Test User wrote:Why should someone who is 17 or 18 be paid less for doing the same job as someone 30 years older? What makes the work they do worth less £s per hour compared to someone else doing the exact same work?
Companies shouldn't be paying people what they, you or I have decided they're worth, they should be paying them based on what their work is worth.
Not only that but it makes absolutely no sense to encourage illegal hiring practices. It's illegal to hire or refuse to hire based on age so why are we encouraging it by allowing companies to pay younger people less?
I also don't believe that the inexperience argument makes much sense. How often do you see jobs that only pay the minimum wage that also require experience?
It's all bullshit. I've yet to read a good reason for paying two people who do identical work, differently based on age. It negatively discriminates age in a way we wouldn't accept if it was gender or race, and it encourages companies to employ people for reasons other than how well they'll work. Which is interesting, because i've seen a few people in this thread who are critical of JC's proposal to end the encouragement of age-based employment complain in the past when the Sun or the Mail report about how companies are using agencies like Creative Access to ensure that they're receiving applications from BAME job seekers. Their complaint there of course is that people shouldn't be employed based on anything other than job performance. It's almost as if there's some cognitive dissonance going on. Or, more likely, it's just that they hate JC and therefore opposing his policy ideas, particularly his economic ones, is a reflex reaction.
Long response, TU. Thanks.
Agree, age discrimination is wrong. Are you saying that someone of 17 (or 18) will have the same working life experience as someone who is many years older? or, are you saying that there are some jobs that are so, shall we say "easy" that anyone can do them from their first day in the job?
I doubt either you or I are seeking to encourage discrimination in anyone's hiring practices, I'm certainly not.
I've just checked out a couple of job sites, cleaning jobs in Manchester £8.21/hour (or some just say NMW) - I saw a few that mention work experience. I'm sure the "experience" a lot of employers will often look for is the exerience to turn up every day and do the hours that you are expected to do. I'm sure there's nothing worse than running a business when a member of the team doesn't show up reliably, especially when the business depends on all the team being there.
And, I absolutely agree that neither you nor I should be deciding what someone is worth. I don't think JC should be making this judgement either, or any other politician. Set a minimum, yes, OK. But, if you push up the minimum too high - and above the level that the employee is worth - then the business won't employ them and those that aren't worth, at least, the minimum wage might not be employed.