iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

New Jobs Come With A Price: Lower Salaries, Economic 'Scarring' Of Labor Force

CHRISTOPHER LEONARD   01/10/10 06:59 AM ET   AP

Unemployment

Unemployed for nearly a year, David Becker was relieved to land a new job in information technology last summer.

The offer carried a price, though: It was a lower-rung job than the one Becker had lost. He had to uproot his family from Wisconsin to Nevada. And, like many formerly jobless people who find work these days, Becker is now paid far less than before – $25,000 less.

It's one of the bleak realities of the economic recovery: Even as more employers are starting to hire, the new jobs typically pay less than the ones that were lost.

In the government's data, a job is a job. More jobs point to a growing economy. But to people who used to earn $60,000, a new $40,000 job means they'll spend less – and contribute less to the recovery.

"In most cases, it means a subdued expansion, for sure," said Marisa Di Natale, director at Moody's Economy.com.

Worse for those affected, people hired at lower wages in a tight job market tend to lag behind their peers for years, sometimes decades. For example, workers laid off during the 1981-82 recession earned 20 percent less than people who remained in a job – even 20 years after they were rehired, a Columbia University study found. The study examined pay for white- and blue-collar workers, managers and hourly workers.

That means a few short months of unemployment could haunt workers such as 34-year-old Jessica Moore for years.

Moore had been employed since graduating from Penn State University more than 12 years ago. But in March, she was laid off from her job as managing editor for digital media at the nonprofit Sesame Workshop in New York, which produces "Sesame Street."

In April, Moore got an interview for a job opening as editor and publisher of the nonprofit Teen Voices magazine in Boston. The job paid 25 percent less than her previous position. And the company was a fraction the size of Sesame Workshop.

Still, she leapt at the offer.

"I wanted the immediate security," she said.

It's hardly surprising that employers are being stingy with pay these days. Their own businesses were squeezed by the recession. Most depend on consumer spending, which remains tepid.

The first jobs to emerge from a recession typically aren't well-paying ones, says Till Marco von Wachter, a Columbia economics professor. Companies delay hiring for higher-paying jobs, in particular, until they're confident the recovery will last, he says.

In addition, as the unemployed compete for the few job openings available, employers face no pressure to raise wages. More than six people are now vying, on average, for each job opening, according to Labor Department data – compared with just 1.7 workers per opening when the recession began in December 2007.

That's why Becker considered himself lucky to get a job offer this summer as an information-technology manager after months of searching. That was even though he had to move his family from Milwaukee to Reno, Nevada, and take less pay than he'd been used to.

"I think a very large number of people will never have the life they had at one time," he said.

Becker, 48, oversees fewer than a dozen employees, compared with the 60 he managed before the recession when he earned $25,000 more, or $150,000. He drained $100,000 in savings to support his family during a year of unemployment to pay his mortgage, health insurance and college tuition for two children.

Though his current job is a step down, he wasn't prepared to hold out for a better and higher-paying one. Too many other workers were lined up for each opening he sought.

John Irons, research and policy director for the Economic Policy Institute in Washington, says that as millions of unemployed workers accept lower pay for new jobs, their collective wage cuts will likely stifle income growth for years.

Inflation-adjusted hourly wages rose throughout most of 2008 but peaked at an average $8.65 in May for non-management hourly employees, as measured in 1982 dollars, according to Labor Department data. (Unadjusted for inflation, the average was $18.53.) Since then, inflation-adjusted wages have fallen 1.3 percent to an estimated $8.54.

The resulting wage depression is part of the economic "scarring" of the labor force, Irons said. For example, inflation-adjusted wages stagnated for four years after the downturn of 1991. And they remained mostly flat from 2002 to 2005, after the mild recession of 2001, according to Labor Department data.

"You can't spend what you don't have," said 35-year-old Travis Becker, who took a 12 percent pay cut when he was hired in July. Becker (no relation to David Becker) had been laid off a few months earlier by a Minnesota company that installed concrete pieces for commercial projects.

Pay cut or no, Becker is grateful to have a job at Wells Concrete in rural Minnesota Becker moved his family from a small town near Minneapolis, lost his seniority and took a job with less responsibility.

"There's no other choice," he said. "It's job or no job."

Becker said he and his wife will remain as frugal as they have been after he was laid off. They dine out rarely and spend mainly on necessities for their three children.

Consumers already are saving more and spending less than they normally do, because of high debt and tight credit. With Becker and other newly hired workers keeping tight grips on their wallets, consumer spending could stay weak well into the recovery, sapping its strength. How much will hinge on how long and how deeply wage growth lags.

