Gaining a job that pays above minimum wage...how hard is it?

[Harry Guerrilla]

That's kind of how I got into my present job, though they are always bringing in temps and I'm 25 years away from high school. Of course, 11/hr. doesn't go very far at all when you're in your 40s.

Our temp system is really just a probationary period.
So that we can fire the bad ones without a lot of paperwork or mandatory benefits.

 

[chromium]

Yea, but around equipment that can maim or kill you and others, that isn't an excuse.
Not being heartless, but safety trumps this everytime.

oh i agree when it comes to that line of work. What i'm thinking of is like a 5 week temp job doing data entry where even for that you have to pass a drug test. If smoking weed on the weekend somehow makes a person incapable of doing that work, then you should have to test positive to go into entertainment. From my view it's all about control

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

oh i agree when it comes to that line of work. What i'm thinking of is like a 5 week temp job doing data entry where even for that you have to pass a drug test. If smoking weed on the weekend somehow makes a person incapable of doing that work, then you should have to test positive to go into entertainment. From my view it's all about control

I agree with that.
If their level of work is up to standard, I don't see why it matter if someone smokes some weed.

 

[Carjosse]

It comes down to who you know. Back in the day most people could easily get entry positions regardless of education and skills, and learn on the job. Now a lot of places want experience and/or education. But if you know someone personally who can hire you or get you in, all those requirements get waived because the employer would rather be hiring someone trustworthy than someone random. I ended up going to school later than most and prior to my education all my good jobs came from knowing somebody who knew somebody. I was able to learn on the job until I eventually had transferable skills that landed me better positions. But it all started with knowing people.

I've known people with skills and education who can't get hired because their resume is just another name in the pile. I always tell young people that the best thing they can do regardless of how few credentials they have is to network, network, network. Whatever skills you have, however humble, turn it into a business card and trade cards with every person you meet.

That was even how I got my minimum wage jobs. It just gets worse the more you want to make.

 

[countryboy]

During the busy season, my company will hire people as temps, fresh out of high school at about $11-12 an hour.
If you do well enough, you go from temp to hire, with all the bennies including 401k contributions.

What's the catch?
It's manufacturing work and you have to work.

Edit add: Some young folks don't know where to look, but temp agencies are a good start.

And therein lies the problem. Earning more than minimum wage is too much like work for many.

 

[Northern Light]

in other words, if you're shy or just don't like bragging about yourself or aren't related to a higher up, you're screwed. There's always been some amount of nepotism in business and politics, but since the great recession it's really seeped into all levels of work. I even know someone who got hired at DHS (social services) at the capital because her mom worked as secretary for one of the county DHS directors on the other side of the state. So what is someone highly skilled without connections to do? I fear our meritocracy is dying

i think the OP can just peruse indeed.com or whatever and see how many require 3+ years experience at very specific protocol. Some of them even have the audacity to call themselves "entry level." I guess these days, relatively, they are

There's always been nepotism, but I think job market scarcity really brings it out because people are leveraging everything they've got in order to get work. Also, there's always the stated policy and then the unofficial policy... friends usually get exceptions, that's just how people are all over the world. It's different if some random stranger approaches you for employment versus a friend or an employee who has a friend. It puts a human face to the situation, making it not only more credible but also harder to refuse.

I think you still need some skills though. Nepotism won't save you from being fired if you're a total hack at your job.

All that said, if I was starting over today as a young person, I would probably start my own business or go into self-employment. I know it can be a rough gig but getting hired at a company is such an arduous task these days.

 

[Mycroft]

Just how hard is it to gain a skill which pays more than minimum wage AND gain a job in that skill set AND keep that job (IE:not losing a job due to being laid off... not counting firings)?

A lot of people throw out the phrase "gain a skill that will pay more than minimum wage!" like it's the easiest thing in the world to do but they never address the amount of available jobs in those given areas vs how many people there are in this country. 318 million people in this country and rising. At least half of which are of working age. Are job availability in those areas that require a higher skill set also rising on an even pace with the amount of people that are able to work in this country? This is something that I never see them address. Yet they love to holler and scream about people that only work minimum wage jobs. So, I'd like to see them address this.

So, what is the current job rate of above minimum wage jobs to available working population ratio? Can you guarantee that everyone will have jobs that pay above minimum wage? <--- This is assuming that EVERYONE was able to gain a skill set that pays above minimum wage. Of course we know that assumption to be wrong don't we? We know that there are people out there that are straight up incapable of achieving any type of skill set that pays above minimum wage. Yet they will be ignored, as always.

