Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Retail Employees Getting Smaller Raises of Approximately 4% in 2023
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It would be nice if people spoke clearly and didn't obfuscate things.
The term for that is Business Unionism. Basically the footing that many unions adopted in the 80’s. Protect your workers, but not Labor overall.
For someone that claims to hate politicians so much you sure are evasive when it comes to answering simple yes or no questions
Are you claiming that “in a few years” Apple will be staffing its retail stores with “illegal immigrants?”
or just finding a way to wedge one of your racist tropes in to any discussion you can find?
Last edited:
What planet are we living on? In what world is a $60k salary for an “unskilled” job like retail worker considered slave wages? I’m sure the top end $30/hr are for NYC/LA workers.
I don’t know what planet we’re living on when $30 wage with excellent benefits for a retail worker is considered bad.
Not regionally adjusted though. It’s below COLA in many places. And that’s assuming things stay “low.”
But Apple knows the best way to prevent unionization is to offer wages with negative real growth. 🙄
when median rent in NYC hit $3700? if you make $60k that represents most of your take home by itself
It’s called layoffs.
You ger raises during good times because there is no job security. During bad times there are layoffs and the remaining employees have to be more productive, which is a defacto pay cut.
So by waving a magic wand they are now legal and can work here? That’s not how a lawful federal government works. They need to go back to wherever they came from and come in with accordance to our laws. No other country on the planet lets you do that. Protecting your country and selectively letting in migrants is not xenophobia. It’s common sense.
@nathansz you starting to see what’s going on?
You’re definition does nothing to change my point. I’m all for States rights handling state issues. Immigration or illegal invasion in this case is a federal issue.
You’re going to have to read through and find it yourself.
I guess when you’re so far to the left even the “center” is “far right”.
Don’t have much to say on this one?
There’s no “racism” involved in any of this. If you think allowing millions of people in to the country and giving them access to more federal services than some of our veterans receive, then I don’t know what else to say.
Sorry, I don’t get how your math works in that first paragraph. I do certainly expect that share prices will adjust over time, I just don’t expect a quick one for one, as I have never seen the market behave that way. But I don’t understand your assertion that the share holder will come out ahead if the prices don’t increase at all. Even in the simplified example you first gave, where you own a tenth of the company, if the price didn’t change, you would only have the same value of shares you started with. It isn’t like they buy back all shares except yours and you suddenly have a controlling interest. The value proposition is dependent on the price moving at least somewhat in step with the buybacks.
I don’t really have a problem with that, and it actually makes sense to me, especially when it seems like the market is undervaluing a company’s shares… buy low, like everyone else should.
I do have an issue with the “activist investor” scenarios where those guys buy up large quantities of shares and then demand company buybacks in the media. That specific move is so obviously market manipulation that there should be an SEC rule where the activist investor will be charged the moment they try it.
He poorly worded it, however it’s called fiduciary duty and it requires prioritization of the wellbeing of the company. It’s not a slam dunk answer because anyone could argue that the general health & welfare of the employees are part of that wellbeing. In business parlance, the CEO would argue back that their are metrics for employee satisfaction and as long as those are met, they’re fine and within their fiduciary responsibilities. They would use those metrics to determine that many employees are happy and don’t care about what the CEO makes and feel happy about the 4% increase. I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with you, just trying to clarify what he was saying.What is this law that requires for-profit companies to prioritize their financial health? I've never heard of such a law.
It sure what you’re on about exactly
I just know you still haven’t answered the question
Oh yeah you are a centrist. Sure!
Ive read so many of your far right and conspiracy theory posts on these forums that this literally made me laugh out loud.
You are probably not living alone, in a 1 bedroom apartment in NYC if you only make $60k a year.
Life is about choices. I’ve lived my life in California. It too is very expensive. If I want to continue living here I either downgrade locations, work towards a better job, or move. You said median rent so there are literally places from little to very expensive. If you’re a retail worker in NYC, hopefully you’re dual income, room mates, or you found a decent rent bargain. It’s why people flock across our southern border. They’re looking for a better standard of living. If NYC is too expensive, it may be time to look elsewhere. We’re quite lucky that our country has 50 different states and economies. I too will be moving away from a state that I’ve lived in for 55 years because it’s too expensive, when I retire I want my income and expenses to align with my happiness goals.
$60,000 can be extremely difficult to live on your own in NYC/SF/LA/Seattle/Portland in the United States these days.
We have some very strange disconnects in where it's obvious that something needs to be done, but we have elected officials who seemingly have no issues seeing many end up in dire situations. Whether it be a tent at the tenderloin in SF, Skidrow in LA or by the Hudson River in NYC - these things shouldn't be happening at this scale to people who work full-time and a single slip or accident is followed by a call to local government asking for assistance.
Everytime someone has a reply like this I have to wonder "do you have family? Children? Dependents? family care responsibilities? A support network? Specific medical needs? Disabilities (or someone in your family who does)? The cash to move in the first place (spoiler: moving a family isnt cheap)? A drivers license (NYC is one of the few places in this country where most people dont drive to work) and cash for a car (because almost anywhere else you'll need one)? Can you come up with the first and last months rent plus security deposit for the place you're moving? Do you have help to move? Have you found a job where you want to move to afford it (it's hard to find a job before you move)?"
"people can just move" is such an utterly unrealistic and absurdly simplistic response to high cost of living that I almost feel embarrassed for people who make the argument. It's not that easy for most people.
Also, re:median, the average is higher than the median and the bottom that pulls it down at all is hard to access (rent stabilization, section 8/NYCHA, ML buildings, etc are all difficult to get)
It's an idea or counter argument that isn't really well thought out. Any meaningful pushback exposes the wet paper bag level logic the argument has.
I try to avoid politics on here, but what we are witnessing is needing to shift our priorities. The amount of money that goes into programs in most cases costs MORE than the cost associated with working to get more affordable housing out there. You combine this with other programs that have hurt the middle class and this misguided achievement of 'job creation' within these programs and you can quickly see how this loop we are in has contributed mightily to the mental health crisis we have today.
I shouldn't have clicked into this thread! I just want to enjoy my new iPhone coming soon!
Actually it’s called life. Everyone has those choices to make at some point. It’s not unrealistic especially since it goes on every day at our southern border. Those people left anything and everything for a better life. Certainly we in this country are better off, if not perhaps a foot journey to El Salvador might provide some perspective.