Labor Economics – Page 93 – artdiamondblog.com

54 Year-Old Auto Worker Writes Three Novels After Taking Voluntary Buyout

Source of graphic: online version of the NYT article cited below.

(p. 1) TALK to Kenneth Doolittle about General Motors, where he once supervised a team of assembly line workers, and he readily speaks with pride about his job and the self-esteem it provided. “I loved all of it — the people, the work,” he says. “I was in a position finally where people listened to me when I spoke. I wasn’t just a Joe-Nobody. I contributed.”

Talk to Mr. Doolittle a little longer and he gradually describes why he decided to take a buyout from G.M. — joining more than 80,000 Big Three employees in the largest exodus of workers from a single American industry in decades.

. . .

The exodus that Mr. Doolittle is joining is voluntary. Some have changed their minds. More than 3,000 workers who signed up over the last year to leave Ford and G.M. subsequently decided to stay. These are, after all, the highest-paying blue-collar jobs left in America. Even so, workers are departing from the auto industry en masse, escaping — as they put it in interviews — increasingly difficult working conditions at companies they fear will desert them.

. . .

(p. 9) When G.M. decided to close his plant in 2005, Mr. Doolittle’s seniority gave him every right to transfer to a much newer factory right next door, where G.M. is building a popular Cadillac sedan and is likely to do so for as long as Mr. Doolittle might have wanted a job. But he balked because of the change in stature that would accompany the switch.

Since his departure last year, he has struggled to occupy his time. Divorced, with four grown children, he divides his days between an apartment in Lansing and a trailer parked on a small lakefront plot that he owns north of the city. He has typed out on a laptop three novels “about my life experience.” And to make up some of his lost income — his $36,000 pension is 60 percent of his old pay — he works 20 hours a week, at $10 an hour, doing maintenance at Sears stores.

“That is just enough to keep me from watching Jerry Springer every day,” he said. “I don’t want to sit in front of a TV; I’m too young for that.”

. . .

Across America, more than 30 million people have been forced out of jobs since the early 1980s, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports, and regaining lost incomes has not been easy. Nearly 50 million new jobs have been created over that same period, according to the bureau, so there are always new opportunities but more often than not at lower pay. Among those who have lost work, only a third held new jobs two years later that paid as well as those that were lost, according to the bureau’s surveys of displaced workers. Another third of those displaced were in jobs that paid, on average, 15 to 20 percent less than their previous employment — while the final third had dropped out of the labor force entirely.

The Census Bureau reported a jump in net migration out of Michigan last year: some 42,300 people left, up from 29,700 in 2005. That was far and away the largest outflow from the state since 1984, during the Rust Belt crisis, census data show. . . .

. . .

The exodus is reminiscent of the Dust Bowl migration from the prairie states in the 1930s, when unemployed farmers gave up and trekked west to California. The Dust Bowl migration, on its face, was much more brutal — the number of displaced Okies, as they were called, was far greater than the current number of departing auto workers, and there were not corporate and public subsidies at the time to soften the hardship.

“The Okies did not know whether they would get to their destination before they starved to death,” said Daniel Luria, an economist at the Michigan Manufacturing Technology Center. “The labor market prospects for the auto workers are not good, but they have assets. They are not in danger of immediately falling into poverty.”

For the full story, see:

UCHITELLE, LOUIS . "The End of the Line as They Know It." The New York Times, Section 3 (Sun., April 1, 2007): 1, 9, & 10.

(Note: ellipses added.)

Novelist Kenneth Doolittle. Source of photo: screen capture from online version of the NYT article cited above.

The Safety Net in Europe and the United States

Source of graphic: online version of the NYT article cited below.

FROM issues of crime and punishment to the proper domain of the spiritual and temporal powers, Americans and Europeans have long cast a skeptical eye at one another across the Atlantic.

Perhaps nowhere has the gaze been more jaundiced than in the area of work. From the perspective of Western Europe, American employers have a relatively free hand to hire and fire, coupled with meager and short-lived unemployment benefits. America’s deregulated labor markets seem to provide hardly any safety net when it comes to economic dislocations of workers.

Americans, by contrast, have found it hard to resist a touch of schadenfreude at the joblessness stoked by European governments’ intervention in labor markets, with rules on everything from wages to layoffs, on top of generous unemployment benefits.

For the full commentary, see:

EDUARDO PORTER. "Economic View; A Bridge Over the Atlantic, in Labor Policy." The New York Times, Section 3 (Sun., April 1, 2007): 5.

