Slashdot Mirror

Slashdot's owners are scam lords. Read the reviews below.

https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Employee-Review-BizX-RVW20868609.htm

I answered you elsewhere, most of the executives (store managers - equivalent to a senior director/VP in most non-retail organizations) make around $75K per year. A few at their corporate ownership - Amazon - probably pull in high 6/low 7 figure. But let's not confuse wealth with income.

Bezos is rich not because of income but because of investment - he founded Amazon, maintains a massive amount of stock, and whilst making $81K per year - on par with a Whole Foods manager, his wealth is massive because the stock he owns - originally worth nothing - has dramatically appreciated in value. But then, he created the company, he invested his own time and equity, and he spent the years building it.

Do NOT confuse wealth with income - they are usually not related.

That discussion isn't really about companies slashing hours to avoid paying benefits, it's about the slashing of hours resulting in potential loss of benefits as a side effect without regard to whether the employer did so intentionally. The "30 to 20 hours" thing in the original post was an anecdotal example from one worker, so it doesn't necessarily represent what's going on here either. It's great that Whole Foods gives benefits to all workers instead of only full-timers, but that isn't necessarily true at some or even most of the companies forced to pay higher wages. However, let's roll with the example we have.

If we completely ignore the potential loss of benefits, the irrationally optimistic vision of "less hours at the same rate of pay" still falls completely flat because a 50% wage increase is required to fully reverse the pay loss stemming from a 33% cut in hours. It is unlikely that the workers affected by this $15 minimum wage, when averaged together, made $10 or less an hour, and Glassdoor says the average base salaries for cashiers and "prepared foods team members" is $11-$12 an hour. Using the lowest of those figures, $11 * 30 = $330/wk, $15 * 20 = $300/wk. That's a 10% pay cut.

"armada" said "the same money for fewer hours of your life is a freaking raise" but I wouldn't call a 10% pay cut a raise. For someone making $1,320/mo to now make $120/mo less, that's a hell of a lot of lost wages and those people are really going to be hurting under this benevolent new minimum wage.

Most of those Whole Foods bosses earn around $75,000 a year. Grocery stores are very low margin outfits, typically around 2%. You cannot carry much salary load at all with such tight margins.

Bob the janitor doesn't work for IBM even though he cleans buildings at IBM. Bob the janitor works for a sub-contractor. He doesn't get IBM stock, if he gets any medical insurance at all it's lousy, and no part of IBM's extra profits make it it him.

Some examples:
https://www.joinabm.com/job/ni...
https://www.glassdoor.com/Bene...

A quick Google search shows that they have one in Alabama and another in Arizona. Also, if you do a job search for data center positions at WF, results for those cities and more turn up.

Furthermore. according to this story, their entire Minnesota data center shut down after the Halon deployed, yet according to this story, the outages were intermittent. Maybe their DR switchover broke?

LOL

Are you suggesting that only Amazon and Jeff Bezos in his infinite wisdom could bring these jobs to NYC?

How about the fact that working for Amazon sucks.

It sucks as a blue-collar worker, and it sucks as a professional too: https://www.glassdoor.com/Revi... (a rating of 3.8 out of 5 for the largest company is not "great" by any stretch)

Its a shit company with shit product. She should've looked at the
Glassdooor reviews and told them to fuck off.

This review nailed it :
https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Employee-Review-WTS-Paradigm-RVW22558549.htm

"[Pros] No positives I can think of"
"[Cons] Work environment is so bad you literally might be shot by a co-worker"

Because it happened at a software consulting firm. Employee reviews makes it sound like a bad place to work: https://www.glassdoor.com/Revi...

Amazon has 566,000 employees (source).

A cynic would say that is only a one time payout of ~$3,533 per employee. A realist would understand that only the bottom rungs of the income ladder should get this money, so let's redo the math:

Amazon has "125,000 full-time hourly associates in the U.S" (source).

Now it's a one time payout of $16,000!

A "warehouse associate" earns ~$13/hr (source).

That is a staggering (/s) $27,040 per year.

Does Bezos really think that the overhead of starting, yet another, charity and its administrative costs is cheaper than just giving his lowest level employees a decent living wage?

This announcement says, yes, he does think that. But you say, that's just stupid.

So a then you would say, who benefits?

The Day 1 Academies Fund "will launch and operate a network of high-quality, full-scholarship, Montessori-inspired preschools in underserved communities," Bezos said.

Bezos said that the preschools will be directly operated by the organization and "use the same set of principles that have driven Amazon."

"Most important among those will be genuine, intense customer obsession," Bezos wrote. "The child will be the customer."

(source)

"The child will be the customer."...

In the age of DeVos, Bezos is going to open private charter schools, for the youngest among us, and run them like a business, but the difference is that the "child will be the customer".

Smell something?

Would someone learn the likes and dislikes of these children and slowly build an "anonymized" ad profile for that child, following them throughout their life span, knowing exactly what products they are likely and not likely to buy?

Now the decision to pass over that wage increase and open a "charity" makes sense.

Just read the reviews of their employees, mentions out-of-date systems, low pay, or no pay, unrealistic deadlines, high turnover, etc. Not a good way to run a company in the long run. If their competition cannot price their pharmaceuticals any lower, why should this company do the same?

https://www.glassdoor.com/Revi...

Then you know wrong and I don't believe you looked very hard. Target give vaca and paid time off.

The NSA and other gov agencies just don't pay enough for your laundry list. Working for "God and country" doesn't fit with the US capitalism idea very well. They are on the low end of almost all salary ranges; and that is BEFORE you eliminate about 95% of the potential people with your list.

What does "politics" or "faith group" even mean in your post? Many would point to a good chunk of our currently elected lawmakers in the Federal government who are associated with Dominion theology, "end timers", and other now-deeply ingrained ideals. Are you wanting non-political persons only? According to the Eastern Orthodox church, every Christian religious group that is associated with the Baptists is considered a "heretical cult". One third of the current US population doesn't believe anything the US intelligence agencies say about foreign politics and blindly believes anything Trump says, another third think his actions are nearly treasonous, so the idea of a "political litmus test" is a very tricky barrier; and is probably illegal anyway (there are Supreme Court cases around this). We currently have POTUS staff who are potentially (I say this because there has yet to be hearings, trials, or such) in violation the Hatch Act, so even the very top of this food chain is contaminated.

If you define a "criminal past" as the FBI does, that only eliminates around 29% of the US population. If you take it further, and cull out anyone with any negative relations with law enforcement, including non-felonies, then it's more like half of black males and almost 40 percent of white males. Combined with the low pay, and one ends up in the position we are currently in: not enough people to do the job.

While I understand what your getting at, your idea would require a huge, non-partisan overhaul of the underlying "security form" system. We can't even manage to approve money to have a plan to secure our elections in any meaningful way, and your idea goes directly against the ideals of the current administration and many elected officials. They want people who believe in the scourge of the "Deep State", not people who are willing to go work for the Deep State...by which I define "deep state" as the unelected bureaucratic apparatus that keeps the government functional in it's day-to-day workings. Many of the appointed Cabinet heads have publicly said they want to dismantle the bulk of the Federal government, so good luck finding anyone that fits your list who is willing to take home 80% of the average wage for their position.

https://www.glassdoor.com/Sala...

https://www.glassdoor.com/Revi...

It's just people publishing garbage to make some money and make their own names. It's not serious journalism.

Do you actually have information about this, or are you just making things up? Reviews of Microsoft as a place to work are pretty positive. They have their issues as a company, but abusing their workers isn't one of them. As a rule, large US tech companies treat their engineers well. They may be dysfunctional in a lot of ways, but they pay well, give good benefits, and don't demand insane hours.

Low skilled workers are another matter. You really don't want to end up filling boxes in one of Amazon's warehouses. But they aren't going to waste H1Bs on jobs like that. Unskilled workers are easy to find.

I'm not sure from where the idea that accounting is paid better than IT comes from. Unless by 'accounting' you mean CFO of big company, I don't think this is the case.

It is bit hard to qualify what you mean by 'good accounting' and 'good IT', but let's try.

First anecdotal evidence - average IT guy in my area (Central Europe, medium sized city) earns 2-3 times more than average accounting guy.

Then let's look at some official stats for US.
https://www.glassdoor.com/Sala...
https://www.glassdoor.com/Sala...

Accountant - 55k average, 40-74 range. Programmer - 66k average, 50-90k range.

Let's switch to 'good'. Large company, 15+ years experience.
Accountant - 59k average. Programmer - 84k average.

Not only IT is paid considerably better, but also their experience is better rewarded (while with accounting job, it seems that you will move from 48k to 59k in 15 years of experience).

I'm not sure from where the idea that accounting is paid better than IT comes from. Unless by 'accounting' you mean CFO of big company, I don't think this is the case.

It is bit hard to qualify what you mean by 'good accounting' and 'good IT', but let's try.

First anecdotal evidence - average IT guy in my area (Central Europe, medium sized city) earns 2-3 times more than average accounting guy.

Then let's look at some official stats for US.
https://www.glassdoor.com/Sala...
https://www.glassdoor.com/Sala...

