"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 12/12/2013 8:44 AM, Gary wrote:
>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 00:15:40 -0500, jmcquown wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/11/2013 11:55 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Or do you think
>>>>> Jill might pull an Elaine Benes on the pasta primavera? ;-)
>>>>>
>>>> Sorry, too lazy to care who Elaine Benes is. I'm obviously not
>>>> planning
>>>> to do whatever she did to be banned from a restaurant kitchen.
>>>
>>> That must have been one hell of a deep cave you lived in if you don't
>>> know who Elaine Benes is. Perhaps you're just not used to seeing it
>>> spelled out (I had to look it up myself).
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> I also had no idea who Elaine Benes is until I looked her up. I knew
>> about Elaine from Seinfeld but never knew her last name.
>>
>> G.
>>
> Oh, is *that* who he meant?! Must have been the Soup Nazi episode.

I didn't know either but I didn't watch Seinfeld much.

"Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
.. .
> In article >,
> Ophelia > wrote:
>>
>>Oh dear We have a National Minimum wage law set in law
>>
>>https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates
>
> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health insurance,
> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
>
> We can account for the differences in cost of living and exchange rate
> by using the Big Mac index:
> http://www.economist.com/blogs/graph.../daily-chart-3
>
> It costs $2.50 to $2.99 in the U.S., so it takes about 24 minutes
> to earn a Big Mac at the federal minimum wage. The average in
> England (only data I could find) is 2.89 (sorry, no pound symbol
> here). Minimum wage appears to be 6.31 for adults. It appears to
> take 27 minutes to earn a Big Mac in England.
>
> At first glance, the U.S. minimum wage worker appears better off.
> House is very difficult here, though, since we have nothing
> like council houses/flats. And, of course, the American workers
> will have to pay for all of their own medical expenses.
> So the minimum wage worker might be better off in England.
>
> Sorry I couldn't find anything for Scotland with a quick google.
>
> Cindy Hamilton

I think taxes are higher in the UK but I don't know. They also seem to
tolerate squatters. Or they used to. I had a friend who was offered a job
in Italy some years ago. Long story short, it turned out there was no job.
His neighbor was in love with a woman and had a child by her. She moved to
Italy. He wanted to go there to be with her but sadly she had no interest
in him. He also did not want to go there alone so concocted this story to
get my friend to go along. At their going away party, the neighbor got
drunk and tearfully confessed to me that there were no jobs! I think the
guy was mentally ill. I did try to tell my friend this but he pooh poohed
the notion and told me not to worry about it.

They actually managed to survive in Italy for a little while, mainly through
my friend getting bits of work here and there. He had worked in
restaurants, designed his own fashions and did some runway modeling over the
years. He did have the right build for it and was attractive but was also a
big klutz so he never would have been able to make modeling a career. He
was more like one of those people they would call at the last minute. Like.
Uh oh. So and so is sick or didn't show up. Who can we get? Well, we used
Doug that one time. We'll call him!

Their main difficulty in Italy was that they didn't speak the language so
they traveled around as finances would allow and finally wound up in England
where they were able to squat in some house until they had saved up enough
money (working under the table) to get back home. They weren't even gone
for a year. Not sure exactly how long they were out of the country for. My
friend was so embarrassed by the whole thing that he said he did not come
straight back here, but instead moved in with his grandparents for a few
weeks and then into a motel room, subsisting mainly on lettuce and carrots.

I know that sort of thing does go on here but I believe it is a lot harder
to do. We did have squatters living in an abandoned school across the
street from us and they were in the midst of a legal battle to remove them.
My friend said that nobody bothered them at all when they were squatting.

What we do have here (in Seattle) is tent city. I used to think that the
majority of the people who lived there had some sort of problem that made
them not want to conform to society and I know that some are that way. But
recently, I discovered that a whole lot of young adults that I had heard of
(but did not know personally) had to move there.

They are all around the age of 25 and had been employed for years, mainly in
the fast food or retail industry. They never achieved getting full time
hours. Their parents kicked them out of the house as soon as they graduated
from high school. Many came from a foreign country and came from a large
family, poor and living in a small apartment. They were kicked out with
just the clothes on their backs.

At various points in time they got together in larger or smaller groups and
rented a house or apartment together but for some reason never managed to be
able to stay in any one place for very long. From the stories I had heard,
none were particularly responsible and did some typical guy things like not
picking up after themselves and not seeming to care if something happened
where they were living, like a hole getting put in a wall or a cat peeing on
the rug. Did not sound too good. But they blithered about like this for a
few years, finally winding up in tent city.

Now I am going to sound like some old fuddy duddy but... Stuff like this
does seem like a problem with the younger generation. Many of these young
adults were raised by two parents who worked, put them in day care or other
activities and didn't do a heck of a lot of parenting. These young adults
seem to have no meaning to their lives. They merely exist. It's sad.

"Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
.. .
>> Makes you wonder why anyone will work there
>
> Lack of other opportunities. No skills, manufacturing jobs offshored.

I was saddened to hear yesterday that one of my former coworkers and friends
just went to work for Walmart. He is slightly younger than me but somewhere
around the age of 50. He is Latino and does speak English although he
doesn't come across particularly well. For instance, he would say things
like, "He bees doing it wrong!" And he used a lot of slang in his speech.
You could always understand what he meant but in listening to him, he came
across as uneducated. Add into that, he is a very flamboyant person and
small in stature. Yes, he is *** and very obviously so. Great friend and
wonderful person to be around but... Does not exactly present the most
professional manner for most retail type jobs. And I think retail is the
only thing he has ever done. He was in management. Not sure what job he
got at Walmart or which one he is working for.

He is my friend on Facebook but I haven't had much contact with him since I
got married and subsequently moved out of the area. I do know that he had
moved back to CA for a while to look for work. But he didn't find any so
came back here.

I am not going to totally knock Walmart. My dad used to tell me that they
were a good thing because they moved into rural areas where there otherwise
would be no jobs. But... I also don't think they pay a living wage. I
have another former coworker and friend who used to work for Walmart and she
said overall, they treated their employees better than K Mart did. K Mart
was a great place to work for when I first started working there but perhaps
I only thought that because I was 19 and didn't know any better. At that
age I didn't want for anything more than to get by week to week. Needed
enough money for food and rent and hopefully maybe an extra $20 a month or
so for savings. Oh how times change! But they did used to have a very good
benefits package and gave raises quickly. It's not that way now. Or so
I've been told.

Am even more worried about another friend who is a couple of years older
than me. He got laid off perhaps a year or two ago and I don't think has
found a job since. Heard that his mom just died and when I got married and
left here, he was living with his mom. Not sure where he is currently
living. But it can be very rough once you hit 50 and have to find a new
job. Particularly if you didn't finish college. He was in law school but
then his dad (a judge) died and he took it very hard and couldn't bring
himself to finish school.

"Brooklyn1" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 19:46:16 GMT, (Cindy Hamilton)
> wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>>Ophelia > wrote:
>>>
>>>Oh dear We have a National Minimum wage law set in law
>>>
>>>https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates
>>
>>We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
>>will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
>>don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health insurance,
>>retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
>
> You make is sound like the Walmart employment ad states: only those
> who've undergone a frontal lobotomy need apply... if people are not
> happy with the details of the job they are under no obligation
> whatsoever to accept that employment or am I missing something?

Sometimes people just have to take a job, any job! What do you do when you
get laid off? Maybe you get unemployment for a while. But then it runs
out. Then what do you do? If you are a single person, chances are you
won't qualify for any sort of aid. And if you have kids, you might but...
You are still expected to work. Sometimes a job, any job is better than no
job.

In article >, Sqwertz
> wrote:

> 98% of restaurants have at least one microwave oven. Heck, they were
> invented for restaurants.

I'm sure they were, but the first time I saw a microwave, in the
(late?) sixties in the wild, was in a liquor store that served burritos
to go. I didn't really trust the damned things, but the liquor worked
well enough.

leo

"Jacopo Peterman" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 07:45:14 -0800, sf wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 14:53:32 GMT, (Cindy Hamilton)
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> Sqwertz > wrote:
>>>>On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 00:15:40 -0500, jmcquown wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/11/2013 11:55 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Or do you think
>>>>>> Jill might pull an Elaine Benes on the pasta primavera? ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, too lazy to care who Elaine Benes is. I'm obviously not
>>>>> planning
>>>>> to do whatever she did to be banned from a restaurant kitchen.
>>>>
>>>>That must have been one hell of a deep cave you lived in if you don't
>>>>know who Elaine Benes is. Perhaps you're just not used to seeing it
>>>>spelled out (I had to look it up myself).
>>>
>>> Not everyone has seen Seinfeld. I haven't.
>>>
>>> Obviously I've heard of it, and knew it had a character named Elaine.
>>> At least, I could correctly answer the question, "Did 'Seinfeld' have
>>> a character named Elaine?" even if my answer to "Name the characters
>>> on 'Seinfeld'" would be "Um... Seinfeld?"
>>
>> Now you know what he does when he's not trolling 95 different usenet
>> groups.
>
> Aww, are you ladies feeling left out because you haven't seen one of
> the top 3 television series of all time?
>
> BTW Barbie, the 95-group troller is your boyfriend Casa Boner. This
> just adds more credibility to the theory that YOU are the projecting
> Casa Boner. You've already proved your psychoness under your own nym
> that it only stands to reason you'd invent another nym to air the rest
> of that pent-up loonyness. A Genuine psycho sock puppet.

