First, that assumes the company makes no profit at all. Not a sustainable way to keep a company in business. If they go out of business, 400,000 people lose their jobs and a whole lot of them lose their health insurance. Starbucks is pretty well known for being generous with their benefits.
Second, wages are typically only about 2/3 or even less of the total compensation, and don’t account for the employer’s share of payroll taxes.
So figure that you think Starbucks should make half their current profits and give the other half to their employees. That puts it at $6250 per employee, which would likely translate to about $4000/ year before the employees’ portion of taxes, or about a $2/hour raise. Which would be great for employees making maybe $30k/year, but is not exactly going to vault them into the middle class.
With equal distribution, that actually makes a $12,500 raise for 400,000 employees
First, that assumes the company makes no profit at all. Not a sustainable way to keep a company in business. If they go out of business, 400,000 people lose their jobs and a whole lot of them lose their health insurance. Starbucks is pretty well known for being generous with their benefits.
Second, wages are typically only about 2/3 or even less of the total compensation, and don’t account for the employer’s share of payroll taxes.
So figure that you think Starbucks should make half their current profits and give the other half to their employees. That puts it at $6250 per employee, which would likely translate to about $4000/ year before the employees’ portion of taxes, or about a $2/hour raise. Which would be great for employees making maybe $30k/year, but is not exactly going to vault them into the middle class.