BASTROP, Texas --National Review writer Kevin Williamson looked at both sides of the argument on increasing wages through the lens of convenience-store and gasoline retailer Buc-ee’s, which operates 32 large, high-volume locations in Texas.
“Its customers may have a great and deep hunger for jalapeño cheese bread, but Buc-ee’s has a great and deep hunger for labor: lots of it, for which it is willing to pay goodly sums,” he said.
Stopping recently at a Buc-ee’s location in Bastrop, Texas, he “was greeted by (in addition to a man dressed as a giant aquatic rodent) an A-frame sign advertising Buc-ee’s version of the minimum wage: cashiers, $12 to $14 an hour; food-service and car-wash help, $13 to $15 an hour; team leaders, $14 to $17 an hour; assistant, $17 an hour and up. Each job came with three weeks paid time off each year, which employees are welcome to use, roll over or exchange for cash. If you want 40 hours a week, there’s 40 hours a week to be had; if you want more than 40 hours a week, that can happen, too.”
The conservative reaction: “This pay scale was absurd for such low-skilled work, and that that was why a gallon of gas at Buc-ee’s cost a dime more than it did across the street.”
Williamson argued, “In a free market, consumers can choose between lots of price points offering different levels of service and amenities. … There’s a reason that we have first class, business class, steerage and Spirit Airlines: Some people are willing to pay more for better, and some people hate themselves and don’t care if their flight from Vegas to Houston runs a few hours late.”
“The left-wing response to Buc-eenomics is just as predictable and just as dumb,” he said. “If Buc-ee’s can afford to pay gas-station attendants $17 an hour, then why can’t we mandate a $15-an-hour federal minimum wage? Put another way: If it’s a good idea for one specific business in one specific market at one specific time, why not everywhere?”
He concluded, “Every situation is different, and every business is a social-science experiment, trying out different approaches to solving social problems, which is what entrepreneurs and successful firms actually do. If it weren’t for the self-interest of big, nasty corporations, it wouldn’t be a question of clean bathrooms vs. less clean ones: You’d be out there on the side of the road.”
Click here to read the full National Review story.
Members help make our journalism possible. Become a CSP member today and unlock exclusive benefits, including unlimited access to all of our content. Sign up here.