Through new legislation, the Ministry of Justice is aiming to make ‘offenders … take personal responsibility for their crimes’. The idea is to cut the wages of prisoners who work in communities, with the objective of raising £1m a year for victim support services. Any prisoner earning above £20 a week after tax, national insurance, child support payments etc, will face a 40% deduction in their pay. The money raised will be used to ‘repair the damage done by crime’ and begin to remove the burden from the general taxpayer. Critics, however, argue that this legislation will create a disincentive effect and discourage prisoners to work in the community before their release. It may also create additional bureaucracy for the external firms that employ them and at the end of the day may not even affect most prisoners, as many receive earnings, after all deductions, below £20 and so would not be liable. The following articles consider this policy.
Prisoners’ wages docked to fund victim support Associated Press (26/9/11)
Prisoners’ wages to help crime victims BBC News (26/9/11)
Prisoners to pay victims of crime The Press Association (26/9/11)
Victims handed £1m as prisoners suffer wage cut Independent, Nigel Morris (26/9/11)
Questions
- To what extent do you think the above policy is (a) equitable and (b) efficient?
- What might be the adverse effects of such legislation, from the point of view of both prisoners and the firms that employ them?
- What are the income and substitution effects in the context of a worker’s decision to work more or less hours?
- Using indifference analysis, explain how a fall in the prisoners’ net pay (due to this latest deduction) might have an impact on their desire to work more or less.
- Using your analysis from the previous question, explain the importance of the income and substitution effects.
No, bonfire night hasn’t been moved, but the 30th November could certainly be a day to remember. This day has been ‘selected’ by Unions for a nationwide day of action in response to government plans to increase workers’ pension contribution. The action would undoubtedly lead to massive disruption to public services across the UK and if an agreement is not reached with Ministers, we are likely to see further days of industrial action. In the words of the TUC boss, Brendan Barber, if no agreement is forthcoming, there will be ‘the biggest trade union mobilisation for a generation’.
The so-called pensions crisis has been an ongoing saga with seemingly no end in sight. As the UK population gets older, the strain on the state pension will continue to grow. The dependency ratio has increased – there are more and more pensioners being supported by fewer and fewer adults of working age. If the level of benefits is to be maintained, workers must either work for longer or make larger contributions to make up the deficit.
Plans are already in motion to increase the retirement age, but this in itself will not be sufficient. If pension contributions do increase, workers will undoubtedly find themselves worse off – a larger proportion of their gross income will be taken and hence net incomes will be lower. With less disposable income, consumer expenditure will fall, and given that consumption is the largest component of aggregate demand, the economy will take a hit. This is even more of a concern given the pay freezes we have already seen, together with rising inflation. People’s purses will get squeezed more and more, So, while raising pension contributions may help plug the pensions deficit, it could spell trouble for the economic prospects of the UK economy.
In addition to the potential longer term effects, there will also be a significant short term effect, namely, the loss of output on the day of the strike action. If workers are absent, the company will produce less than their potential and in some cases, the lost output can never be regained. If the postal workers go on strike, businesses may find packages go undelivered, customers experience delays, bills are not paid and so on. In all, strike action on the scale that is planned will have an impact on everyone, so it is in the interests of the economy for some sort of agreement to be reached. As Mr. Barber said:
‘If there’s no progress, then potentially we will see very widespread industrial action across the public services’
The following articles look at this conflict.
Unions plan ‘day of action’ over pensions Financial Times, Brian Groom (14/9/11)
TUC: ‘Strikes will be the biggest for a generation’ says Brendan Barber Telegraph (14/9/11)
Unions call for ‘national day of action’ over pensions BBC News (14/9/11)
Unions call collective day of strike action in November Guardian, Helene Mulholland and Dan Milmo (14/9/11)
Ed Miliband to warn trade unions that they must modernise Independent, Andrew Grice (13/9/11)
Trade unions plan day of action over pensions on Nov 30 Associated Press (14/9/11)
Are the trade unions about to save Britain? Telegraph, Mary Riddell (12/9/11)
Pension row unions in day of action The Press Association (14/9/11)
Unions set date for pensions strike as ‘unprecedented ballot begins’ Telegraph, Christopher Hope (14/9/11)
TUC to attack ministers over public sector pensions BBC News(14/9.11)
Secret plan for union strikes to cripple the country Telegraph, Christopher Hope(14/9/11)
Questions
- What are the main costs of strike action to (a) the individual going on strike (b) the firms which lose their workers (c) small businesses (d) the economy?
- What is meant by the dependency ratio? What action could be taken to reduce it? For each type of action, think about the costs and benefits.
- If pension contributions do increase, explain how workers will be affected. How will this affect each of the components of aggregate demand?
- Based on your answer to the above questions, what is likely to be the impact on the government’s macroeconomic objectives?
- What other action, besides striking, could unions take? Is it likely to be as effective? Do you think strikes are a good thing?
- Illustrate on a diagram the effect of a trade union entering an industry. How does it normally affect equilibrium wages and employment?
Cutting the budget deficit is a key government objective, but at the moment it seems to be in conflict with another objective, namely economic growth and thereby avoiding a double-dip recession. In order to raise tax revenue and meet the cries for more equity, the 50% tax rate above £150,000 was imposed, affecting some 310,000 people. However, in a recent letter from some top economists to the Financial Times, they called for the scrapping of the top rate of tax. They argue that it is hindering entrepreneurship and encouraging potential top rate tax payers to leave the UK, thereby hindering the economic situation. George Osborne has asked HMRC to evaluate just how effective the top rate of tax has been at generating government revenue.
In contrast to these calls for scrapping this top rate of tax, some of the richest people in the world have said that they would be happy to pay this rate of tax. In the words of Sir Stuart Rose, the ex-boss of Marks and Spencer:
“How would I explain to my secretary that I would pay less tax on my income, which is palpably bigger than hers, when her tax is not going down.”
Those against scrapping the tax argue that it will be ‘monstrously unfair’ and ‘phenomenally immoral’. This, combined with official figure that suggest by 2015/16 the top rate tax will bring in an extra £3.2bn more revenue than had the tax remained at 40%, certainly adds weight to their argument. In total, over the five year period, it is predicted to bring in an extra £12.6bn.
The policy to increase the tax threshold to £10,000 will meet with the critics’ approval, but less so, if it is accompanied by a scrapping of this top rate tax. Furthermore, the government’s coffers will take a significant beating if both of the above occur!
Another option to replace the 50% tax rate is a higher tax on high value homes – the so-called ‘mansion tax’. Whatever happens with taxation, one thing is clear: the government needs to find a way to generate tax revenue, without putting the economy back into recession. If the 50% tax rate encourages people to leave the UK to avoid the tax or to forego entrepreneurship, it will directly be acting as a disincentive. Fewer jobs will be created due to a lack of entrepreneurship, output may be lower and hence growth will not reach its potential. Crucially, the international competitiveness of the UK economy is being badly affected, as it becomes a less attractive place for investment and talented workers. The following articles consider the 50% tax rate and the controversy surrounding it, despite it only being a temporary policy.
Stuart Rose ‘would pay more tax’ BBC News (9/9/11)
Lawson: ‘dangerous’ and ‘foolish’ to keep 50p tax rate Telegraph, Louisa Peacock (10/9/11)
Rose calls 50p tax rate ‘only fair’ Financial Times, Elizabeth Rigby (9/9/11)
Top 50p tax rate damages economy, say economists BBC News (7/9/11)
George Osborne loses nerve on plan to cut 50p top tax rate Independent, Nigel Morris (8/9/11)
Top tax rate will raise £12.6bn more in revenue, official figures reveal Guardian, Polly Curtis (7/9/11)
Laffer curves and the logic of the 50p tax Financial Times, Tim Harford (9/9/11)
Row over ending of 50p tax rate threatens to spark Tory rebellion Guardian, Patrick Wintour and Polly Curtis (7/9/11)
I’d happily pay more tax, says former M&S boss Sir Stuart Rose Independent, Andy McSmith (10/9/11)
Questions
- What are the main arguments in favour of keeping the 50p tax rate?
- What are the main arguments in favour of scrapping the 50p tax rate?
- What does the Laffer curve show? Is it relevant in the case of the 50p top rate of tax? What does it suggest about the ability of the tax to generate income?
- How does the top rate of tax affect the international competitiveness of the UK economy?
- Why is there a trade-off between raising tax revenue and boosting economic growth through the use of the 50p tax rate?
- Why is there concern about the highest rate of tax actually causing tax revenue to fall?
- What are the equity arguments concerning the scrapping of the 50p tax and raising the tax threshold? Is there an equity argument in favour of the 50p tax rate?
Over recent years, labour markets have become more flexible. Both firms and workers have been much more adaptable to changing market conditions.
This has been illustrated by responses to the 2008/9 recession and the minimal recovery since then. Many firms have seen a drop in demand for their products and have responded by producing less. But this has not necessarily meant laying off workers. But why not? The following include some of the reasons:
• greater flexibility in hours worked: thus hours can be reduced;
• reduction in real wages because of wages not keeping up with inflation;
• many workers receiving part of their income in the form of profit sharing: when profits fall, employees’ income automatically falls;
• a general reduction in unionisation in the private sector;
• in firms where workers are still unionised, unions and management increasingly seeing themselves to be on the ‘same side’: thus unions more willing to explore flexibility;
• less support from state if people are unemployed;
• greater flexibility from the use of temporary or agency staff: these can be reduced in a recession, thus helping to protect the jobs of established workers.
The following podcast looks at this growing flexibility and why it has helped to restrict the rise in unemployment.
Podcast
The real economy: Labour market BBC Today Programme, Evan Davis (24/8/11)
Articles
Agencies placing more in new jobs Western Mail (4/8/11)
Staff appointments increase at subdued pace in July, according to latest Report on Jobs The Recruitment & Employment Federation, News Release (4/8/11)
Manufacturing week: How we got here The Telegraph, Roland Gribben (27/8/11)
Jobless figures show the real risk of creating a lost generation London Evening Standard, Jonathan Portes, Director, National Institute of Economic and Social Research (17/8/11)
Flexible working: is more legislation needed? Personnel Today, Laura Chamberlain (1/9/11)
Recruitment agencies ‘play a big part’ in flexible working The Sales Director, John Oak (10/8/11)
Questions
- Find out what has happened to real GDP, employment and unemployment over the past four years. (Try searching Reference Tables for GDP and Labour Market Statistics on the National Statistics site at http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/index.html.)
- Distinguish between ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’ in the labour market? How has the relationship between the two groups changed in recent years?
- Distinguish between functional, numerical and financial flexibility of firms? (See Box 9.8 in Economics (7th ed), Web Case 6.2 in Essentials of Economics (5th ed), section 18.7 in Economics for Business (5th ed) or section 8.5 in Economics and the Business Environment (3rd ed).)
- Examine the effects of wage rises being less than the rate of inflation on the profit-maximising number of full-time equivalent people employed. How is this influenced by the rate of increase in the price of other inputs and the ability of the firm to raise prices in line with inflation?
- Should firms be required by law to allow workers to demand flexible working conditions? What forms might such flexibility take?
Approximately 1.6 million past and present female employees of Walmart have had their sex discrimination case dismissed by the US Supreme Court. This case began almost 10 years ago with claims by 5 female workers that they were paid less than their male counterparts and had been passed over for promotion. Despite statistical evidence suggesting a case of sexual discrimination, it was ruled that Walmart was not discriminating against women, as promotion decisions were made by individual managers, hence there was no common element between the plaintiffs. Justice Antonin Scalia said that a common element was ‘entirely absent here’.
Discrimination of any kind will have an impact on the demand curve for labour (or the marginal revenue product curve). As such, the equilibrium wage rate will also be affected: if a firm believes that women are less productive than their male counterparts, the MRP curve will shift inwards, pushing down their wage. The key to this case was that there were so many plaintiffs and so it was practically impossible to determine whether or not pay differentials and promotions were based on legitimate grounds. The following articles consider the case against Walmart.
Supreme Court decision in Walmart class-action claim brings praise, anger FoxNews (20/6/11)
Walmart wins class action ruling Financial Times, Barney Jopson (20/6/11)
Wal-Mart women denied discrimination class action BBC News (20/6/11)
Walmart sex discrimination class action rejected Guardian, Dominic Rushe (20/6/11)
Questions
- Why might a firm engage in discrimination?
- Use a diagram to illustrate the impact of discrimination against women by a firm on the marginal revenue product curve for women.
- Following discrimination against women and in favour of men, what happens to the men’s marginal product curve?
- Given your answer to the above 2 questions, what would you expect to happen to the equilibrium number of male and female workers and the male and female wage rate?
- Are there any adverse effects to a firm of engaging in discrimination of any kind?