Work Reform

10037 readers

583 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.

Our Goals

Higher wages for underpaid workers.
Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
Better and fewer working hours.
Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

seeCseas@lemmy.world

tintory@lemm.ee

TinMod@lemmy.world

1568

Gen Z is prioritizing living over working because they've seen 'the legacy of broken promises' in corporate America, a future-of-work expert says (www.businessinsider.com)

submitted 10 months ago by stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to c/workreform@lemmy.world

332 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A future-of-work expert said Gen Zers didn't have the "promise of stability" at work, so they're putting their personal lives and well-being first.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 37 points 10 months ago (2 children)

In 1960, minimum wage was $1.00/hour and the price of the average home was $11,000.00. Of course people wanted to work hard and save, because they could see that it paid off almost instantly.

BTW, in 1960 $1 million would buy a mansion, a few nice cars, and a couple of businesses. Today, it's what a rich guy pays for a party.

[–] DerisionConsulting@lemmy.ca 13 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I wanted to see a graph, and couldn't find one online.

It looks like, at least in the middle of Canada, being born between 1960 and 1980 was the ideal time if you wanted to buy a home.

This doesn't take into account mortgage rates, tax rates, average household income, unemployment rates, or other cost of living expenses.
I just wanted a little chart, not to lose my whole day

In the middle of Canada; Winnipeg, MB:

Year	Minimum wage	House price	Price/wage (lower is better)
1960	$0.66	$15,151	22,956
1970	$1.50	$51,678	34,452
1980	$3.15	$53,513	16,988
1990	$4.70	$87,173	18,547
2000	$6.00	$95,520	15,920
2010	$9.50	$231,411	24,359
2020	$11.90	$299,994	25,209

Lazy sources:
https://www.gov.mb.ca/labour/standards/history-min.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3TKC-H0omc
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/980512/dq980512-eng.htm

[–] SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That early minimum wage growth is huge. 2,5x during 1960-70, then 2x 10 years later. Imagine minimum wage being $30 by 2030, then $60 by 2040.

[–] DerisionConsulting@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

If we wanted things to keep pace with the house price to wage ratio of 1980(for people born in 1960), Minimum wage should've been $17.66 in 2020.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 2 points 10 months ago

Minimum wage had an increase of 1,703%. Housing had an increase of 1,880%.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

In 1960 you could buy an estate in Beverly Hills, or La Jolla, for a cool $100,000