Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Letter to the Editor: Daily's Living Wage editorial uses questionable labor demand logic

Published: Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Updated: Thursday, November 11, 2010 00:11

One must be very careful when invoking logic as an authority to justify an argument. Unlike our everyday conceptions of it, logic never operates on its own; it is always already grounded by taken for granted assumptions, unscrutinized principles, and internalized sets of knowledge. What we assume to be logical might be an insufficiently examined common sense. The Daily's editorial falls into this problem when making its claims on the living wage campaign.

One of The Daily's main arguments is rising wages will logically cause unemployment. This is only "logical" if we assume an unmediated inverse correlation between wages and employment and fixed profit rates. Yet the ratio between wages and profits is not fixed, it's an expression of multiple institutional and political conditions. Wages can go up, profits can go down and no one may be fired. It depends on the profit margins of the contractors and we can assume that they usually have high profit margins.

Considering that the demand for labor is fixed (students, academics and administrative personnel require the same services), the contractors have several options in case of firing workers: finding technological solution to compensate for the lost labor, prolonging work hours for the remaining workers, intensifying their labor or having lower standards of service.

It's administration's task to monitor the quality of services, if the contractor commits to labor standards in line with labor law, human rights and dignity. It's also LWC's task to monitor if the administration and the contractors fulfill their commitments.

One can find many businesses in the U.S. and around the world where the workers earned higher share of the value they produced (higher wages) without losing their jobs when they are organized enough. That's why as they used to say in the good old days, balance of class power is one of the critical factors determining the wage levels. Contrary to what neoclassical economics have taught us as "logical" over the last three decades, labor relations are not the expressions of neutrally and naturally functioning market forces, they are the terrains of political struggles. And at Northwestern, the name of that political struggle is Living Wage Campaign!

—Mert Arslanalp

Political Science Graduate Student

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

9 comments

ex-Union
Wed Nov 17 2010 09:03
Ummm -- not sure if you were ever in a Union -- I've been in three different Unions since 1970. In reality - the Unions did gain higher wages - however - Unions had very little actual power over the corporations. In all 3 Unions - jobs were cut - to cut salaries - they "surplused" the whole department - opened a "new" department - with lower wages. There was no such thing as "job security". If the corporation wanted to fire workers - they fired workers. If they wanted to cut wages - they cut wages. U.S. Corporations are the highest taxed in the USA - so - when they see China & India with lower taxes, regulation, wages -- they can't resist the move overseas. If you want to compete with China & India - then pay Chinese wages, charge lower taxes & delete the regulations - then - you can compete with these countries.
Dagny
Sat Nov 13 2010 23:25
some of your points are valid, but they are also over stated a little. For example saying demand for services is fixed. Yes in some sense demand is fixed students still need food made and dorms cleaned, but how often do they need that. I guess it might fall under your category of standards of service, but when labor is cheap it may well be worth it to hire a cleaning lady to come by every day to clean the dorms, but would anyone really notice if that was cut to every other day, or every third day (i don't know how often they actually do it, but the point is the same.) I don't know how heavily technologised the food service at northwestern is. It may be that they gone as far as they can go, and they need all the staff they have right now, but i suspect not.

Well it is certainly true that labor can make more or less money depending on how organized they are that doesn't mean they aren't costing/creating jobs. If an industry is very profitable more people will look to join it creating more jobs, or they might not. Autoworkers are a good example. America has lost a huge number of automaking jobs because the industry is no longer attracting in the US given the huge salaries demanded by the union. Those who still have jobs are living large, but those who might have gotten a job, if a plant had opened up near them given lower labor costs, they may not be doing so well. Not many people got fired because of the salaries demanded by the unions, but that doesn't mean that the salaries haven't taken away jobs.

Non-Sympathetic
Fri Nov 12 2010 10:40
Mert - you should have gone into Economics. The bottom line is - don't bite the hand that feeds you - however small portions. They will soon be feeding others instead. This is all contractual - if the workers strike - they get fired. If they complain - it falls on deaf ears. They don't like their lot - apply elsehwere. Sorry - but - the minute you start costing an organization money - you become a liability. I survived Northwestern by not costing them any money - not one red cent. So - when you learn that lesson - then you would have grown up some - but - for you - I hold out -- very little hope.
Anonymous
Fri Nov 12 2010 09:23
The Living Wage Campaign disdains to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the university administration and Sodexho tremble at the Living Wage Campaign. The NU Cuisine employees have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win.

Food service workers of all dining halls, c-stores, and Norris, unite!

Anonymous
Fri Nov 12 2010 09:14
After having his letter published, Political Science grad student Mert lights a cigarette and leans back in his chair. Having singlehandedly proven the entire field of economics a pathetic farce using anti-logical rhetoric, he whispers to himself, "10/10." He smirks maliciously, and takes a long, luxurious drag.
Illogical
Fri Nov 12 2010 08:00
Logic ?? You mean to tell me this world is logical !! You're kidding - aren't you ?!
Anonymous
Thu Nov 11 2010 12:01
SOLIDARITY
Ralks
Thu Nov 11 2010 04:06
"It's administration's task to monitor the quality of services, if the contractor commits to labor standards in line with labor law, human rights and dignity" In case you haven't noticed, Mert, the first two of these are unquestionably met; the third means such different things to different people that it basically opens Pandora's Box. Then again, this could be the political struggle you reference.

"One can find many businesses in the U.S. and around the world where the workers earned higher share of the value they produced (higher wages) without losing their jobs when they are organized enough." Another fundamental difference- I'm not necessarily sure that we want to say that the workers and the workers alone produce value. Say, for example, the worker makes me a MTO pizza in one of the dorms. While their labor was somewhat instrumental, they did not produce or purchase the dough and ingredients for the pizza, the oven they cooked it in, and the entire dining hall in which they work. I think there are a lot of people here who see this sorta share of production the same way. It's not that the worker does nothing- it's just that he/she is not the sole producer, like in your view of the world.

Anonymous
Thu Nov 11 2010 03:07
Wow, you'll make a great fiscally liberal politician someday (not a compliment).

By the way, I love how you begin by railing against assumptions based on relatively straightforward economic models then write, "We can assume that they [contractors] usually have high profit margins."

Between your flippant, unsubstantiated comments and the (admittedly) imperfect yet instructive economic models, I'll stick with the "logical" economics.







log out