Aldi is hiring!

So one of the perks of working at home is that I can take a long lunch and run an errand. Today it was Aldi, where they’ve got a “now hiring” sign with the starting wage posted: $13 an hour. So, in other words, they pay significantly higher than minimum wage for what is, in terms of the skills required, a minimum wage job. Now, I don’t think they do this because they’re a German-based company; I think that they want people who, even if, strictly speaking, are only required to operate a cash register and stock shelves, have the initiative to switch between the two tasks and use their time as productively as possible, rather than being dependent on a supervisor to constantly supervise them.

But what happens if the minimum wage increases, say, not all the way to the agitated-for $15 an hour, but even just to $13 an hour.  They they’re paying minimum wage, and, if they keep their wages the same, would have a hard time getting the most productive workers.  Why bother, if the job at the store next door pays the same, and you can be a little lazier there?  Now, if unemployment’s high, then maybe there aren’t enough low-effort minimum wage jobs to go around, and workers will be happy to take the high-effort jobs rather than be jobless.  But it still seems like it would be rather challenging for the employer to make demands of employees, at a minimum wage level — which means that Aldi, and every other employer who wants to differentiate themselves as an “above-minimum wage employer” has to raise their pay.  Tell me how that doesn’t lead to inflation and no net improvement for workers.