Derek StaffansonThe Value of the Working Poor
Just a few days ago the House of Representatives passed a bill increasing the federal minimum wage to $7.25 an hour over the next three years. The bill is rather controversial, including both the minimum wage increase and big reductions in the estate tax.
While I listened to the radio report on the bill, I was reminded of a discussion I had some time ago with “Jed.†We were discussing politics/economics, and I had mentioned the frustration I felt at the meager compensation so many in our communities receive for their work. Jed scoffed.
“It is what they are willing to accept,†Jed asserted. “If they don’t like it, they can get something different. They can go to school and get the training to increase their earning power.â€
I was rather disturbed by Jed’s response. I am an enthusiastic advocate of higher education—not merely because of the potentially improved earning power, but for Jeffersonian reasons; higher education helps individuals learn to think critically, to communicate, and to understand the world around them. But Jed was not extolling the virtues of higher education. The implication was that low-income wage earners deserved nothing more based upon their choices. This attitude simply does not reflect the subtleties of the situation or the principles of a moral, “Christian†society.
It is worth noting that the more recent generations are finding it a greater and greater challenge to pay for college. The combination of the stagnation of wages (adjusted for inflation), skyrocketing cost of college, and reduction in grants in favor of loans have all created a more precarious situation for graduates than in years past. The average student graduates with an unprecedented $19,000 in student loan debt, takes longer than four years to complete their degree, and sees lower adjusted earnings than previous generations. A daunting prospect indeed for many student (See NPR’s On Point: “Can America Afford Going to College?â€, Anya Kamenetz’s Generation Debt, and Tamara Draut’s Strapped: Why America’s 20- and 30-Something Can’t Get Ahead). Do we really want our upcoming workforce to be in such a precarious financial circumstances?
Nor is the degree which those students pursue guarantee employment or financial security. Jed was suggesting that by simply getting a degree in a high-compensation field (and assuming they are dutiful workers), they would be virtually assured financial security. This suggestion does not withstand basic scrutiny. Not all college programs can claim to lead to well-paying and highly secure careers. Many students are not inclined by talent or interest to enter those financially profitable programs. Nor are those programs equipped to accept everyone if all the students were so inclined. And a glut of trained candidates for a particular field would not mean high rewards for everyone; the demand would remain relatively fixed, leaving the bulk of candidates to find work in fields for which they may be poorly equipped and in which they are not so well rewarded. In fact, in according to the principles of supply and demand, the influx of applicants into a relatively fixed job market could drive down salaries, hurting even the “winners†in the competition for work.
But this isn’t really about the educational system. Nor is it about promoting the minimum wage. I’m aware of and willing to discuss the possible negative consequences and the demographic realities of the minimum wage—though studies by the Fiscal Policy Institute, Economic Policy Institute, and The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities all indicate that those consequences are far less grave than opponents suggest; and according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, teenager (presumably dependents upon their families) are a minority within the minimum wage labor force—meaning a majority of minimum-wage earners most likely are working to provide for themselves and possibly families.
No, the real issue is the way we value the working class and working poor in our society.
No matter how advanced our society, economy, and technology becomes, there will always be a need for janitors, garbage collectors, groundskeepers, maids, agricultural workers, factory workers, fast-food workers, etc. And no matter how advanced our educational system, we will always have people who, due to circumstances such as disability, past history, or just plain inclination, are best suited for that sort of work, or unable to obtain anything “better.†Since they will always be here—and we will always need them, we should not devalue those people or the work which they do simply because those jobs may not require glamorous skills.
A bishop once told me that “There is dignity in all work.†I believe there is truth to this. I have found satisfaction in working in a warehouse, doing routine janitorial/cleaning work, or operating a factory machine, just as I have working at the library or doing design work. I have a friend who finds great personal fulfillment in his lawncare job. One of the maintenance staff at the Library has confided in me that she feels gratified to help make that important community resource clean and comfortable for the public.
