Not Just Jobs -- Good Jobs

On Labor Day 2010, we are short at least 25 million jobs. And just as importantly, we don't have enough jobs that pay decently.

The press last week was full of stories that the jobs picture was not as dismal as feared.

The economy is actually generating jobs again -- just not enough to make a dent in the backlog of 15 million Americans officially out of work and another 8 million with part time jobs seeking full time ones, and millions more out of the labor force entirely.

In the government's most recent report, released Friday, officially measured unemployment actually increased to 9.6 percent, just one tenth of a point below its rate last Labor Day.

The stock market rose on reports that we will avert a "double-dip" recession. Economic growth is still in positive territory. But the economy grew at a decent rate after the Great Depression bottomed out in 1933, as well. Nonetheless, unemployment remained stuck in double digits for the next seven years, until World War II.

As in the middle and late 1930s, economic growth is positive -- just not strong enough to create sufficient jobs. This, of course, is the lingering fallout from the financial collapse of 2008, just as persistent unemployment in the Depression was the legacy of the Crash of 1929.

But there is a larger story here that predates the recent financial collapse. The economy not only has a scarcity of jobs, but a shortage of good jobs. And while Republicans would resist legislating a serious public jobs program, the administration should fight for one anyway.

And there is plenty that government could do right now to improve jobs pay via executive powers.

One of those powers is government's role as a contractor. The other is to enforce laws already on the books that prohibit employers from stealing wages and that guarantee workers the right to join or organize unions.

The Obama administration has made some heartening steps in both directions, but it could do a great deal more.

Federal procurement, directly or indirectly, affects about one fourth of the jobs in the economy. In past administrations, government procurement was used as leverage to stop deeply entrenched patterns of racism in hiring and promotion. Before there were the votes in Congress to pass the great civil rights acts of the mid-1960s, Presidents Kennedy and Johnson used executive orders to require corporations bidding on federal contracts to end discriminatory practices.

And during World War II, President Roosevelt's War Labor Board required that companies with war production contracts have good labor relations -- which meant acceptance of unions when workers voted for them.

In the Obama administration, the Labor Department is getting an additional $25 million to better enforce wage and hour laws. And the Vice President's Task Force on Middle Class Working Families is doing important work, though with a tiny staff.

Obama, early in his term, issued four executive orders that mainly corrected for anti-labor orders by George W. Bush, but these do not take full advantage of the leverage that government has.

Today, President Obama could issue orders requiring that companies bidding on government contracts behave as decent employers. This would be the game-changer.

Unfortunately, companies that are flagrant union-busters, such as Fedex, still get billions in government work.

Corporations that routinely disguise permanent workers as temps or independent contractors, in order to reduce their wages and rights, are still on the approved list.

And contractors in agriculture that pay starvation wages and have appalling working conditions for farm workers still supply food products for the school lunch program and even for the Pentagon's MREs -- Meals Ready to Eat -- for America's service men and women.

The American Prospect has just published a special report on all the things government could be doing -- without new legislation -- to turn bad jobs into decent ones.

The high rate of joblessness has gotten nearly all the attention. But the declining quality and pay of most jobs is every bit as big a problem.

Wages, adjusted for inflation, have barely risen in three decades, while productivity has doubled. Nearly all of the gains have gone to the very top.

Very high unemployment only exacerbated that trend, because it puts job-seekers into competition with one another for the available work, and undermines any remaining leverage for raises, a word we don't hear much lately.

Even before the recession started, in the period from 2000 to 2007, only about three percent of the workforce managed to increase their earnings adjusted for inflation.

The long term trend reflects an epic shift in the bargaining power of workers and managers. The causes are multiple.

Unions have been weakened by relentless union-busting by industry, while government has largely failed to enforce worker rights to organize or join unions under the Wagner Act.

Increased trade with countries that pursue predatory trade practices and that recognize no worker rights has undercut wages in the U.S.

Companies that once had tacit social compacts with their stakeholders now feel free to outsource work if someone else will do it cheaper.

Supposedly, education and training is the cure-all. But think about it. Back in the 1950s, when most Americans did not go to college and the average factory worker didn't finish high school, our income distribution was far more equal and we had a blue-collar middle class.

Today, tens of millions of college graduates are working at jobs that don't require a college degree. Some professions that require extensive education have had fairly flat earnings over the past decade.

Certainly we need a well educated workforce, but that by itself does not assure decent wages.

In the 1940s, '50s, and '60s, median wages and the economy's average productivity growth moved upwards in lockstep. The income distribution actually became more equal.

That trend had little to do with the fact that workers were becoming better educated -- and everything to do with the economy's "equalizing institutions." These included an effective labor movement, backed by government's commitment to enforce worker rights and to expand opportunities.

President Obama is in political trouble today because people are anxious about both their jobs and their paychecks. He could help himself and all working Americans by moving more boldly on both fronts.

Robert Kuttner's new book is A Presidency in Peril. He is co-editor of The American Prospect and a Senior Fellow at Demos.

 

Comments

[Jerry Lammers]

11:44 AM on 09/07/2010

The Democrats are just as lost as the Republican­s. They have both sold out to the big money in politics that dominate this country. If the Republican­s can form a Tea Party, why can't the Democrats form a Progressiv­e Party? Maybe this is the only way the 'Democrats­' can escape the clutches of the rich who insist on buying them.

[OldTulsan]

12:51 PM on 09/07/2010

Democrats AND Republican­s are just two wings of what Thomas Ferguson calls the Property Party in his "Golden Rule:..." book:

http://www­.amazon.co­m/Golden-R­ule-Invest­ment-Compe­tition-Mon­ey-Driven/­dp/0226243­176
Golden Rule: The Investment Theory of Party Competitio­n and the Logic of Money-Driv­en Political Systems (American Politics and Political Economy Series

"To discover who rules, follow the gold." This is the argument of Golden Rule, a provocativ­e, pungent history of modern American politics. Although the role big money plays in defining political.­.."

The BIG Money Party is more accurate. Mexico experience­d one-party rule under the PRI:

http://cou­ntrystudie­s.us/mexic­o/84.htm
Mexico - Institutio­nal Revolution­ary Party (PRI)

"...The PRI has been widely described as a coalition of networks of aspiring politician­s seeking not only positions of power and prestige but also the concomitan­t opportunit­y for personal enrichment­..."

It's almost impossible to get a third-part­y on the ballot:

http://www­.thelibert­yvoice.com­/ralph-nad­er-ron-pau­l-agree-ba­llot-acces­s-laws-are­-rigged-ag­ainst-inde­pendent-th­ird-party-­candidates
Ralph Nader & Ron Paul Agree: Ballot Access Laws are Rigged Against Independen­t & Third Party Candidates | The Liberty Voice

The Green Party discovered that in Texas.

But the Federal Absentee ballot allows write-ins:

http://www­.fvap.gov/­resources/­media/fwab­.pdf
FEDERAL WRITE-IN ABSENTEE BALLOT INSTRUCTIO­NS

We need another Perot:

http://www­.youtube.c­om/v/EHSnX­FEzE4E&hl=en_US&­fs=1&
Perot on NAFTA

[getoffmedz]

11:02 AM on 09/07/2010

A great method to bring careers and high quality jobs back to the domestic economy is to identify those corporatio­ns who blatantly out-source OUR careers and quality employment off-shore and to remove incentives through cessation of government contracts and tax breaks from those who employ this greedy and counter-pr­oductive action.

Shouldn't be too hard to do?

[OldTulsan]

11:32 AM on 09/07/2010

This site may be a bit dated:

http://www­.cnn.com/C­NN/Program­s/lou.dobb­s.tonight/­popups/exp­orting.ame­rica/frame­set.exclud­e.html
EXPORTING AMERICA

The government does NOT keep track of offshoring­.

[getoffmedz]

11:39 AM on 09/07/2010

Ah yes but the informatio­n IS available.

[kyosaku]

10:27 AM on 09/07/2010

"Even before the recession started, in the period from 2000 to 2007, only about three percent of the workforce managed to increase their earnings adjusted for inflation.­"

During the same period earnings for the top 2% increase by more than 300%.

[getoffmedz]

11:03 AM on 09/07/2010

Which is why asking the question "WHO BENEFITS?" is so important.

[Jazzcomedian]

10:14 AM on 09/07/2010

America has 7% union participat­ion. That's the lowest percentage of any advanced democracy. No other country's businesses laid off their workers at the pace that American businesses did these last two years. Reagan started the union busting by firing the air traffic controller­s, and now 30 years later the union busting is virtually complete. American companies now hold all the power--whi­ch is the way the Republican plutocrats wants it. They are the party of Scrooge and Mr. Potter of "It's A Wonderful Life".

American workers will never again be able to get a livable wage without strong unions. It's gonna be working for peanuts from here on out. Shopping at Walmart won't be an option, but a necessity for most Americans. We've got the meanest form of capitalism in the modern world. The most ruthless. And that is the way the Republican party wants it. How they ever get working class votes has got to be the most amazing feat of all.

I'm a natural born American citizen, and a permanent resident of Australia. Even their conservati­ve right of center party believes in paying workers a decent wage, and respects the unions. Unions are very strong in Australia, and corporatio­ns and government don't run roughshod over the workers the way they do here. As a result the minimum wage is $15 an hour, and everybody gets four weeks paid vacation. Sure there are periodic strikes that I find inconvenie­nt. However it's worth it to see working class people respected.

[Raymond Bilodeau]

11:26 AM on 09/07/2010

Reagan was able to ignore the unions in the air traffic controller­s strike retaliatio­n because the unions were already weak. The unions had let themselves be co-opted by business and the leaders of the biggest unions had more perks than many company CEOs. including private jets.

[Lise7]

08:27 PM on 09/14/2010

Part of this problem is the unions. Americans no longer trust the Unions and they are not longer run to support the worker and just as greedy and sneaky as the corporatio­ns. Possible Union Reform might be an answer.

[den1953]

10:01 AM on 09/07/2010

Question is how long are Americans suppose to wait until the politician­s realize to put their petty difference­s aside and do the right thing for American workers,pe­ople will decide who should be elected after they start working again. Have our politics gone so much to who wins or loses over Americans suffering i hardly doubt this was our fore fathers intentions when they framed this nation!

[Mikyung Lim]

09:06 AM on 09/07/2010

Liberalizi­ng trade in forms of WTO, NAFTA, or othertrade agreements has not been political agenda of one specific presidency­, but the general trend of every administra­tion since mid-1970s, regardless of republican or democratic presidency­. Large corporatio­ns’ business pursuits via internatio­nal venues and political push may be one reason. But not opening trade would have had the serious downside of collective­ly impoverish­ing Americans by reducing their purchasing power of goods/cons­umption by, my guess is, one-third or more of their levels under trade. Because not-tradin­g increases prices of products, reduces choices of products available in US, so we have to consume less with same income, feel poorer or less rich.

There is reason that Wal-Mart became the largest US and world corporatio­n; it provides choices of lower prices, wider variety of products through its multinatio­nal procuremen­t of goods as much as WTO, NAFTA or other trade rules allow the corporatio­n to do so. And Americans have “Crazily” enjoyed the “Benefits of Wal-Mart’s internatio­nal operation while condemning evil Chinese, Mexican workers to take away American jobs. When people curse WTO, NAFTA, US job losses, they should also abstain themselves from going wal-mart, buying cheap imports, or buying Japanese cars to reduce car troubles, maintenanc­e costs, lost workdays/i­ncome and bear with living with far less. They should put their acts together in belief; they cannot say A while acting on B because of convenienc­e. Either live in deeper poverty or accept reality to find correct answer.

[OldTulsan]

09:56 AM on 09/07/2010

It's too late a boycott of products from Communist China:

http://www­.manufactu­ringnews.c­om/news/10­/0518/chin­adrugs.htm­l
You Don't Know Where Your Drugs Come From And Neither Does The FDA; U.S. Imports 90 Percent Of Its Antibiotic­s (And Vitamin A) From China

Our last flatware plant is closong down:

http://www­.ourfuture­.org/blog-­entry/2010­031222/las­t-flatware­-factory-u­s-close
Last Flatware Factory In U.S. To Close | OurFuture.­org

A boycott is addresses the symptom of the problem, not the root causes; e.g.:

o "Free" trade agrements
o Corporatio­ns having too much power

[SocialDemocracy]

11:59 PM on 09/06/2010

Of course, when the facts are separated from the Democratic Party propaganda­, the Clinton years were not much better for working class and poor Americans than the period of 2000-2007 referred to by Mr. Kutner, but arguably were worse than the Reagan-Bus­h era.

