This is what's wrong with the US...

THIS is what's wrong with this country?

Cycle of poverty, public education going to hell, deficit-spending mania coming home to roost ...

Thing is, if all people have to look forward to is 25,000 to manage others... Above poverty, but not by much. This is in a Div 1 college town. $25,000 doesn't make it very far.

I agree with you. There are a lot of issues with this country. Can we agree that a happier, properly compensated workforce would help?

Labor rates are to some extent a function of market economics. It's important, of course, to legislate laws that set a minimum wage, compensate workers for sickness, maternity leave, etc... But beyond all that, the market will determine the wage.

If someone's willing to work 45 hours a week for $25K a year, why should the owners of the hotel pay more? Businesses operate on profit margin, not on some feel-good sentiment because they pay their employees more than the next guy. If no one is willing to take that job at $25K a year, the hotel will be forced the raise the wage to fill the position.

Now, you get what you pay for. If you want to run an upscale hotel that runs $300 a night, you need to pay more for experienced hotel management. My guess is that this hotel is not a 5 star Marriott in downtown San Francisco. It's probably some Motel-6 type place in Shitsville, USA. Have you ever stopped to crash at some crappy roadside motel? What kind of rocket scientist happened to be behind the desk at 2 a.m.? Probably someone who can't do better than $25K a year anywhere else. And don't forget that entry level teachers with college degrees often make very close to $25K a year, and they are working a hell of a lot more than 45 hours a week teaching our kids.

Which is why we get such lousy service. I am 48, when I was a kid the employees in retail stores were mosrly adults who made their living selling what they sold.

Now, there is no one to help you.

No customer service.

I made reservations at a hotel for a high school cross-country team in August. I frequently called to make sure everyting was fine with the reservations. One week before the meet, I called to confirm my rooms and they told me that the part of the hotel where my rooms were BURNED DOWN!!! They weren't going to tell me! They were going to let me show up, 5 hours from home, with a group of teenagers and nowhere to stay! That's service.

Not saying your post is bad, but to SOME extent?try more like they are entirely a function of the marketeven with a minimum wage, sure it will change the market but the market still determines quantity at the various wages and qualitywhere is this $25k a year... a div I college town means is meaninglesswhere penn state is, that is a div i college town... i certainly wouldn't call it expensive there

RunDaddy wrote:

Labor rates are to some extent a function of market economics. s.

I partially agree with you. But here's thing.....In reality, while this is technically a mangament/leadership position, a chimpanzee could do this job. Any Joe Schmoe with an IQ of 90 and a vague sense of responsibility could be a front office manager at a hotel. The posted title of a job often makes it sound like a bigger deal than it actually is. For instance, Janitor becomes "Custodial Technician.

Plus, the job requires no education. So why should a job that requires no education, that could conceivably be performed by a person with below average intelligence, command an above average income?

correction: front 'desk' manager

[quote]anEconomist wrote:

Not saying your post is bad, but to SOME extent?

try more like they are entirely a function of the market

even with a minimum wage, sure it will change the market but the market still determines quantity at the various wages and quality

where is this $25k a year... a div I college town means is meaningless

where penn state is, that is a div i college town... i certainly wouldn't call it expensive there

[quote]

Right - I should have said 'mostly' determined. But not nearly entirely, as a bunch of labor laws and things like government subsidies, tariffs (for some industries), and mandating benefits like health insurance all affect the price of labor and, consequently, wage rates.

Thanks mcordi. That is what I'm getting at. If you pay someone more and don't work more than "the norm" they will provide better customer service.

I've heard about teachers making less than 30K. I've never seen it, I went to school in Michigan (where they get paid more?), but I do think it's a shame. I've also heard of teachers making much more however.

It seems like the cost of living is continually going up, but the compensation for workers doesn't keep up. That statement could be entirely wrong. I have no idea where that balance is at in comparison to years, decades ago...

I'm not sure who stated it, but what is your definition of an "above average income" if you are calling this 25,000 average??

This hotel is in Boulder, CO.

Perhaps this job would be suited for a retiree with ample time to augment their retirement pay. It's not a livable wage anywhere I know.

It's not a livable wage anywhere I know.

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you!

Seriously? wrote:

If you pay someone more and don't work more than "the norm" they will provide better customer service.

...

This is an erroneous assumption.

If the salaries of the folks that work at your favorite running store were suddenly doubled tomorrow, do you think you'd get twice as good service when you walked in the door in two weeks? I doubt it. If you want a quality person to work for you, you need to set a base entry wage that's respectable and competitive in the market you're in. Raising that wage should reward loyalty and performance - not be an incentive to work harder.

