General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhere Have All the Raises Gone?
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/03/opinion/where-have-all-the-raises-gone.htmlBut that is only a partial explanation, because declining and stagnant wages predate the latest downturn. Understanding the causes is essential for determining the policies needed to create good jobs. Research by three economists — Paul Beaudry, David Green and Benjamin Sand — goes beyond familiar explanations for wage stagnation like global competition and labor-saving technology. Examining the demand for college-educated workers, they found that businesses increased hiring of college graduates in the 1980s and 1990s in adapting to technological changes. But as the information technology revolution matured, employer demand waned for the “cognitive skills” associated with a college education.
As a result, since 2000, many college graduates have taken jobs that do not require college degrees and, in the process, have displaced less-educated lower-skilled workers. “In this maturity stage,” the report says, “having a B.A. is less about obtaining access to high paying managerial and technology jobs and more about beating out less-educated workers for the barista or clerical job.”
The findings help to explain the trajectory in wages for workers with bachelor’s degrees. From 1979 to 1995, their average pay rose modestly, by 0.46 percent on average annually, while wages declined for the non-college-educated who make up the vast majority of workers. From 1995 to 2000, wages grew for all educational groups, but since 2002 pay for the less educated has declined while pay for the college educated has largely stagnated.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)This idea is sometimes made quite overt. So when Alan Greenspan was testifying before Congress in 1997 on the marvels of the economy he was running, he said straight out that one of the bases for its economic success was imposing what he called “greater worker insecurity.” If workers are more insecure, that’s very “healthy” for the society, because if workers are insecure they won’t ask for wages, they won’t go on strike, they won’t call for benefits; they’ll serve the masters gladly and passively. And that’s optimal for corporations’ economic health. At the time, everyone regarded Greenspan’s comment as very reasonable, judging by the lack of reaction and the great acclaim he enjoyed. Well, transfer that to the universities: how do you ensure “greater worker insecurity”? Crucially, by not guaranteeing employment, by keeping people hanging on a limb than can be sawed off at any time, so that they’d better shut up, take tiny salaries, and do their work; and if they get the gift of being allowed to serve under miserable conditions for another year, they should welcome it and not ask for any more. That’s the way you keep societies efficient and healthy from the point of view of the corporations. And as universities move towards a corporate business model, precarity is exactly what is being imposed. And we’ll see more and more of it.
http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/chomsky-how-americas-great-university-system-getting
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)I was reading in one of my textbooks (I'm in my last year of a Bcom) that many corporations think this 'greater work insecurity' is a great thing because for too long 'the workers held the balance of power' and that 'corporations would invest thousands in a worker only to have them leave for a better opportunity' so this 'insecurity' is simply a 'leveling of the playing field' where now corporations had 'some leverage' over workers and were no longer at the 'mercy' of unions.
What BS. We had a good class discussion on it. Everyone thought it was all BS, for one reason only: the biggest 'leverage' the corporations ALREADY have over us is that we NEED jobs to survive. They don't need any more 'leverage' than that because it's the ultimate power. Anything more than that is simply abuse.
Let's just say it was really eye opening to see what those in charge of corporations REALLY think.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)as well as the unemployed. Masses begging for jobs, food, shelter, healthcare, etc ....it's just business.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)they are actually shooting themselves in the foot. Short term worker insecurity is good for this year's balance sheet, but long term? It's bad for the entire economy. Billionaire dumbasses everywhere have cost themselves even MORE money because of their incredibly short sighted business plans. They are too stupid and greedy to know this and those who aren't stupid and do know this, just don't care because they require instant gratification. Like toddlers. Spoiled, tantruming toddlers.
spooky3
(34,456 posts)As an alternative to the neoclassical supply demand model of hiring and pay setting.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0465026680
I strongly encourage anyone interested to read it. Spot on.
He is was a dean at MIT.
