It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Entry level jobs...What!!

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2014 @ 09:34 PM
link   
My kid should get at least a b in every class, no need to earn it.




posted on May, 21 2014 @ 09:36 PM
link   
a reply to: VoidHawk

I'd use the term - In the IT world, it usually goes in the following hierarchy for job titles:
1. Internship/Volunteer (Yep, free or the lowest of the low pay)
2. Entry Level/Beginner (Hey great, you maybe took one class or have a little experience - we want to train you).
3. Mid-Level (Now that you have some experience, are you up for a challenge?).
4. Senior (10 years of experience, and very knowledgeable in your field, come on in).
5. Retired (I will never see this level, with all these student loans of mine).

So, according to my little chart - Entry Level is for those that do not have a lot of experience. I started out as entry-level, and it was the right level of pay for me Because I had no idea how to code in C#, which the job required.

Just like minimum wage jobs - Entry is designed as a foot in the door, or a way for the company to determine how you will proceed. First rule I learned about the real world, is you cannot beat someone with 10-years of experience in a given field; most companies will consider that person a "senior", just as one does not simply go to college for 2 years, and consider themselves at a PH.D level.

And you are right though - In a sense, the title is a bit misleading, in that everyone is usually working on the same items (In my company, the entry level positions are more for training - when you can fully demonstrate you know what you are doing, you are considered a "mid" level, because the projects are usually harder, something a beginner would throw the towel in).

Entry level is just a term to say that the work is not as hard as a higher-up position. As for pay - the title of the job doesn't determine that. What some companies classify as "Entry" others see as "Senior"


@HanzHenry - Hate to say it, but I'm not an immigrant, but if I had to, I'd gladly take that position (as would any college or high school kid that doesn't have the deluded fantasy that they will make billions of dollars upon graduating). I started from the bottom, working for free, and because I put the effort in, I'm saving enough to reduce my college debt. You complain about immigrants getting the jobs, and yet at least from what I've seen, they get the jobs because they are motivated - At least here in Michigan, I've seen people from other countries work twice as hard as a USA-equivalent.

-fossilera



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Maybe some people work at entry level jobs because they have no skills or they have been looking for a job for so long they gave in and decided to flip burgers to pay the rent. These folks are entitled to a living wage so they can also put food in their bellies. Places like this make a killing in profits every year and the little guy gets a one cent raise once a year.



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 09:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: 1Providence1
a reply to: VoidHawk


Yep. Here in California it's virtually impossible to live without increasing debt for many, many people. It's largely due to the low wages, high living costs (which includes the "necessities" to be competitive, aka cell phone+plan, internet, and expensive ass gas).

Basically, anything under $15 /hr or $30,000.00 makes it close to impossible, even if you're simply eating, gassing, and occasionally beering!


thank all the IMMIGRANTS..


Supply vs Demand.. More low end labor competing for the jobs = LOWER PAY.. very simple concept

as a former electrician I saw wages go from very high in the 90s to stagnant and then plummet from $38/hr down to 22/hr BEFORE the 2008 crash, back in the RE boom.



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: MiguelTheMagician

Please tell us what a living wage is.
Enough for cable TV and a new car every 4 years? Luxury car or economy?
I hear that term often and have never heard a good explanation.
And what is to much profit?
What percentage of profit is to much or just right?



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 10:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
a reply to: MiguelTheMagician

Please tell us what a living wage is.
Enough for cable TV and a new car every 4 years? Luxury car or economy?
I hear that term often and have never heard a good explanation.
And what is to much profit?
What percentage of profit is to much or just right?


What are you saying? A living wage is a what is required to meet minimum standards of living in a given area. There's a serious misconception that everyone who isn't middle class is lazy or just made bad decisions or is so contentedly suckling on the public teet that they lack sufficient motivation.

Here's where your thinking is wrong. Minimum standards of living aren't a "a luxury car and cable TV." It's things like being able to afford food and shelter. At the height of the middle class (and unionization for that matter), before decade upon decade of automation, outsourcing and the drastic trade imbalance with China, most people could get an "entry-level" job, learn a skill or a trade and if they applied themselves, they could make far more than "a living wage."

That opportunity has been been in steady decline and at the EXACT SAME TIME, income inequality has been steadily rising (thought lately, it's been explosively rising). You don't need to be an economist to connect the dots.

The 1% is something of a myth. The 1% are doing well but the real transfer of wealth (and power) has been to the .01%:


source

Across the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index of companies, the average multiple of CEO compensation to that of rank-and-file workers is 204, up 20 percent since 2009.

source

How can you logically blame people who don't have good jobs for not having good jobs when there's only so many good jobs to be had and there's people filling them? If the people your blaming had those "good jobs," it would just be OTHER people at the bottom. The problem is that the BOTTOM is getting bigger as the MIDDLE is shrinking.
edit on 2014-5-21 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)

edit on 2014-5-21 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2014 @ 11:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: 19KTankCommander
a reply to: VoidHawk

Sorry you feel like that but to me Entry level jobs (No offence to anyone) but McDonalds, my sons first job was at MC D's

he had no skills as a 16 year old, but they hired him, he has been working there for two years and has been saving his money for college.

The good thing for him is he is now able to show a dam good work History, during the summer months he will put in 40 hours and yes he has received raises for the different jobs he performs.

My first entry level job into the work force was Delivering News papers, then from there I was dropping off the papers to those that delivered them.

So what I guess I am trying to say is Entry level Jobs to me are those jobs that you apply for that you have no skill in but are willing to learn the skills to perform the job.



I agree with this, however in my job searching, I have found that "entry level positions" still require a BS and 2 years experience minimum. I still can't figure that one out. Entry level means you have NO experience, right?



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 12:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
Why cap the minimum wage at 10.10 for federal workers and try to raise it to 10.10 for everyone else?

I see so many arguments that claim that raising the minimum wage will help the economy.

Okay.

Lets raise the minimum wage to 60,000 a year.

No "entry level" title anymore.

We'll all be equal, except for those of us who make more.

Wait, what?

Why should there be those of us who make more?

They should lower our wages and make us all equal. . . wait, what?

All jobs aren't equal?

Sorry beez but I am gonna pick on you here for a minute, your a big name, and your very smart and even tempered, so I know you won't be offended, or knee jerk in your response.

All jobs are not equal, no they are not, yes it is obvious some jobs deserve way more compensation than others, this is a nobrainer.

Why do businesses exist?

To make money right?

Why do people work?

To make enough to live right?

What is the difference?

A business doesn't need to eat to not die, it can't die, it isn't even alive, not even when compared to the lowest most basic form of life.

Business is an object, a thought, an abstract.

Wtf is wrong with you, that you think a parasite is worth more than its host?

All business and corps are nothing but parasites, they always take as much as possible at all times, while giving back as little as possible at all times.

All the while, these parasites and their proponents act like their workers should do far more than they are compensated for and be greatful for the honor of making money for them.

Business functions the same from both ends. Employees should do as little as possible for as much as possible at all times.

This is what has broken the system, the employes kept producing while the corps kept hoarding and not compensating fairly.

Now millions of workers in America are priced out of many markets, no matter their want of the product because close to half the workers in this country, are in "entry level" jobs.

All the while you pro business types keep championing a business model that is obviously unsustainable, and quite destructive to our society.

The price of everything has gone up by factors in my life, the minimum wage has not even doubled in the same period.

In the 90s gas was what $1and minimum wage was $4.25. Today gas is $3.50 and it is $7.25 or something.

You really don't see how out of proportion it has come?

Labor is the most important part of most businesses, they are forgetting they cant even exist, or make a single dime without them " worthless takers" to do all the actual money making work for the company.

Mcdonalds Walmart BK taco bell .....etc can not even exist without their laborers.

If a job is this crucial to a business I would think it wise to remember that.

If people work 40 hours a week at any job in this country, they should be able to afford rent car car insurance electric phone ( not cell phone home phone like me, I just hate cells, I don't want folks calling me all the time, I am not a phone talker, I am a face to face type fellow) maybe even child care health insurance...etc

This is the minimum in America today for a "life".

None of what I mentioned was even an extravagant purchase. It was all basic ness and I didn't even factor food in or entertainment.

I mean honestly, in America if you don't have a home and electric and water and food, the CPS will come and take your kids. Unless your a POS crack head, then they will send them to the crack house with you and act shocked something bad happened to them.

Plz beez , don't act like people who are performing needed labors full time don't at least deserve a house and car and electric and water and food and phone.

This is known to be basic American life.

I mean honestly, in your opinion a man who works 50 hours a week doesn't at minimum in your opinion deserve room and board for his labors?....... really?

Because even though a job is necessary....nay required, anyone can do it, so even though they spend 50 hours a week doing it, they should have to work 6 of these jobs a week to have a home and car and food IYHO?

If that is your position, your position represents one of the biggest POS in human history.

Yours is that of a slave master, trying to convince others (quoting cloud atlas here) " there is a natural order to things that must be protected" "the weak are meat, and the strong do eat".

I am very disappointed in your position here beez.

I know from your history here you know history well, how strong are the weak when they have had enough of the BS?

What is better, to pay a fair wage today, or get lynched tomorow?

To the greedy that care only about themselves the answer is easy, enough is never enough, even if it is millions of times more than the workers that made you that money while living in poverty.

To the worker, this is the last straw, the status quo will change or it will be changed.

At the loss of many wealthy and the confiscation of their "wealth" by those they thought below them.

Thin back, how many times has it happened in human history?

Thousands?


It is about to happen again.

Workers will be paid better or things will change badly, we are not that far off from the problems of the early 20th century honestly, actually today it I worse.

How can one support this and act like there is nothing wrong with it?
edit on 2014bThursdayv4420145 by oblvion because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 12:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: VoidHawk

I don't think you quite understand what a level entry job is...


en·try-lev·el
adjective
at the lowest level in an employment hierarchy.
"he was hired as an entry-level research assistant"


It simply means you were hired in the most basic of positions for what you qualify for.

It doesn't effect wages or anything of the sort. You don't hire somebody as an 'entry level employee' then hire somebody else the next day and give him more money for the same work.

There's no 'wages' scam being perpetrated by using this language.

Entry level engineering, architecture, computing etc.

Nobody gives anybody a CEO job first day out of university.

I'm confused about the outrage..

Also that language has been around for at least 30 years.

~Tenth


Wrong.

I got hired in at entry level back in the 90s in an injection molding factory, minimum wage $4.25 or close, I got hired in at "entry level'' $8.50 there were folks that worker there for 10 years and made less than me, I even made more than 1 supervisor.

The market is effed the eF up, new guys getting highered in at more than vets?

I never even knew it was a problem to talk about pay until a couple years ago, I got highered in as a hold carrier at more than the lead mason who was with the company 10 yeas and had 30 years experience.

The owner chomped my britches pretty well because now he had today the guy over twice as much to keep him around.

My bad, don't screw people over and you don't have to keep secrets.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 06:20 AM
link   
a reply to: oblvion

One of the problems I see is that the onus of responsibility does not fall where it should.

It's easy to blame corporations, bosses, greed, etc.

But if we're really being honest with ourselves, then the person responsible is the individual.

Personal responsibility isn't just buzz words conservatives use to irritate the left.

*******

It isn't about everyone getting a trophy. Face it, some will win and some will lose. Equal opportunity means every gets a chance. Not everyone gets the same outcome.

Opportunity doesn't knock. Those who wait for opportunity to come to them, abdicates their own future, their own responsibility.

If someone wants opportunity, then they have to go out and hunt it down like it stole something.

*****

Life isn't fair. It'll never be fair because that is a subjective term. Laws make it as fair as it's going to get.
But sometimes life just plain sucks. It is up to the individual though, to see that it doesn't suck all the time.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 06:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: VoidHawk

I don't think you quite understand what a level entry job is...


en·try-lev·el
adjective
at the lowest level in an employment hierarchy.
"he was hired as an entry-level research assistant"


It simply means you were hired in the most basic of positions for what you qualify for.

It doesn't effect wages or anything of the sort. You don't hire somebody as an 'entry level employee' then hire somebody else the next day and give him more money for the same work.

There's no 'wages' scam being perpetrated by using this language.

Entry level engineering, architecture, computing etc.

Nobody gives anybody a CEO job first day out of university.

I'm confused about the outrage..

Also that language has been around for at least 30 years.

~Tenth

Well, this IS the Rant forum


This was the reason for my rant, its from another thread.


if your working at McDonald's, you are in a entry level job.

I should have been more clear in my op (never post while angry), but as you can see, "entry level" wasn't being used in the hierarchical sense that you and many others in this thread have described. When a person is employed by McD's they have to be trained to "flip burgers" they have to be trained to deal with customers, they have to be trained in food hygiene etc etc, but all that is ignored, as far as many people here are concerned, if you work for McD's its an entry level position, and thats what I disagree with.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 06:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
a reply to: MiguelTheMagician

Please tell us what a living wage is.
Enough for cable TV and a new car every 4 years? Luxury car or economy?
I hear that term often and have never heard a good explanation.
And what is to much profit?
What percentage of profit is to much or just right?


What are you saying? A living wage is a what is required to meet minimum standards of living in a given area. There's a serious misconception that everyone who isn't middle class is lazy or just made bad decisions or is so contentedly suckling on the public teet that they lack sufficient motivation.

Here's where your thinking is wrong. Minimum standards of living aren't a "a luxury car and cable TV." It's things like being able to afford food and shelter. At the height of the middle class (and unionization for that matter), before decade upon decade of automation, outsourcing and the drastic trade imbalance with China, most people could get an "entry-level" job, learn a skill or a trade and if they applied themselves, they could make far more than "a living wage."

That opportunity has been been in steady decline and at the EXACT SAME TIME, income inequality has been steadily rising (thought lately, it's been explosively rising). You don't need to be an economist to connect the dots.

The 1% is something of a myth. The 1% are doing well but the real transfer of wealth (and power) has been to the .01%:


source

Across the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index of companies, the average multiple of CEO compensation to that of rank-and-file workers is 204, up 20 percent since 2009.

source

How can you logically blame people who don't have good jobs for not having good jobs when there's only so many good jobs to be had and there's people filling them? If the people your blaming had those "good jobs," it would just be OTHER people at the bottom. The problem is that the BOTTOM is getting bigger as the MIDDLE is shrinking.




You failed to answer either question.
Exactly how good of a living is a living wage?
When people get this living wage do we drastically reduced food stamps and subsidized housing?
And how much profit is to much profit for a large corporation? Don't give me any millions and billions, I want to know what percentage profit on investment is acceptable? 5%? 8%? 15%?



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

I disagree with the entire premise about it being on the individual.

An individual cannot take on a corp and win any more than they can take on the state and win.

Sure it happens 1 time in millions, but just as evidenced by the success rate, it is an impossibility.

Laws do not make things fair, they make it even harder for the individual to excell. All laws are designed to benefit those already on top, just look at the tax code that allows a millionaire to pay less in taxes than a cab driver, or a multi billion dollar corp to pay none......GE. cough.....

The system is not working, can't you see that? Walmart corp got more tax money given to it last year than any individual in a thousand life times. Because nobody would work for them if they couldn't eat after working a week.

So instead of letting this business die as it should since its business model is crap, the government just hands them millions upon millions, in subsidies to their workers.

How about Walmart just pays there folks enough to live on and the government just hands Walmart a couple hundred million dollar check every year, would you agree with that? Because it is already happening now indirectly, why not just do it directly and be done with it?

No, there is no fairness to be found in the law at all, it serves those at the top at all times and those at the bottom very rarely.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 11:02 PM
link   
a reply to: VoidHawk

"proper wage"....can you define that term for me?

For the record: not all labor is equal. "Entry level" denotes an untrained worker with no particular skill. A good example would be kitchen steward. If the kitchen steward does well, maybe he will end up as a pantry assistant, or a garmage. Perform that, and you get a shot at maybe doing some prep work, then move onto the hot line as a line cook.

There are progressions at many jobs. And in any progressive system, there is an entry level.

I get the philosophical point of what you are talking about. But the fact is, "entry level" is a valid term that is synonymous with "unskilled" or "inexperienced". Unless you are interested in having high school graduates in a position to supervise you when you are 40 and have 20 years in your position.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 05:23 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

When I started work (many years ago now) I never ever heard those words. A job was a job, simple as that!
But as you can see from this (its from another thread)


if your working at McDonald's, you are in a entry level job.
Its classifying a TYPE of job as "entry level" and it was the reason for my rant, Those words are being used a lot these days!


