http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/personal … index.html
A guy has to do what a guy has to do to get by…
Thanks for sharing that story! I hadn’t seen it.
From the article:
He spent nearly five months delivering pizzas at Domino’s. He admits he fell into depression during that time.
I can understand that.
This article must be made up as it say ‘She watched her husband, Rob LeBlanc, 35, load Domino’s pizza boxes into their family car and deliver orders until near dawn for $10 an hour.’
$10 an hour! - surely not last time I heard Domino’s was one of the Big3 and you keep telling us they all pay sub minimum wage. This guy had the perfect opportunity to raise the issue of sub minimum wage to a newspaper.
Surely you can understand that also?
That’s what I am doing. This store is not opening anytime soon the way things are going and I need something to do… not to mention make a little money. I do not want to take on the obligation of a career position. It is loads of fun most nights. I closed for a guy the other night and will not do that again. Not worth it at $5.85 an hour.
Not enough info to make a judgment. Heck, the guy could have been working for one of the rare Big 3 shops that pays fairly, they do exist. However, it’s far more likely that he simply never really did the math on what he was taking home versus his expense in working there. He may be taking home $10 for every hour that he works, but if you take gasoline, accelerated car maintenance and rapid depreciation from that $10, then factor in the risks inherent to the work, it might start to look a bit less attractive. Nevertheless, we don’t know, so any further discussion would just be speculation.
god I wish someone would have told me that when Gregster posted on here first of all - I’d have just not bothered arguing with his speculation!
how easy is it to find uncertainty when someone shows another side to your arguement. A PIG3 store that may pay more than MW - well I never who’d have thought it!
There is a big difference between Gregster’s posting of DOL literature and speculating about a news article where the relevant information is simply not present. The only “speculating” in Gregster’s posts has to do with how the law is actually enforced, since it seems to depend upon the day of the week and possibly the moon cycles as well. What so many seem to be afraid of is that someone will take a good hard look at the law one of these days and overturn years of industry practice, and possibly award damages against companies that have been violating the letter of the law. The law says what it says, there is no speculation there; the speculation is guessing when someone, either a lawyer or the DOL itself, decides to do something about it.
You’ve had a fair few posts speculating so I thought it was the norm.
If the DOL literture is clear then I really can’t see what the issue is - as I’ve said all along if someone is paying sub MW then they should suffer the penalties. But it funny how when it doesn’t suit your purpose its ‘speculation’.
I’ll call a spade a spade whether it “suits my purposes” or not, and drawing inferences out of incomplete information definitely fits the description of speculating. When I speculate, I state that up front with such prefaces as “I’m no expert”, “I may be out on a limb here”, etc, to clearly mark that I’m not sure of something. The post that I was referring to seemed more like someone trying to score “points” by drawing conclusions that just weren’t there, rather than any serious argument, hence my post.
As to the DOL, on the one hand they have the very organized and funded restaurant industry and it’s attorneys, and on the other they have a handful of disgruntled employees pointing to arcane clauses in various federal laws; who do you think they are going to take more seriously? We have an awful lot of bureaucratic inertia to overcome to get anywhere, and even then it can be hard to enforce a judgment. As I’ve previously stated, given our new president and the current public mood, I can only hope we find a more receptive ear to our grievances, and I for one intend to take advantage and get the word out as much as possible.
ummm. no you don’t.
Not enough info to make a judegment BUT I’m going to anyhow ‘it’s far more likely…’. Please don’t dress yourself up as something your clearly aren’t
Here is an older story from september 2005 with another driver’s point of view (it’s an audio interview on NPR):
The High Cost Of Pizza Delivery
(Click on “Listen Now” to hear the interview if it does not automatically play)
“far more likely”, while definitely biased in one direction, is still a qualifier. Your initial post in this thread by contrast, takes the limited information in the article takes it at face value in an attempt to discredit Gregster, just one of the many pot shots I’ve seen you take at him lately. Both of us are still waiting for someone to actually take on the laws that he’s posted, as opposed to how the laws are enforced, but I suspect that we shall remain waiting for some time.
unlike, of course, Gregsters initial post?
To be honest I am not trying to discredit Gregster, I’m trying to make the point that both YOU and him paint a picture which you change to suit the argument. First the mw issue was firmly at the feet of the big3, but not indies, then its indies, then when people post examples of the big 3 paying well over mw they are mistaken! which is it?
You guys have taken plenty of ‘pot shots’ at people in the last few weeks and accused a fair few people on this board of things which you even less than ‘limited information’!
Please quote where I have done so and I’ll be happy to respond.
gregster Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 2:44 pm Post subject: Re: A new career as a pizza delivery driver!..
Wizzle Wassell wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
Your initial post in this thread by contrast, takes the limited information in the article takes it at face value in an attempt to discredit Gregster, just one of the many pot shots I’ve seen you take at him lately.
unlike, of course, Gregsters initial post?
To be honest I am not trying to discredit Gregster, I’m trying to make the point that both YOU and him paint a picture which you change to suit the argument. First the mw issue was firmly at the feet of the big3, but not indies, then its indies, then when people post examples of the big 3 paying well over mw they are mistaken! which is it?
You guys have taken plenty of ‘pot shots’ at people in the last few weeks and accused a fair few people on this board of things which you even less than ‘limited information’!
Please quote where I have done so and I’ll be happy to respond.
gregster
Delivery Tycoon
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 5629
12/12/08 11:52:52 AM
Thanks Tim. I sure that you know that we don’t include yourself and GiGi’s in the ‘evil owner’ empire. From what I read over at PMQ, there are a few honest hardworking and fairly compensating employers over there too.