If we truly believe that bishop’s precept, should it not follow that all work deserves a dignified wage, one on which these good people can live a dignified (if modest) life? In a moral, “Christian,†civilized society, shouldn’t we strive to ensure that all heads of households are able to support their families with some measure of security, regardless of their educational or skill level? Don’t we believe that these providers should be able to have the peace of mind which comes from knowing that they can cope financially with an emergency which might grip their families? Don’t we want them to be able to make enough that they can spend time raising their families and strengthening relationships instead of desperately working multiple jobs to keep food on the table and a roof over their heads? Don’t we want them to have the time to spend in the community, performing church service, and growing as people? Should we not value them as important and valuable human beings, irrespective of their career path?
I find it a sad commentary on our Christian compassion and our belief in the family values about which we talk ad nauseum that we would simply write off the working poor as deserving and justifiable losers in our economy and society.
August 1st, 2006 at 6:45 pm
I recently read Barbara Ehrenreich’s “Bait and Switch” where she demonstrates that even those who do all the right things and get the degree may not be able to even get work.
August 1st, 2006 at 10:33 pm
Well put Derek. “Jed” is another example of how effective are the republican talking points. “Rugged individualism” sounds great doesn’t it? For a guy like Jed, it provides all the validation he needs to ignore the uninteresting fact that we will always need janitors, garbage collectors, groundskeepers, maids, agricultural workers, factory workers, fast-food workers etc, and that one way or another we need to find a way that they can live with some dignity by providing a livable wage.
The only alternative is the humiliation of public assistance at taxpayers expense compounded by the additional economic cost of increased crime and substance abuse, and the social cost of a growing membership in the cycle of poverty and the children being raised in a culture of hopelessness.
The scariest part is people like Jed are one or two paychecks away from backruptcy and will continue to vote based upon who they’d rather have a beer with fi they vote at all.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:40 am
You briefly mentioned the law of supply and demand in your post. Don’t you think the same principles apply to the labor market for lower skilled positions of employment?
I agree with you that it would be great if everyone made enough to live a “dignified (if modest) life”. I’m just curious how you think we as a society should go about providing that. Should employers be compelled to do it by our government or should we as concientious citizens make a better effort to encourage/urge/embarrass businesses in our area to pay more for workers than the market indicates they should be paying?
It is hard not to feel sympathy for low wage workers but it is much harder to come up with solutions to the problems in a free market where by definition businesses are free to pay the market wage for the services they require and workers are free to charge a competitive price for their own services when they are desperate for employment.
I really enjoy your blog. I’m probably more libertarian than most of your readers but I am definitly more sympathetic to your viewpoints than I am to the views of the Republican mob that is most of the rest of our state.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:49 am
This is an extremely difficult question. I agree with Derek that there is a real problem in this state with undervalued labor (especially in St. George). I have been blessed to find an employer who believes that his employees are his biggest assets, but I know my situation is not the norm. However I find it frustrating at the lack of innovative means of overcoming this problem. Minimum wage is asprin. It relieves the pain temporarily, but the pain of the poverty disease always returns. I don’t have an answer to cure the problem, I’m curious about what solutions others may have in mind other than altruism, which is still unfortunately lacking in this world.
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:51 am
Excellent Post.
August 2nd, 2006 at 1:22 pm
This is an interesting conversation, and almost serendipitous. I just barely attended a meeting where many of the candidates for county commission, state senate, and state legislature were in attendance. The meeting was put on by ur Intermountain hospital here in Cedar City (non-profit hospital, one of their missions is to provide charity health care to community members in need.) So of course the topic of medicade and medicare came up. I was shocked to hear some of our legislators talk about the “lazy people” who use medicare, and who “abuse the system” and who “make lifestyle choices” that put them in the hospital in the first place. The most shocking comment came from a gentleman running for the county commission who said the people who use medicare or medicade “use it all the time” because it is available to them and they have unending access to it. (Paraphrasing).
One southern utah incumbent and member of the Health and Human services committee was also in attendance and talked about the abuses of the system and went on about how people need to be more accountable.
I can only think that employers also need to be more accountable. By keeping our minimum wage so low and allowing the Walmarts of the world to pay their workers poverty wages, we continue to not solve the health care problem and encourage folks to continually use the system. An increase in minimum wage might very well help folks just a little bit more to afford some of these things. It would be a start.
It amazes me that our legislature is so misinformed as to who uses the services, and who would benefit from an increase in minimum wage.
August 2nd, 2006 at 1:50 pm
Excellent post. There is dignity in all work, but you can’t pay the rent with dignity. The minimum wage ought to be a living wage.
August 2nd, 2006 at 2:10 pm
Wasn’t making minimum wage a living wage the point of minimum wage to start with. That is the problem with minimum wage, the wage increase is wiped out by inflation (rather quickly in some cases). The only idea I can come up with is instead of the Fed setting a flat minimum wage amount, the Fed should mandate that minimum wage be calculated on an metropolitan area by area basis per the average cost of living. This wage rate would need to be adjusted every two years.
Not a ground breaking idea, but maybe an approach that would make a little more of a diffference than the current Minimum wage system provides.
August 2nd, 2006 at 4:24 pm
Thanks for all the comments. Some very good conversation.
I very deliberately avoided discussion of solutions in the post, because the root of the problem isn’t policy or program. The real problem is that which “Jed†exhibited; our attitude about the poor and our callous dismissal of their plight. Before any solution can be found, we have to change the attitudes that encourage the problem. Once we honestly begin to value and respect all who contribute to the success of society, including the “unskilled†workers, we can earnestly begin to discover the best solutions. I wanted to address that need for empathy and concern first and foremost.
The solutions are another discussion. To touch on that very briefly, much can and should be done as conscientious citizens. We need to vote with our dollars to support those businesses which show that they value the work of all their employees. We can be socially active, writing to companies to promote the fair compensation of labor, participating in Socially Responsible Investing, and using our investments to advocate progressive changes within those industries in which we invest.
Those of us who are able to rise to the level of employer or entrepreneur should make the concerted effort to respect their employees with fair compensation, good working conditions, etc. We should consider business models other than the conventional models (why not form co-ops?).
But I don’t believe that individual action is the entire solution. I do indeed believe that governmental action is a legitimate option.
Yes, I did mention the Law of Supply and Demand in my post–but not with any sort of approbation. I implied that the principle was another factor compounding problems for graduates in Jed’s scenario.
I am firmly opposed to what the late Pope John-Paul called “the idolatry of the market.†Too often we glamorize and romanticize the market. When we fall into idolatry of the market, we loose sight of the fact that free markets are simply a tool. No more, no less. It is an incredibly important tool, but still just a tool. And like any tool, there are limits to its usefulness. I have no problem with careful and well-informed restriction of “the market,†such as moderating the impact of the Law of Supply and Demand.
Maybe intervening in the Law of Supply and Demand by implementing a minimum wage (which, as Phillip pointed out, was intended to be a living wage) which is tied to the local community’s cost of living, as Phillip suggested, or linked to inflation, as Robert Reich has suggested, is the best way to improve the plight of the working poor. Maybe the best solution is a serious expansion of the EIC for the poor. Perhaps nationalized health care. Perhaps greatly strengthening the power of the unions so that they can effectively fight for their needs. There are many options we can debate. But first we need to recognize the moral imperative to change the current situation.
Jenni: I’d heard the claim that graduates were having more difficultly getting work, but I haven’t studied it enough to feel comfortable including it in my post. Thanks for bringing up Ehrenreich’s book!
Emily: Thanks for sharing your experience. Just another example of how our legislators in Utah are living in a paradigm not consistent with reality.
August 14th, 2006 at 7:33 am
Let help people fill their measure. Let help people survive, if they just want to survive or let help them fly if they want to fly. Let be sure people have work opportunities.