Asia floor wage for Bangladesh that is a living wage is 259 usd per month. Now minimum wage in Bangladesh for garments is 50 usd per month.
http://www.cleanclothes.org/livingwage/living-wage-versus-minimum-wage
The solution - An Asia Floor Wage
http://www.cleanclothes.org/livingwage/what-is-the-asia-floor-wage
The Asia Floor Wage proposes a wage for garment workers across Asia that would be enough for workers to live on.
Based on some common factors including the number of family members to be supported, the basic nutritional needs of a worker and their dependents and their other basic needs including healthcare and education, the Asia Floor Wage is able to calculate the minimum amount needed to constitute a living wage.
The Asia Floor Wage is calculated in PPP$ - Purchasing Power Parity $, which are an imaginary currency built on the consumption of goods and services by people, this currency allows us to compare the standard of living between countries, regardless of the national currency.
Currently the Asia Floor Wage is calculated to be PPP$ 725.
The Asia Floor Wage is different in each country's national currency, but has the power to buy the same set of good and services in all countries.
For a breakdown of what the Asia Floor Wage is in local currency click here.
how calculated video
http://www.cleanclothes.org/livingwage/a-short-introduction-to-a-living-wage
how calculated explanation
http://asia.floorwage.org/calculating-a-living-wage
worker,her partner,two kids. Each kid is considered half the adult.
he Asia Floor Wage Alliance base their calculations on the following assumptions:
A worker needs to be able to support themselves and two other “consumption units” (1 Consumption unit = 1 adult or 2 children)
An adult requires 3,000 calories a day to be able to carry out their work.
In Asia food costs account for half a workers monthly outgoings that is 50%
rest 40% towards housing,clothing,travel cost,kids education,health costs
Updated with 2015 calculations
http://asia.floorwage.org/asia-floor-wage-in-local-currency
The 2015 Asia Floor Wage figure is PPP$ 1021 [that is in USA, now it would be converted using Purchasing Power Parity].
Below is this calculation in local currency.
Bangladesh 29,442 Taka
The London Living Wage is currently £9.40 per hour.
http://www.livingwage.org.uk/calculation
world living wage map
http://www.wageindicator.org/main/salary/living-wage/living-wage-map
Living wage links and calculation methods
http://www.ethicaltrade.org/in-action/issues/living-wage-workers/living-wage-resources
Why Companies That Pay Above the Minimum Wage Come Out Ahead
http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesleadershipforum/2014/07/01/why-companies-that-pay-above-the-minimum-wage-come-out-ahead/#423555f93ccc
This article is by Zeynep Ton, an adjunct associate professor of operations management at the MIT Sloan School of Management and the author of The Good Jobs Strategy: How the Smartest Companies Invest in Employees to Lower Costs and Boost Profits.
The conventional wisdom in business is that bad jobs like this are necessary to keep prices low and profits high. If a low-cost retail chain were to pay its cashiers more, then it would either make less money or have to raise its prices. Implicit in this logic is the seemingly self-evident tradeoff between low prices and good jobs. But that is a false tradeoff. Even in highly competitive industries like low-cost retail, it is possible to pay employees decent wages and treat them well while giving customers the low prices they demand.
First, these companies consider their workforce not as a cost to be minimized but as a strategic asset. They invest in their employees with the expectation that they will get even more back in terms of labor productivity, customer service, cost-cutting, innovation, and flexibility during difficult times. Most businesses consider their high-level managers and skilled professionals to be strategic assets. But these companies see their front-line people that way, too.
Tedx talk
The Good Jobs Strategy: Zeynep Ton at TEDxCambridge 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD67LKqXGrg
Her webinar presentation
http://cdn.executive.mit.edu/00/000147a915d7fdabc7f93519980000/file/ton-webinarthe-good-jobs-strategy-v7pdf
Her book
http://zeynepton.com/book/
Full of surprising, counterintuitive insights, the book answers questions such as: How can offering fewer products increase customer satisfaction? Why would having more employees than you need reduce costs and boost profits? How can companies simultaneously standardize work and empower employees?
