Minimum Wage Seattle...

[Chizzang]

"You might be making $35,000 a year right now but everyone in here will definitely be making $70,000 a year and I'm super excited about that," Dan Price, CEO of Gravity Payments in Ballard, told his employees during a recent gathering.
The announcement caught everyone off-guard. Could it be true? $70,000 is the new minimum wage in this office?
"To hear those numbers is just, 'Wow,'" said Alyssa O'Neal, who will more than double her salary. She came to Gravity from a career in the Army and is already making plans for her young family.
"House, absolutely. I have this goal of being a 21-year-old homeowner and I'm going to reach that now and I'm stoked," she said.
Price is taking a big pay cut to make the raises possible, but he says it's worth it to make his employees happy and build loyalty.
"I think this is just what everyone deserves," he told employees.
In a growing city where the cost of living is only increasing, some competitive companies are no longer waiting for employees to ask for extra benefits like a raise.
"I think you almost have to be proactive and take care of your employees," said Matt Ehrlichman, CEO of Porch, a company in Eastlake that developed an app to help people find reliable home improvement services.
While they applaud Gravity for its bold move, Porch executives say stock options could be a more valuable offering for their employees who stick around as the business grows.
"If you are trying to build a great long-term company, your employees by definition have to be with you in that journey," he said.
The Gravity raise will be phased in over the next few years, giving the company time to adjust its bottom line and employees a chance to catch their breath.





http://www.king5.com/story/money/2015/0 ... /25761421/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Col Hogan]

Private industry making a decision on what is best for it...it's the American way...no government forcing it to make the decision...no big brother looking over its shoulder

[houndawg]

Private industry making a decision on what is best for it...it's the American way...no government forcing it to make the decision...no big brother looking over its shoulder

Unusually forward thinking.


I don't think the bonus pool boys are going to adopting this business model

[CID1990]

Good for them, and also the company.

[CAA Flagship]

I find this a very interesting case study. I wonder what the employees who had already worked their way up to making $70k are thinking about this.

[YoUDeeMan]

"You might be making $35,000 a year right now but everyone in here will definitely be making $70,000 a year and I'm super excited about that," Dan Price, CEO of Gravity Payments in Ballard, told his employees during a recent gathering.
The announcement caught everyone off-guard. Could it be true? $70,000 is the new minimum wage in this office?
"To hear those numbers is just, 'Wow,'" said Alyssa O'Neal, who will more than double her salary. She came to Gravity from a career in the Army and is already making plans for her young family.
"House, absolutely. I have this goal of being a 21-year-old homeowner and I'm going to reach that now and I'm stoked," she said.
Price is taking a big pay cut to make the raises possible, but he says it's worth it to make his employees happy and build loyalty.
"I think this is just what everyone deserves," he told employees.
In a growing city where the cost of living is only increasing, some competitive companies are no longer waiting for employees to ask for extra benefits like a raise.
"I think you almost have to be proactive and take care of your employees," said Matt Ehrlichman, CEO of Porch, a company in Eastlake that developed an app to help people find reliable home improvement services.
While they applaud Gravity for its bold move, Porch executives say stock options could be a more valuable offering for their employees who stick around as the business grows.
"If you are trying to build a great long-term company, your employees by definition have to be with you in that journey," he said.
The Gravity raise will be phased in over the next few years, giving the company time to adjust its bottom line and employees a chance to catch their breath.





http://www.king5.com/story/money/2015/0 ... /25761421/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

They are in the credit card business...merchant services end. In other words, they are being paid through the increasing load of consumer debt, where a large part of the profit, and the ability to pay merchant services folks, comes from bilking idiots who pay ridiculous amounts of interest on everyday purchases.

In other words, complain about the big, bad banks making money off the working poor Americans..but hey, let's take advantage of those suckers so we can pay our small number of white (check out the pictures and lack of diversity...better get Al Sharpton on the phone) employees a better working wage.

Oh, and they drug test their workers.

[YoUDeeMan]

I find this a very interesting case study. I wonder what the employees who had already worked their way up to making $70k are thinking about this.

Read the fine print...

The employees are at first hired as customer service folks...but they also have to be trained as tech folks so they don't have to transfer calls (and so they learn the inside and out of servicing the merchant's issues with credit card acceptance).

IF they do well on the phones, they are promoted to "sales."

The $70k salary will be phased in over a few years, but only if the company hits their financial (read that as sales) goals.

In plain language, the company is trying to dramatically increase the number of merchants that use them for credit card transactions...and they focus on local merchants. So, you will first be trained to answer beginner customer phone calls from their merchant customers, while also learning about their tech issues, and then, having the knowledge needed to service the merchants, you will be asked to make sales for the company.

Care to guess what happens if you don't make your sales quota?

[CAA Flagship]

Well, that didn't take long.

Just three months ago, Dan Price was a progressive hero. To much fanfare, Price, CEO of Seattle-based Gravity Payments, announced he was raising the minimum salary for employees of his company to $70,000, and taking a $930,000 pay cut himself to help pay for his new minimum wage. Three months later, the experiment does not go well.

Price has had to rent out his own house to help cover his bills. In addition, the New York Times reports Gravity lost two of its most valuable employees whose departure was “spurred in part by their view that it was unfair to double the pay of some new hires while the longest-serving staff members got small or no raises.”

http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/02/ceo-w ... ard-times/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But the most damaging blow to the company is internal, as some of the most valuable employees at Gravity Payments have started to leave the company. The Times reported that two employees have left directly because of the policy. One told the paper she was initially excited about the new policy, but as she thought about the details she began to get dismayed. “He gave raises to people who have the least skills and are the least equipped to do the job, and the ones who were taking on the most didn’t get much of a bump.”

She said she presented the issue to Price along with an alternative way to raise salaries, but was met with an accusation of selfishness. So she decided to quit. Another employee, on the lower-end of the former pay range, also decided to quit after thinking through the policy. “Now the people who were just clocking in and out were making the same as me,” he told the Times. “It shackles high performers to less motivated team members.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidburkus ... -payments/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[JohnStOnge]

Yes. As you can imagine I tuned into Rush Limbaugh today on the long drive back from some field activity and heard about how this guy's decision has blown up in his face. And Limbaugh got to play audio of him saying this was going to blow up in the guy's face back when it first happened. Great day for Limbaugh.

[Chizzang]

Yes. As you can imagine I tuned into Rush Limbaugh today on the long drive back from some field activity and heard about how this guy's decision has blown up in his face. And Limbaugh got to play audio of him saying this was going to blow up in the guy's face back when it first happened. Great day for Limbaugh.

And now for the actual facts...
Yes it has been difficult because some long time employees quit
and some significant accounts dropped

but otherwise it has been as anticipated
and they added more accounts than they lost (RUSH didn't cover that I'm guessing)
and they have a line of people wanting to get hired there to replace the people who left

Nobody said it would be easy - but as a general rule - Rush is blowing his own horn with 1/2 the facts

[CID1990]

Yes. As you can imagine I tuned into Rush Limbaugh today on the long drive back from some field activity and heard about how this guy's decision has blown up in his face. And Limbaugh got to play audio of him saying this was going to blow up in the guy's face back when it first happened. Great day for Limbaugh.

And now for the actual facts...
Yes it has been difficult because some long time employees quit
and some significant accounts dropped

but otherwise it has been as anticipated
and they added more accounts than they lost (RUSH didn't cover that I'm guessing)
and they have a line of people wanting to get hired there to replace the people who left

Nobody said it would be easy - but as a general rule - Rush is blowing his own horn with 1/2 the facts

why did those long time employees quit?

[houndawg]

And now for the actual facts...
Yes it has been difficult because some long time employees quit
and some significant accounts dropped

but otherwise it has been as anticipated
and they added more accounts than they lost (RUSH didn't cover that I'm guessing)
and they have a line of people wanting to get hired there to replace the people who left

Nobody said it would be easy - but as a general rule - Rush is blowing his own horn with 1/2 the facts

why did those long time employees quit?

Not team players. Selfish. No "I" in team...