One of my sons is in college and one is not. They both work...and have worked since getting out of high school. They both have always earned more than minimum wage.

So...I'd say it's pretty darned easy to work for more than minimum wage.


That being said, if the minimum wage increases...especially to somewhere around $15/hr...things could change very quickly.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

And therein lies the problem. Earning more than minimum wage is too much like work for many.

There are a lot of Hispanic people, both immigrant and 1 gen Americans that don't mind it.
The bonus is that they're great workers.

 

[Deuce]

At the end of January there were about 5.5 million job openings in the US. Now, a substantial number of these are going to be near minimum wage positions in fast food, retail, etc. However, I have no particularly good way to find out exactly what that number is. (I say near minimum wage because there are plenty of people who worked for six months and got that whopping 25 cent/hour raise like I did at a gas station back in college, technically making them not minimum wage anymore but definitely worth including in the discussion)

At the same time, there were about 7.8 million unemployed people in the labor force. However, right-wingers are always whining about the "real" unemployment number being substantially higher due to declining labor force participation rates.

So, absolute best case scenario like three million people need some kind of voodoo magic to get a higher than minimum wage job. The real number will be substantially higher.

 

[Carjosse]

During the busy season, my company will hire people as temps, fresh out of high school at about $11-12 an hour.
If you do well enough, you go from temp to hire, with all the bennies including 401k contributions.

What's the catch?
It's manufacturing work and you have to work.

Edit add: Some young folks don't know where to look, but temp agencies are a good start.

Too often temps in companies get treated more like slaves than employees. Your company does it right.

 

[joG]

I know lots of people that would LOVE to be paid that much per day. Including me.

And I love your example. It shows a job which doesn't require a college degree, IE: "Skill Set that is worth more than minimum wage", and yet its apparently doing well enough to pay its waiters 4 times more than minimum wage and gets recognition on the BBC. (don't suppose you can get a link to it can ya?)

Yes. I thought it very interesting too.
I don't know if I can find a link, but will look.

 

[chromium]

There's always been nepotism, but I think job market scarcity really brings it out because people are leveraging everything they've got in order to get work. Also, there's always the stated policy and then the unofficial policy... friends usually get exceptions, that's just how people are all over the world. It's different if some random stranger approaches you for employment versus a friend or an employee who has a friend. It puts a human face to the situation, making it not only more credible but also harder to refuse.

well if they aren't qualified, the risk is they will suck it up on the job, and if there's a pattern and it's a public position like the one i cited, all it takes is an FOIA request and some digging to expose it. Then you're facing a class action

I think you still need some skills though. Nepotism won't save you from being fired if you're a total hack at your job.

yes but when there's 300+ apps for one position and say 1/3 of them are pretty much equally capable, and especially if you don't interview well, nepotism can be everything. It's like legacy admissions at elite private schools. Foot in the door is everything

and if you're not capable, it's not really a risk to you, but it can be to the employer (as above)

 

[chromium]

Too often temps in companies get treated more like slaves than employees. Your company does it right.

no kidding, 3 years to be "hired in", what would make me vote for sanders is some real worker reform like strictly limiting temp work to 90 days

 

[Deuce]

Too often temps in companies get treated more like slaves than employees. Your company does it right.

I've never had an experience with temps that made me think it would ever be a good idea for a company to hire them. Sure, they're cheap. But they don't know what the hell they're doing and end up dragging down the productivity of the full-time people around them. Hard to measure that cost on a balance sheet, which is why I suspect so many companies go that way.

edit:

no kidding, 3 years to be "hired in",

Well, except when companies do shady **** like this.

 

[Carjosse]

no kidding, 3 years to be "hired in", what would make me vote for sanders is some real worker reform like strictly limiting temp work to 90 days

90 days might work for some industries but not others, I can think of many situations where a company needs temps for longer than that.

 

[countryboy]

There are a lot of Hispanic people, both immigrant and 1 gen Americans that don't mind it.
The bonus is that they're great workers.

I know it. It seems to be a lot of young Americans who don't want to work.

