Elizabeth Warren's "Model Employer" request

BDBoop

Former Staff
Dec 2010
46,652
43,406
Twitter
#1
Brilliant, IMO.

In a letter to the White House led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Friday, 18 senators, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), asked Obama to issue a "model employer" executive order, which would give contracting preference to firms that pay a living wage, offer health care and sick leave, and guarantee union rights for workers.

"Mr. President, the stroke of your pen can have transformative impact for millions of workers," the letter states. "As low-wage fast food, retail and federal contract workers continue to strike in growing numbers to 'Fight for $15 and a Union,' we urge you to harness the power of the presidency to help these workers achieve the American Dream."


The letter notes that the president has held up for-profit companies like Costco as high-road employers, so the federal government itself should "invest our taxpayer dollars to incentivize model employers that commit to creating good jobs and to rebuilding America's ailing middle class."
 
Likes: 3 people

metheron

Former Staff
Nov 2006
14,266
4,164
MI
#2
Contracting preference for the federal government? Is this a real issue or a feel good one? Do they contract with a lot of companies paying minimum wage?

I don't mind the living wage and benefits thing, I think for him to give contracting preference to unions would be an unpopular move as a whole, although I guess why should he care?
 
Likes: 2 people
Feb 2011
16,652
5,885
Boise, ID
#4
I might consider a vote for Warren if it weren't for this particular brand of peddled garbage.

In a letter to the White House led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Friday, 18 senators, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), asked Obama to issue a "model employer" executive order, which would give contracting preference to firms that pay a living wage,
To whom? Most firms pay a living wage to some employees. How do you pay someone that works 10 hours a week for you "a living wage?"

offer health care
So this would be limited to health care industry firms? Most employers aren't in the business of providing health care. Most provide other goods and services.

and sick leave, and guarantee union rights for workers.
"Union rights" is a misnomer. Every seller has a right to offer something for sale. No seller should have a right to force another to buy it.

"Mr. President, the stroke of your pen can have transformative impact for millions of workers," the letter states. "As low-wage fast food, retail and federal contract workers continue to strike in growing numbers to 'Fight for $15 and a Union,' we urge you to harness the power of the presidency to help these workers achieve the American Dream."
This is very sad that what once appeared to be a critical thinking financial market critic is peddling such cliché garbage as this. Is she really suggesting that the only thing preventing retail and fast food workers from achieving the American Dream is the fact that the federal government hasn't mandated that being a retailer or food service worker warrants that achievement? These particular jobs (retail and food service), while popular hot buttons in the tabloid media, will never achieve any dreams of bounty and riches. Ever.

The letter notes that the president has held up for-profit companies like Costco as high-road employers,
Which is also stupid considering Costco caters to a higher-earning demographic, for one, and has achieved a successful business model by selling a lot more goods on a per-employee basis than most other consumer good retailers. Just divide revenue by the number of employees for two firms like Costco and Walmart. Paying less for labor than Walmart relative to sales is one of the things making Costco more successful.

This is the classic thinking error in which a company that pays 10 people $20 an hour is celebrated as a model employer while a company that pays 100 people $10 an hour is chastised, even though the latter is putting more dollars in consumer pockets than the former.

so the federal government itself should "invest our taxpayer dollars to incentivize model employers that commit to creating good jobs and to rebuilding America's ailing middle class."
Cliché garbage rhetoric. A disgracefully boring populist appeal.

Contracting preference for the federal government?... Do they contract with a lot of companies paying minimum wage?
No.
 
Last edited:

Southern Dad

Former Staff
Feb 2015
40,330
8,435
Shady Dale, Georgia
#5
Give the left an inch and they'll want a mile. President Obama already unilaterally increased the minimum wage for federal government contractors from $7.25 per hour to $10.10 per hour but is that enough? Of course not. Feeling emboldened by this success now the demand is $15 per hour. If they get that, it'll be $25 per hour. Who will pay for these wage increases? The taxpayers, as these are government contracts.
 

Babba

Former Staff
Jul 2007
74,890
64,996
So. Md.
#6
Give the left an inch and they'll want a mile. President Obama already unilaterally increased the minimum wage for federal government contractors from $7.25 per hour to $10.10 per hour but is that enough? Of course not. Feeling emboldened by this success now the demand is $15 per hour. If they get that, it'll be $25 per hour. Who will pay for these wage increases? The taxpayers, as these are government contracts.
Yes, because underpaying people will get you quality work.
 
Likes: 1 person

Babba

Former Staff
Jul 2007
74,890
64,996
So. Md.
#8
So what you are saying is that the employees are not doing their best because they are greedy. If you give them more money they'll put forth more effort?
Bwahahahaaaa!!!! Conservatives have always argued that CEOs need to be paid outlandishly in order to attract the best and the brightest, but that theory doesn't apply to working people. I'll never understand righties.
 
Likes: 1 person

Southern Dad

Former Staff
Feb 2015
40,330
8,435
Shady Dale, Georgia
#9
Bwahahahaaaa!!!! Conservatives have always argued that CEOs need to be paid outlandishly in order to attract the best and the brightest, but that theory doesn't apply to working people. I'll never understand righties.
A company can hire the CEO who will work for less, if they want to do so. But what you are telling me is that employees are holding back over money. They'll work harder if paid more. See that isn't how it works. You don't give them a raise, then they work harder. They work harder and then get raises. That's how this works.
 

Similar Discussions