An article that appeared in the Daily Beast is getting a lot of attention. The co-owners of Moo Cluck Moo have been paying their workers $12.00 per hour. But beginning in October they’re going to raise their pay scale to $15.00.
Good for them. It’s their business, their money, their decision.
No one is stopping them, and no one is forcing them. Isn’t America great?
“In exchange for paying higher wages, Moo Cluck Moo’s owners got better service, more skilled and committed employees, and a lot of free publicity. After our article, Moo Cluck Moo was featured on outlets like Huffington Post and MSNBC. Meanwhile, executives at other chains were crouched in a defensive pose as workers walked out over low wages.”
Of course they’re going to get better service from people they pay more money. In fact, if they don’t get better service, there will always be people in line wanting these higher paying jobs.
Again, it’s the decision of the business owners to make this decision.
I wonder what would happen if a business opened across the street from Moo Cluck Moo and offered a similar quality menu but only paid its workers $8.00 per hour which is above the minimum wage and had lower prices? Everything else being equal, which eatery do you think would go out of business first? Where do you think even liberals would eat if the food costs were 25 percent lower but the food was just as good?
We’ll have to see since the restaurant has only been opened for a few months.
I would also like to know the work load of the employees. How does it compare with other fast food restaurants? Are the employees doing more work for the money? Certainly more work is required of an employee making $15 per hour than one making minimum wage.
I also wonder if the owners are working at the restaurant. They aren’t getting a salary. It’s most likely they are working extended hours. Their work could account for at least three employees. They will only make money if there are profits at the end of the day. If they open up additional restaurants, their sweat-equity labor will not be a factor in keeping down costs.
The co-owners offer a number of benefits for paying more money per hour, and they’re good reasons:
“Over the weekend, three customers came up to Parker, without prompting, and thanked him for the quality of the customer service. Paying people more means you spend less time firing, hiring, and training. And Parker and Moorhouse would prefer to spend their time thinking about the business than supervising employees. ‘If I have to babysit these people, I’m a high priced baby-sitter.’”
These are very good business reasons for paying a higher wage. And that’s the point. If this works, other companies might calculate the costs of only hiring minimum wage workers and come to see that increasing wages is an economic benefit to the company.
In no case, however, should the government force a certain wage base on businesses. If the pool of good workers at a low wage dries up, market forces will necessitate a higher wage to attract disinterested workers at the lower wage.
One more point. Because of the higher starting salary, Moo Cluck Moo gets a higher quality employee. This means that young people just entering the job market are nearly shut own. A company paying double the minimum wage is going to look for the most skilled workers for the money.
In the end, business owners should make their own business decisions. Keep the government out of the equation.