I rarely watch Prime Time TV, partly because I am often not home at that
time and partly due to no interest. The few Seinfeld episodes that I did
see were at my MIL's house and re-runs. She loved the show. I had no
problems with it. Just wouldn't make it a priority. I think I saw the
episode where they visited Jerry's parents and Elaine had to sleep on the
pullout couch with the bar that hurt her back. That one struck home because
every time we had overnight guests, that was me. My mom would never believe
me about the bar.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 10:43:23 -0500, jmcquown wrote:
>
>> Someone here said "every" restaurant has microwave
>> ovens. I sincerely doubt that.
>
> 98% of restaurants have at least one microwave oven. Heck, they were
> invented for restaurants.

I would imagine that they would. I can even remember the signs about
"Microwave in use" for people with pacemakers. Haven't seen such a sign in
a long time. Does that not apply any more?

"Julie Bove" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> In article >,
>> Ophelia > wrote:
>>>
>>>Oh dear We have a National Minimum wage law set in law
>>>
>>>https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates
>>
>> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
>> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
>> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health insurance,
>> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
>>
>> We can account for the differences in cost of living and exchange rate
>> by using the Big Mac index:
>> http://www.economist.com/blogs/graph.../daily-chart-3
>>
>> It costs $2.50 to $2.99 in the U.S., so it takes about 24 minutes
>> to earn a Big Mac at the federal minimum wage. The average in
>> England (only data I could find) is 2.89 (sorry, no pound symbol
>> here). Minimum wage appears to be 6.31 for adults. It appears to
>> take 27 minutes to earn a Big Mac in England.
>>
>> At first glance, the U.S. minimum wage worker appears better off.
>> House is very difficult here, though, since we have nothing
>> like council houses/flats. And, of course, the American workers
>> will have to pay for all of their own medical expenses.
>> So the minimum wage worker might be better off in England.
>>
>> Sorry I couldn't find anything for Scotland with a quick google.
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton
>
> I think taxes are higher in the UK but I don't know. They also seem to
> tolerate squatters. Or they used to.

It has been illegal to squat in Scotland for a long time, and recently it
also became illegal in England


--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>
> >> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
> >> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
> >> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health insurance,
> >> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there's no law requiring private
companies to pay extra benefits for full time employees. Unionized
workers might get this but unions have also run many manufacturers
offshore. They were a good thing once but have since demanded too
much.

People take the financial risk of starting a company in order to *make
money*, not to provide jobs for their neighbors. The govt. set pay
standards low with their minimum wage. All of these low paying jobs
will remain low as long as there are people willing to work for what's
offered. In most cases, you start out low but if you stick with the
company, show up on time, and work hard, you can move "up the ladder"
in pay.

I find it interesting how many here have singled out Walmart to
boycott.
Do a google search for salary (store of your choice) and you'll see
that Walmart actually pays more per hour than KMart and Target....and
many other retail stores and fast food places. Real nice restaurants
often pay even less than minimum wage and let the customers make up
for it with tips.

Most construction companies don't automatically pay benefits. Most do
start out at a higher wage because there's a lot of physical work
involved. Stay with the company, develop a skill and you'll start
making more per hour. Be a valuable, reliable employee and they might
also add benefits just to keep you with them. There are no guarantees
in life.

G.

Ophelia wrote:
>
> Oh dear, I said I wouldn't do this Ok I am done)
>
> Before anyone shouts at me it is all Cindy's fault))))

I AGREE! It IS all Cindy's fault. I just responded to her too even
though I know I will envoke the wrath of some here.

G.

Julie Bove wrote:
>
> Sometimes a job, any job is better than no
> job.

Well said, Julie. And if it's not a good job, treat it as temporary.

G.

In article >, says...

> I think taxes are higher in the UK but I don't know.

True; but people in the UK working full time for minimum wage, pay
very little income tax on it; all low-wage parents automatically qualify
for a range of state child benefits and many also qualify for
housing/rent subsidy. And all get full healthcare free at the point of
delivery.

> They also seem to
> tolerate squatters. Or they used to.

Rubbish

Janet UK

In article >, says...
>
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> >
> > >> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
> > >> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
> > >> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health insurance,
> > >> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
>
> Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there's no law requiring private
> companies to pay extra benefits for full time employees.

In the UK there is, and partimers share the same entitlements.

