quote:Originally posted by Hero_Mike: Subway uses the term "sandwich artist" to imply that their employees are somewhat more than a mere sandwich *maker*. They are *artists* - their work *is art*, they take pride in it, and it is better in quality than the competition.
It's a marketing ploy, and one I object to.
It can also work the other direction as well. If you're in a menial position, a simple name change may be just the morale boost that one needs to do a better job. I mean really, would you rather be a *sandwich maker* or a *sandwich artist*?
A good personal example is myslef. After finals are over I will start work at the new Whole Foods in Greenville, in the prepared foods department. I definitely think having a title or designation as *Prepared Foods Team Member* is much more preferable than *Cook*.
I don't put much stock into that myself. I know that there's no difference between a sandwich maker and sandwich artist. I don't believe that most Subway employees make more of their job because of that silly title. I can't prove this of course, but I think you're in the minority when it comes to the title playing that big of a part.
You don't understand. Subway's goal is not to make their employees lot in life better by naming them "Sandwich Artists". If they fall for the improved morale of this, that's another feather in the cap of the employer - something for nothing. But Subway's goal is for us - the dumb consumer - to pay more for their sandwiches. That money does not make it into the pockets of the employees. But it is part of the ploy to get more money out of the consumer's pockets. We feel that the quality is worth the price because it is being produced by a "Sandwich Artist". That's why I say it's a marketing ploy, and why I object to it.
ETA - pockets - I meant to say pockets.
-------------------- "The fate of *billions* depends on you! Hahahahaha....sorry." Lord Raiden - Mortal Kombat Posts: 1587 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
I worked at a subway in my home town many moons ago. n the shop I worked at the title of sandwich artist was bestowed only onto those who had earned it by learning all of the sandwich ingredients, and being able to assemble them in a quick yet visually appealing manner. Once our skill had been proved true, we were awarded a certificate, a shirt with "sandwich artist" embroidered on the sleeve, and a mild pay raise. Was it silly, yes, even still I was proud. I know for a fact that this is not the case everywhere, but at my shop it it was an honor. I still have "sandwich artist" on my resume' in the "skills" section.
I'd like to stoke the fires of the "Deserve a living wage" side arguement while I'm here. I think "deserve" is a very strong word. I beleive that everyone deserves the oppertunity to equip themselves with marketable and employable skills so that they can earn a living wage. I do not however beleive that a person deserves a living wage just for being.
lets take a look at Bill. Bill has no marketable skills what-so-ever. Which is to say it would not be in any employers interest, financially, to employ bill as he has nothing to offer, or at least not enuagh to offer to pay him a "living wage". By some rationels expressed in this thread some employer somewhere should pay bill MORE than he is worth to that company, OR create work with no real value that bill could "work hard" at to make a "living wage". From a business stand point, this makes no sense.
What would I do if I were Bill? I would gain some skills, make myself a more valuable employee. I know that some people will ask me "How exactly do you suggest Bill do so" To which I will answer: Every danm way possible. It is every individuals own responsibility to make sure that they are getting as much money for their time as possible. For exapmle, I washed dishes in a slightly upscale resturuant for a few months. During my shift I would bust my ass to get done as quickly as possible. As soon as I was cuaght up I would head over to the prep cooks area and ask them to teach me. On my days off I came in and worked for free so that I could gain skills and knowledge. The next time I worked in a resturant I was a prep cook making 2 bucks more an hour than the dishwashers. While working as a construction site clean up lackey I asked the backhoe operator to show me how to run the backhoe, he did. Three weeks later he moved on to another job, and I replaced him, making 12 bucks more an hour. I've not included these anecdotes as pratical advice for others, but to show that when I want to make more money I ensure that I truely do "deserve" it by making myself more valuable to my employer.
This is not to say that every person is an island and must go their way alone. Certainly we should try and help one another out in as many ways as we can (this includes boycotting employers who don't compensate their workers fairly). But if you expect an employer to pay someone 12 bucks an hour to coalate papers, or work at mcdonalds, your dreaming. Not becuase the person dosn't "deserve" that much, but becuase that person does not provide a service which is worth that much, no matter how hard they work.
Posts: 45 | From: Memphis, TN | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |