What makes a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work?

Fair labor practices, Uncategorized 2 Comments

Debates about the setting of minimum wage levels typically result in a range of perspectives and approaches being put forward by different parties.

Unions and workers, along with some social groups, tend to place strong emphasis upon increases in the cost of living and the financial pressures confronting low income workers.

Employers, on the other hand, feel that the need to control inflation, in addition to any uncertainties in the economic outlook, should be given paramount importance.

Whilst the debate may involve a certain degree of self interest, both camps raise legitimate concerns. 

In this post, I will not deal with the debate about whether or not a minimum wage should exist at all – that debate will probably be the subject of another post at some stage. Instead, I would like to focus on the question of where the minimum wage should be set.

Here are my thoughts – readers are encouraged to add their own:

 
(1) Minimum wage levels should exceed the poverty line.

The earnings of full time workers should be sufficient to cover the cost of food, clothing, accommodation and other basic necessities for a reasonable sized family.

To be sure, workers on the minimum wage should not expect to be able to afford luxury items. However, every employee who puts in an honest day’s pay should expect to provide bare necessities for their family.

There appears to be little point in having a minimum wage at all if the level at which it is set is not sufficient to meet basic needs of workers.

 
(2) Minimum wages should comfortably exceed unemployment benefits.

Personally, I am not opposed to the concept of unemployment benefits, particularly for the majority of recipients who actively seek gainful employment.

Nevertheless, I do feel that there should be a significant gap between those who are in gainful employment and those who are recipients of unemployment benefits.

(Let me stress that my comments here relate specifically to unemployment benefits. My comments do not relate to other forms of welfare, such as disability support pensions or old age pensions)

 
(3) Minimum wages should at least keep pace with inflation.

To be sure, adjustments to minimum wages should be modest so as not to cause unnecessary inflationary pressures.

However, low paid workers should at least be entitled to expect their incomes to keep pace with the cost of living, particularly in cases where workers achieve productivity gains on a consistent basis.

There are, I believe, two temporary exceptions. The first exception occurs where the economy experiences a period of stagflation – where high levels of inflation are accompanied by economic stagnation or recession. The second occurs in a period of hyperinflation.

In either case, minimum wage adjustments which keep pace with inflation may be deemed to be inappropriate on economic grounds.

 
(4) Executive salaries should not be a major factor.

Frustration on the part of low paid workers at sky-rocketing levels of executive remuneration is understandable, particularly in cases where those same executives preach about the need for wage restraint. 

However, the issue of appropriate levels of executive remuneration should be considered independently to that of appropriate minimum wage settings.

Minimum wage settings should take into account factors such as the need to provide reasonable living standards for the low paid, the need to reward workers for productivity gains and the economic impact of minimum wage settings on the broader economy.

These considerations are of paramount importance, and whilst executive remuneration is an important issue in itself, there are more important factors to be taken into account in the process of setting minimum wage levels.

 
(5) Minimum wages should be linked to productivity growth.

Productivity growth should be a key factor in determining the appropriate size of minimum wage adjustments, both from a viewpoint of social equity and fairness as well as from an economic standpoint.

From a viewpoint of social equity, employees should be entitled to share in the benefits of productivity gains. The process of linking minimum wage adjustments to productivity helps to ensure that workers who are not in strong bargaining position receive their fair share of such benefits.

Also, productivity growth is a critical factor in determining the size of minimum wage adjustments that is sustainable without causing undue inflationary effects. Adjustments which do not exceed the growth in productivity have no inflationary effect. The increase in the price of labor resulting from such adjustments is offset by the increase in labor productivity. Furthermore, adjustments which marginally exceed productivity growth will be inflationary, but their impact will be moderate.

However, minimum wage adjustments which exceed productivity growth to a significant degree fuel domestic inflation to a considerable extent, not to mention their impact upon economic growth and job creation. Such adjustments are unsustainable from an economic viewpoint.

2 Responses to “What makes a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work?”

  1. Brad Shorr Says:
    July 15th, 2008 at 11:00 pm

    Hi Andrew, your point about productivity is interesting. I wonder if that could be applied at the company level. Macro productivity numbers don’t apply equally to all companies or sectors. But I think it would be marvelous if all minimum wage workers qualified for a profit sharing program.

    Brad Shorrs last blog post..News about Word Sell, Brad Shorr

  2. Andrew Says:
    July 16th, 2008 at 6:28 pm

    Hi Brad,

    Your suggestion raises an interesting point, and that is whether or not one singular minimum wage should cover every worker across every sector, or whether different minimum wages should apply to workers in different sectors.

    If a singular minimum wage applies across the board, then it is only possible to use the macroeconomic numbers when taking productivity considerations into account.

    However, in cases where minimum wages vary from industry to industry, then the use of industry specific productivity numbers would be a viable option.

    In terms of productivity at the company specific level, I do not believe that it would be possible for minimum wages defined in state or federal legislation to take into account productivity gains at an individual company level.

    However, in terms of wage negotiations at an individual enterprise level, I do feel that companies would be well advised to provide some form of mechanism to reward all staff to share in the achievements of the company. This could be based upon some measure of labor productivity gains or could be constructed as some form of profit sharing agreement.

    When I was a student, I worked for a large supermarket chain which offered a small amount of shares to all full time and part time staff, even those on the minimum wage. Staff responded very positively to the offer, and the result was that staff felt a significantly greater connection to the company than what they otherwise would have felt.

Leave a Reply

CommentLuv Enabled
Icons by N.Design Studio. Designed By Ben Swift. Powered by WordPress and Free WordPress Themes
Entries RSS