Janet UK

"Ophelia" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> "Julie Bove" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
>> .. .
>>> In article >,
>>> Ophelia > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Oh dear We have a National Minimum wage law set in law
>>>>
>>>>https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates
>>>
>>> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
>>> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
>>> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health
>>> insurance,
>>> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
>>>
>>> We can account for the differences in cost of living and exchange rate
>>> by using the Big Mac index:
>>> http://www.economist.com/blogs/graph.../daily-chart-3
>>>
>>> It costs $2.50 to $2.99 in the U.S., so it takes about 24 minutes
>>> to earn a Big Mac at the federal minimum wage. The average in
>>> England (only data I could find) is 2.89 (sorry, no pound symbol
>>> here). Minimum wage appears to be 6.31 for adults. It appears to
>>> take 27 minutes to earn a Big Mac in England.
>>>
>>> At first glance, the U.S. minimum wage worker appears better off.
>>> House is very difficult here, though, since we have nothing
>>> like council houses/flats. And, of course, the American workers
>>> will have to pay for all of their own medical expenses.
>>> So the minimum wage worker might be better off in England.
>>>
>>> Sorry I couldn't find anything for Scotland with a quick google.
>>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>
>> I think taxes are higher in the UK but I don't know. They also seem to
>> tolerate squatters. Or they used to.
>
> It has been illegal to squat in Scotland for a long time, and recently it
> also became illegal in England

Ah, okay. The squatter I knew did it in the 80's.

Ophelia wrote:
>
> It has been illegal to squat in Scotland for a long time, and recently it
> also became illegal in England

So what do they do with the caught squatters there now? Let them squat
in prison at taxpayer's expense? Just wondering.

G.

On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 20:42:37 -0000, "Ophelia"
> wrote:

>
>
> "Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
> .. .
> > In article >,
> > Ophelia > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>"Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>> In article >,
> >>> Ophelia > wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>Oh dear We have a National Minimum wage law set in law
> >>>>
> >>>>https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates
> >>>
> >>> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
> >>> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
> >>> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health
> >>> insurance,
> >>> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
> >>
> >> Makes you wonder why anyone will work there
> >
> > Lack of other opportunities. No skills, manufacturing jobs offshored.
>
> OK. We have that here too with the huge number of immigrants in many places
> and the dumbing down of education in many schools. Even many university
> graduates can't find work any more The situation is not good.
>
> Our situation is improving but the young are finding it very hard:
>
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...h-8935723.html
>
> The jobless rate among under-25s is now 3.74 times the adult rate, up from
> 3.5 times the adult rate a year ago.
>
> More than 950,000 young people are now unemployed and almost a third (30 per
> cent) of them have been looking for work for more than a year. The latest
> official monthly statistics will be published today.

That pretty much mirrors what's happening over here. So much for the
Trickle Down theory.
>
> Oh dear, I said I wouldn't do this Ok I am done)
>
> Before anyone shouts at me it is all Cindy's fault))))

Yeah, yeah... blame the one in the hoop skirt. She's an easy target.


--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

Janet wrote:
>
> In article >, says...
>
> > I think taxes are higher in the UK but I don't know.
>
> True; but people in the UK working full time for minimum wage, pay
> very little income tax on it; all low-wage parents automatically qualify
> for a range of state child benefits and many also qualify for
> housing/rent subsidy. And all get full healthcare free at the point of
> delivery.

Interesting that in the UK it's a good thing. Here in the US it seems
to be a bad thing and blame put on Walmart.

G.

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>
>> >> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
>> >> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
>> >> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health
>> >> insurance,
>> >> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
>
> Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there's no law requiring private
> companies to pay extra benefits for full time employees. Unionized
> workers might get this but unions have also run many manufacturers
> offshore. They were a good thing once but have since demanded too
> much.

I believe you are correct.
>
> People take the financial risk of starting a company in order to *make
> money*, not to provide jobs for their neighbors. The govt. set pay
> standards low with their minimum wage. All of these low paying jobs
> will remain low as long as there are people willing to work for what's
> offered. In most cases, you start out low but if you stick with the
> company, show up on time, and work hard, you can move "up the ladder"
> in pay.

I think that's mainly if you work for a large company. Where is a
receptionist at a dance studio going to go? Not much of any place for him
or her to move up there. Same for the clerk at a small store or other small
business. When I lived on Cape Cod, there were a lot of little shops that
were open for the season. Season being mainly spring, summer and the
beginning of fall. Far fewer places were open year round. Most of these
places had the owner. And if there was another employee or two it was
usually their husband or wife, kids or a very part time employee. At most
places I applied at, the best they could offer me was 10 hours a week,
gauranteed. And that was not all in one day. It was 1-3 hours here and
there, sometimes with no real day off.

The dry cleaner I applied at, expected me to be up, showered and dressed by
8:00 a.m., 6 days a week (they were closed on Sun.) and if they needed me, I
would have to drive to any one of their 10 locations on the Cape. I was a
smoker at the time and they also required me not to smoke at all on the days
that I might be called in to work lest my smoke smell offend a customer.
And... I had to sit at home waiting for a potential call. Mind you, we had
no cell phone back then. They were available but not nearly as prevalent as
they are today. People still used beepers! There was no way in hell I was
going to take *that* job, especially since I had been told that chances were
very slim of it ever working into any sort of full time position ever. The
woman who wanted to hire me was actually a nurse but said she couldn't find
a nursing job there so took that job.

In many areas, the bulk of the jobs out there are things like that. I think
people in big cities and suburbs have better chances of getting a job where
they could move up. Yes, I could have traveled to Boston daily. Some
people did. But in those days we didn't need income from me badly enough
for me to have wanted to do that.
>
> I find it interesting how many here have singled out Walmart to
> boycott.
> Do a google search for salary (store of your choice) and you'll see
> that Walmart actually pays more per hour than KMart and Target....and
> many other retail stores and fast food places. Real nice restaurants
> often pay even less than minimum wage and let the customers make up
> for it with tips.

I don't know if they do or not. When I first started at K Mart which was I
think in 1979, my starting wage was more than minimum. My first job at the
inventory company started at $2.15 an hour and I had gotten raises to make
it $2.30 an hour when I quit after about a year. Worked briefly for Jafco
and I think I made $2.30 there. Started at $2.45 at K Mart and with raises
of 25 cents an hour every three months plus one 30 cent cost of living
raise, I felt I was doing well.

In those days we got medical insurance after 30 days and it covered 100% of
all hospital stuff. This was a bad move on their part because as you could
imagine, everyone treated every little thing as an emergency and went to the
ER. We also got a lot of newly pregnant women who sometimes managed to keep
the pregnancy a secret and get the medical care despite the pre-existing
condition. Not all employees got the medical. I think they had to work at
least 32 hours per week on a regular basis. 1 year vacation after a year's
service and 1 week of sick leave plus a personal day of our choice. We
could also buy stock in the company which I did and made money on. Not a
lot but seemed like a lot to me at the time.

I did move up in the company and as the years went by, some of the benefits
got worse. The medical for instance. It was no longer free to us. If we
wanted it, we had to pay. We had no dental for many years but then they
offered that as well. The actual plans that I had were good ones but they
offered others and some of those were not so good.

Eventually my pay topped out at $10.00 an hour. There were basically 6
levels of employment. I was at level 4. And the jobs above me were only a
few and not ones I was interested in nor were there any openings while I was
there. There were salaried positions but since I had no college degree, I
would have made less money than those who did, regardless of my experience.
I was able to get a token raise of 15 cents every other year after that and
should they have offered it, a cost of living raise. I only remember them
giving that twice and that was in the early stages of my employ there. I
retired from there after 17 years of service. At the 15 year mark, I got 4
weeks of paid vacation per year. Had I stuck it out till 20 years, I would
have gotten 5 weeks off.

I also have a pension coming to me. That is one thing that they essentially
did away with not long after I retired. But there were other perks that we
got from working there. They had a company picnic and Christmas party each
year. The picnic was free and the food and drink was provided. I believe
we had to pay a small amount if we wanted to dine at the Christmas party.
This was always a catered event but was held at various places. Sometimes a
hotel, a fancy restaurant and other times merely a hall somewhere. There
was always a band. But there were prizes. Lots and lots of prizes! So
many that you'd be hard pressed not to win one. I won a little TV set, BBQ
grill, countless clocks and pictures, candy, duffel bags, hats, sunglasses,
sweat pants, shirts, blankets, and some odd things like hairspray. I'm sure
there were a lot of other things I don't remember.

We also had the monthly birthday breakfast. This was cooked by the
employees and again there were prizes. At those I won another BBQ, candy
and a candy dish, towels, cash, and I'm sure a lot of other things I've
forgotten. There was also a recognition breakfast yearly and if it was our
anniversary, we got flowers or some other little token plus every five years
we got our jewelry which was a pin or pendant of our choice. I still have
all of mine but I would never wear them anywhere since they have the K Mart
logo on them. They do have real gems on them though. Tiny ones. Heh.

Plus we had various other contests, one of which was a sales contest. We
were assigned to teams for that and we could use pretty much any means
possible (legally) to try to either sell the most number of items or bring
in the highest dollar amount of the item we picked to sell for that week.
My team won a lot because my dad had a computer and in those days not many
people had a home computer. I printed up nice looking flyers for our items
plus I went around the store promoting them to the customers. The prizes
for these contests varied. Might be a sum of cash, a pizza party, gift
certificates to a restaurant, some item that we sold in the store or even a
day off with pay.

That job was a lot of work and stress but I was able to better myself by
working my way up. I had my own apartment and didn't have to have
roommates. Wasn't a super great apartment but it also wasn't the cheapest
one around. And I was able to buy a newer, used car and could pretty much
buy what I wanted and take a vacation or two a year, including plane tickets
and sometimes a hotel stay.