I should have been more clear in my op (never post while angry), but as you can see, "entry level" wasn't being used in the hierarchical sense that you and many others in this thread have described. When a person is employed by McD's they have to be trained to "flip burgers" they have to be trained to deal with customers, they have to be trained in food hygiene etc etc, so therefore, it is a "progressive system", but all that is ignored, and as far as many people here are concerned, if you work for McD's its an entry level position, and thats what I disagree with.

edit on 23-5-2014 by VoidHawk because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 07:35 AM
link   
a reply to: VoidHawk

One of the roles of my job is to assign value to training and tasks. For example, in a hotel a front desk agent is a far more skilled worker than a housekeeper. Yes, the housekeeper has to learn all manner of standards and processes. But the front desk agent has computer skills, which take quite a bit to teach to someone who doesn't have that skill.

McDonald's is a good example. The skill it takes to work a register at McDonalds is far less than the skill it would take to work the register at a convenience store. At McDonalds everything is coded into the keypad. At a convenience store, you have to know prices of items, and tax status (you don't tax bottled water, but you do tax ice as an example).

When I first entered the workforce, "entry level job" was not in common use. But we did call McDonalds "a high school job". "High school job" was far, far more common back when people weren't having to work at McDonalds to support a family. Now, to call it a "high school job" is insulting.



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
The easiest way to remember taxed vs non taxed food items( ice is included in food for those that don't know) is actually very basic.

Is it prepared? If it is it it taxed. Water is just water not prepared. Ice is water that has been prepared so it is taxed.

Pack of hot dogs, no tax, warm dogs in a bun, taxed.

BFFT

Is there any hope of our current business model not collapsing in its current state? Poverty is climbing, middle class families are now the working poor( I know I am one, from $50 K plus a year to less than $30K in less than a year).

All the while all the " experts" tell us we are in a recovery, while wages for all but the already retardedly rich are still falling at the exponential rate of 9.82 m/s2.

Most folks can't keep doing worse while those with many times more than they could ever even use keep hoarding more.

It is as blatantly illogical and unsustainable as the infinite growth business model that brought us here.

Infinite growth in a finite system is not possible, and supporting it is stupid, because it is an obvious fail.

Yet........and here we are.

So, BFFT, you have a mind for business, and a very good head on your shoulders, do you think we will just drive on to oblivion, or do you think we will wise up and invent a system that remembers labor is important, it is what makes all the money, not a guy behind a desk?



posted on May, 23 2014 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: oblvion

Our system doesn't need to be recreated. It just needs to be returned to equilibrium.

The biggest issue is availability of credit. This is choking small businesses. It is killing the ability of good earners to buy homes.

Beyond that any number of things can really be done. Stuff like putting in limits on governmental payrolls, balancing trade deficits (why do we not tariff Chinese good, for crying out loud???), and eliminating public waste (i.e., kill the IRS and just about all other 3 letter agencies and replace with systems that are leveraging technology and efficiency over bureaucracy).

I have talked at length about whistleblower Charlotte Iserbyte. What she talks about seems to be ignored by all audiences. But that is the heart of our problem. We sit here today and wonder why children are getting dumber every year.



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 01:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScientiaFortisDefendit

originally posted by: VoidHawk
If an employer has work to be done, it is NOT entry level, it is work to be done, and therefore they should pay a proper wage for that work.


Exactly, and if the job requires no more than functioning hands and the attention span of a 5 year old, then it will pay accordingly because ANYONE can do it.


^^ This is just so insulting to so many millions of people across the world that work for absolutely nothing just so they can survive.

Can you even comprehend the kind of world we've enabled to be shaped in this century of better than ever technology?? You're just screwing yourself with this "I support slave wages" crap.



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: VoidHawk


if your working at McDonald's, you are in a entry level job.


Oh well that changes things.

Mcdonald's is not an 'entry level' position, it's a McJob.

Meant for students & business professionals who want to run fast foot joints and make money. To claim that these are careers or qualify as Entry Level is insane IMO. I consider an entry level position to be something you studied for and have a degree for.

Or a cert from college or something of that nature.

~Tenth



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join