Accountant - 55k average, 40-74 range. Programmer - 66k average, 50-90k range.

Let's switch to 'good'. Large company, 15+ years experience.
Accountant - 59k average. Programmer - 84k average.

Not only IT is paid considerably better, but also their experience is better rewarded (while with accounting job, it seems that you will move from 48k to 59k in 15 years of experience).

According to the same source as TFA, H1B workers don't depress native wages. In fact, they are on average paid slightly above market rate.

https://www.glassdoor.com/rese...

They certainly do depress wages for tech jobs, as your own citation states:

By contrast, there are many examples of jobs where H1B workers usually earn less than U.S. workers — despite legal requirements that employers pay “prevailing wages” to H1B workers. Four examples of these types of jobs are shown in the table below: data scientist, financial analyst, programmer analyst, and software engineer. In these cases, H1B workers usually earn less than otherwise similar U.S. workers. For example, among software engineers, H1B workers earned less than or equal to U.S. workers in every city we examined, ranging from equal median salaries in Seattle to -17 percent less in Chicago. Similarly, H1B salaries for programmer analysts were lower in nine of the 10 cities we examined, ranging from -1 percent in Atlanta to -28 percent in Chicago and Washington, D.C. (H1B pay for programmer analysts was 7 percent higher in one city: Philadelphia).

According to the same source as TFA, H1B workers don't depress native wages. In fact, they are on average paid slightly above market rate.

https://www.glassdoor.com/rese...

How's that $15/hr min wage working for you?

Priced yourself right out of a job, didn't you?

Let me show you how this works out:

Let's say a Caliburger grill cook - a burger flipper - makes $9/hr. This is what Caliburger pays for a "prep" position. It may be more than that; Caliburger pays up to $11/hr for a lead cashier, but we'll go with the lowball.

Caliburger is open from 11am to 10 pm, or a total of 11 hours a day. The fry cook position has to be paid all those hours - not to the same employee in order to avoid overtime, but still, all the hours are worked in that position, so this is a fair way to look at the costs.

That's $9 x 11 hours x 365 days, which is $36,135.00 gross salary costs. Now add the per-employee tax overhead, and you're pretty near $40,000.00 / year, not counting any other costs such as uniforms, cleaning uniforms, liability insurance, employee benefits if any, etc. But you know what? We won't even count the tax costs. So:

The robot costs $60,000.00 (minimum... I presume there are added-cost options, but for $60k you get your burger flipper replaced, so we'll just focus on that.)

Let's look at a 5-year cost comparison, which I am presuming is the lifespan of the robot. That's very conservative in terms of hardware, but let's assume that a much better model will be made available and purchased within 5 years.

o The robot costs $60k x 1 ... which is $60,000.00
o The employee costs $36,135.00 x 5, which is $180,675.00

This means that in 5 years, Caliburger saves somewhere in the range of $120,000.00 by moving this job from an employee to the robot.

This is at $9 per hour. Not $15 per hour.

Which I've shown here is that the assumption that a raise to $15 / hour is what will create the motivation for a business like Caliburger to utilize a robot like this is nonsense.

The motivation already exists at the lowest income levels Caliburger is already providing. Sure, there's an even better case to be made for a $15 / hour wage, but the point is, the case was already made.

So no, the $15 minimum wage has nothing to do with this at all.

1) Caliburger Salary Reference

2) Caliburger Hours Reference

There are companies like Costco & Quick Trip that treat their employees pretty well

QuikTrip appears to pay less than $10/hr for regular employees and $12-13/hr for managers, so not sure of your point there.

Costco does indeed pay its employees more -- the few employees that remain, that is. Costco figured out how to minimize human labor early on and has been using wages to put pressure on its competitors who actually employ more warm bodies (and for favorable PR for people like you who just look at the raw hourly wages and think they're a bunch of humanitarians). Here's the take-home from an article on the subject from 2006:

• Costco has sales of $51 billion, 110,000 employees (45% part time, similar to WalMart isn't it?) and WalMart has sales (in North America) of $191 billion and 1.3 million associates. So Costco has sales of some $465,000 per employee and WalMart $147,000 per employee. . . . So, in theory, we could in fact get WalMart to pay the same as Costco by making similarly efficient use of labor: that is, firing between two thirds and three quarters of their staff.

and policies like Single Payer health care and basic income are gaining in popularity (with Single Payer being supported by a majority of voters).

You're telling me that the majority of people who were asked if they want More Free Shit said yes? Knock me over with a feather. I'll take a wild guess that the Single Payer polls just ask the question in a vacuum and don't bother to mention the rationing, wait times, and lack of provider choice that result from government-mandated fee structures, but I'd be happy to look at raw data that suggests otherwise.