I had been looking for other jobs and had been to am employment agency who
tested me and said that my skills were in data entry and 10 key. I was
hella fast on the 10 key. But... Those jobs really weren't going to better
me in terms of wages or benefits. In fact, many employers told me to stay
where I was because they couldn't offer me better and there was no chance to
move up. I did get one offer that was better but I declined it because it
would have involved taking a bus to work. It was at Immunex. And it was in
some part of Seattle with no parking. The job was washing glassware. Test
tubes I think. I think they even would have given me a bus pass but... I
just couldn't see myself riding on a bus and I really didn't think there was
any chance of my moving up from that.

But I have digressed. At that point in time, we had no Walmarts in this
area and Target was new to us. So I didn't know a whole lot about them but
we did check wages and they all paid about the same. One big difference
between us and Walmart though was... People who worked at Walmart had a set
job. I think this is still true. I know a college student in TX who works
there. He gets carts, cleans up messes outside and assists people to their
vehicles if they need assitance such as with a heavy item. And that is all
he does.

But at K Mart, we were told never to say, "That's not my job!" We even
signed employment papers on our first day of work stating as such. It was
worded more nicely than that. So if we were called on to clean up something
nasty in the bathroom or dispose of a dead rat or follow a shoplifter or
even work in the camera department despite having no experience over here
whatever, we did it! And we didn't complain. Either that or...don't let the
door hit you in the butt on the way out. Some of our store managers were
better than others. The one that was there when I retired was a very nice
person. He would never ask us to do something he wouldn't do himself.
>
> Most construction companies don't automatically pay benefits. Most do
> start out at a higher wage because there's a lot of physical work
> involved. Stay with the company, develop a skill and you'll start
> making more per hour. Be a valuable, reliable employee and they might
> also add benefits just to keep you with them. There are no guarantees
> in life.

You are right on that! I know plenty of people in construction. And around
here it's not a year round job either. And if you get injured? You likely
don't work.

Janet wrote:
>
> In article >, says...
> >
> > Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > >
> > > >> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
> > > >> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
> > > >> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health insurance,
> > > >> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
> >
> > Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there's no law requiring private
> > companies to pay extra benefits for full time employees.
>
> In the UK there is, and partimers share the same entitlements.
>
> Janet UK

Not in the US though. To my knowledge NO company *has* to pay extra
benefits unless the employees are unionized.

G.

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> Ophelia wrote:
>>
>> Oh dear, I said I wouldn't do this Ok I am done)
>>
>> Before anyone shouts at me it is all Cindy's fault))))
>
> I AGREE! It IS all Cindy's fault. I just responded to her too even
> though I know I will envoke the wrath of some here.

It's her fault because she didn't watch Seinfeld.

"Janet" > wrote in message
t...
> In article >, says...
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> >
>> > >> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
>> > >> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
>> > >> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health
>> > >> insurance,
>> > >> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
>>
>> Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there's no law requiring private
>> companies to pay extra benefits for full time employees.
>
> In the UK there is, and partimers share the same entitlements.

Not here.

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> Sometimes a job, any job is better than no
>> job.
>
> Well said, Julie. And if it's not a good job, treat it as temporary.

Yes.

"Janet" > wrote in message
t...
> In article >, says...
>
>> I think taxes are higher in the UK but I don't know.
>
> True; but people in the UK working full time for minimum wage, pay
> very little income tax on it; all low-wage parents automatically qualify
> for a range of state child benefits and many also qualify for
> housing/rent subsidy. And all get full healthcare free at the point of
> delivery.
>
>> They also seem to
>> tolerate squatters. Or they used to.
>
> Rubbish

I said used to. My friend, his friend and some others did in fact squat for
several months in England and he said nobody bothered them or tried to kick
them out. Maybe they just got lucky.

In article >,
>
>Aww, are you ladies feeling left out because you haven't seen one of
>the top 3 television series of all time?

Why should we? It's only a television show, and argumentum ad populum
makes no more sense applied to television than it does to anything else.

I cannot recall the last sitcom I watched regularly. Third Rock
from the Sun, probably. I don't believe I stuck with it to the
end of its run, anyway.

Cindy Hamilton
--

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> Janet wrote:
>>
>> In article >, says...
>> >
>> > Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
>> > > >> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
>> > > >> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health
>> > > >> insurance,
>> > > >> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
>> >
>> > Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there's no law requiring private
>> > companies to pay extra benefits for full time employees.
>>
>> In the UK there is, and partimers share the same entitlements.
>>
>> Janet UK
>
> Not in the US though. To my knowledge NO company *has* to pay extra
> benefits unless the employees are unionized.

I've never been in a union but I would think that just being in one wouldn't
necessarily gain one benefits.

In article >,
Julie Bove > wrote:
>
>"Gary" > wrote in message ...
>> Ophelia wrote:
>>>
>>> Oh dear, I said I wouldn't do this Ok I am done)
>>>
>>> Before anyone shouts at me it is all Cindy's fault))))
>>
>> I AGREE! It IS all Cindy's fault. I just responded to her too even
>> though I know I will envoke the wrath of some here.
>
>It's her fault because she didn't watch Seinfeld.
>

Would it help if I streamed all of the Seinfeld episodes and watched
them?

