Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Two competitiveness gurus, Michael Porter and Jan Rivkin of Harvard Business
School, recently warned that stagnant middle-class incomes undermine US
companies in several ways. Businesses cannot thrive for long while their
communities languish, they cautioned. Unless corporations step up to the plate,
American business will suffer from an inadequate workforce, a population of
depleted consumers, and large blocs of anti-business voters.
Porter and Rivkin are not calling on businesses simply to pay their workers more.
Instead, they are urging businesses to engage in a strategic, collaborative push to
improve education and training to raise the skill levels of their workers.
That is a laudable goal. But, as Porter and Rivkin find in their survey of business
leaders, companies often discourage investment in skills by their reluctance to hire
full-time workers. Nearly half of the respondents indicated that, when possible, they
prefer to invest in technology or outsource to third parties and hire part-time workers,
none of whom receive much additional training or have a stake in their companys
long-term success.
There is also a disturbing implication in the Porter-Rivkin survey that workers
themselves, along with Americas schools, are to blame for wage stagnation: If only
workers were not so poor in math and science, so ill-equipped for the modern world,
and so unproductive, they would earn higher incomes.
The reality is different. US productivity has been growing at a respectable pace for
two decades. The problem is that productivity gains have not translated into
commensurate wage increases for the typical worker or income growth for the
typical family.
According to standard economic theory, real wages should track productivity. As
Lawrence Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute has documented, this was the
case from 1948 until about 1973. Since then, real wages for the typical worker have
flat-lined, while productivity has continued to climb. Mishel calculates that
productivity increased 80.4% from 1948 to 2011, while median real wages rose only
39% almost none of the wage growth occurred during the last four decades.
True, highly skilled workers, especially those with sought-after technology skills and
postgraduate degrees, have fared much better. But that prosperity has reached only
a small elite.
From 1979 to 2012, the real median wage increased by only 5%. But real wages
climbed 154% for the top 1% of wage earners and 39% for the top 5%, while real
wages stagnated for the bottom 20th percentile of workers and fell for the bottom
tenth. Indeed, inequality in labor compensation has been the largest driver of
yawning income inequality, except at the very top of the income distribution, where
capital income has been more important.
Meanwhile, corporate profits have soared. The GDP share of after-tax corporate
profits is at a record high, whereas labor compensation has plunged to its lowest share
since 1950.
profits and stock performance. Such incentive pay schemes have driven the outsize
increases in compensation for the top 1% of the wage and salary distribution.
Americas long-run living standards and economic competitiveness depend not just
on productivity growth, but also on how that growth is shared. More equitable
sharing of profits with Americas workers and their families would do much to
address the worrisome stagnation of wages and middle-class incomes in recent
decades.
Source: http://www.project-syndicate.org/