Tuesday, August 25, 2020

What to do for post-pandemic unemployed? Trick Answer

What to do for today's 30 million unemployed after the pandemic is over?  Half of whom, especially lowest wage workers, may not find jobs welcoming them back.  Out on the sidewalk until the labor market processes massive reshaping?

Suppose we could ease their predicament indirectly by paying employed lower wage workers – bottom 40% earners – twice as much as we paid for the same work before (“we” because ultimately we are talking consumers paying more).  Many employed and unemployed abide in the same households, families, etc.  Pre-pandemic, the bottom 40% took 10% of overall income – we should like to double the wages of this segment just in principle.

Increase fast food labor costs 50% and consumer prices rise only 12.5% -- due to 25% labor costs (Micky D's).  Double (!) more typical firms' labor costs and prices rise but 12.5% -- thanks to 10-15% labor costs (Target, Walgreen’s).  Triple (!!!) extreme lowest labor cost firms labor costs and prices could climb only 14% -- as low as 7% labor costs (Walmart).

Let’s guess that an average 12.5% increase in prices would cause 10% loss of sales -- just to have a number to work with.  If most similar businesses were raising prices at the same time there wouldn't be many places to go for cheaper.  With twice the money to burn, enough new low wage largess would work its way back into Micky D’s, Target, Walgreen’s and Walmart’s cash registers to make up for some of 10% sales losses. 

The lower 40%’s newly added income and the upper 60%'s subtracted income (lost sales) should reshuffle overall demand somewhat towards the lower end of the consumer price spectrum.  High end restaurant sales, for contrast, would not benefit from across the board low wage increases. 

Counterfactual: a historic sufficiency of American labor unions would have delivered such fairer labor costs/consumer price match-ups long since.
 * * * * * *

Click here for SEIU counsel Andrew Strom’s proposed path to adequate union membership -- with no threats and no sweat.  Adequate defined as: anyone who wants to be in a union (or does not want to be) is guaranteed the opportunity to exercise their will on the subject in cyclical balloting.
https://onlabor.org/why-not-hold-union-representation-elections-on-a-regular-schedule/

It would be cute if some would-be union members somewhere – whose election was being stolen in advance via the long ingrained union busting practices – made up some form of parody mail-in ballots for union certification election (union elections are not voted by mail but this is a parody to make a point) and sent them via USPS to their Congressional representative(s) – petitioning for regularly scheduled cert/recert/decert elections as prescribed by attorney Strom.  Be a lot cuter if every would-be union member everywhere – and every already belonging union member everywhere -- would swamp Congress with enough mock mail-in union ballots for their reps to finally take the hint how the second most precious species of elections in this country have been getting stolen for fair bargaining denied decades.

Come to think, dosing extra money to today’s employed could spread needed succor to today's unemployed 30 million -- supplement the supplements.  And it wouldn’t cost the treasury a thin dime.
 * * * * * *

Min wage addendum (what good is $15?)
In a" legit" labor market -- where as many employees as want to collectively bargain can do so – setting a minimum wage wouldn’t accomplish much.  It would only mark the best wage that the lowest able to pay employer could manage (e.g., fast food with 25% labor costs).  All other employed would be paid more by definition.
   
In America’s actual shorn of employee bargaining power labor market (6.5% unions in private economy – and going down), the federal minimum wage is $5 below 1968’s $12 an hour (adjusted), back when per capita income was half (!) of today’s.  Raising the minimum to $15 an hour in our unwell labor market would at least start wages in the general direction of what should have been realized by collective bargaining, long ago.
https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=1.60&year1=196801&year2=202007
https://medium.com/@brandiwestjd/why-do-jobs-pay-so-little-e9145f69b57c

No comments: