New Report Warns Of "Unprecedented Wage Stagnation" In OECD Countries

A new, startling report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) warns that positive employment trends are at risk of being derailed by “unprecedented wage stagnation” affecting low-paid workers.

The OECD Employment Outlook 2018 stated the employment rate in developed economies averaged 61.7 percent at the end of 2017, the highest level since the global financial crisis. The employment rate is expected to reach 62.1 percent by the end of this year and 62.5 percent by late 2019 — that is if trade wars and quantitative tightening do not trigger a global slowdown.

While the employment trend appears excellent on the surface, the report cautioned wage growth, which is expanding only half as fast as a decade ago, remains “remarkably more sluggish” than before the great financial crisis.

A slowdown in wage growth by country

The report stressed income inequality has widened to unprecedented levels, which has developed into major structural issues for OECD economies.

Wage stagnation affects low-paid workers much more than those at the top: real labor incomes of the top 1 percent of earners have increased much faster than those of poor and middle class in recent years, reinforcing a long-standing trend seen in the U.S. (below):

Income inequality, in One Simple Chart

“This trend of wageless growth in the face of a rise in employment highlights the structural changes in our economies that the global crisis has deepened, and it underlines the urgent need for countries to help workers, especially the low-skilled,” said OECD Secretary-General Ángel Gurría, launching the report in Paris. “Well-targeted policy measures and closer collaboration with social partners are needed to help workers adapt to and benefit from a rapidly evolving world of work, in order to achieve inclusive growth.”

Spending by the bottom 95 percent has at best returned to the levels reached a decade ago in 2007 (NYTimes 2016)

The Paris-based research group suggested that several factors are contributing to the deterioration in wage growth:

“Low inflation and the major productivity slowdown have contributed to wage stagnation, as well as a rise in low-paying jobs. The Outlook notes a significant worsening in the average earnings for part-time workers relative to full-time workers. Declining coverage of unemployment benefits in many countries and persisting long-term unemployment may also have contributed. Fewer than one-in-three jobseekers receive unemployment benefits on average across the OECD, and the longer-term downward trend of benefit coverage has continued in many countries since the crisis,” said the report.

In June, the OECD released a report titled “Inequalities in household wealth across OECD countries,” which examined the distribution of household wealth across 28 countries and it discovered that America is the number one in the world for financial inequality. About 10 percent of the American households own 79 percent of all the wealth in the country. While the poor and middle class, which is about 60 percent of American households — only owns 2.4 percent of the country’s wealth.

The role of income and financial inequality reminds us exactly why President Trump was elected. Both OECD reports stress that OECD countries are at severe levels of economic inequality. While President Trump has unleashed financial propaganda touting the “greatest economy ever,” we caution that quantitative tightening and trade wars could usher in a global slowdown. If and when the next recession comes, it could be financial inequality that contributes to the rise in civil conflict among OECD countries. Buckle up, the ride is about to get rough.

Comments

DingleBarryObummer nmewn Sat, 07/14/2018 - 08:31 Permalink

First of all, it was a joke.  Relax, don't get triggered, TrumpFlake

So again, those who attack Trump are conflicted, rambling, idiots.

First he's a moron, get over it!!! Then he's a genius!.

More Binary over-simplified Idiocracy thinking

Everyone is lumped into the category of either being a #alwaysTrumper or #neverTrumper

Hate to break it to you but the world is more complicated than that

And, I am an Individual with Independent thoughts.  This forum used to be a lot of that, but it has devolved in the last couple years.

In reply to by nmewn

Free This rejected Sat, 07/14/2018 - 09:11 Permalink

I know you are probably referring to me, as I am (cough) "new" here, yet I am really incarnated. I was on here in 2009, got kicked off a few times, cause I broke the rules. That is my bad.

Free thought and expression are good things! Differing ideas actually educate, unless one posts pure gibberish. I am not saying you do that, to be clear.

In reply to by rejected

Free This DingleBarryObummer Sat, 07/14/2018 - 08:50 Permalink

Stand for something or fall for anything!

Trump may not be a conservative like me, but he is learning on the job.

If you don't vote, you throw away your rights and have no say.

I bet you don't vote? What would you have rather I voted for Shitery? C'mon, what's your game? I think for myself too sister, you don't have a copyright/trademark on that, mkay

In reply to by DingleBarryObummer

Free This DingleBarryObummer Sat, 07/14/2018 - 09:14 Permalink

I don't like big brother, just as much as you don't. However, why can you not see Trump is made from a different cloth than the satanists in DC?

Is it because he fratted with both sides? If so, then let me say this, in order to make money and get shit done, one has to frat with the enemy from time to time, it's business.

Now, I would rather not frat with the communists here, and the statists, thus I rail against both. Trump is neither.

In reply to by DingleBarryObummer

Things that go bump NoDebt Sat, 07/14/2018 - 13:03 Permalink

I had so much fun the day after the election. I trolled the comments section of a liberal women's magazine and detailed why I, a lifelong Democrat and a women, voted for Trump. They called me a traitor to my sex and a lot of other things. However, I was patient with them, and after I explained what an ad hominem attack was and why it meant that they had lost the debate as soon as they resorted to calling me an old cow instead using reasoned argument, we were able to have a discussion of sorts. They really wanted me to go away and leave them to grieve in peace, but they couldn't refute my reasoning and couldn't really defend Hillary in other than emotional terms. 

In reply to by NoDebt

Endgame Napoleon Hillary Poppins Sat, 07/14/2018 - 10:22 Permalink

Thanks for being honest, OECD. 

Now, let’s be even more honest, taking into consideration the impact of fake feminism on income inequality. 

Dual-high-earner households halve the size of the college-educated middle class, keeping two jobs with breadwinner wages and so-called “employer-provided” insurance——-which is undergirded by a $260-billion employer tax exclusion——under fewer roofs.

Assortative mates concentrate wealth from higher paying, salaried positions without taking risks to create jobs, while $9-per-hour NannyCam-surveilled baby-sitters, $10-per-hour daycare workers or elderly grandparents do the work of raising the dual earners’ kids. 

They are accommodated in doing this by LOTS of womb privilege in workplaces, particularly in the highly and openly discriminatory office jobs, dominated by moms. 

Some of the good-paying, salaried positions that dual-earner, “needs-the-job” parents occupy are high-skilled in obvious ways, like MDs. 

Some of the scarce, decent-paying, crony-parent jobs—-—i.e. the few full-time jobs with wages that will cover the cost of rent and all other basic bills on earned-only income———involve most of the same duties performed by much, much, much lower paid, non-absentee underlings during the ten, two-week, excused babyvacations that many crony parents at the top and the bottom of the wage scale take, in addition to PTO and pregnancy leave. 

During those stints of excused absenteeism, about half of their 98% mom underlings———secure in their “voted best for moms” jobs———take off, too, leaving the churn-able chumps to keep the numbers up to the same levels as when the momma manager is actually present.

Skilled v/s unskilled: dunno.

A few of them—very few—are fair and professional to the few non-mom cronies hired and retained. A few have good interpersonal skills. Many are just calculating, churning the hard workers who keep their sales generation and account-retention numbers up, praising them for awhile to keep them bumping up their numbers.

They are skiilled in using advanced software that does more and more of their work for them, making possible all of those vacations (for kids, so they say), but many low-paid employees can (and do) use those computer programs to perform many of the same duties.

After they get in their 10th babyvacation for the year, crony-parent managers churn the “non culture fits” who are, coincidentally, often the non-womb-productive employees who met the numbers every month, but without showing the proper enthusiasm during the baby-mommy-look-alike-bulletin-board-decorating contest or the Family Day parking lot picnic.

The preferred churning method is usually bullying out, strategically done to align with the rules for Unemployment Compensation. 

Except for one guy with a nice employer in an atypical entertainment job—and factory workers who are often laid off with formal pink slips that guarantee the benefit—all of the people that I have seen actually getting their UC benefits had unearned income streams, augmenting their earned income: child support that covers rent, spousal income, income from the military, etc.

With few exceptions, none of those getting their UC needed to cover unaffordable rent and all other household bills on one stream of earned-only income.

Unemployment Compensation is one of the things that temporarily reduces the access of womb-productive / welfare-eligible single-earner parents to free EBT groceries, free or subsidized rent, free monthly cash assistance and free electricity, but it has no impact on their up to $6,431 in yearly refundable child-tax-credit money from the US Treasury Department.

This is their biggest pay-per-birth pay booster. The progressive tax code ensures that the frequently absentee and above-firing mom in the cubicle next to you gets paid more than you. Her paycheck booster from the progressive tax code is a lot, compared to the earned-only income of her non-welfare-eligible / non-womb-productive, single-earner colleagues, especially in the many states where per-capita income is $20k or below. A $6,431 refundable child tax credit for maximum womb productivity is close to 1/3rd of yearly, full-time wages for millions of Americans.

If you are a non-welfare-eligible / non-womb-productive employee or a non-welfare-eligible single parent with kids over 18, you are screwed big time when you are churned in a job with no UC. You have nothing to cover rent and groceries between churn jobs, including during the lengthy period before you get your first low paycheck in a new churn job. 

You are NOT eligible for multiple streams of monthly welfare to cover your major household bills and bigly, refundable child tax credits to spend as you please. You are eligible for only a negligible amount of food assistance for 3 months every 3 years. It is not worth fooling with. Unlike the womb-productive citizens & noncitizens, you live on earned-only income from one stream, and you face rent that consumes more than half of your monthly pay.

But in hiring and in unemployment matters—in the fake-feminist era—all of the emphasis is on the womb-productive employees, the “women (that) we hire here who have somethin’ comin’ in” from spouses, ex spouses or monthly welfare and refundable child tax credits, making palatable the low pay and part-time hours that keep them under the very, very, very low income limits for womb-productivity-based welfare programs. 

During the period that single mommas are collecting it, UC counts as [unearned income] against their expenses at the Department of Human Services, reducing their eligibility for benefits for those months, albeit many single moms know how to maximize their benefits. “Working the system,” as the innocent working families call it, is all in manipulating the calendar dates. 

The USA also lets in 1.5 million new, legal immigrants each year, in addition to aiding and abetting umpteen-million illegal aliens, and while most of them do not collect UC, they often get free EBT groceries of $450 per month on average, cash assistance, subsidized housing and up to $6,431 in refundable child-tax-credit pay boosters. 

To get the monthly welfare, legal & illegal immigrants must stay under the income limits for the programs, submitting proof of [traceable] income, household expenses and US-born instant-citizen kids.

Since these are usually male-breadwinner households with instant-citizen US-born kids that qualify them for public assistance, the immigrants mostly undercut the wages of non-welfare-eligible, womb-less male citizens at the bottom of the income ladder, whereas welfare-buttressed single moms undercut the wages and job access of non-welfare-eligible, non-womb-productive, female citizens who do not have “somethin’ comin’ in.”

This is how fake feminism rolls: At the top and the bottom, it is all about the womb productivity. The labor market now revolves around the womb. 

In reply to by Hillary Poppins