Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Is being paid a non-living wage better than being paid nothing at all?

Say I am a one man shop. I would like an assistant, but I don't actually make enough to pay the assistant a "living wage". My options are to hire an assistant at non-living wages, or not hire an assistant at all. Which is preferable?




You can afford to hire a part-time assistant. You shouldn't be able to hire someone to work full-time for you for $20 a week. I hope that's obvious.


If I wanted to learn from this person their craft and wanted to make a desirable investment in being in their presence and knowledge, you would prevent me from accepting this opportunity?


Don't conflate apprenticeships with taking advantage of poor people. Are you pretending there is no difference between these two scenarios?

A) Someone is a gifted tattoo artist and you want to learn the craft from them, so you pay them to teach you. You're responsible for your living expenses and you get by with odd jobs or what-have-you.

B) Someone pays you $5/day to do office work for them.


What about:

C) Someone is a gifted tattoo artist and you want to learn the craft from them, but you don't have any money to pay them. So the tattoo artist takes you on as a full-time paid intern, making a non-living wage


would like an assistant, but I don't actually make enough to pay the assistant a "living wage"

Have your assistant come in only 2-3 days a week or or only 3-4 hours in the morning.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: