我都係打工仔，
我覺得打工仔爭取權益係天經地義，
但不適宜將商人或僱主妖魔化，
咁對解決問題係無幫助。

引用:

原帖由 至尊豪庭9 於 2008-10-7 22:00 發表
時代
要北移一早移左啦,商家佬有錢(賴)到盡啦,加咁多租夠增加成本啦,你唔小下??

但如果成本不斷增加, 便會迫使雇主將可以遷移工序轉向低成本的地方.特別在電子資訊發達,的時代, 很多文書, 後勤的工序都可以遷移.

本人都是打工仔, 不斷受到高層的壓力, 如何可以減少人手, 節省成本.

引用:

原帖由 理魯竇 於 2008-10-7 23:29 發表
我都係打工仔，
。

Not all employers are bad.

引用:

原帖由 peninsula 於 2008-10-7 13:40 發表

2 different issues!

你可以話係different issues,但係絕對有莫大關係, 而唔可以唔去作出考慮.

簡化作出比如, 最低工資一出, 一定會影響 "所有" 行業, 最前線, 茶餐廳, 7仔, 百佳, 零售, 後勤有會計, 文員, 雜工, 送貨. 個市好既時候, 咪加價. 大家有多d咪洗多d.

個市唔好, 左減右治之後, 都要加價. 大家咪飲少杯咖啡, 出少d街, 洗少d錢, 睇下邊個失業先.  高通脹加高失業, 好似叫"stagflation".

以往經濟出問題, 都係工業支持住, 生產力出口. 但係今次會有d唔同.  有無留意東莞10億救中小企. 銀碼係小, 重點係姿態, 有無朋友做廠?  同佢地傾傾, 問題係好嚴重.

首先搞清楚, 我唔係反對最低工資.  但係做野一定要睇大勢時機.  對或者錯係好主觀既一回事, 不過, 現實就客觀到不得了, 唔好同我講一步就可以到烏托邦.

車要維修找車房, 病要睇醫生, 電路要交比工程師.  依定美國經濟出問題都係由 Bernanke 同 Paulson 諗計去處理. 咩叫專業知識. 而我地香港尊貴議員, 有幾多專業知識, 大家心裡有數.  

尊貴議員唔識唔係問題, 無人可以識所有野, 咪聽取專業意見, 然後基於 "香港整體利益", 而唔係 "私人主觀執著, 或者政治分數, 票源利益" 來做野.
民主嗎, 好似長毛係"高票"當選, 咪睇下佢地點做.

最低工資, 咪最低工資.  經濟出問題, 就唔好一句說話, "行政失當",  班尊貴議員就好似完全無責任.

If it's cleaning, security, fast food etc, then eventually this will be passed on to everybody, higher mgn't fee, food prices...it's all of us paying the bill, no free lunch.

If SMEs, many of the owners actually not earn that much (or maybe even lower than salary man). But they created jobs for others, and take risks (think of those toys recall, toxic paints etc, easily they will lose all they have), & i think they deserve some respect.

Actually, most SME owners earn their fortune from stocks & property investments. Their biz can't create a fortune to them.

引用:

原帖由 peninsula 於 2008-10-5 11:18 發表

Terrible. Too low!

What's acceptable hour rate from your point of view?

引用:

原帖由 至尊豪庭9 於 2008-10-8 21:08 發表

都話要走一早走左啦,而家夠冇最低工資啦,可以走的商家佬咪一樣走,走唔到的就一定要留0係香港,清潔,保安,等好多都走唔到,你咪用以偏概全呢招黎拆啦,冇人信呀.
你老細想減人手叫佢執左間野啦,咁就唔使請人囉,小你老 ...

我老細都是打工仔, 他都要比人小.

引用:

原帖由 public59 於 2008-10-8 00:25 發表
但如果成本不斷增加, 便會迫使雇主將可以遷移工序轉向低成本的地方.特別在電子資訊發達,的時代, 很多文書, 後勤的工序都可以遷移.
本人都是打工仔, 不斷受到高層的壓力, 如何可以減少人手, 節省成本.

傻啦!!! 呢幾年唔流行遷移, 家下流行關門大吉

引用:

原帖由 public59 於 2008-10-8 22:37 發表
What's acceptable hour rate from your point of view?

At least $40. Now, things are so expensive and economy is going down the tube.

引用:

原帖由 peninsula 於 2008-10-10 21:02 發表

At least $40. Now, things are so expensive and economy is going down the tube.

物價同經濟係的而且確既事實, 但係$40 最低工資係咪答案?

遠既, 高地價房屋問題, 有人曾經想用8萬5公屋來做答案.

近既, 尊貴既黃議員, 叫取消強積金, 就每個香港人張來都會退休保障. 人口老化會點? d錢響邊到來?

千絲萬縷, 如果真係高d最低工資就可以解決問題, 不如比夠時薪$100, 我都想大家多d錢洗.