Of course, that would cut into my time for watching curling.

Cindy Hamilton
--

"Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
.. .
> In article >,
> Julie Bove > wrote:
>>
>>"Gary" > wrote in message
...
>>> Ophelia wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Oh dear, I said I wouldn't do this Ok I am done)
>>>>
>>>> Before anyone shouts at me it is all Cindy's fault))))
>>>
>>> I AGREE! It IS all Cindy's fault. I just responded to her too even
>>> though I know I will envoke the wrath of some here.
>>
>>It's her fault because she didn't watch Seinfeld.
>>
>
> Would it help if I streamed all of the Seinfeld episodes and watched
> them?
>
> Of course, that would cut into my time for watching curling.

Don't ask me! I didn't watch it either. Not on purpose anyway...

In article >, Gary > wrote:
>Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>
>> >> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
>> >> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
>> >> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health insurance,
>> >> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
>
>Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there's no law requiring private
>companies to pay extra benefits for full time employees. Unionized
>workers might get this but unions have also run many manufacturers
>offshore. They were a good thing once but have since demanded too
>much.

Absolutely right. However, companies can have a policy of paying
generous benefits to full-time employees, yet somehow manage
not to have very many full-time employees.

>I find it interesting how many here have singled out Walmart to
>boycott.
>Do a google search for salary (store of your choice) and you'll see
>that Walmart actually pays more per hour than KMart and Target....and
>many other retail stores and fast food places. Real nice restaurants
>often pay even less than minimum wage and let the customers make up
>for it with tips.

You can thank the federal government for that. The federal
minimum wage for tipped employees is $2.13.


Cindy Hamilton
--

"Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
...
> You can thank the federal government for that. The federal
> minimum wage for tipped employees is $2.13.

Restaurant workers here in WA must be paid the state minimum wage. Can't
remember exactly what that is but somewhere around $9 or $10 an hour. I
have a friend in TX who is not so lucky. The restaurant that she works for
does catering and they like her to do the catering so most of the time that
is what she does. She also has to wait tables once in a while in the
restaurant. She gets tips for that. But no tips while working catering.
Amazingly enough, she and her husband were able to buy their first house a
few years ago.

Another thing I have noticed is that it seems in the areas where the pay is
the lowest, people tend to give the lowest tips. I always tip at least 20%.
I will give a little more, usually rounding it up to the nearest dollar if
anyone in our party has asked for a special order. Such as something added
or left off of their meal. And we generally do. But some people I know in
other states think that I am massively overtipping. I disagree.

On 12/13/2013 9:28 AM, Gary wrote:
> Janet wrote:
>>
>> In article >, says...
>>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
>>>>>> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
>>>>>> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health insurance,
>>>>>> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
>>>
>>> Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there's no law requiring private
>>> companies to pay extra benefits for full time employees.
>>
>> In the UK there is, and partimers share the same entitlements.
>>
>> Janet UK
>
> Not in the US though. To my knowledge NO company *has* to pay extra
> benefits unless the employees are unionized.
>
> G.
>
Are you talking about health benefits? I don't know that it's a *law*,
but it may depend on the size of the company. A small business with
under 10 employees isn't likely to be able to afford to pay for a even a
portion of health benefits employees. Big companies can and often do.
A larger number of employees means the cost of benefits goes down. In
insurance parlance, it's called "spread of risk". A lot of insurance
companies won't write policies on family-owned businesses at all. They
figure Cousin Fred is on the payroll solely so he can get coverage for
his 6 kids.

Jill

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 12/13/2013 9:28 AM, Gary wrote:
>> Janet wrote:
>>>
>>> In article >, says...
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
>>>>>>> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
>>>>>>> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health
>>>>>>> insurance,
>>>>>>> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
>>>>
>>>> Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there's no law requiring private
>>>> companies to pay extra benefits for full time employees.
>>>
>>> In the UK there is, and partimers share the same entitlements.
>>>
>>> Janet UK
>>
>> Not in the US though. To my knowledge NO company *has* to pay extra
>> benefits unless the employees are unionized.
>>
>> G.
>>
> Are you talking about health benefits? I don't know that it's a *law*,
> but it may depend on the size of the company. A small business with under
> 10 employees isn't likely to be able to afford to pay for a even a portion
> of health benefits employees. Big companies can and often do. A larger
> number of employees means the cost of benefits goes down. In insurance
> parlance, it's called "spread of risk". A lot of insurance companies
> won't write policies on family-owned businesses at all. They figure
> Cousin Fred is on the payroll solely so he can get coverage for his 6
> kids.

Currently they don't have to pay extra for Sundays and holidays or give sick
leave or vacations either.

