The Best Way to Create Jobs: Cut the Work Week

[Hannah Bell]

A problem that has always been called a job shortage is rather a worker glut. Employers have been able to cut and hold wages down because there is an excess supply of trained and eager workers on the job market. The reasons for the surplus are mostly familiar. Corporations send production abroad to get cheaper labor. The total of U.S. jobs eliminated that way in recent years is disputed but is probably more than 5 million.

At the same time, we have added job seekers from abroad in significant numbers. Immigration of skilled workers on special visas lobbied for by high-tech employers and the more publicized large-scale immigration of documented and undocumented workers from distressed economies like Ireland, Mexico and other countries has added significantly to the labor surplus. The share of immigrants in the U.S. work force climbed steadily since its post-WW II low in 1970, and by 2007 reached over 15 per cent of the total, according to The State of Working America 2008-2009 and sources cited there.

Moreover, as family income stagnates and the very rich get more and more of the national income, women and other family members have chosen or been forced by necessity to enter paid work. In an attempt to sustain income, families send more workers into the job market or work longer hours. In this way, families achieve income gains that are ultimately self-defeating, as general wage levels remain depressed by the collective increase in labor hours on offer.

Finally, the unremarked elephant in the room: productivity gains. Productivity gains are seen as a blessing, raising the national income...The long-term trend in productivity growth in the U.S. economy is around 2 to 2.5 per cent a year, climbing to 2.7 per cent annually over the past decade.
Each decade at this rate results in elimination of a shocking 25 per cent of our jobs.

Our problem isn’t cyclical. It is chronic. A stimulus jolt won’t repair a dysfunctional economy. A different approach is required... At the end of the Great Depression, when the nation similarly faced a severe jobs issue, a new Wages and Hours law in 1940 cut the workweek from six to five days, the now standard 40 hours. Hours have not been reduced in the 70 years since, despite the relentless large gains in productivity.

http://www.counterpunch.com/coyle12242010.html

[Sherman A1]

1. Interesting

Another option to the worker glut, might be to find a means of generating early retirements to the baby boom generation, thereby opening up jobs.

My thoughts run along early out at 55, full retirement at 60 (both with Medicare) with the requirement for civic service (museum docents, library & park volunteers, schools, nursing homes, animal shelters, etc) for early retirees.

This could generate business for the vacation/entertainment industries as people travel a bit when they retire, allow for folks to genuinely assist their communities and open up jobs for the next generations who need them.

Worker pay needs to increase most certainly to reflect the increases we have seen in productivity for the last 30+ years.

Perhaps a combination of early retirements, shorter work week and increased pay (or payback for getting screwed for so very, very long)

[area51]

7. Retirement

We definitely should be lowering the retirement age, instead of raising it as the nazis want to do, to help with unemployment. I agree with the 55 age number. Our overpopulation problem along with offshoring and inshoring and lack of jobs is rapidly spiraling this country down to third-world status.

[LiberalEsto]

12. Good idea

I'm 58, out of work more than 26 months, and don't expect to find work any time soon.

[dkf]

2. If you don't produce any more doesn't this necessitate a cut in pay?

What happens to all the salaried workers out there who don't work only 40 hours anyway? Anyone in a position of responsibility knows they have to work til the job gets done.

[eridani]

4. In a sane society, no. Unfortunately workers here lack the power

--to demand reduced work weeks at the same pay.

[dkf]

5. Especially if the object is to solve rampant unemployment.

That means there is an excess of labor out there.

The solution needs to be to get more people out of the workforce if anything. That necessitates an examination of immigration, maybe even legal immigration.

[TBF]

9. Your solution, yet again, is out of the right wing play book.

My solution would be get rid of capitalism.

[dkf]

19. Funny. I thought our angle is that corporations exploit immigrants.

Moodys made it a part of their hiring practices to employ immigrant college grads who could be deported if they lost their jobs. These young folk were malleable and did not have any ability to say no to immoral and illegal practices.. There is a lot more power an employer has when they hire a non US citizen. That puts downward pressure on everyone else in salary and upward pressure on the demands of the job.

Of course if people are here legally they deserve to stay. We should give these people a faster path to citizenship then review our immigration policies and possibly look to start closing the doors.

When you get an OP like this one saying there is systemic excess labor you have got to look at the situation with an eye to solutions.

Of course if you like the fact that our wages are going down then stay with things as they are.

[demandTheGoodLife.co]

3. that will just make people poorer

The only thing decreasing the work week will do is decrease worker pay.

We have to recognize it is no longer the 19th century. We should strive to INCREASE the unemployment rate. Machines should do jobs. People should do leisure activities. That is how we should measure progress. We shouldn't celebrate that we have relegated yet another human being to a mindless, soul-crushing job that a machine can easily do.

The only solution is to use existing taxes to pay people a $50k basic income so that working a job is optional. We have the technology to eliminate 55% of the work we do.

Jeff
↓ Read my sig. Turn the world into a paradise. ↓

[Hannah Bell]

25. there's no wage cut. spreads the work so that there's no class of "welfare

recipients" to act as a "reserve army" to pull down wages.

which is one of the drawbacks of your program.

[demandTheGoodLife.co]

30. spreading the work also spreads the pay

When I go from working 5 days at my job to working 3, my employer is not going to continue to pay me the same amount. Why would a business pay me for the 2 days I am not working?

When I tell my boss tomorrow that I am no longer going to work 5 days, I am just going to work 2 but you have to pay me the same amount, I will get laughed right out of the office!

The only way to get control of how income is allocated is to tax it and then redistribute it. That is what a basic income accomplishes. Redistributing income so there is less income disparity will not pull down wages, it will give every single person a pay raise.