Internet Increases Labor’s Options

A "local" Phoenix talk show host, Joe Crummey, broadcasts from his home in California. Source of photo: online version of the NYT article cited below.

The Internet is sometimes viewed as labor’s enemy because it reduces the cost of outsourcing. But it goes both ways: labor can offer its services to a wider world because of the Internet.

LOS ANGELES, March 27 — When people hear the radio host Joe Crummey on Phoenix’s popular KFYI murmur sarcastically, “We don’t have enough human rights activists in this town,” they know he means Phoenix.

Ditto for when he offers to assess the “east side west side traffic right now.”

As it turns out, Mr. Crummey, whose favorite talk show topics include immigration, patriotism and Arizona politics, is indeed reporting for duty in the valley. Just not in the Phoenix Valley.

Rather, it is here, in the San Fernando Valley, where he works via the Internet from his home on the top of a hill in the Studio City section of Los Angeles. Listeners in Phoenix are none the wiser.

Armed with four computers, a digital recorder, a constant stream of Fox News and a professional microphone, Mr. Crummey holds court for three hours each weekday during Phoenix’s drive-home time slot — from about 400 miles away in a neighboring state.

For the full story, see:

JENNIFER STEINHAUER. "Live, From Station KFYI in …Well, That’s Complicated." The New York Times (Weds., March 28, 2007): A11.

Google Hires “Interesting” “Geniuses” & Provides Them a Workplace Where Interesting Geniuses Want to Be

A break lounge at Google’s Manhattan offices. Source of photo: online version of the NYT article cited below.

You could be forgiven for not knowing that a satellite Google campus is growing in downtown Manhattan. There is no Google sign on the building, and it’s hard to catch a glimpse of a Googler, as employees call themselves, on the street because the company gives them every reason to stay within its candy-colored walls.

From lava lamps to abacuses to cork coffee tables, the offices may as well be a Montessori school conceived to cater to the needs of future science-project winners.

. . .

“These are power geniuses,” said Jane Risen, a statuesque brunette who works in training for the sales staff and is considered among the best dressed on campus — she was wearing a brown blazer from the Gap. “If they don’t have the same social skill or style sense, they’re extremely interesting people or else they don’t get hired.”

. . .

The strategy of keeping employees happy and committed to spending endless hours on campus seems to be working. Richard Burdon, 37, an engineer who joined Google two years ago, has been staying past midnight to prepare for the introduction of a project. (Google’s Manhattan engineers have been responsible for developing Google Maps and are working on some 100 other projects.)

“Google is about as interesting as starting your own startup because you can really follow your own ideas,” said Mr. Burdon, who previously worked for Goldman Sachs, Sony and I.B.M. The only time he could remember leaving the office during the workday was to buy a friend a birthday present.

For the full story, see:

DEBORAH SCHOENEMAN. "Can Google Come Out to Play?" The New York Times (December 31, 2006).

(Note: ellipses added.)

Work and non-work at Google’s Manhattan offices. Source of photos: online version of the NYT article cited above.

The Peril of Being a Bald Economist

Source of graphic: online version of the WSJ article cited below.

‘The term ‘income inequality’ is a bit misleading because it suggests in a somewhat pejorative way that the rich are getting richer at the expense of the poor," Edward Lazear, a Stanford University labor economist who is now chairman of Mr. Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers, said last May. While it’s a concern that some people are being left behind, he said, "There is some good news…most of the inequality reflects an increase in returns to ‘investing in skills.’"

Mr. Lazear has nurtured his relationship with Mr. Bush. His office is decorated with photos of the two mountain biking. When he gave Mr. Bush a copy of the Economic Report of the President this year, Mr. Bush gave him a bear hug and kissed the top of his bald head, according to people who were present.

For the full story, see:

GREG IP and JOHN D. MCKINNON. "THE OUTLOOK; Bush Reorients Rhetoric, Acknowledges Income Gap." The Wall Street Journal (Mon., March 26, 2007): A2.

Source of graphic: online version of the WSJ article cited above.

More Retirees Choosing to Become Entrepreneurs

Call them silver entrepreneurs or senior entrepreneurs or third-age entrepreneurs. They are people who do not want — or are not financially able — to idle away their retirement years and, instead, opt to start a business.

. . .

The numbers of retired people rejecting the unfettered leisure that has been the American model since the 1940’s in favor of starting up a small business are not exact. Federal government data suggests there are now at least three million entrepreneurs who are 55 and over — up one-third from the number counted in 2000.

