Posts Tagged ‘wages’

CEO-worker-2013

According to the AFL-CIO’s latest “Executive Paywatch” report, the CEO-to-average-worker-pay ratio rose last year to 331:1. And the ratio of CEO pay to the minimum wage was much higher: 774:1.

That’s because, in both cases, workers’ wages remained more or less constant while the amount of surplus those workers created that ended up in the pockets of the CEOs of the nation’s largest corporations continued to rise.

As the AFL-CIO argues in their report:

America is supposed to be the land of opportunity, a country where hard work and playing by the rules would provide working families a middle-class standard of living. But in recent decades, corporate CEOs have been taking a greater share of the economic pie while wages have stagnated and unemployment remains high.

High-paid CEOs of low-wage employers are fueling this growing economic inequality. In 2013, CEOs of the Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 500 Index companies received, on average, $11.7 million in total compensation, according to the AFL-CIO’s analysis of available data from 350 companies.

Today’s ratio of CEO-to-worker pay is simply unconscionable.

146910_600

Special mention

146870_600 146890_600

quits

In a recent speech, Fed Chair Janet Yellen admitted that “the recovery still feels like a recession to many Americans, and it also looks that way in some economic statistics.”

Some of those statistics are contained in the just-released Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS). While there may have been 4.2 million new job postings in February, 300,000 more than in January, many of these are low-wage jobs (temp jobs in business services, food-service jobs, jobs in retail trade, and so on), many of them at or just above the minimum wage. And, even though they’re less-then-desirable jobs at less-than-desirable wages, there were still 2.5 unemployed workers for every job posting. So, given that reserve army of labor, employers have absolutely no reason to offer higher wages. Which is why the so-called quits rate—the number of job quits divided by total employment, a measure of the willingness of workers to leave their current jobs in search of new, better, higher-paying jobs—remained at 1.7, virtually unchanged over the last 4 years.

The economic statistics are thus clear: American workers have been jolted and they’re still waiting for their recovery.

146712_600

Special mention

146758_600 146683_600

MPzfH.AuSt.79

Answer (according to Kathleen Madigan):

College football’s “Norma Rae” moment joins other recent pay-related episodes. First was the proposal to raise the federal minimum wage. Next came the White House’s directive to expand the number of workers eligible for overtime pay. Employees who currently work extra hours for free will soon get paid for their time.

Add in interns and citizen journalists that perform duties for free and a trend is evident: The U.S. economy may be the richest in the world, but sections of it depend on cheap or free labor.

Chart of the day

Posted: 28 March 2014 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , ,

P140327-2

As Ed Dolan explains,

The chart [above] assigns a value of 100 to each component’s share in 2007, the year before the recession began. This chart shows that corporate profits were hit hard in the first months of the recession, but began to recover already by the end of 2008, when GDP was still falling. By the time the economy had officially entered the recovery phase in mid-2009, corporate profits were surging to new highs.

Compensation of employees and proprietors’ income behaved differently. During the downslope of the recession, the shares of those two components held fairly steady, that is, they decreased but only at about the same rate as GDI [Gross Domestic Income] as a whole. After mid-2009, when the economy began to recover, the two diverged. Proprietors’ income grew faster than GDI as a whole, so that its share increased. Compensation of employees grew less rapidly than GDI, so its share began to fall, and is still falling.

These trends in the shares of GDI components provide another view of the substantial changes in the distribution of income and wealth that are underway in the twenty-first century United States. The data shown in our charts are only indirectly related to the more widely publicized increase in the share of total income accruing to top earners, but they explain part of what is going on. It is true that some high earners receive the major part of their income in the form of salaries and bonuses, and that many middle-class families receive some corporate profit income through mutual funds and retirement savings accounts. Still, corporate profits are more unequally distributed and compensation of employees less unequally distributed than income as a whole. That means the rising share in GDI of the former and the falling share of the latter are two of the factors behind the rising fortunes of the super-rich and the relative economic stagnation of the middle class.

poverty-and-marriage-650

Special mention

0326toon_wasserman-1947.r 140326_Hobby_Lobby_t618

American-Dream

The American Dream has been a prominent theme of our Tale of Two Depressions course this semester. We have had the opportunity to trace both the changing content and contours of that dream and the periods, as after 1929, when it quickly turned into a nightmare.

But, as we know, a new American Dream was invented in the postwar period, the so-called Golden Age of American capitalism, which—while unevenly distributed (for example, in the Jim Crow South and northern inner cities) and openly contested (for example, in the Port Huron Statement and the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom)—held sway at least in some pockets. Such as Detroit:

Decades ago, car workers lived the quintessential American Dream: they pursued stable, well-paying, union-backed jobs, often straight out of high school. They were able to build a middle-class life and provide the promise of something better to their children.

Now, once again, as the BBC [ht: ja] explains, that dream has turned into a nightmare:

Times have changed.

Now jobs are scarce, and people feel shame in being unprepared for the current labour market.

“Unemployed auto workers, factory workers, they have a lot of regrets about the past,” he said.

“A lot of workers are internalising, ‘You succeed on your own merits and your own abilities, and if you fail, you’re to blame’,” [Victor Tan] Chen says.

He isn’t alone in seeing this pattern.

Experts tell the BBC that job seekers in the US are now, more than ever, blaming themselves for being out of work, due in part to misconceptions about what it takes to succeed in America.

What reinforces such an American Nightmare is a self-help industry that is the modern secular version of our grounding myth—which, as Helaine Olen explains, is “the idea that diligent efforts and thrift demonstrated both godliness and virtue — and would result in worldly success.” Belief in self-help easily becomes self-blame. And, of course, an attempt to blame the victims of the Second Great Depression for their own plight.

Viewed through this prism, you can think of the constant simmering anger in our culture as the road rage of self-help culture. Fearing the humiliation of failure, we aggressively lash out at others who prove the self-help nostrums a lie.

This could be the reason that many, including Republican members of Congress, blame the long-term jobless for their own plight, and cut off their unemployment checks. We say those who fell prey to predatory lending weren’t misled, but were greedy.

According to the tenets of self-help, the victims of the American economic collapse need not a helping hand, but a kick in the pants.

minwage-avg

source

As Michael Reich and Ken Jacobs explain,

One measure of employers’ latitude to absorb higher wages compares the minimum wage to the median wage. From the 1960s into the 1970s, the minimum-median ratio in the United States varied between 41 and 55 percent. Since the mid-1980s, it has been much lower, varying between 33 and 39 percent. A minimum wage increase to $10.10 by 2016, as President Obama proposed earlier this year, would restore the national ratio to 50 percent.

inequality

Special mention

sbr032014dAPR20140320014919 mike2april-500x361