The output of the crisis undoubtedly requires innovative ideas and creative proposals . The proposal made Tuesday by Secretary General of CCOO, Ignacio Fernandez Toxo, is very interesting, except for one important nuance.
Fernández Toxo proposed to reduce working hours to create jobs. It is an idea which I've been talking a long time, since back in the late 90's, while working in the field of Internet, ICT, efficiency, e-Business, etc.., As many alumni will recall, spoke of "price efficiency" capital firms invest in technology to the detriment of human capital, the technology allows for efficiency (do more with less) and the concentration of GDP in advanced economies informational services (financial products, telecommunications, entertainment digital, etc.). to the detriment of physical products (manufacture of cars, furniture, etc.) has result in more advanced countries produce more (generate more revenue) with fewer people. The price of such efficiency is unemployment. Electronic banking allows banks to meet twice as many customers today than 15 years ago, with half of employees, the online ticketing and electronic invoicing have allowed airlines to cut staff, the RFID (radio frequency) that little to incorporate some food containers, cleaning products, etc. will eliminate the figure of the tellers and cashiers in supermarkets. As I mentioned in detail in "The last straw" a society becoming more efficient by the use of technology has to redefine working hours because otherwise there will be no work for everyone. People have to work 3 or 4 days a week, or better, only half a day. The effect on society and the economy may be very interesting: more time for leisure (new businesses), more time for family, friends (human relations) and higher quality work in companies (less fatigue, less boredom .) Toxo
this car is targeted to the division of labor, but with a "shade" not agree at all: that this reduction in working hours without a corresponding reduction in salary and the state should cover the difference.
what's not outweighed the union at the time of making this proposal, if it was his desire to realize their dream of a state-led economy-style communist, or if on the contrary has been their lack of economic knowledge.
I know that the dream of every professional union is that others will pay for the work he does not perform, but to extend this ideal to the whole society does not think that's exactly what this country needs, here and now. Pay us all for not working could be a nice slogan to stand for election or to increase the number of union members. But clearly is nonsense.
First, because the idea that the State must pay us for doing nothing (or do the right thing) is unfortunately becoming increasingly common, the prevailing culture of least resistance in a country modeled on characters that appear in the reality-show by the cinnamon and then live the story. That if you know how to ride! , Say many young people who yearn to become someone who lives without sticking a stick into the water. Carca I know that when I say dream, but we get excited by work, create, innovate and culture of effort, to find gratification in what it has cost us and assess the outcome of the effort. We say that the state pay for less work I think is going in the opposite direction to the ideal that we transmit.
Second, the proposal seems senseless Toxo after seeing (as I said in my post from yesterday), as is the case of government: does not hold water on all sides. Toxo While calling for the state pay people for not working, the IMF warned of the problems he was getting into Spain because of his fiscal policy: the drop in revenues and increased social spending can become choking finance State (deficit and debt), Spain can enter into a long recession if mortgage their future.
Another thing is that the government redefined the concept of unemployment benefits and for part of the resources for a new formula in place to pay the unemployed to do nothing, you pay a company to articulate formulas for "splitting" four jobs in five, compensating workers who surrender part of their working time to create new jobs.
Keep the salary of a person (artificially) working less, delves into the great current problem of the English economy: the productivity of firms.
productivity should be part of the negotiation of agreements. In an environment where we see the problems of competitiveness of English companies in comparison with German, French, etc., While receiving messages from different international economists say wages in Spain are out of step with respect to the production (approximately 25%), in a scenario in which the solution is a 25% reduction or increase wages by 25% the result (what we produce each person), it is counterproductive to continue demanding wage increases (by "agreement") of 2%. Especially when deflation in Spain is a fact (ie, reducing the wages of people or simply not increasing them, workers do not lose purchasing power). Collective agreements will give the lace finish the ailing competitiveness of companies in this country. Even a questionable entity of any suspicion as the Bank of Spain recognizes that the collective bargaining system is one of the culprits of the destruction of a million jobs.
Enrique de la Rica, School of Business ESEUNE (http://www.eseune.edu) Evolutionary Blog (http://eseune.blogspot.com) 
0 comments:
Post a Comment