引用:

原帖由 Rainybreeze 於 2008-10-11 20:25 發表
物價同經濟係的而且確既事實, 但係$40 最低工資係咪答案?
遠既, 高地價房屋問題, 有人曾經想用8萬5公屋來做答案.
近既, 尊貴既黃議員, 叫取消強積金, 就每個香港人張來都會退休保障. 人口老化會點? d錢響邊到 ...

There must be a basis.

引用:

原帖由 peninsula 於 2008-10-11 20:42 發表

There must be a basis.

Not only there must be a basis; there HAS been a basis, which HAS been dictated by the market.
The concern is whether the government should intervene the labor market? how should it be done? what are the consequences of such intervention?

There aren't simple answers, but one thing for sure is, hopefully, someone who knows what he/she is talking will answer this questions for Hong Kong.

引用:

原帖由 peninsula 於 2008-10-10 21:02 發表

At least $40. Now, things are so expensive and economy is going down the tube.

It makes sense to have a higher min hour rate if things are so expensive.
But if the economy is going down, is it still necessary to compulsory set a higher min hour rate? It should be determined by market.

Some reports about the effect of minimum wage ordinance :
In UK and USA, the findings have been
1/  There has " no measurable adverse effect on employment or inflation."
2/  No obvious incentive for young people to leave full time education and start working.

http://www.lowpay.gov.uk/lowpay/report/pdf/2006_Min_Wage.pdf

http://www.risep-fiu.org/reports/Florida_Minimum_Wage_Report.pdf

引用:

原帖由 public59 於 2008-10-12 01:10 發表
It makes sense to have a higher min hour rate if things are so expensive.
But if the economy is going down, is it still necessary to compulsory set a higher min hour rate? It should be determined ...

At least, something that is reasonable and acceptable to all.

唔明香港的大業主咁無良心,市道一好就加租,完全唔理d經營者能否負擔.

引用:

原帖由 oneout 於 2008-10-12 16:56 發表
唔明香港的大業主咁無良心,市道一好就加租,完全唔理d經營者能否負擔.

所以過去幾十年, 經濟成果/利潤大部份去了大業主及地產商- very unhealthy.
經營者便向打工仔開刀.

引用:

原帖由 Rubber 於 2008-10-12 11:09 發表
Some reports about the effect of minimum wage ordinance :
In UK and USA, the findings have been
1/  There has " no measurable adverse effect on employment or inflation."
2/  No obvious incentive fo ...

From a fundamental scientifical stand point, if the above reports' conclusions are to be applied to Hong Kong, the reports' premises and pre-conditions should be in agreement with Hong Kong's conditions for the conclusion to be valid.

I presume you have read the reports.  In UK's case, in drawing the conclusion, what were they doing to the minimium wages?

In Florida's case, do you think the construction industry blooming (Thanks for CDS and CDO) has anything to do with the economy status at 2005?

Here's a link from the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta
http://www.frbatlanta.org/invoke.cfm?objectid=98D5072C-5056-9F06-99352E51FC7900C1&method=display

我以前做個一間公司，
由清潔公司承包清潔工作，
有兩個亞嬸長駐清潔，
工作量不多，
佢地樂於每月收三千幾，
如果落實最少每月6864，
肯定兩個只能活一個。

可能好心變左做壞事。

引用:

原帖由 Rainybreeze 於 2008-10-13 01:05 發表


From a fundamental scientifical stand point, if the above reports' conclusions are to be applied to Hong Kong, the reports' premises and pre-conditions should be in agreement with Hong Kong's cond ...

In the UK, from the report, they have been increasing the min wage on a yearly rate higher than the average national income increase, that means the lowest income groups are increasing their income.

In the Florida case, there have been a yearly chat and showing that employment rate has increase with respect to nation (USA) wide figures.

I like to point out that the same argument about "job lost", "inflation" has been cited in these countries but that did not happened in reality.

Of course, you are right that the economic model, the culture, the spending (or saving) behaviour all have an impact and social science is not an "exact" science, we have to do what we believe is right and adjust if there is any shortcoming surfaced.

[ 本帖最後由 Rubber 於 2008-10-13 11:29 編輯 ]

引用:

原帖由 Rubber 於 2008-10-13 11:26 發表


In the UK, from the report, they have been increasing the min wage on a yearly rate higher than the average national income increase, that means the lowest income groups are increasing their incom ...

For UK, here is the link to the Low Pay Commission Report 2008

http://www.lowpay.gov.uk/lowpay/report/pdf/2008_Min_Wage.pdf

Do read the Chairman's Foreward

For Florida, on 2005, with the cheap mortgage readily available, they were selling Florida like paradise at an arm's length.  With no real production output increase, yet the property market was blooming.  Jobs were everywhere at that stage of economy.

Behavioral science is not exact science.  I give you that.  But we believe in science, I think we should never doubt the emprical methodolgy of science.  

Newton is wrong. NO! There is just something beyond Newton, we call that Quantum Physics.