How do we have a problem because McDonald's is hiring? I think before you can say that, you have to at least be able to point to a shift in the demographics of the people taking the jobs. At the worst, it means that things aren't as bad as they could have been.Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
I don't have a problem with McDonald's hiring, or their PR move to hire 50,000 people in one day. I don't really care if they're hiring part-time HS students, full-time HS grads, part-time college students, full-time college grads, or any mixture of retirees and senior citizens.
My gripe is using a large employer like McDonald's to suggest a broad economic "recovery". Oh lookie there, some huge firms are hiring?!
Just because McDonald's or Walmart may be hiring does not translate to any "recovery". It could just as well mean more people buying off dollar menus, buying crap merchandise from Chinese imports, and tons of desperate workers looking for any job. Either way, it still looks like people pinching pennies and feeling desperate.
I don't agree how the article called it a hiring boom, it averages out to only a couple of workers per location, which is expected turnover for a job like this. However one of the other new pieces I read on this said that the average age of a fast food worker has gone from 22 to 29 since 2000.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Isn't this 50k above the turnover replacement? Article's not really clear, and I don't care enough to look.That actually just muddies things, since it means any demographic changes might be independent of our current economics. Did it say anything about the causes? It's traditionally been students and retirees in these job, and more retirees could skew the numbers too.However one of the other new pieces I read on this said that the average age of a fast food worker has gone from 22 to 29 since 2000.
I remember there've been a bunch of statistics about people keeping menial jobs and putting off better jobs until later. It's been a trend this last decade, and it hasn't really had that much to do with economics; it's just easier.
Attrition, replacement, who gives a McNugget. Try not avoid words like muddies or muddying, that's not McHelpful. Instead, try using words like sauce, gravy, or ketchup (pronounced Catch Up).
What we need now is a catchy McTune! Reminiscent of McDonalds being our Happy Place, such a clean and Snappy Place. Or Coke inspiring the world to sing, with fries on the side!
McCookies to anyone who can name this original clown actor:
As OG mentioned, my fear is the age has increased. But more generally, my statement was related to me thinking we do have a legitimate problem with youth unemployment.
Then again, I also thought this was in the youth unemployment thread before I hit submit.
Students can generally only get the low-end jobs. They don't have the time or education for better ones. If the number of jobs available to them is expanding, isn't that a point against youth unemployment?
Any job is a point against unemployment. I think the concern here is that the applicant pool may be far older than we would hope.
That said, it's unlikely a McDonalds would hire someone much older over someone who is younger.
Depends upon the age of the applicants and the actual manager/owner doing the hiring. Remember, a lot of these are franchises.
Also, after my many years of working with teens...I would be hiring up older workers in a heartbeat. They tend to have less restrictions and social crap to deal with.
Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita
I'm thinking more 30somethings vs. 20somethings. Depending on job history, once the economy improves an older person may be out the door.
Uhh, I was hired at my retail job and I'm 26, and paid about $8.75 per hour. They even cited my two art-related degrees as to why I was selected for a position that wasn't listed as being available...and it wasn't management or anything special like that...
This is another numbers thing, that I have pointed out in the past. Yes, adding 50k McJobs is better than adding no jobs, but its not equivalent to adding or regaining 50k jobs that pay far more than minimum/living wage.
. . .
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
