Employers added 254,000 jobs in September, blowing away forecasts and reversing a slowdown in hiring that had prompted the Federal Reserve to make a jumbo rate cut at its meeting last month.
Economists had forecast 140,000 new jobs, according to financial data provider FactSet.
The unemployment rate inched down to 4.1%, versus 4.2% in the prior month.
How many pay livable wages too.
Can a job be “good” without a livable wage?
I keep seeing a job posting for a job that I think I would really like doing, but the pay is way too low to consider it.
They are fishing for desperate people… this was their MO for generations. We are undergoing demographic change and this dynamic is not tenable going forward with out mass migration, which has trippled since COVID but still not enough.
Either way, skill up and get money… that’s the only way to get ahead. Don’t settle for shit wage and if you have, then switch ASAP .
It’s an extremely niche job and I assume the business owner is just completely oblivious to current wage expectations. It’s the kind of thing where you would probably have an old timer and an apprentice for an extremely large geographic area.
niche and low pay? must be delusional owner lol but older ones don’t understand new market and you are prolly right abou some old timer enabling it.
but under these facts, owner will have to adjust. if job requires skills, owner must pay!
It’s highly likely that they are not charging customers enough either.
Maybe, maybe not.
But why should a worker worry about owner’s business model. I think worker should start thinking more like owner, ie owner of their labour…
If your in high school and work 12 hours a week…maybe?
Boomer logic lol
recognizing that HS students frequently have different perspectives (and limited options as far as jobs go,) is boomer logic?
Further if you’re only working 12 hours, a livable wage needs to be more than 3x the pay rate of somebody working 40, and for those jobs, you’d be competing with everyone in retail hell to get. And to be blunt, at least in MN, the regulatory scheduling requirements for people under 18 tend to make scheduling students annoying. (like, seriously. it basically makes a normal shift rotation impossible. throw in school or social things; and many managers just decide it’s not worth it… unless the job is such that they’re desperate for anyone with a pulse.) (not the kid’s fault mind. but yeah, it’s seriously inconvenient for basically everyone except people delivering newspapers. because they have carve outs for some reason. Oh. Right. Star Tribune lobbied our legislature for them.)
This is a market transaction… Why is workers age or family situatiom is a factor here?
Who benefits from the child being underpaid?
Uhm, that’s where you went? First off it’s pretty obvious who benefits, but generally speaking, in places that hire high school kids and adults in a mixed setting, everyone gets the same pay. They’re being “under” paid relatively because they usually work fewer hours.
Most unskilled labor the rates are known before you ever apply, and that’s what they offer. You try and negotiate a better wage they’re going to laugh and move on to the next.
As for why their age is a factor at all? Because state and federal regulations make it a factor. There’s a lot of limitations on when, where and how long minors can work.
And unless you go in for child labor… that’s usually a good thing.