Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

A_Man_Who_Writes OP t1_j59xvun wrote

Was there a problem before with companies not being able to save enough?

4

hour_of_the_rat t1_j59z5ky wrote

Fucking hilarious.

No, companies were plenty rich before. They just wanted to be richer.

Fuck you, Baker.

11

A_Man_Who_Writes OP t1_j59zvi0 wrote

That’s what I’m trying to understand. Clearly the extra pay was and is good for workers. So, if companies aren’t losing out because of it, why take it away?

1

hour_of_the_rat t1_j5a1cav wrote

Enough so-called "small business owners" (but, really all businesses) complained about it to Baker, and the legislature.

The "compromise" was to raise the minimum wage, and eliminate time and-a-half on Sundays.

At the time, the argument here on reddit, was, "Why should you get paid 1.5x on Sundays just because its Sunday?"

And the answer is that Sunday was historically recognized as a 'Day of Rest', because it was church day--a day to pray, be with family, read the bible, and in the before times, laborers worked six days a week, went to church on Sunday, and then sometimes worked the latter part of Sunday after church was over, too.

As the economy transitioned from agrarian to manufacturing, and the labor movement pushed for eight-hour work days, weekends, and other labor rights, enough politicians felt that if someone till had to work on Sunday, that was time away from their family, and they should be justly compensated for it.

As church attendance waned, corporate propaganda increased, and local communities atrophied, Sunday became less and less a sacred day / automatic day off, and eventually the time came when corporations felt they were able to make the move to strike time and-a-half from workers' rights.

The End.

13

fuzzypickles34 t1_j5a1gnh wrote

Because they want more money, even if it screws over employees.

1