We don't know why Mozilla Foundation has changed from accepting money from Microsoft to accepting money from Google. We are, apparently, not allowed to know. One possibility is that Google is willing to pay more. Another possibility is that there was a breakdown in the relationship between the very poorly managed Yahoo and Microsoft. (Although poorly managed, one reason Yahoo has money is that Yahoo is part owner of Alibaba. See, for example, Why worthless CEOs laugh all the way to the bank. May 20, 2017)

During the time the money from Microsoft dominated Mozilla Foundation's income, Mozilla Foundation released a version of Firefox that removed the ability to use most add-ons. Add-ons are the reason people prefer Firefox. We aren't allowed to kinow why Mozilla Foundation makes its decisions.

During the time that Microsoft dominated, Mozilla Foundation changed the Firefox user interface in a way that had a negative influence on acceptance of Firefox.

During the time that Microsoft dominated, Microsoft tried other ways to dominate: Mozilla and Google accuse Microsoft of unfair browser competition (May 10, 2012)

That is, in fact, what happened, according to news reports at links I gave.

Other people who have commented and I feel uncomfortable with the fact that we aren't allowed to know how Mozilla Foundation spends its money.

The world needs a browser that is not controlled in a hidden way. At one time, I thought we had that. When Google was paying $300,000,000 per year to Mozilla Foundation, to make Google search the default Firefox search engine. it appeared that Google was not negatively influencing the development of Firefox. Of course, we don't know what actually happened.

I look at this story and see only one thing, a corrupt bipartisan effort to digitally corrupt upcoming elections behind the lies of securing it and surprise, surprise with the help of killing net neutrality, the 99% are all trolls to be censored and full of nothing but lies and propaganda and the 1% are descended from Gods and are to be believed in everything they say. They are still carrying on with this shit with zero public evidence, they are corrupt and fucking lying and about to try to get a whole lot more corrupt.

After over a year, still no evidence publicly provided apart from all the evidence of corruption with the US government, the Democrats and the Republicans, evidence all over the place and the proof of corruption, the continued failure to prosecute. So bipartisan, well that is a typical description of US politics to right parties sharing power and as for Harvard http://lesswrong.com/lw/jwh/wh... and https://www.glassdoor.com/Revi... and https://www.therichest.com/ric.... Yes 'Hardvard' a paragon of virtue, integrity and honesty, fuck you people will believe any dribble the 1% serve (this crap absolutely stinks to high heaven of corruption).

White trash likes to buy gucci, they're still trash.

https://www.glassdoor.com/Revi...

Anyhow walmart will fail to become amazon.

and it works great.

At work we have a very nice looking executive conference room that was mostly configured before I worked here. If you look at that picture the audio equipment is behind the wall with the pictures on it. The main screen is behind the photographer, and so is the PC that runs the main screen. The tech who did part of the original setup ran an 1/8" to RCA cable from the TV's output all the way to the audio amplifier behind that other wall, past florescent lights and everything else in the ceiling. To say the least there was a buzz in the system that I could sometimes get rid of by wiggling cables, putting a little shielding here or there and praying for the best. I didn't like that solution.

Now, I can work fiber optics, I learned that from my years at NASA. I had never really worked with TOS before beyond using some cheap plastic light-guide short distances on stereo equipment on occasion and with my Turtle Beach headset on my work Mac, main system sound went to the dongle via TOS and the USB portion did voice - an awesome setup on what would have been an awesome headset had they not used the most brittle plastic they could find to mold it. I started calling fiber suppliers looking for the connectors so I could make my own cable - they didn't call back. It took a little research to find out that TOS doesn't work on standard OC3 cable, or any other fiber I have run in the past, part of the reason my suppliers didn't carry it. I also found mixed information about the range of TOS saying it topped out around 15 feet or so, and some giving it a lot more.

I figured out it's a lot like Ethernet - some who learned Ethernet 25 years ago is going to keep in mind there's a limit to accumulative cable length throughout the whole network, the longer you make one cable the shorter the rest have to be, that it's a collision based system where only two systems can talk at a time, etc... Things that used to be true and are still true on really, really old equipment, some of which may still be in use, but using more up to day components there's a new reality. You can now buy TOS in high quality glass fiber, and it will go further. You still have limitations because the width of the fiber has to be "wide" to accommodate signal - at least I assume it does, I don't know if it's single-mode or multi, but I'm assuming it carries a wave form instead of a simple on/off since the requirements seem to stand. I eyeballed the room - I didn't really measure it, and I shopped. I found a 65 ft cable from a company I had never heard of and I have to tell you it works great. No more static, the sound quality is great. The only complaint is they can no longer use the TV remote to change volume, but the volume keys on the keyboard work. Since they only use the Direct TV in that room during really big soccer matches I don't see an issue.

I don't think I could have stretched HDMI that far. I could have converted it to SDI and changed it back to do it, but that would require an active box on both sides since nothing in play supports SDI natively. SDI is great for professional equipment, but the budgets I get to do thing usually don't allow for true professional grade equipment - not to mention pro grade equipment is usually a little behind consumer grade equipment when it comes to screen sizes and other little features that advertising people lock onto and "must have". I think I'm finally past having to explain to desktop users why they're better off with a wired keyboard and an Ethernet cable instead of wireless and WiFi, the power of news and buzz words is incredibly strong to marketing people and even though pure logic can win a lot of arguments, when the person who controls the money wants the biggest things with the right buzz words you sometimes have to get it, and SDI isn't a modern buzzword, even if modern SDI can support 4K.

Fuckoff creimer you've had literally every things working in your favor to be making at least 100k a year by this point in your life with the exception of being you but instead you're making less than a office depot warehouse worker
https://www.glassdoor.com/Sala...

Your stupidity has gotten in the way of literally your entire life. Your "trolls" have been full of actually good advice that could have helped you from becoming the fat loser you are now. I never saw any IT worker whose life would be so improved by quitting to work in a warehouse.

On glassdoor, if you filter to US only, the rating drops from 2.6 to 2.5. I've heard bad things about the site in Indiana.
https://www.glassdoor.com/Revi...

Based on this they top out at $223K. That's like making $40K in Metro-Atlanta. You couldn't afford to live here on that.

Like I tell folks who want to go out there, take your current pay, multiply it times 5 and that's your bottom to keep your lifestyle. Don't forget, between state and Federal and local taxes, you're gonna lose half your pay out there. So, $80K in Atlanta would be like getting $400K in Silly Valley.

My parents live on Shattuck Avenue in Berkeley and I live in Metro-Atalanta. They also own rental property and will not even rent to you unless you make at least $200K a year.

    I'd move back but everyone in Silly Valley wants engineers for cheap.

40K is shit wages even in my neck of the woods (Western Arkansas). Now if you made 223K here, you'd be shitting in tall cotton.

Based on this they top out at $223K. That's like making $40K in Metro-Atlanta. You couldn't afford to live here on that.

Like I tell folks who want to go out there, take your current pay, multiply it times 5 and that's your bottom to keep your lifestyle. Don't forget, between state and Federal and local taxes, you're gonna lose half your pay out there. So, $80K in Atlanta would be like getting $400K in Silly Valley.

My parents live on Shattuck Avenue in Berkeley and I live in Metro-Atalanta. They also own rental property and will not even rent to you unless you make at least $200K a year.
    I'd move back but everyone in Silly Valley wants engineers for cheap.

If you got rid of the pilot and co pilot, you would barely see a blip in your ticket price.

Let's do the math.

2 pilots @ $200k each == $400k
Training etc for those pilots @ $200k each == $400k
1 trip per day assuming 3 weeks vacation a year: 5 * (52 - 3) == 245
Cost of pilot per trip: $800k / 245 == $3.27k

There are approximately 200 seats on a 737, so that's $3.27k / 200 == $16 per ticket potential savings

Now for an airline, that might make sense on a large scale because they'll reap millions a year in savings, but for consumers it's barely a blip on the radar.

These are with conservative estimates. The salary I took was the highest in the range on glassdoor, I'm assuming all their fancy simulator time doubles their salaries, and most pilots fly short haul flights so they rack up multiple flights a day. Wikipedia confirms the number of seats for a 737, but of course if you have a cabin of first class passengers there are less seats, but still it wouldn't matter.

Additionally, insurance companies will likely charge increased premiums for a pilotless craft, so at the end of day the savings will be considerably less.

The only time you would conceivably see a savings big enough to care would be with a transcontinental flight where you might have four or more pilots (because they sleep in shifts and rotate out). But, compared to the ticket price, I suspect the savings will be marginal.

I suspect there would also be additional overhead as pilots have other functions than flying. For instance, determining if a reroute is necessary or if a passenger is fit to fly.

Additional training and delegation of these duties would most likely raise the cost of other crew.

So, in the end, this is a non issue. Until AI auto pilot comes in a cheap as in uber quad copter that will taxi you where you want on demand, we won't see AI in the sky

References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://www.glassdoor.com/Sala...

Small costs add up

The argument that it only saves $x can be said of every other cost saving measure but taken together they amount to quite a bit of money.