[kalm]

And now for the actual facts...
Yes it has been difficult because some long time employees quit
and some significant accounts dropped

but otherwise it has been as anticipated
and they added more accounts than they lost (RUSH didn't cover that I'm guessing)
and they have a line of people wanting to get hired there to replace the people who left

Nobody said it would be easy - but as a general rule - Rush is blowing his own horn with 1/2 the facts

why did those long time employees quit?

Because of the inequity of rewarding entry level positions over seniority and the likelihood of finding a better job.

This is one of my biggest complaints about minimum wage increases in that it hampers raises to more deserving people who have been with me longer.

I don't know how much experienced is gained by working at this company, but I do know that

1) Everyone is replaceable

and

2) They'd be stupid at throwing away decent paying jobs without the solid chance of taking an equal if not better position elsewhere.

[CID1990]

why did those long time employees quit?

Because of the inequity of rewarding entry level positions over seniority and the likelihood of finding a better job.

This is one of my biggest complaints about minimum wage increases in that it hampers raises to more deserving people who have been with me longer.

I don't know how much experienced is gained by working at this company, but I do know that

1) Everyone is replaceable

and

2) They'd be stupid at throwing away decent paying jobs without the solid chance of taking an equal if not better position elsewhere.

so people think they should be paid what they are worth, and not the same as some schmuck who just shows up and collects a check?

[kalm]

Because of the inequity of rewarding entry level positions over seniority and the likelihood of finding a better job.

This is one of my biggest complaints about minimum wage increases in that it hampers raises to more deserving people who have been with me longer.

I don't know how much experienced is gained by working at this company, but I do know that

1) Everyone is replaceable

and

2) They'd be stupid at throwing away decent paying jobs without the solid chance of taking an equal if not better position elsewhere.

so people think they should be paid what they are worth, and not the same as some schmuck who just shows up and collects a check?

Yes. However the less green grass on the other side can thwart their uppityness.

[JohnStOnge]

Most of the company’s profits, $2.2 million last year, were reinvested in the company not to expand or innovate, but to cover the new minimum wage.

[kalm]

Most of the company’s profits, $2.2 million last year, were reinvested in the company not to expand or innovate, but to cover the new minimum wage.

Oh boy, I'm gonna get in trouble here for arguing both sides but you do realize that expansion, innovation, and increasing payroll are not mutually exclusive, right?

Obviously whoever you're quoting doesn't.

[CAA Flagship]

I find this a very interesting case study. I wonder what the employees who had already worked their way up to making $70k are thinking about this.

[kalm]

I find this a very interesting case study. I wonder what the employees who had already worked their way up to making $70k are thinking about this.

Attention whore!

[CAA Flagship]

Attention whore!

Like most technical professionals (doctors, dentists, etc.), engineers are not the best businessmen. But one of my bosses in my first job told me about the "equity theory". It came up in a discussion during one of my annual evaluations and he was saying that he couldn't give me the raise he wanted to give me because of the effect on others. I was just 2 or 3 years out of school and did not have my license yet. I remember walking out of there being thrilled with the raise I got, and wondering what the fuck he was talking about.
About a month later I asked him and he handed me a book that discussed it. I took it home and read the relevant portion of the book.............and voted Republican ever since.

[Chizzang]

Any aggressively new idea like this IS AN INVESTMENT
and also with new ideas comes some broken eggs and hard feelings

Isn't it the Republican work motto "if you don't like it then leave..."
well here you go - this is a great example in play - some folks didn't like and and left

The company invested in itself by investing in its employees
(and John and Rush Limbaugh are stunned) Go figure

Its the same as the Wal-Mart vs. Costco business strategy
They are both successful / They are both completely different ideologically speaking

[CAA Flagship]

Any aggressively new idea like this IS AN INVESTMENT
and also with new ideas comes some broken eggs and hard feelings

Isn't it the Republican work motto "if you don't like it then leave..."
well here you go - this is a great example in play - some folks didn't like and and left

The company invested in itself by investing in its employees
(and John and Rush Limbaugh are stunned) Go figure

Its the same as the Wal-Mart vs. Costco business strategy
They are both successful / They are both completely different ideologically speaking

There are many good things about the "plan". 1st, you can higher the best of the best. You will be flooded with applications and you will be hiring high quality applicants. 2nd, you can demand excellence from your employees. Anheuser-Busch, at least until the buyout by Inbev, compensated it's union employees in the top 5% of all union jobs in America. Complete morats were being compensated around $48/hour (late 90's figure) (factoring in all benefits, but not overtime), and they knew they could not make that amount anywhere else. The smarter morats made sure they worked hard and did not fuck up.