On 12/12/2013 6:13 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 12/11/2013 3:57 PM, sf wrote:
>>> On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 13:25:08 -0500, jmcquown >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Now I'm wondering if the requests for the employee holiday gift fund
>>>> could have been applied towards the dining minimum. I found it rather
>>>> odd they were requesting money to give the island employees holiday
>>>> bonuses. Final talley, they'd collected over $75,000 so they could
>>>> split it and cut bonus checks for the landscapers (not that they take
>>>> care of our yards), security guards, the folks who work in accounting,
>>>> etc. Allegedly divided equally.
>>>>
>>>> Were these out-of-pocket donations? Or could that have been deducted
>>>> from the dining minimum, too? I sent an email asking about it. I'm
>>>> waiting to hear back.
>>>
>>> They're sounding like Walmart and them asking customers to contribute
>>> to Thanksgiving baskets for needy employees! Why don't they pay their
>>> employees enough to tide them through the year, so you can tip those
>>> you may wish to tip on your own?
>>>
>> That was kind of my thinking about it, sf. I was told it was strictly
>> out of pocket donations. But really, why do I need to help them pay
>> their employees? The whole operation makes enough money to pay these
>> people well. If some individuals did something helpful I'd be happy
>> to tip them - separately.
>
> It is a disgrace if they are saying their employees are so needy they
> are asking for donations!!! Surely they can't mean that they don't pay
> enough so want you to make up the difference???? If so I simply can't
> believe the cheek!
>
That's how it sounds to me, Ophelia. They instituted a 20% service
charge on all meals a couple of years ago, so that's an automatic "tip"
for the servers, bartenders and kitchen staff. Chances are the servers
are only earning the federal minumum ($2.13/hr) but the cooks and other
kitchen staff make more.

In fact, the last time I was in there to pick up my fish & chips (and
got no chips, bloody fools!), the guy who gave me the free glass of wine
said he'd been working there since the Club opened. That would mean
he's been there since the 1980s. No doubt he could have moved on if he
wanted to.

I can't think of a single reason why anyone would need to be ponying up
money for them to give employee bonuses.

Jill

In article >, says...

> >> I think taxes are higher in the UK but I don't know. They also seem to
> >> tolerate squatters. Or they used to.
> >
> > It has been illegal to squat in Scotland for a long time, and recently it
> > also became illegal in England

Not quite. You mean, In England, squatting in built property used to
be a civil offence. It moved from being a civil offence to a criminal
offence.

A civil offence does not imply tolerance.

>
> Ah, okay. The squatter I knew did it in the 80's.

and in the 80's, did the property owner tell you he tolerated your
squatter friend? Or is that a conclusion you jumped to on the somewhat
biased self-justification by one freeloading trespasser.

Janet UK

On 12/12/2013 11:28 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> <snip rest of blabbering>
>
> -sw

Which would be 99% of what you post...

On 12/12/2013 11:29 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> Like I said, ingredient statements do not apply to local food PANTRIES

Oh **** off, troll.

On 12/12/2013 11:31 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> <sigh> Don't know where you got that from.


Grow up, little man.

On 12/12/2013 11:42 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> 98% of restaurants have at least one microwave oven.

Do try and prove that, troll.

In article >, says...

> So what do they do with the caught squatters there now? Let them squat
> in prison at taxpayer's expense? Just wondering.

A criminal squatter faces immediate police arrest, imprisonment for up
to 6 months or a fine of up to £5,000 (or both) and a criminal record.
In the UK, it's no casual matter to acquire a criminal record because it
goes on a national database, and a wide range of employers and jobs now
depend on a clean record from it.

However, the real advantage of squatting becoming a criminal offence,
is to the property owner. A criminal can be immediately removed by
police, arrested and prosecuted at no cost to the property owner. Unlike
civil proceedings which cost owners a lot of money and take a long time.

Janet UK

On 12/13/2013 5:22 AM, Gary wrote:
> Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> Sometimes a job, any job is better than no
>> job.
>
> Well said, Julie. And if it's not a good job, treat it as temporary.
>
> G.
>

Bravo!

On 12/12/2013 2:53 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 19:46:16 GMT, (Cindy Hamilton)
> wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> Ophelia > wrote:
>>>
>>> Oh dear We have a National Minimum wage law set in law
>>>
>>> https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates
>>
>> We have one too; it's $7.25/hour. However, companies like WalMart
>> will hire twice as many people at 20 hours per week, so that they
>> don't have to pay benefits (for example, paid time off, health insurance,
>> retirement fund) to these part-time employees.
>
> You make is sound like the Walmart employment ad states: only those
> who've undergone a frontal lobotomy need apply... if people are not
> happy with the details of the job they are under no obligation
> whatsoever to accept that employment or am I missing something?
>

Not a thing.