There are about 10 million flights per year in the US. Save $3.27k per flight and that is $32.7 Billion. That's real money and pretty close to what the article suggests.

Rerouting is not a difficult task for a computer, or a person on the ground to deal with. Other members of the flight crew are quite able to determine if a passenger is fit to fly, assuming they slip past the people handling boarding the aircraft.

There is no basis for asserting that insurance would be greater for a pilotless aircraft. It is not a great leap to see computers being better pilots than humans. Every bit of learning, either from actual flights or simulations run 24x7 can be easily rolled out to every artificial pilot in the flight as opposed to the slow way humans pass on knowledge and learn.

The belief that humans can't be replaced by computer software is wishful thinking, IMO.

If you got rid of the pilot and co pilot, you would barely see a blip in your ticket price.

Let's do the math.

2 pilots @ $200k each == $400k
Training etc for those pilots @ $200k each == $400k
1 trip per day assuming 3 weeks vacation a year: 5 * (52 - 3) == 245
Cost of pilot per trip: $800k / 245 == $3.27k

There are approximately 200 seats on a 737, so that's $3.27k / 200 == $16 per ticket potential savings

Now for an airline, that might make sense on a large scale because they'll reap millions a year in savings, but for consumers it's barely a blip on the radar.

These are with conservative estimates. The salary I took was the highest in the range on glassdoor, I'm assuming all their fancy simulator time doubles their salaries, and most pilots fly short haul flights so they rack up multiple flights a day. Wikipedia confirms the number of seats for a 737, but of course if you have a cabin of first class passengers there are less seats, but still it wouldn't matter.

Additionally, insurance companies will likely charge increased premiums for a pilotless craft, so at the end of day the savings will be considerably less.

The only time you would conceivably see a savings big enough to care would be with a transcontinental flight where you might have four or more pilots (because they sleep in shifts and rotate out). But, compared to the ticket price, I suspect the savings will be marginal.

I suspect there would also be additional overhead as pilots have other functions than flying. For instance, determining if a reroute is necessary or if a passenger is fit to fly.

Additional training and delegation of these duties would most likely raise the cost of other crew.

So, in the end, this is a non issue. Until AI auto pilot comes in a cheap as in uber quad copter that will taxi you where you want on demand, we won't see AI in the sky

References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://www.glassdoor.com/Sala...

Well I know several guys in road construction and they do very well and they get winter off. I don't think I live in an especially affluent area -Kentucky. If you are building houses you will make very little as a laborer competing against Hispanic labor but union road construction is severely under manned right now and they really need people but can't find kids wanting to go into the trade. I don't know what the best site would be for checking median salaries but here is one: https://www.glassdoor.com/Sala...

So does Apple have "heart" and give 100% covered health care to it's employees too? Because although the health plan is good, it's not covered completely:
https://www.glassdoor.com/Bene...

Sounds like Tim wants the Senate to do something he isn't willing to do himself.

Now, why would not Amazon suggest to and outright push those people into jobs at Amazon? Warehouse workers make about $13/hour?

I'm assuming they have all the workers they need already hired.

Some homeless are that by choice or by some psychological inability to stay put. For others it is the problem of affordability. It only makes sense to offer permanent shelter to the last category — to people, who want a permanent place, but can not pay for it.

Now, why would not Amazon suggest to and outright push those people into jobs at Amazon? Warehouse workers make about $13/hour? And how will these shelters then be different from workers' dormitories?

Personally I don't see anything wrong with it — as long as no one is forced into these shelters, but that's just what might happen, if authorities start picking up homeless pushing them into such facilities to pretty-up the streets. Which would make these people into something unnervingly close to slaves...

The SSA employs over 60,000 people. They aren't cheap. https://www.glassdoor.com/Sala...
That means that it's costing somewhere around $3 billion a year (probably more) to run the program not including pensions for retired employees. And they don't produce anything. They merely add an expense to moving money around. These days, the entire system could be automated.

Medicare doesn't employ nearly as many people directly but the number of people needed by doctors and hospitals to deal with the paperwork is where a lot of money goes.

Wage stagnation has been kind of a constant theme that I think stretches much further back that the great recession. If you're a recent college grad, I'd perhaps recommend checking out Wages on sites like Glassdoor - https://www.glassdoor.com/Revi... - IE tab over to "Wages."

The article is talking about the gap that exists because of reduced hours, child birth, different professions, etc. That's what it aims to remove/reduce. It's also not entirely accurate to say that those factors fully explain the gap. Granted they account for most of it, but about 5-6% remains unexplained. Links here and here.

Why?

