Print
Comment
Rate
A lower wage for teens? May be something to it.
We think the House Commerce Committee is onto something. A few days ago, they passed a new measure that would set the minimum wage for those 22 or younger to 75 percent of the state's minimum wage rate.
The state's current minimum wage is $7.25 an hour. That means some younger workers could be hired at only $5.44 an hour.
Nationally, the most recent figures breaking down unemployment by age from the U.S. Census Bureau show nearly 19 percent of those 16 through 19 who want to work were unemployed in 2008. At that time, the overall state jobless rate was 6.1 percent. The figure for those 20 through 24 was 10.3 percent.
Federal minimum wage law already has a youth exemption. It states that for the first 90 calendar days of employment, those under 20 years old can be paid $4.25 an hour. But after that first 90 days, the wage reverts to the federal minimum.
At this point, businesses that operate across state lines or that have $500,000 or more in annual revenues would have to follow the federal law. The state bill would only apply to small local businesses not covered by federal law.
We think this could be a good idea. The highest unemployment rate during this recession is for younger workers. A lot of these young people simply can't get into the job market because business owners can't afford to pay them the higher minimum. Besides, if they are forced to pay $7.25 an hour, why not hire a more experienced worker who will be underemployed even at the higher rate.
We think the Legislature ought to look at getting the age limits in line with federal law, so the cutoff should be at 20 years old. And many businesses would not qualify for this exception in any case because of their revenues or sales across state lines.
Nevertheless, we think this might be a useful measure to allow businesses to hire young people with little experience at a lower rate. At least kids who want to work can get a foot in the door and something to put on their resume. In the final analysis, the market will determine the rate. If this recession ends and there are more jobs than workers, the wages will rise of their own accord.
The state's current minimum wage is $7.25 an hour. That means some younger workers could be hired at only $5.44 an hour.
Nationally, the most recent figures breaking down unemployment by age from the U.S. Census Bureau show nearly 19 percent of those 16 through 19 who want to work were unemployed in 2008. At that time, the overall state jobless rate was 6.1 percent. The figure for those 20 through 24 was 10.3 percent.
Federal minimum wage law already has a youth exemption. It states that for the first 90 calendar days of employment, those under 20 years old can be paid $4.25 an hour. But after that first 90 days, the wage reverts to the federal minimum.
At this point, businesses that operate across state lines or that have $500,000 or more in annual revenues would have to follow the federal law. The state bill would only apply to small local businesses not covered by federal law.
We think this could be a good idea. The highest unemployment rate during this recession is for younger workers. A lot of these young people simply can't get into the job market because business owners can't afford to pay them the higher minimum. Besides, if they are forced to pay $7.25 an hour, why not hire a more experienced worker who will be underemployed even at the higher rate.
We think the Legislature ought to look at getting the age limits in line with federal law, so the cutoff should be at 20 years old. And many businesses would not qualify for this exception in any case because of their revenues or sales across state lines.
Nevertheless, we think this might be a useful measure to allow businesses to hire young people with little experience at a lower rate. At least kids who want to work can get a foot in the door and something to put on their resume. In the final analysis, the market will determine the rate. If this recession ends and there are more jobs than workers, the wages will rise of their own accord.
 |
||
| Budget cuts could put food safety at risk |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of willcoxrangenews.com.
Craig wrote on Mar 5, 2010 12:32 PM:
" William, its 25% not "roughly 40%". It says that in the article, don't "roughly" double the number because of your horrible math.
And why would this extend to adults (18-22)? Aren't these the individuals that are going to college and trying to pay themselves through an education? Won't that sabotage them? The longer I'm seperated from college the more I wish I went and rode it out until I recieved a degree. If they make lower wages they will have to work longer (less time to be studious), and it doesn't mean their parents are in a fiscal situtation where they can, or can afford, to help their children. Why would this be supported? "
And why would this extend to adults (18-22)? Aren't these the individuals that are going to college and trying to pay themselves through an education? Won't that sabotage them? The longer I'm seperated from college the more I wish I went and rode it out until I recieved a degree. If they make lower wages they will have to work longer (less time to be studious), and it doesn't mean their parents are in a fiscal situtation where they can, or can afford, to help their children. Why would this be supported? "
William Chinworth wrote on Mar 11, 2010 8:10 AM:
" Craig, my math was an approximation of the average of the two wages (the Federal exception and the proposed State exception) quoted in the article.
However, from your comment, it appears you completely missed my argument -- that if the Federal (or State) Minimum wage is to be excepted, the FICA and Medicare extraction that young workers would be subject should also be reduced.
I apologize if my off-the-cuff mental math caused you to ignore the rest of post. "
However, from your comment, it appears you completely missed my argument -- that if the Federal (or State) Minimum wage is to be excepted, the FICA and Medicare extraction that young workers would be subject should also be reduced.
I apologize if my off-the-cuff mental math caused you to ignore the rest of post. "
William Chinworth wrote on Mar 4, 2010 9:15 AM:
It's assumed that most teenagers are working for a little spending cash. But many are working to pay or save for college. As a nation, let's help them put a little more cash towards that goal which in the long run will net the Nation more in tax revenue once today's teenager is in the work force full time. "