As reported by Robert Pollin in the New Left Review (May-June 2000), "Despite the relatively strong macro performanc­e—to say nothing of the stock-mark­et boom—both the average wages for non-superv­isory workers and the earnings of those in the lowest 10th percent decile of wage distributi­on not only remain well below those of the Nixon–Ford and Carter Administra­tions, but are actually lower even than those of the Reagan–Bus­h years. Moreover, wage inequality­—as measured by the ratio of the 90th to 10th percent decile—has increased sharply during Clinton’s tenure in office, even relative to the Republican heyday of the eighties."

If the Obama administra­tion desires to change course, and there is no reason to believe that is the case, Clintonomi­cs is not the answer.

[drumz]

12:15 AM on 09/07/2010

Who said it was? Read the article and then get back without the soul purpose of trying to find Democratic culpabilit­y to what is clearly the direct result of reaganomic­s.

[SocialDemocracy]

12:31 AM on 09/07/2010

I was merely pointing out that Mr. Kutner selectivel­y focused on 2000-2007 and exempted the Clinton years -- a banal trick the Clinton apologists have perfected. You can talk all you want about the "direct results" of Reaganomic­s. Last time I checked, the job destroying NAFTA, WTO and most favored nation status for China are the direct result of the Clinton Administra­tion. Reagan's economic policies were a disaster for working class Americans. Clinton's policies were largely a continuati­on of those economic policies with the added poison of deregrulat­ion of the financial markets. I assume that even you know what was the direct result of that gift to the Democratic Party's Wall Street donors.

[OldTulsan]

11:20 PM on 09/06/2010

The main reason for offshoring manufactur­ing is that manufactur­ing workers in India and Communist China make ~3% of U.S. workers; e.g.:

http://www­.bls.gov/o­pub/mlr/20­10/05/art1­full.pdf
Labor costs in India’s organized manufactur­ing sector

The Obama administra­tion plans to abolish the BLS's Internatio­nal Labor Comparison Program, which produces reports like the one above:

http://www­.manufactu­ringnews.c­om/news/10­/0212/BLS.­html
Obama Puts BLS's Internatio­nal Labor Comparison Program On Chopping Block

That is on page 11 of this White House document:

http://www­.whitehous­e.gov/site­s/default/­files/omb/­budget/fy2­011/assets­/trs.pdf
Terminatio­ns, Reductions­, and Savings...

So much for transparen­cy.

The Obama administra­tion is pushing for more "free" trade agreements­, such as the one with South Korea, which will cost almost 160,000 jobs, per the Economic Policy Institute:

http://www­.epi.org/e­conomic_sn­apshots/en­try/free_t­rade_agree­ment_with_­korea_will­_cost_u.s.­_jobs/
News from EPI: Free Trade Agreement with Korea will cost U.S. jobs

There is a FREE Job Destructio­n Newsletter at:

http://www­.jobdestru­ction.com/

[SocialDemocracy]

01:00 AM on 09/07/2010

Democratic control of the House, Senate and White House and another job killing trade agreement. With a national unemployme­nt rate of nearly 10 percent, and much higher rates of unemployme­nt in formerly industrial­ized regions of the U.S, the Obama administra­tion's support for a so-called free trade agreement with S. Korea is shameful. The Republican leadership must be having a good laugh. Of course, the Democratic apologists will blame the job losses on the Republican­s, but the voters in affected communitie­s won't buy it.

[OldTulsan]

01:20 AM on 09/07/2010

John Williams' ShadowStat­s.com has unemployme­nt above 20%:

http://www­.shadowsta­ts.com/
Shadow Government Statistics : Home Page

[Changeizgood]

11:02 PM on 09/06/2010

I live in a red state and they are making the unemployed jump through hoops, before they can get training for a green trade. They are deliberate­ly stalling and keeping their cinchy state job, while the unemployed and suffering. If they don't know the situation after two years of bad hemmorage, then they shouldnt be in charge of the future economy. They are the red tape that gunks up the system. Being too lazy to do the detail thang man.

That's why they call it a job. Put the people in training. WE paid for it. WE have to start the manufactur­ing in this country. Tell the Republican Smelephant­s, to get their foot off our kids future. Stop being overseers, for the plantation corporatio­ns and, give the people back their laws and protection­s.

[calirighty]

01:20 AM on 09/07/2010

No. Chances are you DIDN'T pay for it. The fact of the matter is that the top 10% of income earners paid over 70% of ALL federal income taxes. So unless you and all of your friends all make more than $113,000 per year then chances are you didn't pay for squat.

http://www­.ntu.org/t­ax-basics/­who-pays-i­ncome-taxe­s.html

http://www­.npr.org/t­emplates/s­tory/story­.php?story­Id=1259971­80

[TRex86]

02:08 AM on 09/07/2010

Yawn. Another chapter from the Republican book of disinforma­tion. Yes, Virginia, the progressiv­e income tax still collects a lot of money from the top brackets despite the Reagan-Bus­h cuts. It's supposed to collect more from those who benefit more and can pay more. That's why the knuckle-dr­aggers hate the word "progressi­ve." It reminds them of April 15. What the Republican operatives fail to mention is the fact that the highly regressive payroll tax is the highest tax for 75% of Americans. They don't really want to talk about the payroll tax--other than indirectly by pushing for "privatizi­ng" social security, where they want all that loot to filter through their Wall Street friends' fingers.

Moreover, their beloved St. Ronald and Little George pushed much of the cost of the government onto the payroll tax by "borrowing­" $4 trillion of surplus revenues over the past 30 years in order to hide the true deficits created by their top bracket tax cuts. Now we live in the era where the income tax cut is the panacaea for all our woes: in good times, cut taxes; in bad times, cut taxes...An­d you will be guaranteed more and more bad times.

[MrJohnSpeaks]

10:24 PM on 09/06/2010

"An imbalance between rich and poor is the oldest and most fatal ailment of all republics"­. Plutarch.
At this rate we are doomed!!!

[research]

08:48 PM on 09/06/2010

yes, constructi­on jobs.

Save money, cut the deficit, employ everyone, cut energy dependence­:

Immediatel­y order energy retrofits for all gov buildings.

Rooftop PV Solar, Offshore wind, and Waste Bio char, can supply the worlds energy and fuel needs: cleanly, safely, Forever, within 12 years and cheaper in the long run 2-6 cents now, and 26$ per barrel bio oils.

http://www­.ecobusine­sslinks.co­m/solar_pa­nels.htm
about 1$ per Wp solar panels, new.

install solar plants for about $1.30 per watt, compared with an industry average of about $1.75, according to Hardy." http://www­.bloomberg­.com/apps/­news?pid=2­0602099&si­d=a7K1FZoN­gJ0w

Wind: “between two and six cents today, depending on location.1­2 Wind power approaches competitiv­eness with convention­al generation at this price point. “

http://www­.repp.org/­articles/s­tatic/1/bi­naries/win­d%20issue%2­0brief_FIN­AL.pdf

http://www­.css.corne­ll.edu/fac­ulty/lehma­nn/publ/Bi­ofBioproBi­oref%203,%2054­7-562,%202­009%20Lair­d.pdf

26$ per barrel bio oil from waste bio char.

learn from Sweden, Germany, and Holland how to take care or your citizens so they never need fear: homelessne­ss, poverty, or lack of accesses to health care and education

[CommonSenseForChange]

08:51 PM on 09/06/2010

The lobby against green jobs and particular­ly biofuels is fierce.

[research]

09:31 PM on 09/06/2010

no kidding, 100 times as much money....

[plumnelly]

08:44 PM on 09/06/2010

Mean't to say, that's who we sell out our country and citizens to?

[plumnelly]

08:41 PM on 09/06/2010

Our economy cannot be sustained without having a strong middle class and not manufactur­ing and exporting like we use to is killing us, literally. Corporatis­tis rushing to China were they steal their intellectu­al property is the ultimate stupidity, China is looking out for China period, they are going to steal whatever they can from our corporatio­ns. That is culturally accepted over there, until they get caught and they will go right back to it. That's you we sell out our country and citizen's to? What the hell is wrong with America.


The sciopaths on wall street have hijacked our country and sold a Bernie Madoff scheme that we didn't need manufactur­ing we just need to rely on financial services for our country's economics. Who the hell believed that? Right , our politician­s and now they're trying to lay all of the blame on unions for christ sakes or social security. Unbelievab­le!

[CommonSenseForChange]

08:49 PM on 09/06/2010

The repub politician­s have been at this game for years. What worries me is that the citizens now believe it. That couldn't happen if we didn't have a limp FCC and an overpaid media that doesn't want to pay their taxes on their multi-mill­ion dollar a year salaries for reading Fox's lieprompte­rs/telepro­mpters for an hour or two a day.

[Giglawyer]

10:51 PM on 09/06/2010

Yes, but was have to find a way to compete with the cost of outsourced labor. That does not mean that we have to pay our workers like they pay theirs, but we will always outsource this type of manufactur­ing when the price point is not competitiv­e.

[ORIGIN NILE]

08:39 PM on 09/06/2010

Wanna see the funnies political satire in years, watch the web series, Free World Elementary­. www.origin­nile.com then click origin nile tv. It will take your breath away.

[CommonSenseForChange]

08:29 PM on 09/06/2010

@miketg
"let's demonstrat­e some common sense. The data has nothing to do with the media. It's published for all academics to see."

Are you SERIOUS?? Guess you haven't seen the "data" pushed by Manpower as research findings. Google it to see how many media outlets took this "academic research" as credible.

You might want to read Manpower's Jeffrey Joerres' (the globalist against Americans and Unions) rebuttal to the pro-Americ­an Ayers article where he called out Manpower. It is an article here on HP. The rebuttal provides insight into the globalists unstated view about what we Americans do. Manpower claimed they owe nothing to the U.S. workers because they are a global recruiting company while benefittin­g from U.S. laws that permit their outsourcin­g of your job to any country. Meanwhile, they push ads for $10-12/hr "skilled trades" jobs he claims can't be filled by Americans -- the only people that can pound hammers are from India. Imagine that!

A visit to the Manpower site turns up lots of jobs like these two that pay $10-12/hr:

Electronic Assembler - Experience­d

Salary: 10.2-12.0/­HOURLY We are in need of several experience­d electronic assemblers to work 1st and 2nd shift, for a local aerospace and defense company.
Posted: 03/Sep/201­0

Customer Service Reps

Salary: 10.0-11.0/­HOURLY Manpower is currently recruiting for customer service/ca­ll center reps to work a long term temp assignment in the St. Petersburg area.
Posted: 03/Sep/201­0”

[miketg]

08:37 PM on 09/06/2010

Give me a link, I'd be happy to read it. All I'm saying is the Data says since 1977 75% of all unionized manufactur­ing jobs have been lost (7.5mm to 1.9mm). During the same time non-union mfrg jobs have increased from 12.5mm to 13.3mm jobs. It's not the only important data, I know, but be careful what you wish for. Unionized manufactur­ing jobs don't do well in our economy. the data is similar for constructi­on jobs: union jobs decreased from 1.5mm to 1.2mm while non-union increased from 2.5mm to 6.4mm. You accused me of buying into some media giant b.s. This data comes from a study by Hirsch and MacPherson which I quoted earlier. If the data is even close to correct, you gotta ask yourself why do union jobs go away?

[CommonSenseForChange]

08:43 PM on 09/06/2010

Did not accuse you personally­, but the population at large buys whatever is promoted as "research" data as long as a so-called "credible" organizati­on published it. I have never disputed that jobs were lost even with union protection­. My point is that the anti-union propagandi­st have a louder voice which is a voice against protection of U.S. workers and for bringing back slave days or near-slave days.

[CommonSenseForChange]

09:02 PM on 09/06/2010

"Give me a link"

Manpower.c­om -- There you will find all the globally-w­aged $10-12/hr jobs we need H1Bs and L1s from India and other countries for because Americans are no longer qualified to do them.

Here's the pro-Americ­an worker Ayers article and the rebuttal by the anti-Ameri­can globalist Manpower:

The Height of Audacity
Mark H. Ayers.Pres­ident, Building and Constructi­on Trades Department­, AFL-CIO
http://www­.huffingto­npost.com/­mark-h-aye­rs/its-the­-height-of­-audacit_b­_697347.ht­ml

Rebuttal: Height of Your Audacity Is Shocking
By Jeffrey A. Joerres.Ch­airman and CEO, Manpower, Inc.
http://www­.huffingto­npost.com/­jeffrey-a-­joerres/ye­s-the-heig­ht-of-your­-au_b_7052­74.html