business

Is Europe not working?

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

By Khaled Diab

The chair of a leading multinational claims that Europeans do not work hard enough and do not value work enough. I beg to differ.

7 May 2010

At a recent conference in Brussels, bigwigs from the political, business, trade union and academic worlds got together to discuss ways of boosting the performance and competitiveness of European industry. Amid talk of innovation, R&D, job creation and helping SMEs, one speaker caused a wave of uncomfortable murmurs to spread through the audience.

It was partly due to his aloof tone and partly his message which, though he did not say it explicitly, implied that Europeans were lazy and all too often spongers. Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, the chair of Nestlé's board, claimed that Europeans were not working hard enough and had lost their work ethic.

"We have the problem of the hours people are working. If you look at the hours per capita worked in Europe, they are substantially below the rest of the world," he explained.

Citing surveys which he said revealed that only a minority of Europeans believed hard work was a value to aspire to in contrast to a majority of Chinese, he claimed that Europe was facing a crisis of its work ethic and needed to pull itself up by its bootstraps. "Working smarter is not the solution for Europe. The only solution for Europe is working smarter and harder," he told his bewildered audience.

Of course, assuming that Brabeck-Letmathe practises what he preaches, this would be quite understandable considering that, as a top manager, he makes millions and so may feel he owes it to his shareholders to work long hours – and he can probably afford an army of helpers to take care of all the practical aspects of his life.

However, I'm not entirely convinced of the economic and social value of Brabeck-Letmathe's assertions. Do people in countries that clock up a lot of hours actually want to work so long, does it make them more productive, how does it affect their lives and impact their societies? For example, do workers in unregulated China want to spend most of their waking hours assembling cheap goods for export?

In the OECD, South Koreans work by far the longest hours, racking up a massive 2,300-plus hours a year per employee. So, what does this mean ? To demonstrate, allow me to introduce Lee, a civil servant at the South Korean ministry of agriculture and fisheries. He gets up at 5.30am, starts work at 8.30am and doesn't return home before 9.00pm, just in time to snore. In addition, he doesn't get to see his kids except at the weekend or on the three days of holidays he gets a year.

So, is Lee working these hours because he finds his job thrilling or he's a workaholic? No, it's because he feels insecure. "It's the culture. We always watch what the senior boss thinks of our behaviour. So it's very difficult to finish at a fixed time," he admits.

Moreover, is this the kind of existence we Europeans want for ourselves? After all, if we, as a society, wish to use the economic gains of recent decades to have more leisure time, then we are entitled to do so. In any case, economies cannot continue to grow ad infinitum.

But to go to the bottom line, based on Brabeck-Letmathe theory, you would expect that the Europeans putting in the longest hours would be doing pretty well for themselves. So, who are Europe's hardest workers? The Germans, I hear at the back? Perhaps the Swedes? No, it's the Greeks who put in more than 2,000 hours a year – and yet their country is in financial meltdown.

And Greece is a perfect illustration that it is not the quantity of the hours you put in that matter, but the quality. For example, Luxembourg and Norway generate about twice as much GDP per hour worked as Greece.

Those who wish to bash the European way of doing things often point out that Americans work considerably longer hours. But it is something of a paradox that, in the 1970s, the United States had a considerably higher standard of living than Europe, yet Americans worked fewer hours than Europeans. Today, the gap in living standards has narrowed considerably, yet Europeans on the whole work fewer hours.

However, even if Americans do put in the time, they don't make the most of this time compared with north-western Europeans. In fact, according to OECD figures for 2007, Luxembourg, Norway, Ireland, Belgium, the Netherlands, and France all had higher productivity than the United States.

Contrary to what Mr Nestlé suggests, in some parts of Europe, like Belgium, the problem isn't how hard an individual works but the number of people out of work. And this has quite a lot to do with the behaviour of multinationals. At first sight, European industry seems to be in trouble. And yet labour productivity in EU manufacturing rose by more than double the rate of overall productivity (46% against under 20% between 1995 and 2007).

And what happened during those good times? Millions of jobs in industry were cut or relocated to cheaper countries – which could lead workers to the conclusion that they are the victims of their own productivity. The same trend has started in services, too, with the outsourcing phenomenon. In addition, there are fears that the forthcoming recovery in Europe could be a jobless one.

Well, how can this be? Many companies, rather than employ more people, will try to extract more bang from each of their workers – Brabeck-Letmathe's famous work ethic in action. In fact, this is already happening: with the job axe hanging by a thread over the heads of millions of workers in all sectors, many people are putting in extra hours to save their jobs.

The current recession and economic crisis is likely to reverse the gains in work-life balance which Europeans worked so hard to secure. If that occurs, it will be a huge shame.

This article appeared in the Guardian newspaper's Comment is Free section on 3 May 2010. Read the full discussion here.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Post to Twitter Tweet This

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Related posts

Tips for survival

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

By Osama Diab

For many Egyptians, tip-based and street jobs are their only means of  survival.