Pay tends to stagnate during or immediately after recessions – and it's often severe during "jobless recoveries," when hiring remains weak long after the economy starts growing again, according to a 2005 study by Princeton University economist Henry Farber.

For example, workers who lost jobs and found new ones from 1981 to 1983 took average pay cuts of 10.8 percent once they found new jobs, the study found. But from 1983 to 1985, as hiring accelerated, that pay cut narrowed to less than 8 percent.

But those who lost jobs and were rehired from 2001 to 2003 averaged bigger pay cuts of 13.6 percent as hiring stagnated for nearly two years during a jobless recovery.

By contrast, formerly unemployed people who were rehired during the boom years of the late 1990s averaged a minuscule pay cut of 0.2 percent, according to the study, which examined pay data from the Labor Department.

Moore, the former Internet editor for Sesame Workshop, said living in Boston turned out to be more enjoyable than her life in pricey New York.

But to make up the lost pay?

She said she's simply going to work harder in coming years to make some of it back.

"I do have to play catch up," she said.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS

Unemployed for nearly a year, David Becker was relieved to land a new job in information technology last summer. The offer carried a price, though: It was a lower-rung job than the one Becker had los...
Unemployed for nearly a year, David Becker was relieved to land a new job in information technology last summer. The offer carried a price, though: It was a lower-rung job than the one Becker had los...
Filed by Alexander Belenky  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 285
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
04:38 PM on 01/12/2010
It's worse than it sounds.

Business continues to gain efficiency from automation. The revenue per worker continues to rise.

Soon business won't need workers anymore. Or at least will need very few.

This is a situation that the workers and business created together, but business is hoping to be the sole beneficiary.
01:31 PM on 01/12/2010
In addition to unemployment and underemployment re # of hours worked, there is a third form of losing talent: people working below their skill level.
A lot of potential evaporates as people mark time in minimal jobs.
And the lack of learning opportunities is a big driver of dissatisfaction among young workers.

We really ought to do better.
All the best,
Michael
http://bit.ly/6jsZow
11:49 AM on 01/12/2010
I'm fortunate in that, even with a recent job loss, I had enough income to be able to plan for, save for and deal with it. It's tight, but do-able.

I've been in a worse boat before and then, like now, my spending has gone down to almost zero. I wasn't a big spender before but now a big day out for me is a movie at a bargain rate.

In other words, I've gone back to my 1981 self because I know my job, and my pay, are not coming back and at age 50 I have no wish to start over in that field anyway. I would rather someone else have that job, someone with fresh knowledge and the desire to make that environment better.

Because of the recessions, I was never a big consumer anyway, but the economy ran on others. Now, if we all don't spend, either because of being out of jobs or because of wariness, it will indeed be a long recovery, much longer. This, now, makes the early 80s recession look like a piece of cake in my memory.

But hang tough -- it could be that we're in for a time of rebirth and renewal in this post-Industrial Age world. How do we redefine it for the betterment of us all, not just the few? That is our new challenge. I wish the best for all my fellow job-seekers out there.
photo
bryanzth
Honest to Goodness USA Patriot!
05:30 PM on 01/11/2010
One reminder. Right now, the screws are really tightening, and a huge number of people are feeling the pressure. JUST REMEMBER when the screws started tightening:

In the 60s and 70s with the neocon kiddies with Nixon.
In the 80s with the neocon twenty/thirty somethings.
And any chance they got in the 90s and finally in the 00s to put the screws to us. It ain't over, but but it didn't start with Obama, as Che.en,y and his daughter are trying to persuade. Nope. And he is not trying to do anything but hold back the horde, like at the end of the Roman Empire, many leaders tried to avert an even worse disaster.

So, folks, if you blame Obama and cripple him by not voting, then, babies, where are you going to be THEN? It is not at all certain that we will escape this any better than in 1934. And it took 16 more years to recover from the Great Depression. Now with the technology and the keys in their hands, the G.OPerz will squeeze only tighter.

BZ.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
stargazer13
To Love One Is To Love All
01:34 PM on 01/11/2010
I have now become a migrant worker traveling the U.S. in search of a job !!

no longer hoping to live in the same small town in the same home for years and years !!

no longer expecting a living wage and now searching to hire out for survival wage .s

wish I was 30 years younger !! for if I was there might be some hope to better my situation !!

but at fifty years old I am in the late fall of my working career ! and it sucks to be me ! at my age in America right now !!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:35 PM on 01/11/2010
Heartfelt condolences. I'm nearing fifty too but, aside from the increasing aches and pains, I'm mostly relieved not to be any younger. I fret for the kids.
12:20 PM on 01/11/2010
Just wanted to point out that in some cases people left an area that cost more to live and so even with the wage reduction they come out ahead or the same. My family has done that a few times. No regrets.

