Hacker News Reader

Comment by bobro | Hacker News Reader

why?

To distort the labour market and make it harder for adults to actually bargain with their employers for a reasonable wage - I'd assume.

Why would you hire a teenager for a relatively large amount of money?

Are they not producing the same amount of work as anyone else?

No? They have less experience and education on account of being young. Some teens may be geniuses who are better than anyone else, and business owners would be well advised to hire those genius teens at market rates, but some teens will not be as productive as their older counterparts and they shouldn't find themselves forbidden from working just because their labor cannot sell for more than minimum wage.

Age does not equal experience and education.

There are jobs where you don't need any experience and education anyways. The ones that are typically considered minimum wage jobs, like cleaning or restocking shelves. Employers shouldn't be able to hire teenagers for cheap just because they're younger, especially since a teenager isn't going to be less productive than an adult with those types of jobs.

Age is an upper bound on experience and is related to experience and education if not equal. The average 19 year old, all else equal, will have less experience and education than the average 45 year old in the same field. There are exceptions of course - but they are only exceptions.

I'm curious given your view that employers shouldn't be able to hire teens to do low wage jobs what you think about immigration. Is it the same thing, that we shouldn't allow low skill immigrants because they will compete for minimum wage jobs, or do you have a different view there and if so, why?

If you believe someone should be paid lower because of lower experience and education, then pay them based on their experience and education. Not on their age.

Otherwise, what experience and education do you expect that a brand new adult entering the job market to have that a teenager will not? An adult who needs (at least) minimum wage to be able to survive, and a week ago was a teenager. Who is going to hire such an adult when they could hire the teenager, with identical experience and education, for cheaper?

Low skill immigrants are still getting minimum wage aren't they? You're arguing that teenagers shouldn't even get that much. Or are you suggesting that low skill immigrants shouldn't get minimum wage either?

I hire alot of people, I pay them based on the value of what they produce.

One guy I work with has 8 children. Another is married to a partner in a law firm and lives in a home likely worth >$5M. I don’t pay them any different.

Okay, so you wouldn't hire anyone who produces less than minimum wage. What if a teen wants to learn about your profession and is willing to work, but wouldn't really contribute or produce that much?

If there was no exception to hiring people who are financial dependents you wouldn't be able to hire on such a person for a small rate. You'd either have to overpay, discouraging you from hiring them, or not hire them because you couldn't justify the expense.

Perhaps such labor is uncommon in your profession, but there are many professions where it is common. The kid at the mechanic's who answers phones and gets things for people may not actually be all that valuable compared to a wage high enough for two people to live off of. The job may be really valuable to the kid though giving experience and a bit of money.

I do that too. For college students some start earning credits before moving to a paid intern position.

In my business, interns are super valuable. We pay $20-25/hr depending on skill.

Odd - in your previous comment you say you pay people based on what they produce. Here you seem to be saying you pay people more than what they produce - I'm reading "I do that too" as a response to my point about hiring people who produce less than a large minimum wage in value.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com