Interesting article on this topic says that the public support taxpayers give McDonald's underpaid employees is nearly the same as McDonald's profits. Is McDonald's effectively on public assistance itself? Something seems wrong here:
McDonald's announced Monday that it raked in $1.5 billion in profits in the third quarter, up 5 percent from last year.
The number is strikingly close to the $1.2 billion taxpayers are shelling out each year to help pay public assistance to the McDonald's workforce, according to a report released last week by the National Employment Law Project. (source)
Sure, but the person writing the article had the stats for McDonald's.
Starbucks actually gives all of its employees full benefits, doesn't matter if they're part time or not. That act alone saves a lot of jingle for the workers, allowing them to take that minimum wage a bit farther. Norway actually passed a law stating that CEOs cannot make more than 19x what their lowest paid employee makes. In America, there is no law governing maximum wages, and CEOs here make on average 148x what their lowest paid employee makes.
The reason we can't have nice things is because the smallest minority in the country takes the biggest slice of the pie. It's time for equality, not just in rights, but in wealth, health, and well-being.
Starbucks actually gives all of its employees full benefits, doesn't matter if they're part time or not.
So that's why a cup of coffee can cost $3 at Starbucks.
It costs the equivalent of $5 in the UK, and employees have the benefit of National Health for free.
You're gonna love this Bill Maher video:
Twenty years on the job and McDonald's and he's still at minimum wage. Read about it.