The annual commemoration of International Labor Day is often accompanied by protests for a minimum wage increase. However, this yearly tradition might be producing more harm than good, if only because it seems to be peddling a false hope, instead of delivering a meaningful message. (There are times when asking for the moon is not about optimism, but mere luna-cy.)
It is unfortunate that this annual ritual tends to obfuscate the more reasoned and reasonable discussions on the real worth of labor — leading to the tendency for most people to simply tune out. The focus on the “minimum wage” tends to overemphasize the bottomline significance of labor, which crowds out the meaningful discourse on its real value. All this talk about “money” might be more dehumanizing than not getting enough of it.
* * *
The rhetoric of the minimum wage is often painted in red tones that pit labor in diametric opposition to capital — as though the almighty employer is always out to exploit the woeful employee.
The economics of minimum wage is no less controverted and controversial. There are those who believe that a minimum wage increase would help diminish poverty and improve people’s welfare. And then, there are those who argue that, quite the contrary, a minimum wage creates disincentives and foments inefficiency. That such broadly disparate views exist underscores the dilemma. As with most other thorny issues that are underpinned by the imperative to create public value, it is the government’s duty to cut through the debates and posit an answer. There’s more than just the economics of minimum wage to worry about, there’s this bigger picture called the economy.
* * *
The truth is that the minimum wage, as a labor issue, barely scratches the surface of the issues that affect labor.
Our Constitution takes on a more “enlightened” view as it aims to entitle workers to a “living (not just a “minimum”) wage.” For example, it also mandates employers to provide “humane conditions of work.”
A recent ILO paper explains “living wage” as follows:The idea of a living wage is that workers and their families should be able to afford a basic, but decent, life style that is considered acceptable by society at its current level of economic development, should be able to live above the poverty level, and be able to participate in its social and cultural life. It is a definition that spells out aspirations, mindful of realistic limitations and expectations. For while it would be ideal for everyone to aspire to first world living standards, demanding so would be setting ourselves up for disappointment. (Indeed, it is not just people’s greed that requires moderation; just as desirous is a modicum of self-restraint on people’s expectations.)
* * *
It is tempting to argue ad misericordiam, but doing so would be no less fallacious or make the argument any more valid. It is important to ground the discussion on something more substantial — above and beyond the melodrama of the “rich versus the poor”; anchors, with neither meaning nor purpose, are just dead weight.
An across-the-board wage increase could result in a “wage distortion” or the blurring of the distinctions ordained in an existing salary scale. An indiscriminate wage increase extended even to those who don’t necessarily merit them, is a reward for inefficiency to the prejudice of those who truly deserve them. Finally, an amount that responds to the employees’ “wants” may not necessarily correspond with the “needs” of business. When unaccompanied by an increase in efficiency and productivity, it becomes an additional burden that could just as easily serve as a dis-incentive for generating employment opportunities for more people — and worse, a justification for the installation of labor-saving devices, i.e. layoffs. To rest on a social justice bent — unmindful of its legal, practical, and unintended consequences — is to stand on shaky ground.
This is, of course, not to say that there is no room for compassion.
Our labor laws have a built-in bias in favor of labor, i.e. all things being equal, it is the interpretation favoring labor that must be countenanced. Our Constitution promotes the self-organization of our employees, in order to encourage and enhance their ability to collectively bargain.
Where these policies intend is the true and meaningful empowerment of our labor force — as a force to be reckoned with. In other countries, instead of a debate on wages, there is a focus on skills and humanpower development. This shift is premised on the idea that workers can demand higher salaries, as a result of and justified by their improved efficiency and productivity.
Last May 1, the ILO Director-General queried: “Tens of thousands of people around the world are taking to the streets today. What else is new?” It’s about time that we started answering that question by inspiring and effecting change.
* * *
Mourning Us: Four centavos are given to honor the memory of Mario Taguiwalo.
An informed individual with varying interests, he wrote and lectured extensively on a broad range of topics — from politics to philosophy, poverty to population. He was an actor and a screen play writer, co-authoring “Oro, Plata, Mata” and starring in “Unfaithful Wife.” As DOH undersecretary, he was the highest ranking official who wasn’t a doctor.
Idealist, joker, intellectual, and patriot, Mario was originally a portly man with a scruffy beard, and an easy laugh. But for all his good humor, Mario had his fair share of strife and sorrow. He was thrown in jail during the Marcos years. His 18 year old son, Mike, died of a heart attack in 2003. Five years later, he had to bury yet another son, Mark. And he valiantly struggled against colon cancer. Amidst all that, Mario maintained his gregarious self. He laughed and was kind to the end.
Jessica Zafra wrote that Mario has forbidden us to mourn him. I respect that wish. But what comes to mind is when the poet Hopkins asked young Margaret “why she was grieving over Goldengrove unleaving?” It is not Mario, but us that I mourn for.
* * *
“God give me work, till my life shall end; And life, till my work is done.” – Anonymous
* * *
E-mail: deanbautista@yahoo.com