* $120K in Silicon Valley for a single person means either soul-destroying commutes or living like a student with three random housemates
https://news.slashdot.org/stor...

In Google's defense, when people try to build relatively affordable housing around SV, towns tend to permit more office space but will not allow more housing -- even as that is starting to change (maybe too little too late though?):
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/1...

Google private buses do make the commutes easier though -- at a social cost:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

* But even if there was cheaper housing, for singles, SV still has a dating problem other than the year 2038:
https://slashdot.org/story/17/...

* Google no longer has quite the reputation it had now that "don't be evil" is just a memory -- especially as Google has become thought of as a key player in the surveillance/malware state (e.g. with Android).

The fundamental problem here is that the software and services the world desperately needs to be resilient, healthy, and free are not the centralized software and services that will make a company like Google the most money (or maybe that much money at all -- e.g. Gnu/etc/Linux/BSD).

* Google's stock is unlikely to appreciate as significantly as in the past given competition, changing digital landscapes, (re)branding issues, falling computer and networking costs makign personal search engines more viable, federated computing and an emerging social semantic desktop, and more

* Google insists everyone work on-site (ironically, for a company about computer mediated experiences) -- and most of the sites are in expensive places to live (and most US jobs are not at the cheaper cost-of-living sites) -- all of which reduces cognitive diversity at Google from a lack of rural perspectives

* Google's 20% time is now 120% time (one big perk gone)
https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...

Also, Google has not figured out how to try new products without then abandoning ones that are not growing and thus alienating both employees and customers (e.g. Google Reader)

* Google tends to screen out qualified employees by a biased hiring process that, reading between the lines, Laszlo Bock, senior vice president of people operations at Google, indirectly admits has failed -- meaning that the current population of Googlers may not be a diverse enjoyable group of people to work with -- while also indirectly implying a very high fine-grained surveillance of all employee activities:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06...

* Googlers tend to have little work-life balance, working long hours (made worse by being on-site), meaning Google can't readily attract older workers who have families or participate in community obligations or take vacations
https://www.glassdoor.com/Revi...
"Cons: Absolutely no work life balance. Deteriorating health conditions thereafter."

* But even if Google could boast work-life balance to be of interest to older workers, Google, like most SV companies practices rampant age discrimination anyway

For example:
http://www.computerworld.com/a...

Not that the last is specific to only G

Unfortunately, these jobs pay about like Walmart employee.

Jobs are good, but these trends in employment resonate on target with those who say we are the first generation in a long time who will not leave a better life for our children.

What do you expect after 8 years of trying to "remake our economy"...

trying? No credit for rebuilding after the greatest collapse since the collapse in 1929? No credit for the stock market not just recovering, but at record highs? No credit for unemployment falling to under 5% (Yes, we all know that's funny counting, but when unemployment was over 10% in 2008, that was funny counting then too.)

I don't know how your 401K is doing, but mine has grown 10% per year, on average, over the last eight years. That's exclusive of what I've added over the last eight years.

... in ways that make close-minded, sheltered, WHITE suburban "progressives" happy?

versus the close-minded, sheltered white suburban conservatives? Frankly you don't win points by being patronizing.

"Drive for $15"? So what if it makes minority workers with no skills

That's your code word for blacks and hispanics, yes?

because they come out of failed schools

whose fault is that?

too expensive to compete in the labor market, thus locking them into a cycle of poverty?

so your solution is to keep them in poverty anyway. So they can stay on SNAP at the rest of our expense? indefinitely.

And BTW, $15/hour seems to work just fine in, e.g., Europe and Australia. Somehow they can still sell a Whopper combo for $5 while paying the worker bees a decent wage that doesn't require them to also be on food assistance in order to survive.

It makes sheltered white suburban "progressives" feel good about themselves.

again, not winning points. I'm pretty sure I'm not sheltered. I feel good about doing good things. Some would label them Christian things. You probably call yourself a Christian. If you do, I'd probably label you a hypocrite.

"War on coal"? So what if it regressively makes electricity more expensive and disproportionately hurting the poor, it makes sheltered white suburban "progressives" feel good about themselves.

I'm sensing a theme. Did "progressives" abuse you as a child or something? Back on topic. Yeah, keep your head buried in the sand. Ignore the science. Let's keep burning coal – because it's cheap, and it'll keep a few thousand coal miners in West Virginia employed. Keeping them employed like this probably will end up being the most expensive welfare ever when the climate really starts to warm up. But sure, you won, we're get over it. Well, until we win again. Will you get over it like you told us to?

"Ban fracking!" So what if it regressively makes energy, food, and everything else more expensive and limits job growth for the growing US population, it makes sheltered white suburban "progressives" feel good about themselves.