21 October 2009

For 12 hours a day, seven days a week, Mohamed Ahmed sits in the bathroom of a Giza shisha bar handing out napkins to patrons. The job pays the teenager about LE900 a month, all of which comes from tips. It’s just enough to support his mother and four siblings. “I don’t like what I do, but I can’t find a job with a salary that pays even half what I make here,” says Ahmed.

Ahmed wasn’t always a bathroom attendant; he used to work in a brokerage office running errands, fixing drinks and cleaning. The job came with perks, like weekends, but he couldn’t feed his family on the LE250 monthly salary.

So he became one of a growing number of Egyptians forsaking the formal sector for better-paying, tip-based jobs, such as bathroom attendants and parking helpers.

While there are no reliable figures on the subject, experts say the numbers appear to be going up. Many blame the exodus on what they call the woefully outdated wage laws that govern Egypt’s formal economy (companies that pay taxes and register their workers in one way or another). Unchanged since 1984, the country’s minimum wage is LE35 a month, a number that has been made irrelevant by inflation. In the government, where employees are paid according to their educational level, the minimum monthly salary for a university graduate is LE108.

Even though no one actually makes that little, the law does not obligate employers to offer a decent wage, say experts. The outdated law and high unemployment — and, therefore, a large supply of eager workers — have conspired to keep wages down.

Official unemployment figures hover around 10% and are on the rise due to the economic downturn. Some academics say that the real unemployment rate could be as high as 40%.

Ahmed el-Sayed el-Naggar, an economist at the al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies, thinks the wage system in Egypt is one of the worst in the world. “It forces people to take bribes and steal because it’s impossible to live off one’s income,” he says.

There has been a push over the last two years to have the minimum wage raised. In late 2007, President Hosni Mubarak ordered officials at the National Council of Wages to come up with a new minimum.

el-Naggar, a union consultant at the time, was a central player in that effort — he authored a proposal to raise the minimum wage to between LE600 and LE800. “Even that is very low,” says el-Naggar. “But [workers] could not hope to get all their rights at once.”

The drive unraveled less than a year later. Facing the possibility of nationwide strikes, Mubarak raised wages for government workers by 30%. The government financed the outlay by increasing the price of petrol, which in turn fed inflation across the board.

Public uproar prompted a spooked Finance Ministry to abandon the plan to raise the minimum wage — officials worried it could trigger runaway inflation, says el-Naggar. “The Ministry of Finance decided to fund the 30% increase in wages in the worst possible way,” he says.

On the road

The migration of workers from the formal to the informal sector can been seen all over Cairo’s streets. Alia el-Mahdi, a professor of economics at Cairo University and author of several papers on Egypt’s informal economy, estimates approximately 300,000 vendors try to make a living on the capital’s congested roads.

And then there are ubiquituous sayes, the self-appointed parking attendants who direct drivers into spots around Cairo. They usually operate where parking is tricky — in front of office buildings, restaurants, cinemas and clubs. They often demand between LE2 and LE5, depending on the value of the parking spot. Some even give out tickets to make themselves look official. And their numbers, say drivers, are on the rise.

“They are more distracting than helpful,” says Laila Ashraf, a computer science student. “I give them money because it’s common practice, not because I think they deserve it,” she adds.

Experts say the trend speaks to a much larger problem in the Egyptian economy: the gulf between the rich and the poor.

Egypt’s economic reform plan, which really kicked off in 1994 with the formation of a new cabinet, does not seem to have done much to help the millions of unskilled workers here.

Between 2006 and 2008, the country’s GDP grew at least 7% annually, and despite the recent global economic crisis, growth figures remain positive. But that wealth remained in the hands of Egypt’s wealthiest, failing to trickle down to most people. In fact, a landmark study recently revealed that 90% of the country’s people were left out of the boom. Most tellingly, according to the UN Human Development Report 2007/2008, 43.9% of Egypt’s population still lives below the income poverty line (an outdated figure that puts poverty at less than $2 a day). In 1991, the figures were around 20%.

“The growth was more in the financial economy than the real productive economy,” explains El-Naggar. “The other thing is that growth is not real unless accompanied by social policies that improve the distribution of wealth through a fair waging system, a fair taxation system, and a fair subsidy system.”

el-Naggar says the minimum government wage for a university graduate of LE108 is only enough to buy 2.5 kilograms of meat. In contrast, in 1979, a graduates’ minimum wage was LE28, which would buy 35 kilograms of meat at the time.

“So even if we have growth, the upper class is in total control of the newly obtained wealth,” says el-Naggar, who believes there is room to raise the minimum wage. He thinks the government could fund the increase by raising the tax rate for the country’s higher income brackets.

In Egypt, there are only three tax brackets, with the highest starting at LE40,000 a year (LE 3,333 a month). In other words, citizens making LE40,000 pay the same rate as those who make hundreds of millions. According to el-Naggar, the fewer tax brackets, the more unequal the system is. Imposing higher rates on society’s richest is a conventional way to redistribute wealth, he says.

