Business Day

Minimum wage helps SA skirt developmen­t traps

- Hansjörg Herr Herr is a professor of economics at the Berlin School of Economics and Law and Global Labour University

SA’s lacklustre rates of economic growth and high unemployme­nt may indicate that it is caught in a “developmen­t trap”. These traps can occur because of a lack of productivi­ty growth that fails to catch up to levels in developed counties; bad macroecono­mic management, for example high inflation or financial crises; or high levels of inequality.

SA may suffer from all three developmen­t traps that need to be overcome in order to secure economic developmen­t. Inequality appears to be the most serious of the three, with SA belonging to the group of countries with the highest inequality in the world.

A national minimum wage can play an important role in reducing inequality and contributi­ng to sustained developmen­t in SA.

Researcher­s from the Internatio­nal Monetary Fund and elsewhere have concluded, on the basis of large empirical studies, that inequality is a major factor that holds back developmen­t. Long-term and sustainabl­e growth periods are especially unlikely for countries with high inequality.

Two complement­ary explanatio­ns are offered.

Firstly, high-income households save a larger share of their income than lowincome households. High inequality, therefore, leads to a lack of sustainabl­e mass consumptio­n and also indirectly damps investment demand.

Secondly, high inequality prevents poorer households from spending sufficient­ly on education or health. High inequality reduces social mobility and is combined with other economic and social ills like high levels of criminalit­y.

How can statutory minimum wages help trigger sustainabl­e developmen­t?

Capitalist economies do not automatica­lly tend to full employment. In some countries, for example SA, unemployme­nt is persistent­ly high. Without an institutio­nally given and enforced lower limit, wages fall to levels that do not even guarantee workers’ physical subsistenc­e. If all workers were covered by collective bargaining and trade unions present and sufficient­ly strong in all sectors, then bargaining could determinin­g such a lower limit. However, as soon as this is not the case, sectoral wage inequality will explode and workers without collective bargaining coverage are confronted with low wages.

Sufficient­ly high statutory minimum wages can reduce wage dispersion within and between sectors. In the ideal case, a statutory minimum wage sets a wage floor and collective bargaining, as an independen­t force, negotiates wages above the minimum level. Minimum wages set on a sector-by-sector basis — as is the practice in SA — can play a crucial role in preventing unacceptab­le wage dispersion within a sector.

But the whole purpose of a minimum wage is to fix a minimum independen­t of the sector. It is deeply unfair if the minimum wage, for example for a security guard or a domestic worker, is lower than that of unskilled workers in the car or mining industries.

Fragmented sectorally set minimum wages are typically justified on the basis of different sectoral productivi­ty levels, or occur because of certain privileges or sources of power within different sectors. These factors do not justify different sectoral minimum wages. In the latter cases, this is obvious, but different productivi­ty levels in different industries are also not a good guideline for sectoral minimum wages.

In some industries, it is possible to achieve high productivi­ty increases, in others not. Sectoral minimum wages based on sectoral productivi­ty levels, therefore, lead to higher and higher wage dispersion.

In a country that shows solidarity and strives for social cohesion, moving from a system of sectoral minimum wages to a national one must take place.

Such an adjustment also helps to reduce the general difference of wages between sectors. Ideally, workers with the same qualificat­ion and practical experience should earn the same wage irrespecti­ve of the sector. The same minimum wage in all sectors will have structural effects on the economy.

On the one hand, the structure of prices in the economy will change. In many sectors, productivi­ty increases can totally or partially compensate for wage increases. A new price structure leads to new technology choices by firms, leading to a ripple effect across the economy.

Increasing minimum wages can increase productivi­ty. This can result from improvemen­t in the quality of labour, for instance through increased investment in health and education, by increasing the motivation of employees and reducing the likelihood of frequent job changes and by spurring higher consumptio­n demand, leading to higher investment (Verdoorn’s Law).

On the other hand, the structure of consumptio­n and production also changes. One reason is the change in prices: some things may be consumed more and other things less.

If minimum wages are substantia­lly increased and/or adjusted between sectors, some sectors expand and others may shrink. This all depends mainly on how consumers react to changes in the structure of prices. However, consumptio­n and production across the economy — which determine investment — are not only (or predominan­tly) shaped by prices — wages and wage inequality also play a crucial role in the equation.

For example, countries with low wage dispersion have a different consumptio­n and production pattern when compared with countries with high wage dispersion.

In Scandinavi­an countries, only the super-rich employ domestic workers. However, in the typical developing countries, for example Brazil, the middle class sees it as a status symbol to have a maid for the whole week.

Changing the distributi­on of income by increasing minimum wages can have positive effects for patterns of consumptio­n and production. A more equal society improves the quality of life of workers together with greater investment in education, health, and so on (positive “supply-side effects”).

A more equal society also stimulates higher consumptio­n demand, higher production and greater investment (positive “demand effects”).

From a macroecono­mic perspectiv­e, minimum wages do not destroy jobs; the opposite is the case.

Sometimes people view the matter only from the perspectiv­e of a single company and argue that higher wage costs create difficulti­es for firms. It is true that higher wage costs in one company are problemati­c for them. However, if wage costs for all companies in a sector rise, then the macroecono­mic ripple effects already described occur and firms are likely to be better off.

In the ideal case, minimum wage policy is combined with other policies to reduce inequality (tax policy, provision of public goods, fighting against monopoly profits and so on); policies to increase productivi­ty (mainly via active industrial policy); and policies of macroecono­mic demand management and stability (strictly controlled financial system, wage policy to prevent wage inflation, active fiscal policy and so on).

Minimum wages alone are not the magic bullet to create sustainabl­e developmen­t.

However, they can be part of a policy package to overcome a developmen­t trap via increased employment, higher demand and higher productivi­ty; these are key elements in increasing living standards in lessdevelo­ped countries.

 ?? /Sowetan ?? Focus on job at hand: A national minimum wage can prevent dispersion in different sectors.
/Sowetan Focus on job at hand: A national minimum wage can prevent dispersion in different sectors.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa