Of workers and employers (part 1)

Every time prices of basic commodities escalate workers begin to ask for wage adjustments. This is an expected consequence. When the buying power of peso is reduced food items on workers' tables are also reduced. Quality of life suffers a set back, and the workers, already poor by current standard, become even poorer.

To demands of salary increases the usual reaction of employers is negative. This is expected too. The bigger the payroll money the less profitable is business. Yet agreements can be reached if both workers and employers would be willing to give concessions here and there and arrive at a mutually beneficial arrangement. But since this is not happening the government has to step in, thus the much-maligned wage boards have been created. And here the tug-of-war takes place.

Laborers cannot understand why employers are squeamish about wage increase. Or perhaps they do, but cause-oriented groups are doing a good job to mislead them. No wonder these groups keep on harping about labor exploitation and on their perceived evils of what they call "comprador" economy.

The truth is that increasing wages is not a guarantee against a depleted peso. If wages are increased one immediate effect is inflation. More money in circulation drives up the prices of commodities, and of course whatever increase a worker receives is totally absorbed by more expensive goods. Another effect is a slow down in business activities and a paucity in foreign investments both of which make jobs difficult to find.

Because jobs are a rarity some members of families become economically dependent, and those who have jobs are forced to support the jobless. So where's the salary increase? These developments give way to an economic downtrend which has a cyclic impact: Less jobs available reduces consumption; with reduced consumption business has no other recourse but to close shop, thereby throwing more workers to the streets, and so on.

The ideal situation is for workers and employers to come together and agree on non-inflationary and business-friendly measures to minimize the effects of higher cost of living. Among such approaches, as proposed recently by the government, is the availment of non-compensation benefits such as tax exemption, provision for low-cost housing, creation of a scholarship system for workers' children, and others.

The beauty of these strategies is that the financial exposure of employers is minimal, gradual and in fact income-generating. A private company, for example, which would like to embark on a housing project for its employees can arrange for a bank loan. This can be amortized by employees through minimal salary deductions, minimal especially if done in tandem with PAG-IBIG or other non-profit agencies. The result: High morale for employees, high productivity, and consequently, higher profit for the company.

A scholarship system can also be arranged for the children of employees. There are schools which grant big discounts for cash payments as well as for a large group of entrants. With cheaper school expense workers' children can finish college - and who would not be happy about this? Happy employees are of course productive and productive employees make businessmen happy. It's a win-win approach actually.

Unfortunately, very few employers are willing to go into non-wage benefits for their workers. One drawback is the intransigence of the laborers themselves because of constant urging for wage increase from militant organizations and labor leaders themselves. For these leaders the higher the workers' pay the higher is their unions' take in terms of workers' contributions, and the fatter of course are their pocketbooks.

Another drawback is the lack of social conscience on the part of the workers and the employers themselves. Perhaps, because of excessive democratic orientation, each group has a fetish on their rights and are only faintly conscious of their obligations. If only they go strong on what they can do for society and demand less from it, things in the labor front would be different.

Workers with such wholesome conscience are described by Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical Rerum Novarum as those who are bound "fully and faithfully to perform the work which has been freely and equitably agreed upon; never to injure the property, nor to outrage the person of an employer; never to resort to violence in declaring their own cause, nor to engage in riot or disorder, and to have nothing to do with men of evil principles, who work upon the people with artful promises of great results "

And what of the employers' responsibilities? (We shall treat these in later issue)