Almost one in four American working adults has a job that pays less than a living wage. Conventional wisdom says that’s how the world has to work. Bad jobs with low wages, minimal benefits, little training, and chaotic schedules are the only way companies can keep costs down and prices low. If companies were to offer better jobs, customers would have to pay more or companies would have to make less.
review on her book
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/07/opinion/joe-nocera-the-good-jobs-strategy.html?_r=0
last year titled “The Good Jobs Strategy” — her thesis comes out of research she did early in her academic career on supply chain management in the retail industry, focused especially on inventory management. What she and her fellow researchers discovered is that while most companies were very good at getting products from, say, China to their stores, it was a different story once the merchandise arrived. Sometimes a product stayed in the back room instead of making it to a shelf where a customer could buy it. Or it was in the wrong place. Special in-store promotions weren’t being executed a surprisingly high percentage of the time. She saw this pattern in company after company.
Unconvinced that this was the only approach, Ton decided to search for retail companies — the same kind of companies that needed low prices to succeed — that did things differently. Sure enough, she found some.
The two companies she talks about most frequently in this regard are a Spanish grocery chain called Mercadona and QuikTrip, a Tulsa, Okla.-based chain of convenience store/gas stations that competes with the likes of the 7-Eleven chain.
QuikTrip, an $11 billion company with 722 stores, is a prime example of what Ton means by “human-centered operations strategies.” Paying employees middle-class wages allows the company to get the most out of them. Employees are cross-trained so they can do different jobs. They can solve problems by themselves. They make merchandising decisions for their own stores. The ultimate result of the higher wages QuikTrip pays is that costs everywhere else in the operation go down. At QuikTrip, says Ton, products don’t remain in the back room, and in-store promotions always take place, as they’re supposed to.
Ton’s interest in the good jobs strategy is more than academic now; she has become a proselytizer, trying to spread the word that every company would be better served by this approach. “The assumed trade-off between low prices and good jobs is a fallacy,” she says. As we worry about where middle-class jobs are going to come from,
Home Depot is a well-known example. When former GE executive Robert Nardelli became CEO, at the end of 2000, he cut staffing levels and increased the percentage of part-timers to reduce costs and boost profits. Those moves achieved both goals immediately, but they eventually caused Home Depot’s excellent customer service—the company’s claim to fame and, arguably, primary source of competitive advantage—to suffer, customer satisfaction to plunge, and same-store sales growth to drop and even go negative in some years.
https://hbr.org/2012/01/why-good-jobs-are-good-for-retailers
What happened to Home Depot is common. Many store managers at various retailers told me that the pressure to meet short-term performance targets led them to reduce employees even though they knew that the workers who remained would cut corners and make mistakes. And they suspected that this could hurt sales and profits. Indeed, my research suggests that understaffing retail stores amounts to a missed opportunity: In my analysis of data from 1999 through 2002 from more than 250 stores of Borders, a major bookstore chain at the time, I found that a one-standard-deviation increase in labor levels at a store increased profit margins by 10% over the course of a year. Research by Marshall Fisher, Serguei Netessine, and Jayanth Krishnan supports my findings: Their analysis of 17 months of data from a large retailer shows that for every $1 increase in payroll, a store could see a $4 to $28 increase in monthly sales.
Employees of these retailers have higher pay, fuller training, better benefits, and more-convenient schedules than their counterparts at the competition. Store employees earn about 40% more at Costco than at its largest competitor, Walmart’s Sam’s Club. At Trader Joe’s, the starting wage for a full-time employee is $40,000 to $60,000 per year, more than twice what some competitors offer. The wages and benefits at QuikTrip are so good that the chain has been named one of Fortune’s “100 Best Companies to Work For” every year since 2003. All of Mercadona’s employees are permanent, and more than 85% are salaried full-timers.
These model retailers make an effort to provide advancement opportunities. For example, about 98% of store managers at Costco and all store managers at Mercadona, QuikTrip, and Trader Joe’s are promoted from within, and many executives at these companies started out in the stores.
n addition to offering the lowest prices in their industries, these retailers also provide better customer service than their competitors. The University of Michigan’s American Customer Satisfaction Index ranks Costco as high as Nordstrom—a department store chain known for outstanding customer service—and consistently higher than Sam’s Club. QuikTrip performs better than its competitors in evaluations by mystery shoppers. Customers get in and out of QuikTrip stores quickly because merchandise is always where it is supposed to be, and employees have been trained to ring up three customers per minute (often by not having to scan merchandise and by calculating change in their heads).
Eliminate waste in everything but staffing.
Retailers that invest in employees are by no means easygoing about what people do. Rather, they are obsessed with eliminating waste and improving efficiency. At Costco stores, products are shelved on pallets, which eliminates the need to unload and shelve them. At Trader Joe’s, many perishable products are sold already packaged instead of loose, which speeds up checkout. Costco and Trader Joe’s also work hard to eliminate waste in the supply chain—by, for example, purchasing most products directly from manufacturers and moving them to retail stores via their own highly efficient distribution centers.
