Labor’s Day Remembered

Popular Economics Weekly

As we celebrate another Labor Day, a national holiday, how do we remember it? I would like to remember it as some other developed countries celebrate it. France, for instance, has enshrined the one-hour lunch, whereas a 2012 survey of North American workers by Right Management found that only one in five reported taking a real break for lunch. Thirty-nine percent even reported they take lunch at their desks in the survey cited by columnist Robyn Blumner in the Tampa Bay Times.

The French don’t have to worry, for they work less and actually produce more per worker. A new survey touted by The Business Insider from UBS has shown that the French continue to work the least amount of hours per year in the world. Once again, the French have blown away the competition. Nationmaster ranks France as #18 in terms of GDP per capita, at $36,500 per person, yet France works much less than most developed nations.

France, for instance, with $36,500 GDP/Capita and works 1,453 hours per year, said the UBS study. This equates to a GDP/Capita/Hour of $25.10. Americans, on the other hand, have $44,150 GDP/Capita but work 1,792 hours per year. Thus Americans only achieve $24.60 of GDP/Capita/Hour.

And a recent visit to Amsterdam in The Netherlands, floored me. Stores can only stay open from 10-5pm, except for Thursday when they are allowed to be open to 9pm, and this in one of the commercial capitals of Europe!

Many economists and policy experts blame the loss of workers’ income on globalization, the exporting of jobs overseas to cheaper climes. But there is a much simpler explanation for the loss of workers’ incomes—record corporate profits that have enabled corporations to suppress their workers’ incomes, mostly via legislative and judicial means

As a percentage of national income, corporate profits stood at 14.2 percent in the third quarter of 2012, the largest share at any time since 1950, while the portion of income that went to employees was 61.7 percent, near its lowest point since 1966, according to the New York Times. In recent years, the shift has accelerated during the slow recovery that followed the financial crisis and ensuing recession of 2008 and 2009.

Graph: EPI

The legislative means are clear. Some 24 right-leaning Republican state legislatures have enacted right-to-work laws that actually prevent unions from either organizing, or requiring them to pay union dues, even though they receive all the benefits of unionization. This is not to mention the outright voter suppression tactics of ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, a lobbying organization that has written many of those state laws

Judicially, we know that the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens vs. United allowed corporations to contribute unlimited amounts to elections, and with their record profits they have not hesitated to back those right-to-work laws.

So who is the richest country in terms of human capital? Perhaps, France that has the best health care and pension systems in the world, or The Netherlands with 10 to 5 working hours, or the country that diverts most of its profits to corporations, their CEOs and investors?

Harlan Green © 2013

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Labor’s Day—Have We Forgotten What It Means?

Popular Economics Weekly

It’s officially the end of summer, start of school, fall colors, and Obama’s upcoming September 8 joint congressional State of the Jobs Market. With the labor market in dire straits, what can we say about this year’s Labor Day Holiday?

Former French Finance Minister and new IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde gave a highly regarded speech at the Fed’s Jackson Hole conference that said in effect this was the wrong time to implement more austere, budget cutting policies with labor in such trouble. “In the United States, policymakers must strike the right balance between reducing public debt and sustaining the recovery—especially by making a serious dent in long-term unemployment,” she said.

But the latest data on record corporate profits tells us something alarming. Because of the globalization of technology, businesses know how to expand without hiring more employees—at least in this country. About 83 percent of S&P 500 companies have beat second quarter 2011 analyst estimates according to data compiled by Bloomberg News. This is while S&P recently reported that in 2010, 46.3 percent of all S&P 500 company sales originated outside of the US.

“If we look at the last 10 years, the divergence between the corporate profits of S&P 500 companies and domestic GDP growth is astonishing,” said GC Mays, an Independent / boutique research firm analyst in his Seeking Alpha blog. “Between the first Quarter of 2001 and 2006, a simple correlation showed that corporate profits explained 98.4 percent of domestic GDP growth. However, the most recent five years beginning with the first quarter of 2006 the correlation between corporate profits and domestic GDP growth breaks down as corporate profits only explain 10.1 percent of domestic GDP growth.”

Graph:  The Mays Report

Why is it necessary to increase jobs when we now know we can have economic growth without job growth? Well, beside the obvious voter anger if politicos don’t take the lead in creating more jobs, it means taking away the demand that can grow the domestic economy. Corporate profits have risen to the highest level as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product since the Great Depression—14 percent—but much of the profit comes from overseas’ sales of U.S. companies, as we said.

And that doesn’t augur well either for decreasing the record income inequality for most wage earners or growing domestic jobs. Since World War II the unemployment rate has twice reached 10 percent—during the 1981-82 and just ended 2007-09 recession. But because of the housing and financial crashes that accompanied the Great Recession—or Small Depression, as Krugman has christened it—consumers are not spending and employers not hiring domestically as they have in past recoveries.

That means corporate profits are no longer dependent on domestic demand, so are not going to help reduce the various deficits—both household and governmental—without explicit policies to create more domestic jobs. It’s a straightforward equation. Decreasing domestic unemployment means decreasing domestic deficits, and growing household incomes means growing domestic businesses. But since corporations are no longer dependent on growing domestic jobs to sell their products, what policies will? Director Lagarde says it best:

“First—the nexus of fiscal (budget) consolidation and growth. At first blush, these challenges seem contradictory. But they are actually mutually reinforcing. Credible decisions on future consolidation—involving both revenue and expenditure—create space for policies that support growth and jobs today. At the same time, growth is necessary for fiscal credibility—after all, who will believe that commitments to cut spending can survive a lengthy stagnation with prolonged high unemployment and social dissatisfaction?”

We can hope that Labor Day will be a cause for celebration; an international coming together of Big Business and dueling politicians on the need for concrete job creation policies. Make no mistake that as the public becomes better informed on the causes of the current employment malaise, they will seek out leaders who can implement the reforms necessary to correct the imbalance between growing corporate profits and declining payrolls.

“In sum,” concludes Lagarde, “risks to the global economy are rising, but there remains a path to recovery. The policy options are narrower than before but there is a way through. There are lingering uncertainties, but resolute action will help to dispel doubts.”

Harlan Green © 2011