Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cafeteria workers at Facebook struggle to make ends meet

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 546 posts

Re: Cafeteria workers at Facebook struggle to make ends meet

#231

Post by FussyZeus »

tyingq wrote: post #175
FussyZeus wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At some point we have to recognize that service workers must be paid a living wage, or be automated. We cannot, morally or economically, have an entire class of worker that we utterly depend on that lives permanently below the poverty line and we just step on them because "they didn't work hard in school" or whichever narrative you prefer to go with for why people who don't have a degree do work that is essential to…

They are one of many lower wage workers you might see at a place like Facebook that aren't Facebook employees. They probably contract out for janitorial services, landscaping, security guards, etc. All at probably similar wages.

I'm not sure what your point is? I was saying this was a perfect example, it's far from the only one.

Re: Cafeteria workers at Facebook struggle to make ends meet

#232

Post by acid__ »

derekdahmer wrote: post #195

> A spokeswoman for Facebook said none of the company’s contingent or contract workers have access to facilities such as clinics, gyms, or bring-your-child-to-work days One thing I liked about AirBnB was their entire staff including cafeteria workers and security guards were full-time employees who ate the same food, had access to the same facilities and events, and went through the first week 'bootcamp' alongside de…

I want to second this, as a former Airbnb employee -- it really did make a visible difference in enthusiasm, sense of community, and just overall work satisfaction.

Re: Cafeteria workers at Facebook struggle to make ends meet

#233

Post by rhizome »

redorb wrote: post #179

They have been priced out of their own neighborhood and that is really unfortunate. Theoretically they should move to a place with a cheaper cost of living. People move all the time for wages and cost of living; I would guess its the number one reason people move. They don't work for Facebook they work for a contractor; I would say they need to find a better job or a less expensive place to live (cost of living).

Theoretically they should move to a place with a cheaper cost of living.

Theoretically the entire company could do that.

Re: Cafeteria workers at Facebook struggle to make ends meet

#234

Post by abalashov »

placeybordeaux wrote: post #201
jeffdavis wrote: post #185

They make decent money -- good money even. This is really an article about the high housing costs in the Bay Area. I don't see any other real message here. All of the people who oppose residential development near work sites are to blame. Period.

> All of the people who oppose residential development near work sites are to blame. Period. Are you saying that is the only thing that is keeping the bay area's cost of living high?

No, I don't think the GP is. But it's a rather predominant factor!

Re: Cafeteria workers at Facebook struggle to make ends meet

#235

Post by Domenic_S »

dgacmu wrote: post #37
jmcdiesel wrote: post #29

Facebook didn't make the area expensive. No tech company did. Those local businesses, and the chains alike, have made it expensive. So much blame gets put on the tech companies, but the tech companies aren't raising the prices, they are just paying people better, and the local businesses abuse that to the fullest extent. There is no NEED to charge $6 for a gallon of milk, when milk from those same cows is sold for $2…

> Facebook didn't make the area expensive. No tech company did. Those local businesses, and the chains alike, have made it expensive. So much blame gets put on the tech companies, but the tech companies aren't raising the prices, they are just paying people better, and the local businesses abuse that to the fullest extent. There is no NEED to charge $6 for a gallon of milk, when milk from those same cows is sold for…

> Buying food in the bay area isn't expensive.

Yeah, I found that to be pretty much true. Of course there are plenty more options (organic/natural/raw) if you WANT to spend more, but no intrinsic cost increase.

But there are a lot of marginal cost increases in the Bay vs other places. Car insurance is more expensive. Gas is more expensive. Simple one-offs (like oil changes) are more expensive. You're more likely to eat out because of the brutal commute times. Etc.

Re: Cafeteria workers at Facebook struggle to make ends meet

#236

Post by eli_gottlieb »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #92
ocschwar wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re-read the comment. There's a lot of truth to it: raise their wages, and in a heartbeat, those workers will see their rents rise.

>There's a lot of truth to it: raise their wages, and in a heartbeat, those workers will see their rents rise. This offers a brilliant solution, just in the other direction. Let's lower the wages of programmers in the area. As their wages decrease the price of real estate will go down!

That is more-or-less exactly what anti-gentrification activists are trying to accomplish: push tech out, reduce the average wage, rent goes down.

Re: Cafeteria workers at Facebook struggle to make ends meet

#237

Post by maxerickson »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #205
maxerickson wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An electrician union here advertises apprenticeships with (decent for entry level) hourly pay, benefits and no debt upon completion. It's several years to complete, but the 8000 hours of work experience is then sufficient to get a license to work independently.

What's really important is that we design the system so that incumbent wealth can maintain their position by controlling the market through government regulation (licensing).

That's a great defense of your misstatement about what it takes to become an electrician.

Of course regulation often goes wrong. I'm pretty sure that isn't a reason to do away with it altogether, it is merely a reason to find ways to do it better.

Re: Cafeteria workers at Facebook struggle to make ends meet

#238

Post by rhaps0dy »

>Nicole watches large amounts of leftover food go into the compost – food she’s not allowed to take home

Why is she not allowed to take it home? It would be free for whoever her employer is, it would help her and her family.

Also I really dislike wasting food.

Re: Cafeteria workers at Facebook struggle to make ends meet

#239

Post by eli_gottlieb »

goatforce5 wrote: post #104
Bartweiss wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At the end of every shift, Nicole watches large amounts of leftover food go into the compost – food that she’s not allowed to take home. On that one in particular - is there a law against that? I know rules on food service workers taking things home vary quite a bit.

I knew someone who worked at a supermarket many years ago when they were in college. Apparently staff were allowed to take home products that were damaged (crumpled/torn packaging, etc.), rather than just throwing them in the trash. Apparently chocolate cookies had an unfortunate and inexplicable habit of being crushed under other products and being deemed unfit for sale. Once the policy changed and staff had to thro…

Throwing things away is still wasteful. Clearly the right thing to do here is to allow taking some merchandise home, but tie it to following rules and minimizing gratuitous loss in other ways.

One of the remarkable innovations introduced by the Patrician was to make the Thieves’ Guild responsible for theft, with annual budgets, forward planning and, above all, rigid job protection. Thus, in return for an agreed average level of crime per annum, the thieves themselves saw to it that unauthorised crime was met with the full force of Injustice, which was generally a stick with nails in it.

Re: Cafeteria workers at Facebook struggle to make ends meet

#240

Post by wutbrodo »

canadian_voter wrote: post #198
koolba wrote: post #174

> They earn too much to qualify for state healthcare, but not enough to afford the health insurance offered by their employer. They frequently struggle to find enough money for basics like food and clothes for their children. Victor recently borrowed money from his mother to hold a birthday party for one of his daughters, and from a friend to pay for a dentist appointment. They might want to look into not being marri…

They might want to look into not being married. Wow. Just wow. For some people, marriage is more than a financial arrangement. They'd also save a bundle by not having kids. Maybe they should sell one of them, it would help pay for the others?

> Wow. Just wow. For some people, marriage is more than a financial arrangement.

Marriage in the legal sense and marriage in the religious/personal/emotional commitment sense are not the same thing. I don't think you're necessarily _always_ wrong, but I also don't see why you think it's so universal that people should load a specific legal status with so much emotional weight and be unable to separate it from the actual commitment, in the context of meaningfulness.

If I have a religious ceremony during which I get married to someone, I would consider myself married even if I didn't file the papers at the courthouse. The latter is just paperwork. I can't say I relate to the notion that a relationship between two people doesn't have meaning until you get the government to approve it.

Post reply on HN