FYI

<Picture:   ><Picture: Scoop - Headlines> 
 Column - New Zealand's Ageing Non-Workforce
Thursday, 29 July 1999, 9:25 am
Article: 

New Zealand's Ageing Non-Workforce
Keith Rankin's Thursday Column


Massey University History Professor David Thomson, in his Winter Lecture
(University of Auckland, 27 July), described a little-appreciated reality;
that people over 45 in New Zealand and other developed countries are less
likely to be doing paid work than ever before, despite becoming relatively
more numerous. As the age of eligibility for a public pension rises, the
average age of retirement continues to fall. People aged 45-64 can no longer
be regarded as the financial bedrock of our society. 

Twentieth century policymaking has been predicated on the assumption of
"full employment", which was taken to mean that around 95% of men aged 25-60
should be in regular paid employment of 20 hours or more per week. That high
employment consensus also came to mean that perhaps 90% of women aged 25-60,
excluding those caring for pre-school children, should be likewise employed.


The underlying assumption behind this expectation is that, if these
employment figures are not being achieved, then people are either unemployed
or are responding to perverse incentives to not work. Hence, the western
political consensus has been to focus on training workers who would
otherwise be structurally unemployed. And on removing any alleged incentives
to choose welfare over work. 

While the rhetoric of the welfare lifestyle has not explicitly focused on
the middle-aged, if there is any truth to that rhetoric, then that truth
must be taken to apply to them, for they are quite conspicuously doing less
paid work than society expects them to be doing. 

Since the adoption of a neoliberal policy framework in the 1980s the
assumption that a society made up of nuclear families would be able to make
long-term financial commitments on the basis of stable fulltime employment
income has actually intensified. Political leaders, from Jenny Shipley to
Tony Blair, see our problems in the 1990s as largely due to a diminishing
work ethic, and not to a fundamental change in the demand for labour. 

The reality is rather different from these mainstream perceptions. This new
reality has been both accentuated and retarded by neoliberal micro-reforms
(such as the 1991 Employment Contracts Act) and classical macroeconomic
policies (such as monetarist anti-inflation policies and the renewed
commitment to balancing the budget). 

"Retirement" for men in New Zealand and other comparable countries now
begins at age 45. From around 1980, there has been a significant increase in
the number of men and women over 45 who are not employed. 

The causes of this phenomenon appear to be two. 

First, there has been a casualisation of employment generally, which means
more individual contracts, and more short-term task-oriented contracts. This
is largely but not totally due to laws that treat the labour market just
like any commodity market. And it is due in large part to the loss of
influence of the trade unions that gave workers the bargaining power
required to create long duration jobs. 

The social imperative of maintaining stable full employment has been
replaced by a view that the market always knows best how to allocate scarce
resources, and that the "scarcity" of labour will ensure full employment.
People who believe that the market knows best believe that the lack of
employment for older persons is, in large part, due to excessive minimum
wages. We must infer that the free marketers expect 50-year-olds to work for
$5 per hour. That's hardly going to remove the problem of financial
insecurity that today's middle-aged citizens are facing. 
The second cause is technology. New technologies have created a number of
new employment opportunities (eg call centres). 

Further, it has often been middle-aged persons who have created businesses
that utilise information technology. Nevertheless, the more general truth is
that the rising productivity of labour, made possible by technological
change, has permanent and irreversible effects on employment. In particular,
technological change has made labour - even skilled labour - into a much
less important factor of production than it was in the heyday of
mass-production manufacturing. 

Ironically, the introduction of neoliberal economic reforms has slowed down
the growth of labour productivity (as a recent report by Wellington
economist Brian Philpott reveals), so in this sense, the loss of jobs
arising from raised productivity in New Zealand has been less than in many
other countries. New Zealand has suffered the trauma of labour market
decimation, but without getting the dividends that are apparent in countries
like Australia and Ireland. 
The challenge that David Thomson set his audience was to not necessarily
treat the end of the 35-40 year working lifespan as a negative. 

Neoliberal policies that create part-time impermanent McJobs (and casual,
poorly remunerated, self-employment for older workers) while concentrating
wealth into the bank accounts of the top five percent of income recipients
are socially damaging and need to be changed. 

Nevertheless, the bigger truth is that the labour market - the world of paid
work - is going to be a much less important part of modern capitalist
economies in the future. That is the logically necessary consequence of
long-run productivity growth. The challenge for older persons is to find
increasing fulfilment and contribution outside of the paid workforce. The
challenge to society is to ensure that 45-64 year-olds can continue to act
as our social bedrock despite their lesser participation in paid work. 

The proportion of national income paid out as wages and salaries is falling.
Various forms of property income are increasing as a share of the total.
Thus, the challenge for any developed economic society is to find ways of
distributing non-labour income much more equitably than it has been
distributed in the 1990s. 

We need to think of benefits as a form of property income - arising from
intangible public domain assets for which we are collectively responsible -
rather than as a transfer of labour incomes from the workforce to the
non-workforce. We need to think more about property, in all its forms, and
less about paid work and the work ethic. 
Our growing ranks of middle-aged non-workers are not going to have ready
access to private investment income to make good their lost labour income.
Hence, our initial focus has to be on the development of public property
rights and of payments to individuals on the basis of the commercial (eg
TVNZ) and public domain assets (eg the knowledge, culture, the environment,
legislation, institutions, roads, and the Internet) that we own
collectively. 

Our populations are ageing. Yet it is unlikely that all our diminished
supply of young people will be fully committed to paid work next century,
let alone our healthy older citizens. The challenge is to recognise that
increased labour productivity is a symptom of economic success, not of
economic failure. It means we can have more for less. 
We can achieve equitable social outcomes without having to have everyone
aged 25 to 70 in either fulltime paid work or childraising (or both). And we
can learn to give recognition to the important non-market contributions that
45-64 year-olds can and do make to their families, communities and
societies. 

ENDS 


Home Page | Headlines | Previous Story | Next Story 

Copyright (c) Scoop Media 

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL9907/S00136.htm

Reply via email to