Mar
26
Blog Post #11 – Just-in-Time Staffing – Tiffany Fan
March 26, 2015 | Leave a Comment
Jannette Navarro is an ideal example of juggling a relationship with family and friends, taking care of a child as a single mother, retaining a job to support the child, and attempting to remain in school. With companies focusing on profit, they ignore the fact that their scheduling changes causes a chain reaction amongst other issues that may generate such as a care center to take care of their child. To conquer this issue, there needs to be labor laws passed in order to avoid situations where an employee is being sent home due to slow sales during a certain time period.
At the same time, by keeping employees around that aren’t needed may also drive up prices in order to account for the additional wages paid. In addition, Ms. Navarro could have taken online classes while working at Starbucks, which is covered by Starbucks, in order to gain her associates degree and further pursue her career. Furthermore, she could have chose to prioritize other aspects of her life rather than making a license a goal for herself. In addition, there could have been another Starbucks in a span of 3 miles. Thus, the situation can be looked at in both perspectives. For me, I think it’s unfair to state certain hours for a person to work to only be changed on the day of or a few hours before because there could have been tasks that needed to be done in order for the person to go to work.
In a similar situation with McDonalds, workers are getting paid minimum wage with the task of washing their uniforms, waiting for their shift to begin, getting clocked off during slower hours, etc. Furthermore, Amazon goes through a process of security checking employees, which employees claim take approximately 25 minutes, and want to be paid for the wait. I think if the employer requires his or her employees to go through security after working, the employee should reimbursed for the time they have lost whether it be 90 seconds or 25 minutes because it was under the employer’s authority to do such. If it were actually 25 minutes, that could be another 4 dollars, which makes a huge difference in the long run.
As for Forbes “The Ignorance of Nick Hanauer’s TED Speech,” Tim Worstalll disagrees with the thoughts and ideas brought out by Hanauer, which was to tax the rich in order for more jobs to be created. However, in Worstall’s point of view, it is to “tax on the return to capital.” This sounds kind of absurd to me though because I would think that then that the return rate would be low from an overflow of investments. At the same time, Worstall sounds convincing stating “These tax rates aren’t limited to the rich either: low income earners with a bit of savings put by pay these same 15% rates.” In the end, I’m kind of confused with his solution.
Overall, I think the way companies perform their tasks to gain maximal profit by causing others to waste their time is completely unfair. If a schedule is set, I would believe that you would need to follow it. The company must decide in terms of an ethical decision or a profitable decision, which for this case, it seems as if they choose the profitable path.