QuikTrip and Mercadona apply world-class manufacturing practices to their store operations. Every in-store logistics process—from receiving merchandise to moving products within the store—is timed and standardized, and compliance with the standards is constantly monitored. Employee feedback is incorporated into process design and improvement. At QuikTrip, employees from every position regularly discuss problems and identify opportunities for improvement. At Mercadona, managers at headquarters in charge of specific processes routinely visit stores and talk to employees. The company also has field employees whose main job is to relay employee and customer feedback to purchasing and marketing departments.
In contrast to retailers that constantly strive to make do with fewer employees, retailers that operate in a virtuous cycle often err on the side of overstaffing. They want to make sure that employees are not too rushed to serve customers well and finish their logistics tasks. QuikTrip goes even further, maintaining a force of hundreds of employees who do not report to a specific store but are ready to fill in for people who get sick, take a vacation, or have an emergency.
Let employees make small decisions.
In most retail stores, merchandise planning is centralized and only managers can make decisions about product returns and customer complaints. But at companies that operate in a virtuous cycle, employees constantly make decisions. QuikTrip, Trader Joe’s, and Mercadona employees decide how many units of each item to order for their stores. How can large chains trust thousands of people to make inventory decisions? Every decision is small, corporate IT is designed to assist, and the decisions are monitored. Because empowering employees in these ways makes companies more responsive to local needs and preferences, it increases customer as well as employee satisfaction.
Actually you could read it in google books
Bangladesh living wage study by CPD
http://www.irinavandersluijs.nl/site/assets/files/1067/living_wage_report_bangladesh.pdf
care about inequality
http://milescorak.com/2013/08/19/why-should-we-care-about-inequality-tim-harford-nails-it-in-this-financial-times-column/
high salary up the ladder
>>>
Tournament theory provides economics and motivating reasoning about why salary gap is becoming higher and higher up the hierarchy as described by Tim Harford, a columnist for the Financial Times, is author of The Undercover Economist.
http://www.eschipul.com/2008/05/variable-pay-and-the-tournament-theory-of-economics/
After all, managers find it hard to spot an excellent performance. It is a rare job where workers can be fairly paid according to some objective criteria.
The second, and more counterintuitive, prediction of tournament theory is that the more luck is involved in work, the larger the pay gaps should be between the winners and the losers. If Jack’s promotion is 90% luck and 10% effort, Jack may be inclined to goof off–unless, of course, the rewards for promotion are absolutely astronomical. And they sometimes are.
Tournaments also demand increasingly absurd pay packages as workers get higher up the hierarchy. At the lowest level, a promotion may not need to carry much of a pay increase, because it opens up the possibility of future, lucrative promotions. Nearer the end of your career, only a fat check is likely to spur you on.
@it may be termed as lottery effect.
Democracy theory
>>
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/02/what-moral-philosophy-tells-us-about-income-inequality/252455/
The giant who dominates modern American political philosophy is John Rawls. The edifice that he began constructing in the 1950s stands firm today as a philosophical monument for liberal, free-market democracy, and few political theorists have been able to escape from its shadow.
The theory is elegant and powerful. Rawls argues that when we think of how to create a just society, we need to imagine that we are all placed under a "veil of ignorance," where we don't know anything about the various advantages - social or natural - that we are born into. What principles of society would we then agree to? Rawls builds a strong case for two:
Principle 1: "Each person has the same indefeasible claim to a fully adequate scheme of equal basic liberties, which scheme is compatible with the same scheme of liberties for all."
Principle 2: "Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions: first, they are to be attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity; and second, they are to be to the greatest benefit of the least-advantaged members of society."
http://blogdailyherald.com/2015/02/20/ethical-inquiry-moral-boundaries-income-inequality/
Thomas Paine, argued for a sort of middle ground. Paine felt that if all humans have the claim to obtain necessary resources in a state of nature, then when society grows, members should maintain that right. Therefore, in order to preserve those natural rights, Paine suggested a minimal level of welfare for all members of society.
Several mentioned how a capitalist society like America is more concerned with preserving equality of opportunity. However, at a certain point, income begins to influence opportunity.
The Income Gap
Recent increases in income and wage inequality in the United States prompt a look at the ethics of income redistribution.
