[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Entercom imposes contract on AFTRA
On Thursday, January 23, 2003, at 07:04 PM, tony schinella wrote:
> From the Citizen's Housing and Planning Association: "In the Boston
> metropolitan area, a family needs to earn $42,040 annually to afford an
> average 2 bedroom apartment and $52,560 to afford an average 3 bedroom
How old is that survey? Housing prices have soared in the past couple
of years while wages have not.
Rule of thumb: about 33% of your take home pay should go to housing.
It used to be 25% but that's no longer possible. So, your $42,000 a
year guy makes $800 a week, maybe $550 after taxes. By your own
> I saw a two bedroom apartment in
> Winchester last week for $1,400. I knew about a three bedroom in
> for $1,500 that was recently rented by an acquaintance. We pay $1,000
> for a
> two bedroom in Somerville and had a big one bedroom in Mission Hill for
> $1,000 two years ago. So, if you look, you can find a bargain.
...you'd have to pay almost 60% of your take home pay to cover the rent
in Winchester. That's horrible! How are you ever going to get ahead,
save money for a house or anything else, with that kind of situation.
Or are you saying a single person simply should not be able to afford
his or her own place? It seems to me that if you are a good enough
journalist to be working at a major station in a major market like
Boston, you really shouldn't have to bunk with a roommate in order to
> I work for a newspaper company. Two years ago, when the economy was so
> called "good," many of us accepted pay freezes to keep our jobs and
> others in our company from being laid off.
> Many towns in this state are considering going to their teacher's
> unions and
> admin staff and asking them to take pay freezes and cuts to keep
> from occurring.
> Why shouldn't we expect this in other industries?
The other side of that coin is that when everyone lives by these rules,
the economy will collapse. People simply won't pay $1400 to live in
that 2 bedroom apartment. Nobody else will come running to the vacant
apartments with a fat paycheck in their hands, so the landlord will
have to cut the rent. It will be a long and painful process, but
eventually rents and salaries will find an equitable level. Maybe it
will end up like it is in China, where the average urban worker makes
$1400 a month, and pays $400 a month in rent. Of course, they don't
sell many SUV's in China.
> Housing costs aren't really the point to all this. The point is, what
> you do to work in an industry you want to work in? Some people have to
> pay cuts or freezes to fend layoffs. Isn't it worth it if you love
> your job?
> Sure beats working at Home Depot.
Apparently that's what the powers that be think about their employees
in this situation. I wonder if they also love their jobs so much that
they'd also take that kind of salary cut to do them.