Again, the hotel is competing in the market for labor with "hotel management" experience. If the average hotel manager position in Boulder is paying $50K a year for 45 hours of work a week (putting aside, for simplicity, benefits and other factors that go into job quality), then the hotel in Boulder offering the same position for $25K a year is probably not going to get the best qualified person for the position. But, it may get the hotel an employee that's good enough for the clientele the hotel is targeting. If the hotel is targeting low income travelers that don't expect much more than a cheap place to crash, why would it look to pay the same for a hotel manager that Boulder's version of the Four Seasons does?

I've worked in 57 different countries in the course of my career. Americans do quite well in wage compensation. Their problem is they consume too much and save very little.

kiko wrote:

Perhaps this job would be suited for a retiree with ample time to augment their retirement pay. It's not a livable wage anywhere I know.

So what. The hotel is under no obligation to offer a "liveable" wage? It is only required to offer a wage that complies with U.S. labor laws.

If you owned the hotel and were operating on a 2% margin, you might view the issue slightly differently.

If a retiree takes the job to pay their health care co-pays, great. That means the market will take care of you too when you get old.

9 times out of 10 that assumption is correct.

This is a starting wage. If one employee gets 25, and another gets 30, (all things equal) chances are the better paid employee will perform better.

Now, before someone disagrees, I'll also say that if the employee doesn't provide the expected level of service, then they shouldn't get to keep that job.

Americans do consume waaaaay too much. But, $25,000 does not allow one to consume much at all given the cost of living in the area.

I see the management side a bit better now. I still think, however, it's this attitude that "if someone will work for 25 why should I pay 30" that is driving morale into the ground.

I guess it comes down to inflation. Someone explained it to me this way:

Look at the average income in, say, 1970. Look at the average income now.

Look at the average price of a new car and new house in 1970. Look at those prices now. They are way out of line.

Also, anyone alive in 1970- compare what the average family owned and operated back then with now.

I live in the house I grew up in. When I was 11 we did not have as many "things" as my family does now. All the technological gadgets that did not exist back then. If I got rid of the expenses I have that my parents did not have (internet, cell phones, the extra electricity to power all the "extra's") I would have a lot more money.

Also, my first semester of college in 1977 cost me $600.00 at State University ( I lived at home). I went back to that same university in 1997 to get a masters in education and my books cost $600.00!

Another thing that has changed- when I was a kid my doctor lived in my neighborhood- nicer house, but still my neighborhood and we were far from wealthy.

Now, doctors are building these mansions outside of town. I do not begrudge the doctors their money, thye earned it, it is just an observation (and no more housecalls).

Any economist out there? How do we fix that?

fix what? are you referring to urban vacuum?

Seriously? wrote:

9 times out of 10 that assumption is correct.

This is a starting wage. If one employee gets 25, and another gets 30, (all things equal) chances are the better paid employee will perform better.

No. Wrong. The employer offering 30 should be able to hire the better qualified employee, all things being equal. But once both employees are hired and into the job, how well they perform the job will have nothing to do with how much they're making. Actually, quite the opposite is more likely. The person making 25, once they learn that someone in town is making 30 for the same job, is more apt to bust their butt so they get the next job that opens at higher than 30, and beat out the person making 30. This is the way the world works in a market economy.

Moreover, I have never known someone (although I'm sure they exist) that goes to work and says "last week I was happy and busting my butt for $50K a year, but today I learned that some guy just got hired across town for $55K doing the same. Therefore, from today on I'm going to do a half-assed job until I am earning more than that guy."

Competent people with integrity and pride work hard if they are treated with respect and their work is valued. Monetary compensation is part of that "valuing", but not everything. If an employer wants to keep good people, he/she will have to pay more salary relative to the market, plain and simple.

A sack of white castles says this job is either a) in the south b) in the midwest or c) far outside any big city.

The median household income in Louisville, KY...a city of 700,000 in a metro area of over 1 million is about $40k. The per capita income of the county is about 25k. Of course median household rent is only $450 and the median home price is I believe $120-140k.

Remember this job is asking for a desk manager...not THE manager of the hotel. Big, huge, difference. $25k is roughly $10 per hour. Your front desk attendants would make around $8 an hour. You don't need to have any sort of degree or education to be a desk watcher.

While we're at it, Boulder has one of the highest per capita incomes in the nation:

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regional/lapi/2004/mpi0504.htm