Rss Feed Tweeter button Facebook button Linkedin button

Skip to content

Thursday, Feb 23rd 2012


Rigid Labour Markets and Levels of Unemployment

Yesterday evening, Karl Whelan of Irish Economy entered the wages and competitiveness discussion which stemmed from Philip Lane’s post written as a reaction to David Begg’s op-ed column in the Irish Times yesterday. Whelan provided his usual thorough, nuanced analysis which reads like a mainstream economic cheat-sheet on every aspect of the issue for the non-economist. However, although not versed in the current literature on labour market rigidities and what it says their effects are on the levels of unemployment there was one point that ran counter to something I had come across recently myself.

In the section of his post on what the government can do, he says:

“Beyond public sector pay, the Irish government could perhaps encourage lower wages by deregulating the labour market. It is well known that average levels of unemployment across countries tend to correlate positively with labour market rigidities, so reducing these rigidities may help to limit the increase in unemployment.

Three points can be made on this. First, even highly deregulated labour markets such as the US are suffering from high levels of unemployment during the current recession, so deregulation is not a panacea for recession. Second, Ireland does not have a highly regulated labour market: The World Bank’s Doing Business survey ranks Ireland 38th in the world in terms of the freedom of its labour markets, compared with 142nd for Germany and 148th for France.”

His point about Ireland not having a highly regulated labour market is good one. It is said far too many times now that Irish unions are part of the ‘establishment’ and that this unelected special interest group, through social partnership, is only interested in protecting their own interests over that of the general health of the Irish economy. This scenario is only wishful thinking on the part of those who believe that there should be no union representation for Irish workers whatsoever and that the terms and conditions of employment should be determined by the ‘market’.

However, it is point about reducing rigidities in the labour market to help limit the increase in unemployment that I was wondering about. In his paper, Maastricht 2042 and the Fate of Europe James K. Galbraith argues that the opposite is the case, that contrary to all the established literature on labour market rigidities, a more rigid labour market reduces the levels of unemployment. He also argues against the received notion that the US labour market is highly deregulated and that this lack of deregulation or greater labour market rigidity accounts for the long period of full employment that it has enjoyed up until very recently.

From the introduction, Galbraith talks about something that has a familiar ring to those listening and read the debates in Ireland:

“Labor market reform follows a logic familiar to every undergraduate who has ever taken an introduction to economics. Labor markets are supposed to operate under the guidance of supply and demand, with supply curves sloping upwards (mostly) and demand curves sloping downwards (always). If there is unemployment, the cause must lie in a failure of the real wage to adjust to its equilibrium value. Perhaps technological change and other factors have cut demand for workers equipped with relatively limited skills. To restore full employment, wages paid to such workers must decline. This can be accomplished by weakening unions, cutting job protections and unemployment benefits, and otherwise dismantling the market power that democratic governments have rashly allowed to accumulate in the hands of the unskilled.”

And then adds a note to that, should the suggestion that power lies in the hands of the unskilled seems a bit jarring:

“To the untutored, a claim that serious monopoly power is held by the mass of low-paid, unskilled workers may seem strange. One might think that market power would be more likely to accumulate in the hands of, well, monopolies–that the benefits of monopoly are more likely to be found in the stock options of executives than in the pay packets of the assembly line. But to think this way is to misunderstand the logic of supply and demand. Given that there is unemployment, it must be the case that real wages are too high. And this proves, without further recourse to evidence, that the problem of monopoly is a problem of worker power. Conversely, as no chief executive is ever fired for demanding too much money, that is proof that the market for CEOs clears at the competitive price. In some matters, it may be better to remain untutored.”

I realize that I am quoting at length here but this is good stuff.

The argument goes that to cure unemployment in Europe more flexibility in the labour market is required. And where does a model for this flexibility exist? In the United States, of course:

“In the medium term, the flexibility project envisages reaching levels of inequality characteristic of a “dynamic” capitalist economy. And for this, Europeans see a model–when they gaze across the Atlantic at the United States. The American Model stands as the template for the degree of inequality that must be achieved, in order to enjoy American full employment.”

Contrary to this, he argues:

“… in the late 1990s the United States achieved full employment while reducing inequalities in its pay structure, not by increasing them. The task remains to adapt this principle and experience effectively to European institutions, overcoming the true rigidities of Europe. These are not in labor markets but mainly in the credit and financial systems, in the public sector, and in the failure so far to recycle purchasing power effectively across the full extent of the EU.”

His paper goes into extraordinary depth on the issues, but here is a summary of its main thrust:

“To begin, we review the standard theoretical categories of unemployment, both neoclassical and Keynesian. We then take up an alternative perspective, emanating from development economics, with a contribution from the Swedish School. According to this model, unemployment, intersectoral inequalities and migration flows are linked. In this alternative framework, unemployment arises when increasing inequalities induce increased search for better jobs– including migration. With minor modification these models are applicable to modern Europe, and will become even more so as European integration progresses. The implications are consistent with what Baker et al. have already found: that egalitarian policies can reduce unemployment. If it turns out that further evidence supports the hypothesis, then conclusions must be drawn, and the fetish of rigidities should be abandoned.”

James K. Galbraith also provides a snappy overview of the argument in my interview with him in June of this year when we discussed this paper - the topic starts about 20 mins in.

 
 James K. Galbraigh interview: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Discussion

We welcome and encourage lively discussion from the public about articles on Irish Left Review. You can leave a comment using the form at the bottom of the page. Please read through the existing comments before posting your own.

  1. Comment by: Marise

    Aug 3rd 2009 at 15:08

    I have a great respect for Jamie Galbraith, as I had for his father John. I was actually hoping he would be asked to join Obama’s economic council but obviously that was too much to hope for.

    I would note that the old models about supply and demand in the labour market are simplistic in this age, given that many discussions about them in the media don’t mention immigration and the mobility of capital. The models may still hold, but now the labour pool is the whole world and not just the nation-state. So most people hearing of this model aren’t told that the supply is world wide and the “clearing” price for unskilled labour resides somewhere in the third world.

    I’ve suspected this for a while, but it really comes home to me whenever I hear that skeletal fella from IBEC averring that Irish wages must fall to ensure “competitiveness”. What that means is he wants Irish labour to compete with the wage levels of — who? Eastern Europe? China? Vietnam? Can you imagine this, if the cost of living in Ireland doesn’t crash as well?

    An economist from the Center for Economic Policy Research in the USA, Dr. Dean Baker, notes that in the US (and perhaps worldwide, but I don’t know), the low-skilled labourer competes in a world market, but doctors, lawyers, economists, etc., are still very much protected, keeping their wages artificially high. This is not a discussion I hear in the mainstream, even when supposed “Free” Trade is being discussed. What’s up with that?

    Keeping professional services expensive through protectionist measures, along with intellectual property rights keeping many items like music, technology, and medicine high, will guarantee that prices won’t come down along with wages. So do they want the bulk of workers living in shanty towns, or have they simply not thought it through?

    Aargh on Ayn already!

Leave a Comment

(required)

(required, will not be published)

Sins of the Father

Sins of the Father:

Tracing the Decisions

That Shaped the Irish Economy,

by Conor McCabe

from The History Press

Now Available as an e-Book.

Subscribe by Email

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



Irish Left Review on Facebook

Best of the Web

  • EU Should Admit Greece is Bankrupt | Christian Rickens

    The unvarnished truth - the second Greek Bailout should not have happened.

    The mistake isn’t the size, but the construction of the bailout package. It isn’t geared to the requirements of the people of Greece but to the needs of the international financial markets, meaning the banks.

