[skhunted]

There is no need to make a case. They have the right to strike. In general though one should support workers when they seek higher wages since the pay has increased at a much lower rate than productivity the last 40 years or so. Enough wealth has been extracted from labor. It’s time to give labor its due.

[seizethecheese]

I just looked up FRED data on productivity and total compensation (including benefits) and they look roughly in line. Actually, compensation seems to have gone up faster.

To be honest, this comment reads like a political campaign statement, and I’d like less of this on Hacker News.

[skhunted]

To be honest, this comment reads like a political campaign statement, and I’d like less of this on Hacker News.

To be honest this comment reads like a statement from someone who can’t dispassionately discuss something. The validity of what I wrote is independent of the motivation for writing it.

[seizethecheese]

I was reacting to this: “Enough wealth has been extracted from labor. It’s time to give labor its due.” It sounds like a campaign speech.

[skhunted]

https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

This next paper is funny. Notices the decoupling and tries to hand wave it away without explaining why there was no decoupling before the 80s. At any rate note that the graph is from FRED.

https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2023/03/when-comparing-wages...

[ethbr1]

The FRED blog discussion makes an interesting point about whether deflators are calculated from import or export prices changes (or both), and the effects it has on the analysis.

Reminder of how difficult it is to make real-terms adjustments to economic measures over multiple decades spans when a country's balance of trade with the world in different sectors is also changing!

[skhunted]

Notice though that the FRED blog post does not explain away the discrepancy but merely mitigates it a bit. Note the decoupling still starts in the 70s. The great wealth disparity that exists today started at the same time. I don’t believe this is a coincidence.

[ethbr1]

"A bit" is imprecise for the adjustment. I'd say more than a bit.

It also suggests that if you dice it up by sector you might get different amounts of decoupling, which makes logical sense given productivity gains aren't equally spread.

[skhunted]

Sure. But in general there was no decoupling prior to 1970 and there is now decoupling. There has been wealth extraction from labor. That it is more prominent in some sectors than others is not too relevant in my opinion.

[seizethecheese]

The link is absurd. The productivity data is for everyone while the wage data is for a subset of data. If you look at compensation for everyone against productivity it tells a different story

[0xdde]

Can you post your comparison?

[whatever1]

Can you share the links because from what I see the federal minimum wage is stagnant for decades.

[seizethecheese]

Search FRED employment cost index.

The federal minimum wage is irrelevant. Something like one percent of workers make federal minimum wage. It’s a good political talking point though…

[whatever1]

The annual raises seem to be in the order of 2-3% [1]. Inflation is also in the same order [2].

I am asking you again to show me convincing numbers.

[1]https://www.bls.gov/eci/home.htm

[2] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FPCPITOTLZGUSA

[skhunted]

Yes, let’s ignore the million plus workers getting minimum wage. A wage that hasn’t increased in a very long time. It’s not a political talking point; it’s a moral talking point.

[s1artibartfast]

If you want to make a minimum wage argument, you have to look at total receipts and benefits.

For better or worse, we have opted for a systems where much of the receipts for low income works flow directly from the government. A minimum wage worker qualifies for free healthcare, food subsidies, and greatly subsidized housing if they can navigate the waitlist.

[JumpCrisscross]

> the million plus workers getting minimum wage

Neither of you have a point. Median wages have lagged productivity growth. But most Americans don’t earn the minimum wage.

[skhunted]

We should ignore that a million plus people are working for minimum wage. They don’t count. I agree with you.

It’s better to say that the statistics aren’t changed much by increasing the federal minimum wage as it pertains to the productivity/pay gap. But one should acknowledge that for those making minimum wage it is a disgrace that it hasn’t increased for a long time and that it is far too low. Those people do matter. This isn’t just a discussion about statistics. There is a human element to the issue and morality is part of what one ought to consider when thinking about the issue.

EDIT: I edited my comment while you were responding. The discussion in the present thread is not about the dockworkers. It’s about the pay/productivity gap in the U.S. In that discussion a person said that minimum wage workers were irrelevant and that the minimum wage was just a political talking point.

[seizethecheese]

Average compensation has not lagged productivity growth. Maybe median has? Maybe only some subset?

Longshoreman make well above median wage.

[seizethecheese]

This argument shifted the goal posts. First, it was about compensation in general against productivity. now it’s about minimum wage workers, who comprise 1% of the workforce ? What is the productivity change of minimum wage workers? (I actually don’t know.)

[whatever1]

You are the one shifting the goal posts.

We are pointing out that the salaries are stagnant or getting worse over time (e.g. min wage) in real money terms. We show you that the inflation is same or higher than the annual wage raises, while the GDP is still growing (GDP growth is already adjusted for inflation).

So someone is benefiting from the GDP growth, but this someone is not the W2-worker. But you don't want to admit the facts.

[HDThoreaun]

Less than 1% of workers are on federal minimum wage.

[lotsofpulp]

What if the workers are opposing automation?

[JumpCrisscross]

> What if the workers are opposing automation?

The union is demanding “a total ban on the automation of cranes, gates and moving containers in the loading and unloading of freight” [1].

That said! They are negotiating. This is their opening ask. If they stick to it, fuck them. But maybe they can permit modernisation alongside a pay raise.

[1] https://apnews.com/article/longshoremen-strike-ports-pay-con...

[zifpanachr23]

Workers have a right to oppose automation and strike over it if they so choose.

[JumpCrisscross]

> Workers have a right to oppose automation and strike over it if they so choose

Workers have a right to strike. But there should be room, at the same port, for trying a more-efficient approach.

The management of this unionised workforce shouldn’t have a choice. But this union’s members shouldn’t have dictatorial power over our Eastern seaboard’s port infrastructure.

(Also, I have the right to demand a personal battleship. Not everything one has the right to do is reasonable.)

[talldayo]

> But there should be room, at the same port, for trying a more-efficient approach.

I'll gladly steelman the opposite idea. If you're running a McDonalds and you fire half your employees to replace them with burger-flipping robots, you damn well better expect the cashier to quit or go on strike. People aren't that stupid - they can see the Looney-Tunes ACME anvil suspended over their heads, they know when they have to negotiate themselves off the red painted 'X'.

Similarly, I think introducing automation to a historically-human career like longshoring is absolutely an all-or-nothing shtick. You're either displacing your human workers entirely with unpaid alternatives, or you're dealing with the consequences of a partially human workforce. There is no magic compromise, despite what management wants. You either acquiesce or replace them with robo-scabs.

[lotsofpulp]

Longshoring has had numerous technological advancement over centuries that have resulted in fewer workers being needed.

Far, far, fewer longshoreman are accomplishing magnitudes more work than longshoremen a few generations ago.

[refurb]

Sure they have the right. But the bigger question is - is it a net benefit for society to do so?

[skhunted]

Would that we ask if it is a net benefit for society that so much wealth extraction from labor has occurred the last 40 years.

[ethbr1]

We shouldn't right wrongs by deliberately capping economic efficiency, especially in sectors that are foundational to the rest of the economy (e.g. maritime trade and energy).

[skhunted]

Indeed. And we shouldn’t ask if it is in society’s best interest only when the discussion is about benefits for labor.

[throwawa14223]

And the rest of society has a right to bypass and work around them.

[HDThoreaun]

And society has a right to ignore people who want to make it worse.