Wage inequality states otherwise.They would pay more to prevent their employees from leaving the company. This applies until they automate.
Goes against this:The reason why wages are currently about stagnant is because employees who work low wage jobs don´t consider finding better jobs that require only a high school diploma.
They would pay more to prevent their employees from leaving the company.
If they did in masses, then employers would have to pay their workers more or they would have to automate in order to maintain a workforce.
The reason why wages are currently about stagnant is because employees who work low wage jobs don´t consider finding better jobs that require only a high school diploma.Goes against this:They would pay more to prevent their employees from leaving the company.
Meaning people should quit their job and get an education instead of threatening to quit only to get paid more.
False. A janitor is worth less so whatever education they get doesn't improve their pay instead would require them to find a better job. Meaning the janitor job will be vacant along with other low-skilled work.
Right now, many employees get paid less than a good wage. However, that can change if they find better jobs that only require a highschool degree. If employees did this in masses, then the employers would have to pay the employees more just to keep them working and to prevent them from leaving the company.
They should quit their current job and get a better one that only requires a high school diploma to work.
The robots for it already exist, my grandmother has one and businesses can buy robots to automate the janitor.
Meanwhile, the janitor would then have to find a better job that pays better, which would benefit hi due to his increased salary.
As for your other quote, when has this idea been tested before?
109 days later
