Yours is a common belief, and I don't think you should be down voted for it, but you are wrong.
Firstly companies don't shutter, they downsize. The most vulnerable employees are the first to go, the higher paid ones are typically the most valuable, remain. Owners go last.
Secondly, in my experience, all employees would rather forgoe a raise and keep everyone employed that insist on a raise. We saw this first-hand in 2020. Lockdown brought extreme uncertainty but employees agreed to 50% [1] pay instead of massive job cuts.
Yes it helps that we pay staff well. Yes it helps that they get a bonus in the good years. Yes it helps that we have their interests at heart. Yes it helps that they are skilled and we don't want to lose them.
Yes, over the years some people have become redundant, but there are swings between good times and bad times, and no we don't shutter just because there's a bad time. That's explicitly _not_ how it is supposed to work.
[1] we had a min threshold for 50%, those under got 100%. Also thanks to govt assistance, and our ability to back-pay later, they all ended up "whole".
[2] ps - I agree on the need for a minimum wage. In almost all cases it is too low by a lot. And I agree that if you can't pay minimum wage, then you can't afford an employee.
The thing I specifically wanted to highlight (which I think most readers missed) was that not receiving a raise is equivalent to receiving a pay cut unless we're riding at 0% inflation. Every year costs go up for employees and keeping them pegged at the same salary prevents them from being able to cover those costs as efficiently.
I've seen workers pidgeon-holed into low stagnant wages too often to accept it as a status quo when the companies employing them are posting profits - in the modern world we too quickly accept the fact that owners are supposed to take out lion's share salaries and profits need to continuously increase. A business can have a healthy existence just making the economic wheels spin and ensuring that employees are well compensated.
We usually set minimum increases based on inflation. Often we do higher. Occasionally we have wage freezes but they are not common. We adapt to conditions and circumstances.
Obviously we are one data point, but I have seen other small companies do the same. Big companies bad behaviour does make the news, good behaviour does not, so while bad actors certainly exist, I don't know if that is the norm, and I don't know if it is more prevalent in the US.
Firstly companies don't shutter, they downsize. The most vulnerable employees are the first to go, the higher paid ones are typically the most valuable, remain. Owners go last.
Secondly, in my experience, all employees would rather forgoe a raise and keep everyone employed that insist on a raise. We saw this first-hand in 2020. Lockdown brought extreme uncertainty but employees agreed to 50% [1] pay instead of massive job cuts.
Yes it helps that we pay staff well. Yes it helps that they get a bonus in the good years. Yes it helps that we have their interests at heart. Yes it helps that they are skilled and we don't want to lose them.
Yes, over the years some people have become redundant, but there are swings between good times and bad times, and no we don't shutter just because there's a bad time. That's explicitly _not_ how it is supposed to work.
[1] we had a min threshold for 50%, those under got 100%. Also thanks to govt assistance, and our ability to back-pay later, they all ended up "whole".
[2] ps - I agree on the need for a minimum wage. In almost all cases it is too low by a lot. And I agree that if you can't pay minimum wage, then you can't afford an employee.