When one door closes another one opens.
01:14 PM on 01/11/2010
Whilst viewing the snow still on the ground since 12/24 and acknowledging that the temperature's about to climb out of the single digits (both positive and negative) for the first time in a couple weeks, I STILL think taking less money and moving from Wisconsin to Nevada may NOT be much of a, "compromise!"
photo
BBackSoon
Hello, I must be going.
01:47 PM on 01/11/2010
What makes you think it is cheaper? It might be if you are moving from an affluent area of one of the coasts but otherwise I think your full of crap.
11:07 AM on 01/11/2010
welcome to the 'new normal' - no jobs, but record bonuses for wall street. A cabinet largely indifferent to the struggle of average Americans. What a joke.
hat tip to http://iamned-website.blogspot.com
06:17 AM on 01/11/2010
The labor market functions similar to the goods market with hours worked the independent variable and wage the dependent variable. Labor supply (how much people are willing to work) slopes upward and labor demand (how much labor forms demand) downward. Even given this simplistic model you can easily see that because there is a shortage of demand, people are forced to take jobs at a lower wage than they would in equilibrium. The most important question of course is whether the new equilibrium will be at a lower wage and lower number of hours worked.
09:07 AM on 01/11/2010
Except that the income of average Americans have stagnated or declined over the last thirty years. Even during the so-called boom years. And do not forget, banks are not lending as much to small and medium sized businesses in order to facilitate an economic recovery. Thereby artificially reducing labour markets. In the case of the banks, it is survival of the few over the well-being of the many. This is capitalism.

I get rich. You suffer.

And let us not forget the government action regarding visas for technical workers. The encouragement of the off-shoring of American jobs to cheaper, overseas labour markets. NAFTA (thanks Clinton) which ensured wage reductions or factory relocation to foreign countries.

Business has inherently superior bargaining position over workers. If we did not have minimum laws, what do you think the average hourly pay would be for a worker? Twenty-five cents? A dollar? Two dollars?

So, the simple function is a mathematical load of bollocks. If mathematical functions and the models work so well, how did we get to this point? Because the math failed. Economics is not a science. A voodoo science at best. Pure crap used to justify excess at the very worst.
06:15 AM on 01/11/2010
Most people are taking pay cuts to get new jobs. Yet minimum wage jobs are artificially getting the same rates. is it any wonder that blue collar workers are not getting any jobs right now.
We should go back to the rates before Nancy pelosi raised minimum wages and then caused the recession. But it will never happen the democrats won't admit their mistake and the republicans wouldn't want to be seen as heartless.
and the blue collar workers of this nation will keep on suffering even while the rest of the people start getting jobs
06:36 AM on 01/11/2010
LOL. You are a piece of work. Nancy Pelosi caused the recession? All by herself? Is she also a comic book villain in your world?--because that's pretty amazing for one woman to bring down the world economy.

No, it couldn't have been the legalized gambling on Wall Street....

Your kind of delusion is why we can't afford another Republican in the WH. Please people, whoever you vote for, don't vote for people who live in alternate universes where they don't have to take responsibility!
08:55 AM on 01/11/2010
"We should go back to the rates before Nancy pelosi raised minimum wages and then caused the recession."

That's the stupidest claim I've seen yet today; but as this site sees its share of rightie simpletons, it will likely be usurped later today....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:23 AM on 01/11/2010
Its a employer market, same as it was during the mid 80’s (thank you Ronald) and early 90’s, (thank you Bush). So your pǝʍǝɹɔs, period. I would imagine now is even worst then those periods. More qualified people applying for the same positions, and remember you are competing against those that are working under a “Green Card”, which drives the salaries down.

Just like back then, it is strange that with the number of so called qualified “High Tech” unemployed people in the market place for a position, they are still competing with people with “Green Cards”.

Back then, companies were able to get qualified people, at a 30%+ savings, the why is that the companies control Congress. Most of that time, I worked as an consultant and worked with a lot of people that had “Green Cards”, they started as temporary employees and later became permanent.

Were they more qualified than others, or were they able to converse in understandable English? Good questions. But I bet the answer is the 30%+ savings, and as temporary employees, no benny's.
12:41 AM on 01/11/2010
Rather than a "recession generation" a case can be made that America is experiencing a Regression Depression. What prior century it ends up in remains to be seen, but certainly at this point it will be a pre-industrial society, as no industries remain here. The cost of living here cannot support citizens in the global competition. With the low standing of it's educational system it also won't compete globally with students of other countries. It can't forever live off the largesse of the producing nations in a credit bubble. Unless we become a major producer of goods again (not likely) we might encourage our children to become blacksmiths and candle makers to catch up with the new reality.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
loki
cheap politicians for sale
12:01 AM on 01/11/2010
Since the Reagan administration , which was were the concept of driving the country into an economical trainwreck was born, the republicans with the backing and full support of Ivy greed Capitalist, and the ivy greed educational institutions, have been pushing hard to bring the us standard of living down for the working class people in America. They wanted to keep more of the profit. Later on in the Clinton era the democrats realized how much money was to be made by doing the bidding of corporate Ivy greed Capitalist. Since then, it has been snowing with money from lobbyist in DC. In fact, as of Aug 17th, 2009, the latest record I can find, the ratio of lobbyist to Congressmen is 6 to 1. For every 1 congressman, there are 6 lobbyist with large checks or envelopes of cash in hand. And there is no party loyalty with Lobbyist or their corporate backers. They just hand out money in exchange for getting the bills that many lobbyist or corporations write themselves, passed into laws that favor them completely, and screw us over royally.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:29 AM on 01/11/2010
Welcome to indentured servitude. Fortunately, we are a one-income family and don't need to rely on two incomes to survive. We planned it that way, making due with less. Not that everyone is as lucky and I'm certainly not trying to poke a stick into anyone's eye. The reason I mention it is because I've made a decision NOT to seek employment upon graduating. It occurred to me that someone out there needs that paying position more than I do. I'll remain content for the time being offering my services to certain non-profits for free. I'll gain experience, build a portfolio, serve the institutions that serve my fellow human beings, and hope for better times.

If you're like me, and can make it on just one income, maybe you'd consider letting that single mother or father take the position you're competing for?

Just a thought... maybe just wishful thinking? Another small rebellion to slow the downward trend of wages…. Everyone could sacrifice something to ensure the future prospects of all.
06:07 AM on 01/11/2010
It's nice to see someone being thoughtful of their fellow human beings on these boards for once. Too many people are all about themselves at the expense of everyone else in this country. And they wonder why we're in a recession and other countries are disg.usted by us.

Fanned-- for being a decent human being.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:39 AM on 01/11/2010
You are on my Hero list!
11:23 PM on 01/10/2010
p
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tom95134
11:20 PM on 01/10/2010
"Companies delay hiring for higher-paying jobs, in particular, until they're confident the recovery will last,..."

And, in the current economy, many companies have made increased use of contract workers. Anybody who is serious about looking for a job should be trying to find placement through a contract agency. It's a foot in the door and while pay will not be anywhere near what they made working directly for a company, and it will likely be without health insurance (some agencies allow you to buy in to a group policy) your face is in front of the manager and if/when they get ready to hire you could be the first one they think about. Most agencies are willing to allow a company to convert a contract worker to an employee at no cost to the company after a given number of months,
10:55 PM on 01/10/2010
The sad thing is that Obama is doing absolutely nothing to help the job market. He only cares about golf, expensive vacations, global warming, more war in Afghanistan and anything he can call healthcare reform. This all rests with Obama and his many failures.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tom95134
11:23 PM on 01/10/2010
Actually, he is trying to do something but the stimulus money was funneled through the States which resulted in State Politics coming into the picture. He would have been better off doing something like FDR's New Deal with the CCC, WPA, etc. which put people to work directly for the Federal Government. But, if that happened you would have heard the Republicans screaming socialism even louder that they already have been.

What he needs to do is figure out a way o force the States to use the remaining stimulus money in a way that creates the maximum number of jobs.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Adartist777
Middle Class Warrior
11:40 PM on 01/10/2010
True. In my state the stimulus money hasn't gone to helping the average citizen, but to increasing police presence and keeping schools open. Maybe the police presence is needed because of increased crimes such as burglaries committed by desperate unemployed people and we all want our children to go to school so they can eventually work for huge corporations, such as Wal-Mart, at low wages.

Good comment, Tom! Just had to vent.
10:17 AM on 01/12/2010
Excellent post. When the money went to the states it propped up bad budgets and kept bad programs going instead of helping more people in more towns beyond the state capitals.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
loki
cheap politicians for sale
12:09 AM on 01/11/2010
tell me something SuperGenius , Do you honestly think that a Republican would be doing anything different? Really... But before you answer, just think back to all the economic wonders that Bush did in his 8 terms and when he had the full support of a Republican majority congress passing anything and everything he ever ask for.. Or look back to Bush Daddy's term, and yes, even Reagan era, especially the last term when the economy was heading into the dumps.
Look at the facts, then , respond honestly and please. Qualify what you base your response on.
Im very curious to know.