The problem is that he just gave huge raises to people he hired for far less, meaning that they are not likely the "best of the best". And he clearly pissed off people that are upset that these people are making nearly as much money as they are without having put in the effort or having the responsibility that they do.
You can't give the student that busts their ass and "A" and every other student a "B", regardless of how little they studied or how bad they performed on the tests.

[Chizzang]

Any aggressively new idea like this IS AN INVESTMENT
and also with new ideas comes some broken eggs and hard feelings

Isn't it the Republican work motto "if you don't like it then leave..."
well here you go - this is a great example in play - some folks didn't like and and left

The company invested in itself by investing in its employees
(and John and Rush Limbaugh are stunned) Go figure

Its the same as the Wal-Mart vs. Costco business strategy
They are both successful / They are both completely different ideologically speaking

There are many good things about the "plan". 1st, you can higher the best of the best. You will be flooded with applications and you will be hiring high quality applicants. 2nd, you can demand excellence from your employees. Anheuser-Busch, at least until the buyout by Inbev, compensated it's union employees in the top 5% of all union jobs in America. Complete morats were being compensated around $48/hour (late 90's figure) (factoring in all benefits, but not overtime), and they knew they could not make that amount anywhere else. The smarter morats made sure they worked hard and did not fuck up.

The problem is that he just gave huge raises to people he hired for far less, meaning that they are not likely the "best of the best". And he clearly pissed off people that are upset that these people are making nearly as much money as they are without having put in the effort or having the responsibility that they do.
You can't give the student that busts their ass and "A" and every other student a "B", regardless of how little they studied or how bad they performed on the tests.

You're making assumptions about how they hired prior vs. after
And they are wrong assumptions
and he also let go of under-performing staff during that period

All you're doing is repeating the ancient business 101 text

This company and it's practices will need to be evaluated over time
but yes - the knee jerk reaction is well documented
We can all tune in to Rush and listen to him tell us how the world works



Thanks but I'll let this one play out...

[houndawg]

Who was it that said :" "Our people are our greatest resource."?

Used to hear it from HR all the time.

[CAA Flagship]

There are many good things about the "plan". 1st, you can higher the best of the best. You will be flooded with applications and you will be hiring high quality applicants. 2nd, you can demand excellence from your employees. Anheuser-Busch, at least until the buyout by Inbev, compensated it's union employees in the top 5% of all union jobs in America. Complete morats were being compensated around $48/hour (late 90's figure) (factoring in all benefits, but not overtime), and they knew they could not make that amount anywhere else. The smarter morats made sure they worked hard and did not fuck up.

The problem is that he just gave huge raises to people he hired for far less, meaning that they are not likely the "best of the best". And he clearly pissed off people that are upset that these people are making nearly as much money as they are without having put in the effort or having the responsibility that they do.
You can't give the student that busts their ass and "A" and every other student a "B", regardless of how little they studied or how bad they performed on the tests.

You're making assumptions about how they hired prior vs. after
And they are wrong assumptions
and he also let go of under-performing staff during that period

All you're doing is repeating the ancient business 101 text

This company and it's practices will need to be evaluated over time
but yes - the knee jerk reaction is well documented
We can all tune in to Rush and listen to him tell us how the world works



Thanks but I'll let this one play out...

Those assumptions are not wrong. At most they are "likely". At least they are "likely". He probably had 100 of his 120 employees making less than $40k. And most of them are "likely" being paid what they are worth in today's job market.

Now, as for your hero, he was taking home 1 million dollars. The question is why was he taking home 1 million dollars when the company profited only 2.2 million dollars? This fool should have read the ancient business 101 text. If you want to reward your employees, you do so in bonuses and not salary. Salaries bind you for years. Bonuses are in the moment, and when you know you can afford it.