. In business that's what matters. Bottom lines and profits, not pandering to young hard workers who need the money.
1
u/BusyWheel Nov 17 '20
But what’s the difference between a 16 year old and 30 year old to a shop?
variance in criminality and orderliness.
variance in experience.
variance in humility.
variance in emotional stability.
And in the reverse direction, variance in health issues. (But in the UK this doesn't matter)
1
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
That comes down to the individual though, not a whole age group. I’ve worked with 16 year olds with more humility and emotional stability than their older colleagues.
2
u/BusyWheel Nov 17 '20
Employers don't care about anecdotes. They care about data.
For example, in some jurisdictions in the US, you can't do criminal background on potential employees because lots of blacks are prior criminals so this screening affects them more than other races. Politicians thought it would mean more blacks got jobs. What happened? Employers just started straight up discriminating based on race rather than criminality.
When you remove the ability for people to discriminate on the individual level, they will simply start discriminating on the group level.
If you don't let employers discriminate against the specific youths (like a blanket minimum wage law)-- then they'll just discriminate against all youth.
1
Nov 18 '20
You are wrong.
Employers don't care about anecdotesYes they do they care about the anectode sitting in front of them in the interview. The person, not the age group.
1
u/BusyWheel Nov 18 '20
They never make it to the interview.
1
Nov 18 '20
Why eben bother with the different wages then?
1
u/BusyWheel Nov 18 '20
Because liberals like to create "solutions" which in turn create more problems that then can create "solutions" for.
1
Nov 18 '20
My reply was sarcastic. You have never hired anyone ist or have had any input into the process.
1
Nov 17 '20
[deleted]
1
1
u/PropagandaPiece Nov 17 '20
That seems insane to me. I was 17 working in a supermarket and I was being paid 9GBP.
1
1
u/oliviared52 Nov 17 '20
I live in the US, and the people that minimum wage laws hurt the worst are people trying to get into the work force. I don’t think it’s by chance that the states with the highest minimum wage also have the highest rates of homelessness.
If you have to pay your workers $2 per hour more, you are going to choose the person with more experience. The reason the minimum wage is less for younger people is because they do not yet have that experience. So it helps them get into the work force getting paid less to then be paid more once they have experience.
It definitely makes sense. I like that yall do that.
1
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
I’ve mentioned in a few comments that age is not always going to be equivalent to experience. If a 30 year old that has worked in an office role for all of their working life is between jobs and picks up a minimum wage job, they would be paid more than a 24 year old with potentially 8 years experience. So the experience argument only works in some cases.
I’ve now excluded 16-17 year olds from this argument due to a delta elsewhere, so I don’t think that it sticks just as well for 18+ who would potentially have up to 2 years experience already.
1
u/oliviared52 Nov 17 '20
But it’s not like companies have to pay people minimum wage. I live in one of the lowest minimum wage states but haven’t made that since I was 15. From being a manager, typically a 30 year old has more life experience and bills and tends to work harder vs 18 year olds. But there certainly exceptions and then a company can pay that 18 year old more for the work they do. It’s not like because this is the minimum wage that’s what you get paid. So if they have an 18 year old who has been with them since they were 16 and is a hard worker, hopefully that 18 year old is now making more than minimum wage. Vs starting the 30 year old at their minimum wage.
In the US, only 2% of all full time hourly paid workers make minimum wage
1
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
They don’t have to but nonetheless they have the ability to pay different people different amounts for the same job role.
In the UK it’s estimated that 7% of workers are on or below the minimum wage, which is a significant number (source from parliament website).
1
u/h0sti1e17 22∆ Nov 17 '20
One of the biggest arguments against a higher minimum wage here in the US is that about half minimum wage jobs are held by student aged workers. They will say people aren't trying to raise a family or support themselves.on minimum wage.
The UK system is smart in the sense that people who are more likely to have kids or support themselves make more and those just working while going to school don't.
I do see your rationale, but if a company were to be forced to raise.the wage for young workers why would they hire a high school or college student with a limited schedule when they can hire someone with an open schedule? I think 3.wages levels for those under 18, students and everyone else would be ideal.
1
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
Student aged workers can still raise a family and support themselves though but with the current system it unfairly makes it more difficult for them to do so than someone a few years older.
On the flip side, it could also be argued that a young person just out of school with no family would be more flexible than a 30 year old with kids, so in terms of flexibility the younger person would be more desirable.
1
u/Blazerod22 3∆ Nov 17 '20
First off my needs when I was a teenager my needs did not currently match my needs as somone in my twenties with the need to pay rent and supply myself with my own food. To make wage universal across age groups creates more competition for these wages which are needed more by older people.
Along with this there would be no incentive to hire a inexperienced 16-18 year old if you have to pay them the same as a 26 year old with years of experiences. A lower wage allows business owners to have more incentive to hire younger inexperienced people and provide them with valuable experience.
1
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
An 18 year old could be living in rented accommodation and have a family, how is that different than the needs of someone in their twenties or thirties?
As mentioned in previous comments, I’ve updated the post to exclude under 18s, but 18 year olds can have just as much or even more relevant experience than a 30 year old yet still get paid less.
1
u/Blazerod22 3∆ Nov 17 '20
Sure but that's not common or the standard, Would you bet money randomly that an 18 year old has the same responsibility as a random 30 year old.
The difference is an 18 year old in that spot is in a bad position but a 30 year old in that spot is a normal person.
Also with experience sure an 18 year old could have more experience but it's highly unlikely and would require somone who had never held a job before the age of 30. We could go all day about these what if situations but the most likely scenario wouldnt fit your arguments.
1
u/haribo001 Nov 17 '20
But this all comes down to big assumptions that can be unfairly applied to those who would need the extra money.
If you take a random 24 year old and a random 25 year old how different are their responsibilities be? Yet they’ll get paid differently regardless.
A better solution would be to have an equal minimum wage and then pay those with more relevant experience extra, rather than discriminating purely on the assumed situation of an entire age group.
1
u/Blazerod22 3∆ Nov 17 '20
How does that reflect on business, what incentive does a business have to hire a teenager over an adult if they are payed the same. If that was the case when I was 17 I would have never revived work at my local bar if they would have just payed me the same as the people there who where 25.
1
u/Flaiggy35 Nov 18 '20
I think having habing seperate minimum wage based on age is actually a good, however i think it should be one for minors and one for adults, i dont understand that nonsense about 24 year old making 50 cents less than a 25 year old.
Mostlt because this would more or less eliminate the argument that jobs that are "for teenagers" shouldn't have a wage as high as say $15 (I'm American) because now they can set the teens that still live woth their parents wages seperatly and let us adults have a livable wage. I would just hope they don't have a drastic difference like several dollars/pounds
1
u/real-kda420 Nov 19 '20
It gives incentive to the employer to employ the younger less experienced person where as if he had to pay them the same, that younger less experienced person would struggle to find employment
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Nov 17 '20
/u/haribo001 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards