Wages push increases profit slowdown fears

[stui magpie]

Since some people are bored with the talk about racism in cricket, lets talk Politics.

[member34258]

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/put-half-the-promised-tax-cuts-into-super-union-urges-government/2008/01/30/1201369229550.html

[stui magpie]

LOL,

Feel better now?

[Zakal]

I reckon its a bit hard to comment given the incredibly sustained run of profitability and success the country has enjoyed over the last decade or so.

The desire to get and retain quality long-term employees has seen business far more ready than any time in recent memory to, of largely their own volition, increase wages and improve working conditions of those good employees that they have.

I know its something we have done, increase the amount we pay considerably (percentage wise), cut back hours [sorry, just read over this again...cut back hours for salaried workers, so its a good thing, not a bad thing hehe] and introduced more "perks" for employees because we were just sick to death of employing incompetent morons. I think its pretty safe to say this has resulted in some increased productivity, and if not entirely justified by the bottom line, it is made up for in the decreased hassle of having a stable and content work force. (has positive effects on quality control as well).

Now this is something that a lot of businesses have found lately, and has occured largely without Union interference (has been absolutely no union involvement in our scenario).

But as i said at the outset, this is an experience from a period of sustained growth, and i wonder whether it would continue in a time of economic hardship. I half suspect that bottom-line constraints during those time periods would alter the balance of considerations that had previously made paying more etc a relative 'no-brainer'.

The employer instinct during a restrictive economic climate (where their profitability is affected) is to cut costs. Wages is one of the biggest costs in a lot of businesses, and it becomes the first target a lot of the time. Whether its cutting back the rate of pay (unusual) or simply cutting back the amount of staff.

The problems arise because there is a conflict between Employers and Employees as to who should bear the cost of the economic downturn. The Union movement has traditionally (perhaps not so much lately) tried its hardest at these times to hold firm on wages, which effectively forces the employer to bear the cost. Prior to that, employers would have past a vast majority of the costs onto the employees simply because they could.


I would like to think after the past decade, both employers and employees have matured enough to realise they must both share the costs of the downturn together, and if they dont, it will only make the hardship longer and more pronounced. Employers cant screw their employees to the wall to protect their margins...the economy sucks, profits will suffer...and Employees simply cannot rigidly sit on their "rights" to long-term detriment of everyone. If either side does that, everyone loses in the long run. Everyone has to contribute to 'smoothing' the economic cycle.

[HAL]

How do you know? What else we did increase the amount we pay percentage wise cut back hours and introduced perks for employees because we were sick to death of employing incompetent morons ?

[Zakal]

[HAL]

What subject would you like to talk about?

[member34258]

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/comments/0,22023,23171750-662,00.html

[slangman]

It's a bit rich for big business to ask for wage restraint in the wake of Allan Moss' $100m retirement payout.

No "...ism" is good.

The best we can hope for is the middle ground between Capitalism and Socialism.

Intersting times ahead.