Minimum Wage Should Be Bt500, Dhanin Says

[tlansford]

Bring in the B300/day first, let the inflation spiral start to work, and quite soon he will get his wish.

Good ole TL makes another invalid comparison. Paying above the minimum can have benefits for both the employer and the workers, paying excess tax will gain you nothing.

Is it possible that the proposer has a significant amount of debt locked into fixed interest loans? Great position to be in if inflation takes off, an expensive piece of insurance if it stays low.

Nice try but your logic is flawed as so often the case.

The tax example is to counter the deflection technique that others used and that you use here, too. Attack the person, don't discuss the idea. In the case of altruistic approach of "if he really thought that, then he would do it already himself, ... oh he doesn't, so we can ignore the idea" the tax comparison is a fine analogy. Your "he has an ulterior motive to benefit himself, so it is just self-serving and we can ignore the idea" is a different approach.

So what do you think about a 300B / day minimum wage? Or a 500B / day wage?

For me, to be honest, I feel that 300B/day for a *minimum wage* would be a good floor for wages in Thailand. There are arguments against it when comparing to wages in other countries, but in most cases (not always, but most cases) this is IMO a false argument. There are arguments that say you must do it slowly over time, but that is an implementation question, not a question about the increase itself. There are some who just come with meteor-crashes-into-Earth disaster scenarios, but there are no such disaster scenarios due to min wage increases to bring forward as examples - that is just fear or fear-mongering.

It could be a reasonable idea for some parts of the country to have a minimum wage of 500B/day. But to say that it is/isn't the right level points to the need to maintain a good analysis of the labor market conditions and the economy. It appears that Thailand, like many countries, does not manage the minimum wage, they just let it stay a given level until it becomes obvious that the level is too low.

The minimum wage is just one tool which helps prevent the lowest levels of exploitation of the citizens by capitalism. Beyond that, the issues of education, health care, increasing productivity, a balance between security for the worker & flexibility for a company, regulations, environmental protection, transparency (ie: lack of corruption), are among the topics that make a country economically competitive and provide a better quality of living for everyone. Clearly Thailand can improve in many areas, but Thailand is not alone in that regard.

[tlansford]

scorecard/ricardo :

I am a fan of the min wage increase. I think that it is needed and that it will improve people's lives in a real way.

Being a businessman, I also believe that there will be some businesses which will be affected, but I do not believe that there will be a disaster in the business community nor in the economy regarding this increase.

This CEO proposes an even higher minimum wage. You are dismissing the idea not by discussing the idea, but by essentially smearing and questioning the motives of the CEO.

If you knew that he had ulterior motives, that would be a valid point in the argument, but you don't know that. So instead of talking about the minimum wage, you slam the source... It is the same as Warren Buffet when he recently suggested the ultra rich should pay more taxes in the USA - Fox slams Buffet rather than addressing the issue. Just a way to dismiss the idea without addressing it.

Personally, it surprises me to see him suggest 500 B / day. The man knows how that would impact his business and other businesses, but still he proposes it and defends his position. As he is clearly not an idiot, it gives me reason to consider the difference from 300->500B/day. 500B/day would be about 13,000 / month and not 7800 / month ... from the standpoint of the employee, a pretty significant difference. The costs differences are pretty important to a business which uses a lot of low-paid workers.

But it puts the 300B proposal into perspective a bit. Paying 60B/day more per employee. I'd like to see the job which a company says is not worth 60B more per day. Be honest, if it is not worth more than 240 B / day to a company for a job to be done, then the company should eliminate the need for that job altogether and do something of more value with their people.

I too support an increase in the minimum wage, although believe it would be better spread over a couple of years, as the Dems had proposed, rather than the large immediate national increase which PTP campaigned-on, but have now pulled back from delivering.

My sense of justice is appalled at the way that decision was taken & announced, not by PTP or the government or PM, but by the 'big boss' living far away. It is cheating the voters, who aren't getting what they were promised, and voted for. That's wrong.

I'd like to see the existing promises honoured, before looking at what further improvements might be made, one step at a time seems to me more-likely to achieve progress, rather than a greater leap than what has already been promised & then retracted.

But as an ex-businessman myself I would also expect companies to shed some labour, rather than reallocate it, because if there were many new opportunities worth paying 300B/day to the workers employed on them, I think they would already be developing those opportunities. And a lower-paid job is better than no job at all IMO.

I also think it's perfectly reasonable and relevant, when the CEO of CP proposes an even-higher minimum-wage, to ask whether he already pays the 300B/day to all his workers. Is he 'voting with his feet', to support the idea he's proposing, or not ? That's not a smear, but a valid question, asked by several posters in this thread.

I do also still believe there might be other reasons why he might support a general increase in wage-levels, the commercial-benefits of putting more money into consumer hands (what used to be called Thaksinomics ?) and possible political aspirations being but two possibilities. Is speculation not allowed ?

This story is interesting, partly because of who is saying these things, so it's impossible IMO to divorce him from the idea.

Perhaps I would be less cynical, if there weren't already a fairly-recent example of a Thai businessman proposing political-policies to benefit the poor, but which then also helped increase his own personal wealth dramatically, over only a few years. The emergence of Thai businessmen who have their workers' interests at heart would be welcome, but I don't yet see the likes of Sir Titus Salt or Lord Leverhulme here, perhaps I'm wrong.

Hi Ricardo,

Nice post -

Staged / planned increases for the min wage make sense. But that means it needs to be managed. Here, it has not been managed, so it becomes a political issue - IF the gov't managed minimum wage, then it would have on-going adjustments over time rather than political campaign promises. So I agree with you.

I disagree with the altruistic deflection technique. You are right, you can ask the question - I looked for CP wage information myself. But here on the forum, the question is used to avoid the issue. That is what I had an issue with. Not the question itself.

Regarding your other reasons for which he (and other businessmen) might support a general increase - absolutely. Putting more money into the pockets of low earning consumers is a good idea for a lot of businesses because those people will spend very close to 100% of the money injecting it back into the economy. When your products, like CP's, are largely consumed in the local economy, then a policy like this can benefit your business. Were the article more detailed, it might have pulled out some of his reasoning for a 500B/day minimum wage.

On the other hand, posters here used a different kind of speculation - the ulterior-motive / personal gain deflection technique - again, just to dismiss the idea. It is not speculating, as you do here, what his economic / rational is for proposing the 500B/day min wage. Two completely different objectives !

[tlansford]

'tlansford'

you look at financial reports. I ask people working for CP.

well one person anyway.

Other companies have already started paying the 300b per day. Yet here we have an owner stating it should be 500b but he is NOT paying the minimum 300b per day at the moment.. thats what is smelly.

If they did the 300b across the country (which they have realised is impossible all at once) then it could almost double the salary of that person (pai. 168b/day)

I am all for an increase BUT it has to be done gradually.

Because when the minimum wage goes up then the other wages will have to go up as well THAT could be a HUGE increase in the wage bill.

If companies are paying 300b now for semi skilled workers and then they find unskilled workers are getting the same then they will want more...simple really... and you are naive if you think differently.

Thanks for coming back to your comment on the CP employee's pay. In your other post, you state that they make 7500/month. Right?

While it is under 300B/day, it is not much under according to your information - 7500/month, 6 days / week (and only 8 hours / day too - woo hoo! )

which comes to 288B/day - well above the minimum wage in that area (isn't it about 240B?) and not too far below the proposed new min wage of 300B.

But I am confused about where this new figure of 168B/day is coming from?

[whybother]

(pai. 168b/day)

<snip>

But I am confused about where this new figure of 168B/day is coming from?

I would suggest cbr is referring to the minimum wage in Pai.

When the minimum wage is increased to 300 baht in all provinces, some provinces will be getting an 80% increase. Increase it to 500 baht, and that makes it a 300% increase.

[tlansford]

(pai. 168b/day)

<snip>

But I am confused about where this new figure of 168B/day is coming from?

I would suggest cbr is referring to the minimum wage in Pai.

When the minimum wage is increased to 300 baht in all provinces, some provinces will be getting an 80% increase. Increase it to 500 baht, and that makes it a 300% increase.

The first post was that a CP employee thaicbr knows makes 7500B/month, room onsite 400B & shared with sister, etc...

That is why I ask, as that job is nearly 300B/day already as I calculate it. But I guess that thaicbr can explain what was meant.

In any case, 500B is just under a 200% increase from 168B.

[thaicbr]

'tlansford'

you look at financial reports. I ask people working for CP.

well one person anyway.

Other companies have already started paying the 300b per day. Yet here we have an owner stating it should be 500b but he is NOT paying the minimum 300b per day at the moment.. thats what is smelly.

If they did the 300b across the country (which they have realised is impossible all at once) then it could almost double the salary of that person (pai. 168b/day)

I am all for an increase BUT it has to be done gradually.

Because when the minimum wage goes up then the other wages will have to go up as well THAT could be a HUGE increase in the wage bill.

If companies are paying 300b now for semi skilled workers and then they find unskilled workers are getting the same then they will want more...simple really... and you are naive if you think differently.

Thanks for coming back to your comment on the CP employee's pay. In your other post, you state that they make 7500/month. Right?

While it is under 300B/day, it is not much under according to your information - 7500/month, 6 days / week (and only 8 hours / day too - woo hoo! )

which comes to 288B/day - well above the minimum wage in that area (isn't it about 240B?) and not too far below the proposed new min wage of 300B.

But I am confused about where this new figure of 168B/day is coming from?

You are correct that it's well above the minimum wage for Chonburi which is 196b (but that's why it's minimum, wages CAN be higher)

BUT it's still not 300b. It's 12b less per day or 312b per mth or 3744b per year (based on 12 mths) .

And Whybother is correct about Pai. http://www.business-...m_wage2011.html

but it's Payao which is the lowest at 159b

Also before this Political use of the minimum wage the wage was raised every year by 5-8% by a Central Wage Committee, which is a group of government, employer and labor representatives

Edited January 24, 2012 by thaicbr

[tlansford]

'tlansford'

you look at financial reports. I ask people working for CP.

well one person anyway.

Other companies have already started paying the 300b per day. Yet here we have an owner stating it should be 500b but he is NOT paying the minimum 300b per day at the moment.. thats what is smelly.

If they did the 300b across the country (which they have realised is impossible all at once) then it could almost double the salary of that person (pai. 168b/day)

I am all for an increase BUT it has to be done gradually.

Because when the minimum wage goes up then the other wages will have to go up as well THAT could be a HUGE increase in the wage bill.

If companies are paying 300b now for semi skilled workers and then they find unskilled workers are getting the same then they will want more...simple really... and you are naive if you think differently.

Thanks for coming back to your comment on the CP employee's pay. In your other post, you state that they make 7500/month. Right?

While it is under 300B/day, it is not much under according to your information - 7500/month, 6 days / week (and only 8 hours / day too - woo hoo! )

which comes to 288B/day - well above the minimum wage in that area (isn't it about 240B?) and not too far below the proposed new min wage of 300B.

But I am confused about where this new figure of 168B/day is coming from?

You are correct that it's above the minimum wage (that's why it's minimum, wages CAN be higher)

BUT it's still not 300b. It's 12b less per day or 312b per mth or 3744b per year (based on 12 mths).

And Whybother is correct about Pai.

OK, thanks.

[StevenWayneSimpson]

Pure and simply, it aint going to happen in the near future.