People in the highest income tax bands in the United States, China, the Netherlands and France pay 35%, 45%, 52% and 48% of their incomes, respectively. Meanwhile, in Egypt Law no. 91 of 2005 reduced the highest income tax band to only 20% from 42% as part of the government’s tax reform plan.

Sawy Culturewheel’s latest campaign 'La Faqr' (No Poverty) asks people not to give money on the street, the idea being to redirect those funds to fight poverty in more effective ways. Mohamed el-Sawy, the founder of Sawy Culturewheel, includes street vendors in his formula. “I can’t say begging is bad but selling is okay, because then they will pretend to sell anything while what they do is actually begging.”

Advocates for the poor say it is time for Egypt to re-examine an increase to the minimum wage law and move away from band-aid solutions to poverty. “We keep complaining that there are hundreds of thousands of beggars, but we are the ones who created them,” says el-Sawy. “I am convinced that Egypt is a rich nation that would be capable of taking care of its poor people.”

This article first appeared in the October 2009 issue of Business Today. Republished here with the author's permission. ©Osama Diab. All rights reserved.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Post to Twitter Tweet This

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Related posts

Revenge of the ‘baby doomers’

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

By Christian Nielsen

Could the disgruntled ‘baby doom’ generation turn on Europe’s baby boomers?

16 July 2009

“As the recession tightens across Europe, the young are hurting disproportionately,” Time magazine reported last week in its piece The broken hopes of a generation. Unemployment in Spain is around 17% – already high – but one in three of these are under 25.

Bankers have been blamed for the global recession, but in Spain blame is starting to fall on successive governments seduced by the boom times, and a seeping suspicion that joining the euro has lined the pockets of businesses and left young people – even very well educated ones – scraping for entry-level employment opportunities.

“The lack of decently paying jobs for young Europeans is one the continent’s great failings,” writes Time. In France, they have a term for this which translates literally as ‘young graduates’ (jeunes diplômés) but means so much more. It speaks of a generation of young people who, perhaps for the first time since World War II, may be worse off than their parents. It speaks of a generation that will have to live longer with their parents. Without jobs and with dwindling prospects of getting one, as employers increasingly look for proven track records, this generation is even unattractive to a contrite financial sector.

Spain has dubbed this disappointed generation the mileuristas apparently because they scrape by on a thousand euros a month. They have been chewed up and spat out by companies looking to avoid the country’s onerous employment laws, with few benefits and little protection now that the axe is falling.

In Greece, a similar phenomenon is called the “Generation 600” which, according to the The Wall Street Journal (In Greece, protests echo European students' ire) refers to the country’s national minimum wage of €600 a month. Germany calls them “Generation intern” because of the long spells of no- or low-paid jobs they are forced to take.

Turning on the baby boomers

Greece’s violent riots in December last year and Italian student protests – at their government’s unfavourable schools overhaul – are a palpable sign of things to come elsewhere where younger generations are starting to question a system set up by their ‘baby boomer’ parents who (they may well conclude) have sucked the planet dry for 50 years. Economic growth, asset creation, feathering nests… however you want to put it.

And don’t even get the youth started on the environment and how their erstwhile parents and grandparents have sat on their growing wealth (and hands) while the planet got sicker and sicker but the oldies’ bank accounts got healthier and healthier. At least the stock market (and pension fund) crash of 2008 set some of that straight, the young people may well conclude.

Don’t forget, it’s the same baby boomers who invented the pill and decided to breed by choice – fewer children means fewer future workers, which means less tax revenue, less money to pay for future pension schemes... The same baby boomers who are also hell-bent on living longer than ever – through medicine, genetic manipulation, what ever it takes – and the health and welfare systems of socialist countries in Europe will pay for it! (Read Promises of immortality.)

“ No problem, say the baby boomers, our health systems are strong enough for this right now and our nest eggs survived  the crash.”

But the deck is stacked... in their favour.

No problem for them. It’s the 40 year-olds and down – generation ‘baby doomers’ – who will have to pay tax for their parents’ comfortable (cruising the Caribbean) retirement, and stump up at the same time for their own superannuation in the expectation that most government pension schemes will probably be scrapped within 30 years anyway. And with financial markets faltering and crashing, private schemes are not a safe bet either.

The Economist had a great idea a few years ago to deal with this dearth of money and burdened pension schemes: it suggested granting baby boomers income tax-free status on everything they earned beyond the legal retirement age. Good idea, yes. But again the sliver set score big at the fruit machine.

Who knows, may be this problem will solve itself, as it looks like governments will expect baby doomers to work till 70, 80 or till they drop! Or perhaps growing automation will make most work redundant in the coming decades.

So, how is generation doom supposed to do all this, and be all things to everyone (model employees, positive parents) if their parents hold onto the jobs?

How is this generation to strive for better things, to put its all into an economic and social model created by their elders when the model now seems to be a one-size-fits-me (the parents)?

How can they trust that any decisions made on their behalf today will be any better suited to their needs in 30 or 40 years’ time?

They can’t. And when the penny drops, just watch it roll.

This article is published with the author's permission. © Copyright - Christian Nielsen. All rights reserved.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Post to Twitter Tweet This

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Related posts