    How else can one explain the fact that around a quarter of the package won’t even arrive in Athens but will flow directly to the country’s international creditors? The holders of Greek government bonds are to get some €30 billion as an incentive to convert their old paper into new bonds. The aim is to keep alive the illusion that Greece isn’t bankrupt — after all, the creditors are voluntarily forgiving part of the debt. The financial sector is cleverly manipulating the fear that a Greek bankruptcy would trigger a fatal chain reaction.

    That leaves €100 billion. But that too isn’t geared to what Greece needs in order to get back on its feet. It’s linked to an estimate of how much debt the Greek economy can bear without collapsing. International technocrats agree that with debts amounting to 120 percent of gross domestic product, the country can just about go on servicing its debt. That’s the level at which the cow can go on supplying milk without dying of exhaustion. So 120 percent became the goal.

    No comments »
  • Collaboration, with our European partners | Cunning Hired Knaves

    The European project was supposed to be a bulwark against the dangers of fascist ambition, but now it is the instrument used to dismantle European democracy in the interest of the risk adverse looking for a steady income stream from the provision of the social net by those who cite the words and actions of old fascists while doing so.

    The post Collaboration, with our European partners by Richard of Cunning Hired Knaves summed up in one sentence. For much better sentences and many more urgent points read the post.

    On Sunday there were massive demonstrations throughout the Spanish state, with half a million people on the streets of Madrid and 450,000 in Barcelona, protesting against the labour ‘reform’ planned by the Partido Popular, the right-wing party that most closely represents the interests of the power elites that conserved their position when the transition from dictatorship to democracy was undertaken.

    No comments »
  • S.P.A.R.K. protest at cuts to lone parents, Dublin 18th February 2012

    Many families were cut in the last budget but lone parent families were particularly hit by the Fine Gael/Labour Party government.

    The key elements are that single parents can’t take advantage of training such as Community Employment (CE) Schemes and when the youngest child turns 7 years old, the parent is declassed as a lone parent but treated as an ordinary worker even though there are few affordable creche places. There is a bill coming up in March which will copper fasten some of the worst elements of government plans.

    There is particular anger directed at the Labour Party because they are associated with women’s rights and a more progressive society.

    Please share the link to this video

    No comments »
  • Exiting the euro | Michael Roberts

    Michael Roberts argues that those in Greece who cite the example of Argentina when suggesting that Greece should leave the Euro are not necessarily looking at the whole picture. The situations are not the same, Roberts points out, citing Argentina’s former central bank governor at the time, Mario Blejer and his recent piece in the Financial Times. He also points to research based on the the experience of five recent devaluations of economies in crisis (including that of Argentina) which “shows that they lead to a 10-20% fall in real GDP and take five to ten years to recover to previous real GDP levels. But that is not to say that there is no alternative to “lowering wages, privatising the state sector, reducing taxes for the corporate sector (especially big business) and ‘deregulating’ labour markets i.e. the super-exploitation of the Greek people to raise profitability.”

    But the left could also find an alternative policy to exiting the euro where Greece negotiates a full default on its debt to private and foreign bondholders; takes over the banks; and uses the savings from bond and interest repayments (€17-20bn a year) to start state directed investment in jobs, technology and funding small businesses, while staying in the euro to protect the savings of the people from destruction, keeping down inflation and avoiding a rise in foreign debt.  The question of exiting the euro then becomes an issue for the Euro leaders to impose (and to be resisted by a campaign within Europe), not as the main policy plank of the left.

    No comments »
  • Corporate tax avoidance: where are the worst offenders?

    This table comes via  the Tax Justice Network (and Richard Murphy). It’s from a table produced by U.S. researcher Kimberly Clausing and as TJN notes “demonstrates which countries are working hardest to wage economic warfare on the United States (and, by extension, on other countries,) via the global tax system”.

    No comments »
  • Solidarity campaign to support the people of Greece

    Mikis Theodorakis, famous Greek composer of Zorba’s Dance, and Manolis Glezos, veteran resistance fighter against the Nazi occupation, have issued a call for a European Front to defend the people of Greece and all those facing austerity. We have decided to support this call and work with trade unions, campaigns and parties across Europe to establish a European Solidarity Campaign to defend the people of Greece. We will organise solidarity and raise practical support for the people of Greece; they cannot be made to pay for a crisis for which they are not responsible.

    1 comment »
  • Chris Dillow | Capitalism against freedom

    [...]

    During the Cold War, opponents of communism routinely, and not entirely wrongly, claimed to be champions of liberty. Freedom for capitalists and freedom of speech and thought go together, it was claimed. “Freedom is indivisible” wrote Bruce Winton Knight in 1952. “Economic freedom is…an indispensable means toward the achievement of political freedom“ wrote Milton Friedman in Capitalism and Freedom. And back in 1944 Friedrich Hayek complained that “We have progressively abandoned that freedom in economic affairs without which personal and political freedom has never existed in the past.”

    Today, though, this seems wrong. Many threats to freedom come from capitalists. The story is no longer capitalism and freedom, but capitalism against freedom.

    No comments »
  • Ian Stewart | The mathematical equation that caused the banks to crash

    In The Observer, Sunday 12 February 2012

    Anyone who has followed the crisis will understand that the real economy of businesses and commodities is being upstaged by complicated financial instruments known as derivatives. These are not money or goods. They are investments in investments, bets about bets. Derivatives created a booming global economy, but they also led to turbulent markets, the credit crunch, the near collapse of the banking system and the economic slump. And it was the Black-Scholes equation that opened up the world of derivatives.

    The equation itself wasn’t the real problem. It was useful, it was precise, and its limitations were clearly stated. It provided an industry-standard method to assess the likely value of a financial derivative. So derivatives could be traded before they matured. The formula was fine if you used it sensibly and abandoned it when market conditions weren’t appropriate. The trouble was its potential for abuse. It allowed derivatives to become commodities that could be traded in their own right. The financial sector called it the Midas Formula and saw it as a recipe for making everything turn to gold. But the markets forgot how the story of King Midas ended.

    No comments »
  • Greece: a Sisyphean task | Michael Roberts

    In a Eurozone that is unwilling to share its surplus with weaker, hardest hit economies there is no other option for those economies but default. Despite the agreement of Greek politicians to shorten their political life and accept the deal all that they have done is simply postpone this eventuality once again. However, even that postponement might be shortened by the Greek elections in April where the smaller leftist parties outside the coalition currently have 40% of the vote. Or so says Michael Roberts:

    Whatever the Greek coalition leaders agree to and try to implement, such is the weakness of Greek capitalism, it will not be able to meet its fiscal targets or get its debt down to reasonable levels.  Before the end of the year, the Troika will have to report that Greece is not delivering.  Then the EU leaders will have to decide whether they ‘let Greece go’ or not.  The EU leaders have agreed to more money for Greece  (or more accurately its bondholders and banks) in return for draconian cuts in living standards in order to provide more time to try and ‘ring-fence’ other vulnerable Eurozone states like Portugal and Ireland (where they are preparing extra funding).  So when Greece goes down, it will not affect the rest (or so the EU leaders hope).  Of course, the Greek people may force the issue earlier if they vote in an anti-Troika government in April.

    No comments »
  • As Greece stares into the abyss, Europe must choose | Maria Margaronis

    Do we really want to live in an economic union that must destroy the future of millions in order to just tick along? Maria Margaronis points out that the situation in Greece today says little about Greece and everything about the EU.

    The trouble with historical metaphors is that they can obscure the present: what’s really at stake here is not Greece’s identity but Europe’s. All eyes are fixed on Athens, but the way out of the crisis requires a choice about what kind of Europe we want. The one we have now, with its deep structural inequalities and its rigid adherence to a failed economic ideology, protects neither democracy nor human rights. Stiff-necked and punitive, it prefers to eat its children.

    No comments »

Link Archives »

Authors