How would you force businesses to pay people the same wage for less work? Government has absolutely no say over wages other than a minimum wage.

[Hannah Bell]

31. you didn't read the article & i'm not going to bother since you can't be bothered.

suffice to say your comments are irrelevant.

[GSLevel9]

6. lol...

I just can't get over equating "large-scale immigration of documented and undocumented workers from distressed economies like Ireland, Mexico..."

hehehehe... how many Irish immigrants do we have for every one Mexican immigrant?

[NNN0LHI]

8. UAW just about accomplished this in 1979 because we knew what was coming

And after we established that as the norm it would have became the norm for everyone. At our convention that year the slogan on our signs was "4 For 5", meaning 4 days work for 5 days pay.

Want to know what happened? We couldn't get the workers at most of the import car companies to unionize. They figured scabbing off of us would be better for them. They never gave any thought about the future generations like the UAW always did. The scabs just wanted theirs now and didn't want to have to go on strike or make any waves to get it like we did. And a lot of Americans(some union members themselves), went out and supported those anti-union workers over union workers and this is where we find ourselves today.

That is what happened. I watched it happen in real time.

If just all union members had all stuck together back then the 4-day workweek and low unemployment would be a reality right now and the 5-day workweek and high unemployment would be like a bad memory. Something to tell the next generations about.

Good thread Hannah Bell. I have tried this approach here before with very little success. Reducing the work week appears to be way too radical of a concept for even a "supposedly", left wing board. Amazing isn't it?

Don

[Hannah Bell]

23. i didn't know that. interesting.

[MadHound]

10. So the person working forty hours a week at minimum wage, and just squeaking by,

Will now be thrown off a cliff as their wages are cut by and eighth or a quarter. Meaning that they have to go out and find another part time job, thus putting somebody else out of work, etc. etc.

The only way this is going to work is if employers pay their employees enough to compensate for those lost hours. Otherwise all that this does is create a huge game of employment musical chairs.

Do you honestly think that employers will up their pay scale? Nah, I didn't think so.

[Hannah Bell]

24. except there's no wage cut. you didn't read the article.

[old mark]

11. I have already done my part - I retired, and have no plans to ever work again,

thus providing a job for someone else.


mark

[SmileyRose]

13. Do we really need more jobs?

Seems like we have plenty of jobs if people are working 2, 3 or 4 of them. The problem is wages and benefits coupled with expectations and costs of the "American dream".

My parents needed 3 dresser drawers and under 24" of closet space each for all their crap. Now we build houses with walk in closets bigger than my parent's living room. Dad loved to sit on the porch and listen to the ball game on his little transistor radio - now it's big screens and home theater.

I'm not condemning all the stuff and the gadgets - although it certainly takes it's toll on the planet as far as obtaining resources and waste disposal - but all that crap requires spending money. I mean you know, does anyone really NEED 212 T shirts?


Honestly I don't know how we get there, but it seems to me higher wages and spending less money on crap is part of the equation.

[CrispyQ]

16. Read "Affluenza: The All Consuming Epidemic" by John de Graaf

http://www.amazon.com/Affluenza-All-Consuming-Epidemic-John-Graaf/dp/1576751996

He nails it in this book. We traded in our citizenship to become consumers. He explains how it happened after WWII. It's a little simplistic, but still a good read. The Horsey cartoons alone, are worth it. :thumbsup: Your library might have it.

[SmileyRose]

17. Thanks ! I'll check it out -- eom

[kelly1mm]

18. Great post. Although I am as guilty as others, I think about this often. nt

[maryf]

21. Consumerism is killing us...

slowly but surely...

[madokie]

14. Bring the manufacturing back and problem solved

cutting the work week only cuts into the money earned by the few who have a job. Which will be offset by the new numbers of workers but the overall picture stays the same or worse as a larger percentage of wages paid would be taxed greater due to the larger numbers of employees. Bring the jobs back to America or find another way of supporting our lifestyles. We all know what our only real option is as it stands now and that is to lower our lifestyle.
Bring the jobs home is the solution and nothing will change until that is done, simple as that.+


Dividing the available wages up into smaller bites is NOT the answer. IMHO

[Capitalocracy]

15. I am 100% with you. And we need a living wage.

At least, that's what we need for a working economy. A broken economy is better for moving wealth into the hands of the few, however, so I doubt they're too eager to fix it.

[maryf]

20. Thanks Hannah! and sorry...

I posted this too, didn't see it...K&R (of course)

[Hannah Bell]

26. oops -- i didn't see yours either.

[Odin2005]

22. We need a 30-hour work-week, a Living Wage, and Fair Trade.

That will solve most of our problems.

[Festivito]

27. We achieved enough food and shelter, so who deserves the rewards?

We all do.

Instead of 40 hours per week, why not 30 or 20. Time and a half up to 30, double time to 40, doubling every 10 thereafter.

Or, who does deserve the earned achievement? Only the rich? That is what the rich want. I say we all deserve it.

[Festivito]

28. I want to add that the rich are scared and lazy. That is why they will not share.

They need a time out if not another spanking.

[KT2000]

29. Try to catch Fareed Zakharia

today. He has CEO telling us how it is going to be from here on out. It is up to them and they know it. More government spending on R&D. Then things are developed here and then shipped overseas for manufacturing.

[Skittles]

32. I work four nights a week

unfortunately, they are 12-14 hour nights

[newportdadde]

33. Or hire people for the work available instead of one employee trying to do the work of three.

That is the big trend in the corporate world. Our group is a 1/3 smaller then it was four years ago, work load is the same or more. So how does it get done? Well it doesn't or it gets done much slower. It also kills morale.

[Hannah Bell]

34. +100