”It’s like this sea swell that has been under the radar,” said Linda Wiener, the aging issues expert for Monster.com, the jobs search Web site. ”There are people who don’t want to work an hourly job, and are wondering what are they going to do for the next 30 years?”

A majority of 800 workers surveyed last year for the John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University indicated in their responses that traditional retirement was obsolete. Two-thirds expect to work after 55, and about 15 percent wanted to start their own business after they retired, the survey found.

For the full story, see:

Elizabeth Olson. "Small Business; In Life’s Second Act, Some Take On A New Role: Entrepreneur." The New York Times (Thurs., September 28, 2006): C6.

(Note: ellipsis added.)

Beautiful Downtown Burbank, Runs Amok

Cultural history background for the young: at the beginning of every installment of the "Rowan and Martin Laugh-In" TV comedy review (circa 1968-1973), someone would sarcastically intone that the show was being broadcast from "beautiful downtown Burbank."

Excerpted below is Daniel Pink’s incredible conversation with a Burbank city clerk:

(p. 199) What led me to this 100,000-person city in California’s San Fernando Valley—past the fish fountains, to the steps of City Hall—was a rumor I’d heard that Burbank puts free agents in jail.

. . .

(p. 200) After fifteen minutes of probing, here’s the gist of what he tells me: If I want to write from a home office in Burbank, I first must apply for a home occupation license. The city would examine my application, and then come to my house to inspect the office from which I intended to work. Once the inspector deemed my home office safe for writing and unthreatening to my neighbors, I could begin earning a living, my workplace now officially blessed by the city.

But that was only the beginning. I’d have to pay a special tax. And I’d have to abide by the strictures of Burbank Municipal Code Section 31-672—which, among other things, said: My office couldn’t be larger than four hundred square feet or 20 percent of my home’s square footage. I couldn’t put my home office in a "garage, carport, or any other area required or designated for the parking of vehicles." The only "materials, equipment, and/or tools" I could use to do my work were things used by "a normal household." I couldn’t use my home office to repair cars, sell guns, or operate a kennel. And the only folks who could ever work with me in the office were people who lived with me.

That last provision alarmed me.

Pointing to Section 31-672(c), I ask, "Does this mean I can’t have a meeting at my house?"

"Yep," says the clerk. "You’d have to somewhere else."

"Let me get this straight," I say. "Let’s say I’m a writer collaborating on a screenplay. If my collaborator comes over and we work on the screenplay together, that’s against the law? It’s a misdemeanor to have a meeting at your house?"

"Yep," says the clerk.

"Isn’t California a ‘three strikes and you’re out’ state?"

"Yep."

Burbank, we we have a problem. I hope it’s unlikely that a free agent who has three meetings at her house, and gets caught, prosecuted, and convicted each time, goes to jail for the rest of her life. But the mere possibility reflects a wider problem with America’s legal, policy, and tax regimes. They were built for a (p. 201) work world that has largely disappeared, and are ill equipped for the new world that has arrived.

Source:

Pink, Daniel H. Free Agent Nation: How America’s New Independent Workers Are Transforming the Way We Live. New York: Warner Business Books, 2001.

(Note: italics in original; ellipsis added.)

Why Starbucks Coffee is a Bargain

(p. 161) These coffee places, most of which didn’t even exist ten years ago, had several virtues. They were always in convenient locations. They permitted, even welcomed, patrons to sit and talk for several hours. And they had tables for spreading out my materials and electrical outlets for plugging in my equipment. In short, they provided a four-hour office rental for the price of a three-dollar latte.

. . .

(p. 162) Starbucks and its caffeinated cousins are part of what I call the free agent infrastructure. The components of this infrastructure, which I’ll review in a moment, include copy shops, office supply superstores, bookstore cafés, overnight delivery services, executive suites, and the Internet. Like America’s system of federal highways, the free agent infrastructures form the physical foundation on which the economy operates. But unlike the federal highway system, which was planned and paid for by the government, this infrastructure emerged more or less spontaneously. Like so many other aspects of Free Agent Nation, it is self-organized. Nobody is in charge of it. That’s why it woks. It works so well, in fact, that few people realize that this collection of commercial Establishments even constitutes an infrastructure.

Source:

Pink, Daniel H. Free Agent Nation: How America’s New Independent Workers Are Transforming the Way We Live. New York: Warner Business Books, 2001.

Should Netscape Be Viewed as a Failed Company, or as a Successful Project?

