|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Jun 16, 2007 3:10:03 GMT -6
Dean Baker has written a brief article describing the brainwashing the Wall Street Journal is attempting on the American public regarding the pay of American autoworkers. Though the hourly wages of auto workers are not especially high, the WSJ adds in the "benefits" when describing the compensation of autoworkers, arriving at the ludicrous sum of $75/hour for auto workers. Baker briefly sums up how this fantasy number is concocted in his June 14 article.
|
|
|
Post by blueneck on Jun 16, 2007 4:40:34 GMT -6
Take these intangible "benefits" out of the equation and US autoworkers pay is right in line with Japanese auto workers, and actually less than Europeans. The difference of course is that US mfrs shoulder a higher burden of pension and health costs, something the Japanese and European governments help with national plans. Take health and pension costs out of the equation, and all of a sudden US made vehicles have a 1000-2000 dollar cost advantage over their foreign rivals.
What you are seeing here is the chain reaction that starts in the corporate media - first the "think tanks" like the Heritage Spindation come up with this whole notion that peoples wages are understated because they don't include "benefits", then the editorial pages pick it up and add their own spin to it like Baker points out in his critique of the of WSJ article, next it will be all over the right wing radio bloviation stations, and all the kool aid drinkers will parrot it.
Regardless of these so called benefits, like the health insurance that barely covers anything and rarely crack the deductibles, the real wage is what ends up in your billfold on payday and there is no question more and more hands are fighting what little you have - increased fuel, health, education, food, local taxes and other costs that are conveniently NOT included in inflation calculations.
So in some backhanded way this wage inflation notion actually helps make the case for universal health and pension benefits.
If US automakers are really serious about increasing profit by cutting labor costs they should start from the top down and cut the pay and bennies of the top management first, who make 10 times or more than their Japanese or European counterparts. Little wonder how the European and Japanese automakers remain competitive and profitable.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Jun 16, 2007 13:54:13 GMT -6
When employment is related to consumer spending power and aggregate demand (as Keynes related them), it's the spendable wages that count, not the non-spendable (and usually exaggerated) "benefits."
If workers aren't taking home any more in "real" wages, they're not better off financially, and their spending power is not increased. Consumer spending power doesn't increase unless real take home pay increases.
And these so-called "benefits" are grossly overstated. Companies pay a fraction of what individuals pay for health insurance. Often the pension "contribution" from the company is only a fantasy number. When employees make matching contributions to pensions, it reduces their take-home pay even further. And, as we've seen from the numerous Corporate bankruptcies, the money in pension plans is not guaranteed. Thus, any matching contribution from an employee can simply become an employee-funded hand-out to the employer.
Employees should truly consider holding on to as much of their paycheck as possible, and investing or saving directly themselves. If the employee's company goes under, the pension fund will likely disappear. The Federal insurance of that fund pays only a fraction of what the company was obligated to pay originally.
Counting "benefits" as part of an employee's wages is just another Right-Wing con-job. Auto workers should not allow the companies to cut their actual wages. Let the companies cut their pension benefits if they have to make cuts, since those pension benefits probably won't be there anyway when they retire.
|
|