INC NEWS - other workers wages

nutryb at mindspring.com nutryb at mindspring.com
Mon May 22 15:11:54 EDT 2006 

re: "living wage":

The current national minimum wage is $5.15/hour. This works out to about $10,700/year, at 40 hrs/week, 52 wk/yr. 
$10/hour = $20,800/year, computed as above. 
$15/hour = $31,200/year, ditto.

I don't believe we can include those making $30K/yr as not making "living wage" salaries. They would be outside the boundaries used by many groups working for such things. You might wish to look at ACORN's page on living wage at : http://www.livingwagecampaign.org/  
or the Wikipedia entries on minimum and living wages at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage

What would serve as a "living wage" varies, of course, by local cost of living, but seems to be running around $10-$11/hour in larger metropolises, which I would think would be much more expensive to live in than Durham. 

By comparison, a teacher in NC with a BA and five years' experience would make about $31,500/yr. 

re: garbage collectors, the pay-per-task system, etc:

>From what I've heard on this and other lists, it sounds like, although Mr. Baker did not say it, that Durham has suffered under bad management for so long that a potentially effective system of payment has come to suffer under institutionalized abuse.  I can see nothing wrong with paying per task completed, so long as those tasks are actually completed, and the city does its due diligence in keeping the per-task payment commensurate with an equivalent wage-time - or, in simpler language, if more houses are built and more trash is collected on a route than in previous years, then increase the payment for that route to compensate for the extra time required on average, and vice-versa (if that would ever happen!).   

However, it sounds as though proper auditing and management has not taken place in a while, and folks are being paid as though they have finished work they aren't actually finishing, and then the city has to hire someone else as a temp to finish the job, too. If this is the case - and I'm willing to be corrected if wrong - then it would not be a class or wage issue, but one of integrity: you don't pay for work not done. I'm guessing "Action" Jackson tried to actually enforce the completion clauses, and got a "sick-out" in return.  If that's true, then it's exactly the sort of abuse of the system that hurts the image of organized labor everywhere, and should not be dignified by association with such a fine tradition (I come from a long line of Union people).   

Can someone clarify this whole situation a bit more? Exactly what are the temp workers doing? I don't get the local papers, so I'm probably missing huge hunks of information on this whole mess.

Paula C., over here in CVNA


-----Original Message-----
>From: Chris Sevick <csevick at verizon.net>
>Sent: May 22, 2006 1:18 PM
>To: inc-list at durhaminc.org
>Subject: Re: INC NEWS - other workers wages
>
>I don't know all the details about this situation, but as a casual observer, I see a lot of analysis and criticism related to the compensation 'system'.  Those criticisms may be valid, but I don't see much analysis of the actual compensation, and whether it's a suitable living wage.
>
>In my opinion, garbage workers provide a valuable service to the community, and should have the same opportunity as anybody else to live the American Dream.  I just don't see how you can pay for a mortgage, healthcare, raise a family, etc, while making around $30,000/year.  Perhaps that is a legitimate living wage, but I can't really talk, because I make more money than that, and I would find my life to be much more difficult with that annual salary.
>
>I would love to hear some testimonials on how you can live the American Dream on $30,000/year.  It would be personally enlightening to me, and would provide a legitimate foundation for criticizing the garbage workers' compensation.  Until the living wage issue is dealt with, the criticism of the compensation 'system' just looks like class warfare to me.
>
>- Chris Sevick
>
>
>=====================
>From: RW Pickle <randy at 27beverly.com>
>Date: Sat May 20 13:29:13 CDT 2006
>To: Colin Crossman <lists at crc32.com>
>Cc: inc-list at durhaminc.org
>Subject: Re: INC NEWS - other workers wages
>
>Colin has hit the nail on the head as far as getting the job done, working
>the hours paid for, and holding the administration accountable for getting
>rid of the troublemakers and replacing them with grateful employees. Just
>add to the workload in order to get the work done on time. It may mean
>switching some customers pickup day, but that a simple request to make. If
>we don't get this figured out fairly quick, if the budget is approved and
>we roll out city-wide yard waste pickup, what's going to happen then? the
>yard waste crews are on the same plan as the green can crews. But for some
>unknown reason (maybe just the volume), yard waste never missed a beat
>last week. And neither did recycling which seems to be a one-man operation
>(at least in our neighborhood). Often, the recycling gets done very late
>in the afternoon. But it gets done. I assume their loads vary just as yard
>waste and green can wastes do. So somedays may take longer than others.
>But he is always the last one through and is ofter very late in the day.
>In the winter months, it may be dark when he gets it all.
>
>You may have read (like I did) in the N&O Durham addition today where in
>the not to distant past, solid waste pickup did not occur in a three week
>consecutive time span. This was during a bad ice storm. As pointed out,
>the roads were clear long before pickup resumed. Like Barry and I both
>suggested, we could miss a week or two and never be in a bind. But the
>point to me was, so what if we miss a pickup scheduled for a particular
>day. If it's fixing a problem, there are bound to be some rocky roads (no
>pun intended on our streets). Iron out the issues as they crop up, replace
>holes left in the wake and move on with the better plan. Having plan B is
>always nice. But sooner or later you have to get back to plan A.
>
>I understand there is another plan in the works to fill in the "temp
>workers" with others who are already city employees. I can't see where
>this solves the issue. They must be working in some other capacity already
>and this will leave a void by them doing solid waste duty one day a week.
>Or maybe these city workers are already on the plan most of the country
>works by; an hours pay for an hours work. Regardless, we are still paying
>to get the job done twice if we continue to pay workers for time they are
>not working.
>
>RWP
>27 Beverly
>
>> As Melissa has noted, the breakdown in the compensation of Durham's
>> solid waste collectors is not necessarily in the way they are paid, but
>> the way the specific payments are calculated.  In many industries,
>> hourly wages are the best way to compensate the worker.  Randy has given
>> us a very good overview of why that is.  In other cases, piecework, or a
>> task-based system, is the best way, as Ken has described.  In the
>> Furniture industry, both methods are used, depending on the particular
>> job being done: outsiders generally are piecework, whereas shippers are
>> on hourly.
>>
>> The fundamental problem with Solid Waste is that it is a public service,
>> not the way the work is accounted.  Because it is publicly provided, the
>> performance incentive is divorced from the compensation.  Public
>> services also possess the well-known problem of increasing, over time,
>> the difficulty of terminating poorly performing employees.
>> Additionally, because of the way the public services are organized, the
>> service is essentially provided by a collection of serially dependant
>> monopolies.
>>
>> So, the breakdown here is not in the way the workers are compensated,
>> both the hourly and the task system have significant failures that are
>> exacerbated by the fact that the services are provided through the
>> public sector.  The solution is to address the failures in whatever
>> system is used.  For example, one simple way to fix the task system is
>> to recognize that the workers are able to clear the work unit in less
>> time than assigned, so simply assign more work to the work unit.  This
>> must necessarily be coupled with a strengthened capability of the
>> administration to terminate troublemaking workers (as anyone would gripe
>> at doing more work for the same pay), and heightened accountability of
>> the administration, such as by budget targets.
>>
>> These are just some examples, and are not intended as policy proposals
>> in their current form.
>>
>> -Colin Crossman
>> Walltown
>>
>>
>> Melissa Rooney wrote:
>>
>>>Why not just increase the jobs/streets that the
>>>regular guys have to do each day, and still allow them
>>>to leave when they get the work done...with the
>>>further incentive that if they step up to the plate
>>>with this increased workload, such that the cost of
>>>extra/overtime employment is drastically reduced,
>>>they'll get a raise (or at least a bonus)? No doubt
>>>Durham will still save a lot of money, and the workers
>>>will be happy.
>>>
>>>Melissa Rooney
>>>
>>>--- Ken Gasch <ken.gasch at hldproductions.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Randy,
>>>>
>>>>I think you and I are on the same page with this
>>>>whole thing except for one
>>>>little point.
>>>>
>>>>I think paying by the hour is an old way of
>>>>thinking.  If you want a job
>>>>done, pay for the job.  On trash day, I have a
>>>>little guy that simply has to
>>>>go outside and watch the hydraulic lifters empty the
>>>>cans into the backs of
>>>>the trucks.  Every Friday, these guys are running as
>>>>they go along house to
>>>>house.  As I hold the little guy up so he can get a
>>>>better look, they always
>>>>rock the hydraulic lever and make the cans dance.
>>>>He giggles like you
>>>>wouldn't believe.
>>>>
>>>>Anyway, the point of the story is that I have the
>>>>opportunity to watch these
>>>>guys work week after week and let me tell you, they
>>>>are "moving".  In the
>>>>biz, this is referred to as great American hustle.
>>>>It makes men proud of
>>>>their work.  It lifts morale.  This is because the
>>>>get paid by the job.
>>>>When they complete their route, they are done.  Pay
>>>>them by the hour and you
>>>>will not get a better deal.  They will slow down.  I
>>>>would slow down as
>>>>well.
>>>>
>>>>I used to own a yard service when I was a young lad
>>>>growing up in Dallas.
>>>>My company took care of about 40 yards a week.
>>>>Paying by the hour will kill
>>>>you every time.  You will be running and your helper
>>>>will be walking.  Pay
>>>>by the yard and you are both running.
>>>>
>>>>Besides, paying by the job always give you better
>>>>control over your variable
>>>>costs and eases headaches when it comes to
>>>>budgeting.
>>>>
>>>>Ken Gasch
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: "RW Pickle" <randy at 27beverly.com>
>>>>To: <inc-list at durhaminc.org>
>>>>Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 4:38 PM
>>>>Subject: INC NEWS - other workers wages
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Just to see what some other workers make, I did a
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>random survey. I
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>contacted 2 businesses that use CDL drivers and 2
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>that were in the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>construction business. The going rate for
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>semi-skilled construction labor
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>(large construction firms here locally) is around
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>$8/hr. The going rate
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>for CDL drivers (major concrete company and major
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>bus service in the area
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>as well) is $11.49-13/hr. So I'd have to believe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>the wages for solid waste
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>workers is in line with other industries. I told
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>those who I ask the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>questions of that I would not mention their
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>company name. So that is why I
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>have generalized by industry. But you're welcome
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>to call around for
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>yourself and see. No company paid its employees
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>for time they didn't work
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>unless it was vacation time.
>>>>>
>>>>>I also stopped and asked 6 grounds maintenance
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>workers doing work in a
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>large neighborhood here in Durham. Grounds
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>maintenance is part of living
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>there. All but 2 of these individuals made less
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>than $10/hr. The crew boss
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>made more and one of the six made $10.25. He had
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>been there 5 years.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Just FYI for those who wonder.
>>>>>
>>>>>RWP
>>>>>27 Beverly
>>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>INC-list mailing list
>>>>>INC-list at rtpnet.org
>>>>>http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>INC-list mailing list
>>>>INC-list at rtpnet.org
>>>>http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>__________________________________________________
>>>Do You Yahoo!?
>>>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>>>http://mail.yahoo.com
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>INC-list mailing list
>>>INC-list at rtpnet.org
>>>http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> INC-list mailing list
>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>
>
>
>====================================================================
>This e-mail, and any attachments to it, contains PRIVILEGED AND
>CONFIDENTIAL information intended only for the use of the addressee(s) or
>entity named on the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient of this
>e-mail, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the
>intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading,
>dissemination or copying of this e-mail in error is strictly prohibited.
>If you have received this electronic  transmission in error, please notify
>me by telephone (919-489-0576) or by electronic  mail to the sender of
>this email, RW  Pickle (pickle at patriot.net) immediately.
>=====================================================================
>
>_______________________________________________
>INC-list mailing list
>INC-list at rtpnet.org
>http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>
>_______________________________________________
>INC-list mailing list
>INC-list at rtpnet.org
>http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list

More information about the INC-list mailing list