I take issue with the thieving basturds who cry ‘poverty’ at the same time they deny the law on one hand while reaching in our pockets with the other, and all the while muttering behind our backs that we are not grateful for the opportunity to ‘serve’ them while they screw us.
If everyone over at The PMQ ThinkTank were such law abiding owners, the topics I started would have been DOA (Dead on Arrival) The only reason they felt I was so accusatory was because the laws I pointed out exposed what they want no one to know, especially their employees. It is a painful reminder that their activities have been noticed and exposed and their days of exploitation are numbered.
Thank you everyone here for your support.
Our day will come.
Gregster’s initial post in this thread was decidedly tongue in cheek, he wasn’t trying to make any serious point based on incomplete information. You, on the other hand, trumpeted the woman’s claim that her husband made $10 an hour like it was unimpeachable evidence against Gregster’s accusations of wide spread industry under-paying. See the difference?
Then what is your purpose in sniping at him in completely unrelated threads such as the one about getting by in the bad economy? He hadn’t even posted there, it was a completely unprovoked attack, which has been about par for the course for Gregster here.
As to our “issues”, since you seem to be part of the “enough about the wage” faction, you seem rather wishy-washy yourself, do you want us to be single issue guys about minimum wage, or do you want us to branch out a bit? Despite what you might think, we don’t work together on posting here, and in fact disagree quite vocally on many things in the industry. Gregster is the research master, king of the Google search and lord of Lexis-Nexus, while I’m more of a philosophical type, as interested in what is “right” than what is the law. What neither of us is trying to do is accuse anybody personally, which is why I for one take great pains to address most of my complaints to “the industry”, or “some shops”, or “the Big 3”. Yes, I’m aware that not all Big 3 shops are the same, but I don’t think that I’m talking to morons that need that explained to them every time. Most of the worst abuses that I hear about though do come out of Big 3 shops, which is why I harp on them so much. What I’ve been trying to get across here is that the quoted article didn’t contain nearly enough information to make a judgment either way, and even if this particular driver was in fact clearing 10/hr after all his expenses, it does not mean that industry abuses do not go on, simply that this one driver is doing “ok”.
Such as? When have I ever taken an out of the blue potshot at a member of this board, with or without supporting information? Sweeping accusations about the industry? Guilty. But potshots at an individual? I only got about 40-some posts here, if they where there they wouldn’t be hard to find.
^^^ that’s a messy quote Paul, but I wont cry that it’s ‘out of context’ or incomplete, or whatever. I think I understand what you are trying to say.
In case it is not obvious to you, I speak much more freely over at TTPG and in that instance was using generalities to describe my opinion of how my posts are viewed over here. The ‘Think Tank’ is not ‘my sandbox’ and as such I take great pains to respect the rules here and posters here also.
I have no doubt that amongst my 5000 posts over at the TTPG discussion board you could find my saying unsavory things about management and owners. Much the same as I find many instances of owners and managers disparaging drivers here. Frankly it is the nature of employee/management relationship in many places.
Just the same as I would not go into my manager’s office and be verbally abusive, I try my best not to be rude or make unfounded accusations when I participate here in a forum predominately for owners/operators. That said, “Please quote where I have done so” (here on this forum) "and I’ll be happy to respond.
Afterthought: Seeing as no one has found any fault with the minimum wage laws I have posted, I get the feeling that everyone is resigned to ‘attacking the messenger’ since they have failed to attack the content of the law. Kinda along the line of thinking: “Gregster made a mistake, or expressed bad emotions, or broke a rule of the Think Tank, so EVERYTHING gregster says in wrong.” In my opinion, anyone whose thought process works like that has bigger problems then my posts.
Here is a good rule of thumb I TRY to go by (I fail at it often): Attack the CONTENT of the post, not the POSTER.
Ok so from this board, your very first post I believe
gregster
Joined: 16 Nov 2008
Posts: 125
Location: Virginia
Post subject: Re: Stupid delivery driver got in small wreck and wants new Posted: Sun Nov 16, 2008 2:44 pm
bodegahwy wrote:
You need to require that drivers notify insurance companies that they drive at work.
Coaching employees not to say they are at work if they get in an accident is irresponsible, dishonest and unfair to the employee.
Should he also pay drivers a mileage rate that covers all actual vehicle expenses AND Commercial Insurance?
bodegahwy wrote:
Buy the coverage, divide the cost by the numbers of annual deliveries and add the result to your delivery charge. For me it comes to about 15 cents per delivery.
You can also pay at least minimum wage plus at least the current IRS mileage rate of 58.5 cents per mile (or actual costs) so the drivers can afford proper insurance.
It would seem here you are accusing this think tanker of not paying the driver a proper wage or mileage reimbursement when nowhere in this thread, or any other that I’m aware of does this poster speak of the pay he gives his drivers. I would like for you to show the information these accusations are based upon.
Your method of quoting is very hard to for me to follow.
In my opinion if you think that is an accusation, you are hypersensitive. When I say, “Should he…” I am asking a question, not making and accusation. In my saying “You Can…” I am simply offering a possible solution.
If I were to say "Should Paul look up what ‘accuse’ means? would you take that as an accusation, or as me asking a question?
If I were to say “You can paint the wall blue.”, would you say I was accusing someone of not liking the color blue?
If someone ‘feels’ guilty about something I have posted, that does not necessarily mean I have accused them of anything. Perhaps it is their conscience talking, not me.
Sorry gregster, I haven’t mastered the art of cutting, pasting and quoting as well as you may like. here’s the link to your post: http://www.pmq.com/tt/viewtopic.php?top … 397&t=6300
Are you saying that you were not trying to insinuate that this operator was not paying the driver at least minimum wage and proper mileage reimbursement in this post?