One question

[Luvnit2]

(09-03-2023, 07:29 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: That is great about being able to claim head of household, however the context of what I was commenting on was where you took issue with 16-17 year old workers being paid the same as 18 and up.  I've come to the realization that in this day and age, most 16-17 year old people that are working are doing so because they actually need the money, as opposed to my generation where if you weren't involved in extra curricular activities at school it was expected that one be productive and get a job.

There is no doubt there are 16 and 17 year olds who work to help support their family. My experience is they are in the minority. My 3 daughters played sports and worked because they wanted things like a car, a savings to help when they went to college for example. The kids that worked for me most had similar goals. For the record, I got to know these kids very well. 

My issue is in a direct way, giving all 16 and 17 year olds the same minimum wage hurts those adults who are on their own or a second wage earner in the restaurant businesses. I would much rather give $3 an hour more  in starting pay to an adult than to a minor. The issue is economics won't allow many businesses who have 50% of their workforce as minors to afford it.

Also, I think many don't realize minors have restrictions on when and how many hours they can work with school in session. Last, I hope everyone remembers minimum wage is a starting point for employment. The minimum wage in Ohio goes up every year for inflation, good and great performers can earn a couple of scheduled raises a year in my old businesses. There are opportunities for advancement with those with leadership skills.

My point is the 16 and 17 year olds starting at the same wage as adults, hurts the adults starting wage. By the way, we never started anyone at minimum wage whether 14, 16 or an adult. It is rare in Ohio for any employer to compete and get quality hires paying only minimum wage.