 

[Chomsky]

There are general labor factory jobs that pay above minimum wage. The real difficulty is getting benefits such as PTO and escaping the cycle of temp jobs to which a few huge agencies hold access to millions of these. This is why america is about last in the developed world in days off and jumping into a higher economic class is becoming unheard of. I knew people at the one factory in town who were desperately sick. One would go to work in tears due to kidney stones. But she was paid above minimum wage. Living the dream i guess?

To answer your question, the best new skill you can acquire to gain access to these bottom feeder, technically above minimum wage, jobs is to not do drugs. A new plastics plant opened in the county i'm from, and they couldn't even fill the positions because most who applied tested positive. I'm not saying we don't need more worker rights, including to get high on our time off, but there you go

If you mean a job that requires *actual* skills like some tech knowledge, those typically start at $10-11/hr again thru temp agencies, not a living wage but above minimum. One of the brightest guys i know with a degree in CS had to start at data entry at $11/hr as a temp while living with his mom. Eventually he got hired in and a year later transferred to IT. His friend there worked **3 years** as a temp. Now they're both making $13/hr with 1 day PTO a month. So it's tough out there for new grads.

If you can finish an AAS degree or accounting 2 year and some quick books knowledge, you can maybe eek out a living from the start. But consider that over 90% who attempt this fail and still there's 30 apps per 1 position

A trade skill offers more stable and higher paid employment, if you can land an apprenticeship and are physically capable

Honestly even STEM degrees offer no guarantee any more

I'm completely out of touch with entry level jobs, but what you describe above strikes me as pretty pitiful, particularly the CS guy.

 

[Carjosse]

I'm completely out of touch with entry level jobs, but what you describe above strikes me as pretty pitiful, particularly the CS guy.

Welcome to the millennial generation.

 

[Lovebug]

How many times have we read that people should just move to where the good jobs are, go to college or at least get some vocational training, and I always wonder if
...all people have the brain power to be trained for the more skilled jobs
...they have the money and transportation and babysitters readily available
...or if everyone can and wants to move.
Some people are just stuck in a rut and can't find a way out. Kids, parents, health, funds, reliable transportation are a some of the factors that can prevent them from going elsewhere.
So where does that leave them? Mostly in jobs that are available in their area, some of which pay so little, they have to work 2 jobs to stay afloat.

 

[Deuce]

90 days might work for some industries but not others, I can think of many situations where a company needs temps for longer than that.

But how much longer before a "temp" isn't a "temp?"

 

[countryboy]

How many times have we read that people should just move to where the good jobs are, go to college or at least get some vocational training, and I always wonder if
...all people have the brain power to be trained for the more skilled jobs
...they have the money and transportation and babysitters readily available
...or if everyone can and wants to move.
Some people are just stuck in a rut and can't find a way out. Kids, parents, health, funds, reliable transportation are a some of the factors that can prevent them from going elsewhere.
So where does that leave them? Mostly in jobs that are available in their area, some of which pay so little, they have to work 2 jobs to stay afloat.

In your opinion, what is the logical solution to this dilemma?

 

[Carjosse]

But how much longer before a "temp" isn't a "temp?"

I would say 6 months. It is enough to cover two seasons.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

I'm completely out of touch with entry level jobs, but what you describe above strikes me as pretty pitiful, particularly the CS guy.

You have to be a strategist now.
More people going to school hasn't really helped.
It just caused employers to require even more education, to reduce the number of applicants.

Getting an inside advantage, even if the work is not in your field, is what people should be doing, in my opinion.
My company shows greater interest to inside applicants, rather than outside.
Even if the position is from lowly machine operator to higher office worker.

 

[Lovebug]

In your opinion, what is the logical solution to this dilemma?

Start with a pay grade to give incentives for better performance, encouraging those who want to do well.
I have always wondered about a group/community approach. If one can babysit, help out the elderly, read to kids and help them with homework, the others can go to work/school/training/college etc, paying as they go, or returning favors.
Perhaps after some time, jobs come to where skilled workers can be found.
It won't happen overnight, but it could have a trickle down effect.

 

[countryboy]

Start with a pay grade to give incentives for better performance, encouraging those who want to do well.
I have always wondered about a group/community approach. If one can babysit, help out the elderly, read to kids and help them with homework, the others can go to work/school/training/college etc, paying as they go, or returning favors.
Perhaps after some time, jobs come to where skilled workers can be found.
It won't happen overnight, but it could have a trickle down effect.

That's not how business works. You don't "start with a pay grade". Are you suggesting subsidized pay grades over and above what the market will bear?