- Job guarantee
The Job Guarantee (JG) is an
economic policy proposal aimed at providing a sustainable solution to the dual problems ofinflation andunemployment . Its aim is to createfull employment andprice stability . The economic policy stance currently dominant around the world uses unemployment as a policy tool to controlinflation ; when cost pressures rise, the standardmonetary policy carried out by the monetary authority (central bank ) tightensinterest rate s, creating a buffer stock of unemployed people, which reduces wage demands, and ultimately inflation.The JG proposal was conceived independently by Mitchell (1998) and Mosler (1997-98). It has since been developed further by authors, including Wray (1998) and a comprehensive treatment of it appears in Mitchell and Muysken (2008).
The JG is based on a buffer stock principle whereby the
public sector offers a fixed wage job to anyone willing and able to work thereby establishing and maintaining a buffer stock of employed workers. This buffer stock expands (declines) when private sector activity declines (expands), much like today's unemployed buffer stocks.The JG thus fulfils an absorption function to minimise the real costs associated with the flux of the private sector. When private sector
employment declines, public sector employment will automatically react and increase its payrolls. The nation always remains fully employed, with a changing mix between private and public sector employment. Since the JG wage is open to everyone, it will functionally become the nationalminimum wage . To avoid disturbing the private sector wage structure and to ensure the JG is consistent with price stability, the JG wage rate should probably be set at the current legal minimum wage.Under the JG, people of working age who are not in full-time education and have less than 35 hours per week of paid employment would be entitled to the balance of 35 hours paid employment, undertaking work of public benefit at the minimum wage. The aim is to replace unemployment and
underemployment with paid employment (up to the hours desired by workers), so that those who are at any point in time surplus to the requirements of the private sector (and mainstream public sector) can earn a reasonable living rather than suffer the indignity and insecurity of underemployment,poverty , andsocial exclusion .A range of
income support arrangements, including a generic work-tested benefit payment, would also be available to unemployed people, depending on their circumstances, as an initial subsistence income while arrangements are made to employ them. This would rarely be necessary once the system was well established, because in most circumstances JG jobs would be immediately available and offered instead of income support.The fixed JG wage provides an in-built inflation control mechanism. Mitchell (1998) called the ratio of JG employment to total employment the buffer employment ratio (BER). The BER conditions the overall rate of wage demands. When the BER is high, real wage demands will be correspondingly lower. If inflation exceeds the government’s announced target, tighter fiscal and monetary policy would be triggered to increase the BER, which entails workers transferring from the inflating sector to the fixed price JG sector. Ultimately this attenuates the inflation spiral. So instead of a buffer stock of unemployed being used to discipline the distributional struggle, the JG policy achieves this via compositional shifts in employment. The BER that results in stable inflation is called the non-accelerating-inflation-buffer employment ratio (NAIBER) (Mitchell 1998). It is a full employment steady state JG level, which is dependent on a range of factors including the path of the economy. There is an issue about the validity of an unchanging nominal anchor in an inflationary environment. The JG wage would be adjusted in line with productivity growth to avoid changing real relativities. Its viability as a nominal anchor relies on the fiscal authorities reigning in any private wage-price pressures.
The JG introduces no relative wage effects and the rising demand per se does not necessarily invoke inflationary pressures because by definition it is satisfying the net savings desire of the private sector (see Mitchell and Muysken, 2008 for more details). Additionally, in today’s demand constrained economies, firms are likely to increase capacity utilisation to meet the higher sales volumes. Given that the demand impulse is less than required in the NAIRU economy, it is clear that if there were any demand-pull inflation it would be lower under the JG. There are no new problems faced by employers who wish to hire labour to meet the higher sales levels. Any initial rise in demand will stimulate private sector employment growth while reducing JG employment and spending.However, these demand pressures are unlikely to lead to accelerating inflation while the JG pool contains workers employable by the private sector. While the JG policy frees wage bargaining from the general threat of unemployment, several factors offset this:
*In professional occupational markets, while any wait unemployment will discipline wage demands, demand pressures may eventually exhaust this stock and wage-price pressures may develop. With a strong and responsive tertiary education sector, skill bottlenecks can be avoided more readily than with an unemployed buffer stock;
*Private firms would still be required to train new workers in job-specific skills in the same way they would in a non-JG economy. However, JG workers are far more likely to have retained higher levels of skill than those who are forced to succumb to lengthy spells of unemployment. This changes the bargaining environment rather significantly because firms now have reduced hiring costs. Previously, the same firms would have lowered their hiring standards and provided on-the-job training and vestibule training in tight labour markets. The JG policy thus reduces the "hysteretic inertia" embodied in the long-term unemployed and allows for a smoother private sector expansion;
*With high long-term unemployment, the excess supply of labour poses a very weak threat to wage bargaining, compared to a JG environment (Mitchell, 1998).A crucial point is that the JG does not rely on the government spending at market prices and then exploiting multipliers to achieve full employment which characterises traditional
Keynesian pump-priming.The JG seeks to reorient labour market policy away from the current OECD emphasis on full employability whereby governments engage in programs to prepare the unemployed for work without guaranteeing that work will be available towards a focus on creating enough work.
The
full employability agenda has come under fire from a number of sources in recent years (see, for example ILO, 2004). There are now several countries which have implemented direct job creation schemes to counter the major problems associated with persistent unemployment. For example, the Argentine government introduced the Jefes de Hogar program in 2001 to combat the social malaise that followed the financial crisis in that year. Similarly, the Indian Government has recently introduced the five-year plan called the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGS) to bridge the vast rural-urban income disparities inequality that have emerged as India’s information technology service sector has boomed. Finally, the South African government has introduced the Expanded Public Works Program (EPWP) to overcome the extremely high unemployment and accompanying poverty in that country. The programs run against the full employability tide because they recognise that the solution to joblessness and the poverty that this brings is in the provision of employment opportunities rather than a focus on the victims. They also recognise that the Government (Federal down to local) have a major role to play in providing for employment guarantees.External links
* [http://e1.newcastle.edu.au/coffee/ Centre of Full Employment and Equity]
References
*
International Labour Organisation (ILO) (2004). "Macroeconomic policy for growth and employment." Committee on Employment and Social Policy, Governing Body, 291st Session. Geneva: International Labour Office.
*W.F. Mitchell (1998). "he Buffer Stock Employment Model - Full Employment without a NAIRU," "Journal of Economic Issues " 32(2), 547-55.
*W.F. Mitchell and J. Muysken (2008). "Full Employment Abandoned: Shifting Sands and Policy failures,". Edward Elgar:Cheltenham .
*W.B. Mosler (1997-98). "Full Employment and Price Stability," "Journal of Post Keynesian Economics ", 20(2), 167-182.
*R. Wray (1998). "Understanding Modern Money: The Key to Full Employment and Price Stability". Edward Elgar: Northampton, MA.
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.