|
Last Updated: Feb 13, 2017 - 1:45:37 AM |
 Government workers are lousy, lazy and dreadfully incompetent. They come
to work late, don't produce results of what you asked or paid them for
in a timely manner, plus they take 3 hour lunch breaks and then leave
work more than a half an hour before their scheduled knock off time.
Employees in the private sector want more money for doing nothing at
all. I mean, where do they think this is? Don't they see that I'm the
boss and I know it all? What work do you do around here?! How dare you
ask for more than $200 dollars a week? For what you do? Are you kidding
me? You want us to raise the minimum wage to what?!?
This is what you hear across the board when we talk about labour, work
and employment for The Bahamas. You hear the same cries even in America
and Canada. No doubt the calls are all the same across the Caribbean and
Latin America too. But, for the Caribbean's sake, is it all true? Or,
is it just misguided anger?
The most recent strike actions in early September from the Trade Union
Congress (TUC) and their related sub-unions has garnered some attention
from the local and international media. The courts granted an injunction
to the government to put a halt to this action that the government felt
was illegal, however the discontent was already in the air and certain
concerns were placed before the Bahamian people with regard to these
labour matters. Matters that will most likely be addressed, but at a
later date.
This strike action prompted this author to review an IMF Working Paper
read a few months ago. Published on July 1, 2014, the paper analysed
labour market issues in The Caribbean.
I must say from the rip that I'm not in favour of labour unions striking
on a whim. I'm not appreciative of their particular matters being
rejected totally out of hand either. I'm also not particularly agreeing
wholeheartedly with the IMF's Paper, even though the work produced gives
impetus to framing a separate debate and from that debate begging
particular questions to be asked and other matters to be raised.
My position on this entire affair, leaning from the work produced by the
IMF, is done strictly to bring to the attention of the public a
parallax position that may be seen as distorted or an aberration of the
original issue. But, a part of the issue it is, even though one may feel
it too distant or unrelated.
For instance, we're all not lazy loafs, unskilled and unprofessional and
choose to spend our time drinking rum, smoking marijuana and taking
days off because we can. And, on the other side, we are not mean,
maniacal and spiteful policy makers that want to hog up all of the money
for ourselves and leave the workers to eat cake like we do! This type
of language and sentiment is unhelpful.
In this spirit moving forward, the IMF paper went into great detail to
collect, collate and analyse data on labour market trends in the region.
Some data was more readily available, and others sparse or simply
unavailable. In either extreme case, the data was enough to extracta
rich amount of inferences from the data set and the subsequent
correlations it brought to the fore.
One theme that's prominent throughout the paper is: Employment
output-elasticity. Or, in other terms, the extent to which employed
persons' (hired workers or labourers) output (the amount, rate and level
they are productive based on how and what they produce) is
elastic/inelastic (negatively or positively responsive to external and
or internal determinants and/or shocks) to the extent to which it
impacts, or is impacted by, GDP and/or GDP growth determinants in the
macro-economic sense, or in the micro-economic sense, basic company
performance indicators: The bottom line and the inputs or variables that
affect the bottom line.
One thing that jumps out is the correlation of employment elasticity of
The Bahamas, being the lowest correlated point observed in the data
set with Jamaica being the highest. Directly speaking, with any change
in real growth through cyclical periods, Bahamian employment is least
likely to be impacted in any significant way.
This is a very interesting outcome from this study and says a great deal
about the Bahamian economy. For starters, it lends to the idea that we
are over-saturated with entrenched workers in many areas of our economy,
particularly the services and governmental sectors. A lack of
employment-skills dynamism and services diversification is and was
always a factor in Bahamian labour and employment dynamics.
This also gives the perception that it doesn't matter that if 1 person
is employed on a particular task, or 10: The same level of output will
be evidenced in our GDP estimates and other output and growth
indicators. Essentially, we are doing the very little we are expected to
do with an over-saturation of workers in those areas.
In Jamaica's case, it's the exact opposite. Which leads to another
interesting piece of information brought out by the Working Paper: The
distribution of elasticity of employment over time.
Without being too technical, the second method used is a regression
model over time to pin-point the rate at which growth and employment
were evidenced over time.
The policies that spurred these dynamics could not be explained in the
paper, but highlighting the lowest correlated over time in Jamaica and
the highest correlated over time in Trinidad and Tobago, the authors did
make mention of the Trinidadian government implementing employment
growth initiatives that were independent of regular cyclical periods.
Further to all of this, Caribbean countries that utilized their natural
resources, like Trinidad and Tobago, were seen as countries that were
able to control the dynamics of employment and employment output outside
of the regular business cycles and other related cyclical periods.
To further solidify this observation was that over the last decade, real
growth has been historically low, generating low employment growth.
During 2002–2012, average real growth ranges from 0.62 percent in the
Bahamas to 4.7 percent in Trinidad and Tobago.
The Bahamas has not utilized a great deal of its natural resources in a
nationalistic sense, while Trinidad and Tobago has. Neither has Barbados
(due to a lack of natural resources to exploit)to any large
extent but Jamaica to a larger degree, both countries being on the
sub-side of opposite ends of the spectrum.
While it has been reported that over the medium term real GDP growth is
projected over the entire country set, one must ask the question based
on this analysis is: Where will this growth be seen? Which sectors will
be at the lead of this growth? Also, based on the sectors identified for
growth, will this truly impact the labour market in a substantial way?
Knowing what we know now, removing constraints to innovation and
investment is also a policy recommendation for the region. This is key
to being able to open the doors of opportunity for development led
employment growth, but also keeping our citizenry employed with
worthwhile endeavours and in a sense, not going on labour strikes and
other forms of disruptive behaviour.
Whatever happens as a result of these factors, natural resources are
critical to impacting employment growth and managing employment
elasticity. In fact, this was the key inference suggested from the
paper.
Labour unions in services dominated countries must be cognizant,
particularly in non-resource rich and natural resource producing
countries, that labour input at the widest margins does not
significantly impact real GDP growth. And from this author's estimation,
an over-saturation of employees may harm growth if this study is
launched into another study that pinpoints the effects of labour and
employment saturation.
I must also caution that, over time, if counter-cyclical measures aren't
put in place to satisfy labour and employment demands, regardless of
the benefits negotiated through the various labour unions in conjunction
with the government, strikes and other work-related disruptions will
become more severe and protracted as the years progress.
Youri Aramin Kemp, is
President and CEO of "KEMP GLOBAL", a Management Consultancy firm, based
in the Bahamas which serves all markets. Our core competencies are:
Business and Project Planning and Design; Project Execution; Market
Researchn and Analysis; and Operations Development. Through our
affiliates, we offer Construction Services; Public Relations Services;
and IT and back office support to small and medium sized businesses.
Email: globalviewtoday@gmail.com
Disclaimer:
The views expressed here are solely those of the author in his/her
private capacity and do not in any way represent the views of
TheBahamasWeekly.com
© Copyright 2014 by thebahamasweekly.com
Top of Page
|