By William A. Sundstrom
https://legacy.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v9n3/income.html
Fairness: Morally arbitrary differences among us arising from the circumstances of our birth, upbringing, or current position in the market economy should not be permitted to create drastic differences in basic well-being or human dignity. In a just society, those with a better draw in life's lottery should contribute toward the welfare of those with a poorer draw. Furthermore, to the extent that family income helps determine a child's life chances, fair equality of opportunity depends on providing families with adequate resources to give their children a good start.
http://www.economicsandethics.org/inequality/
another view of egalatarian
What’s Fair? New Theory on Income Inequality
http://engineering.columbia.edu/what%E2%80%99s-fair-new-theory-income-inequality
Yet one of the most significant things Sahlberg said passed practically unnoticed. "Oh," he mentioned at one point, "and there are no private schools in Finland."
This notion may seem difficult for an American to digest, but it's true. Only a small number of independent schools exist in Finland, and even they are all publicly financed. None is allowed to charge tuition fees. There are no private universities, either. This means that practically every person in Finland attends public school, whether for pre-K or a Ph.D.
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/12/what-americans-keep-ignoring-about-finlands-school-success/250564/
From his point of view, Americans are consistently obsessed with certain questions: How can you keep track of students' performance if you don't test them constantly? How can you improve teaching if you have no accountability for bad teachers or merit pay for good teachers? How do you foster competition and engage the private sector? How do you provide school choice?
The answers Finland provides seem to run counter to just about everything America's school reformers are trying to do.
Accountability is something that is left when responsibility has been subtracted."
while Americans love to talk about competition, Sahlberg points out that nothing makes Finns more uncomfortable. In his book Sahlberg quotes a line from Finnish writer named Samuli Paronen: "Real winners do not compete." It's hard to think of a more un-American idea, but when it comes to education, Finland's success shows that the Finnish attitude might have merits. There are no lists of best schools or teachers in Finland. The main driver of education policy is not competition between teachers and between schools, but cooperation.
"Here in America," Sahlberg said at the Teachers College, "parents can choose to take their kids to private schools. It's the same idea of a marketplace that applies to, say, shops. Schools are a shop and parents can buy what ever they want. In Finland parents can also choose. But the options are all the same."
Herein lay the real shocker. As Sahlberg continued, his core message emerged, whether or not anyone in his American audience heard it.
Decades ago, when the Finnish school system was badly in need of reform, the goal of the program that Finland instituted, resulting in so much success today, was never excellence. It was equity.
Since the 1980s, the main driver of Finnish education policy has been the idea that every child should have exactly the same opportunity to learn, regardless of family background, income, or geographic location. Education has been seen first and foremost not as a way to produce star performers, but as an instrument to even out social inequality.
Finnish policymakers decided to reform the country's education system in the 1970s, they did so because they realized that to be competitive, Finland couldn't rely on manufacturing or its scant natural resources and instead had to invest in a knowledge-based economy.
Clearly, many were wrong. It is possible to create equality. And perhaps even more important -- as a challenge to the American way of thinking about education reform -- Finland's experience shows that it is possible to achieve excellence by focusing not on competition, but on cooperation, and not on choice, but on equity.
Sultan Qaboos University Oman salary:::
>>
https://my.vanderbilt.edu/peabodygraduatestudents/2015/01/sultan-qaboos-university-associate-professor-of-educational-planning/
Apart from attractive competitive tax-free base salary. SQU offers free furnished accommodation, free medical care including a hospital and a family clinic on campus, excellent recreational facilities on campus, end of service gratuity, subsidized schooling for up to two children (conditions apply), 60 days annual leave with return tickets, up to 28 days research leave (condition apply), an initial two year contract followed by rolling three year contracts.
http://forums.eslcafe.com/job/viewtopic.php?t=105852
The last offer that I heard was for someone with less experience than you and that was for about 1400 OR a month plus free furnished housing and the other usual benefits. They do have a formal pay scale.
https://www.squ.edu.om/Portals/31/PD&R/Induction%20&%20Mentoring/Guide%20for%20new%20teachers%202013.pdf
For 2012/2013 contracts, the University was offerin
g an allowance of RO 1500 per child (up
to 18 years old) per year for his/her education – u
p to two children per family.
Contracts are generally made for three years, count
ing from the date of your arrival in Oman.
During your first three months you will be on proba
tion, and your classroom teaching will be
observed on at least one occasion.
The notice period for resigning is six (6) months p
rior to the end of contract.