You have a real jones going on for sheltered white suburban progressives, don't you? I'm beginning to think that you're either Kellyann Conway or Steve Bannon.

You need to lay off the Rush Limbaugh, Breitbart, and Faux News for awhile. You'd be surprised how good it feels once you're not being brainwashed with that drivel. You'll be amazed at how good you feel when you start thinking for yourself again.

But back to the topic at hand: So instead you propose we should keep energy, food, and everything else artificially less expensive while simultaneously destroying the environment because you don't believe the science.

Yeah it's real tough to take you seriously. Have a nice day Kellyann.

Unfortunately, these jobs pay about like Walmart employee.

Jobs are good, but these trends in employment resonate on target with those who say we are the first generation in a long time who will not leave a better life for our children.

Go ahead and type "software" into that search box at the top of the page. Doesn't look quite like slave wages from here. Yeah, I know that most of the jobs are warehouse type jobs, and they don't pay much. I'm guessing that's why, when I was a kid, my father told me to get an education so I could work with my brain instead of my back.

Unfortunately, these jobs pay about like Walmart employee.

Jobs are good, but these trends in employment resonate on target with those who say we are the first generation in a long time who will not leave a better life for our children.

Which generation is that? They've been saying "this generation won't do as well as their parents" since after the baby boomers...

Unfortunately, these jobs pay about like Walmart employee.

Jobs are good, but these trends in employment resonate on target with those who say we are the first generation in a long time who will not leave a better life for our children.

What do you expect after 8 years of trying to "remake our economy" in ways that make close-minded, sheltered, WHITE suburban "progressives" happy?

"Drive for $15"? So what if it makes minority workers with no skills because they come out of failed schools too expensive to compete in the labor market, thus locking them into a cycle of poverty? It makes sheltered white suburban "progressives" feel good about themselves.

"War on coal"? So what if it regressively makes electricity more expensive and disproportionately hurting the poor, it makes sheltered white suburban "progressives" feel good about themselves.

"Ban fracking!" So what if it regressively makes energy, food, and everything else more expensive and limits job growth for the growing US population, it makes sheltered white suburban "progressives" feel good about themselves.

Jobs are good, but these trends in employment resonate on target with those who say we are the first generation in a long time who will not leave a better life for our children.

According to Glassdoor:

https://www.glassdoor.com/Sala...

~240k

So Cook gets ~37X what a seasoned engineer gets. That's relatively low compared to most large companies. In fact, ~9M/year is damn low. Marissa did little for Yahoo other than spend other people's money to buy failed ideas and she still got roughly 20M/year.

People commenting are just guessing.

They used to have ONE or two full-time engineers running the entire site till like... 2008 or so. Then they started hiring TONS of people running the "Foundation" including marketing, events, charity shit, "diversity consultant" hires. Basically, an army of losers who don't do anything productive and spend their time justifying their existence and partying.

Basically, Wikipedia has become the US college system. A few productive teachers, surrounded by an army of "administrators" and their assistants... and their assistants... and their assistants.

Hell, check out one of their own projections. Only 35% is engineering. That's pretty much the opposite of "lean" for a company that PRODUCES NO CONTENT.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

But don't take my word for it. Check the glass door:

https://www.glassdoor.com/Revi...

>This is an organization in crisis. It is highly dysfunctional, there is a strong culture of secrecy, which is surprising for an organization working in open knowledge. Teams are siloed and isolated, C-levels disagree on direction, ED has lost the support needed to do her job, BoT is in a freeze and too weak to drive change. It is a toxic and depressing place to work.

>Bureaucracy and secrecy creeps in unless regularly checked. Our Board sometimes wants us to be a venture-style tech company rather than a knowledge-empowerment nonprofit. Community consultation adds a layer of complexity to every new venture (but its worth it!).

>PHP. Low pay. Fear of changes. Top management has almost completely flipped since Lila took over in 2015. (including bosses who have come and gone since then) It's really tough to get work done when your boss keeps changing.

>Many mid-level managers are inexperienced and have trouble supporting their employees. Overall lack of strategy and lack of will to make positive change. The communication can be disrespectful. The foundation values diversity but fails to make it one of their own priorities.

>Politics! Politics! Politics! Performance review process outdated.

>Tolerance of non performers, Hostile behaviors by some staff threaten continued diversity/innovation.

Average professor salary: $114,000. Many climate scientists are professors, so you're probably wrong. Not that "six figures" == "rich"

Position Description: ... The C team works closely with Bjarne Stroustrup to help the firm adopt a modern C approach to application and infrastructure development.,,