(p. 53) Recall the story of Netscape, once the darling of the New Economy. Netscape was formed in 1994. It went public in 1995. And by 1999, it was gone, purchased by America Online and subsumed into AOL’s operation. Life span: four years. Half-life: two years. Was Netscape a company—or was it really a project? Does the distinction even matter? What matters most is that this short-lived entity put several products on the market, prompted established companies (notably Microsoft) to shift strategies, and (p. 54) equipped a few thousand individuals with experience, wealth, and connections that they could bring to their next project.

And Netscape is not alone. A University of Texas study found that between 1970 and 1992, the half-life of Texas businesses shrank by 50 percent. Likewise, a Federal Reserve analysis of New York companies found that the type of firm that created the most new jobs (microbusineses with fewer than ten employees) often had the shortest life span. The life cycle of companies has been that jobs, too, have diminishing half-lives. Ten years ago, nobody ever heard of a Web developer. Ten years from now, nobody may remember Web developers.

Most important, at the very moment the longevity of companies is shrinking, the longevity of individuals is expanding. Unlike Americans in the twentieth century, most of us today can expect to outlive just about any organization for which we work. It’s hard to imagine a lifelong job at an organization whose lifetime will be shorter–often much shorter–than your own.

Source:

Pink, Daniel H. Free Agent Nation: How America’s New Independent Workers Are Transforming the Way We Live. New York: Warner Business Books, 2001.

“Free Agent Nation” Still Rings True

Source of book image: http://g-ec2.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/10/ae/8ca3d250fca0f5b077de4010.L.jpg

Daniel Pink’s 2001 Free Agent Nation has been on my to-read list since it first came out. It finally made it to the top—at least in the author-abridged two-cassette incarnation.

I always found the basic idea appealing: the appeal of the freedom of working for yourself—Harry Browne’s How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World, but for real.

But I also was a little anxious; fearful that the book would place too much emphasis on seeming flash-in-the-pan dot.com labor market phenomena and rhetoric.

To my relief, I can report that little in the book depends on the dot.com over-exuberance. The internet appears, as an infrastructure enabler, but the free agents are mainly doing more standard stuff, but doing it from a home office, and doing it project-by-project.

Pink is not an academic, which has pros and cons. One of the pros is that his prose is pleasant. Another is that he has an ear for a good story and a telling example. Perhaps a con is that he often hasn’t had the time, or the interest, (or maybe the data just don’t exist) to often follow-up with how widespread his examples are.

Still there’s some good stuff here. Like suggesting that free agency is what you would expect more of us to pursue, as we work our way up Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs. (In college I was enthused enough about Maslow that I was thinking of minoring in psychology, until they told me how many hours I would have to run rats through mazes before I’d be allowed to open a Maslow book.)

And there’s plausible discussion about how in some ways free agency is more secure than a regular job (multiple clients means diversification). And there is more freedom to control your own time, and be your authentic self.

There’s also some good discussion of how the government makes free agency harder through health care and taxation policies.

All-in-all, this book helps make the case that labor can thrive in a Schumpeterian world of creative destruction.

Reference to the book:

Pink, Daniel H. Free Agent Nation: How America’s New Independent Workers Are Transforming the Way We Live. New York: Warner Business Books, 2001.

Under Capitalism, the “Innately Conscientious” Usually Earn More

In the excerpt below, the WSJ summarizes an article that appeared in Forbes on March 12, 2007. The summarized study implies that those who are innately conscientious end up being rewarded with higher income. I hope it is true. My guess is that the world comes closer to working that way under capitalist institutions, than under other economic systems. (Note that this study was done by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, which implies that we’re talking about what happens in the United States.)

The insight originates in 1979, when the Bureau of Labor Statistics paid 12,700 young people $50 to take a range of tests, one of which required a simple code to be deciphered. The BLS has since surveyed the test takers regularly. Going through the data, Carmit Segal, a postdoctoral fellow at Harvard Business School, found a strong relationship between someone’s score in the coding test and his or her income over 20 years later, even taking into account differences in IQ.

Ms. Segal argues those who did well on the test were driven entirely by an innate conscientiousness, because candidates had nothing to gain from doing well on it.

For the full story, see:

"The Informed Reader; Workplace; Job Test That Predicts Effort Gets Help From Professors." The Wall Street Journal (Mon., February 26, 2007): B6.

(Note: the online version has a different subtitle: "A Tricky Test Could Reveal Job Applicants’ Work Ethic")