经济学人下载:就业市场萧条 最低工资的意义何在?

The living wage
最低生活工资

Wage flaws
工资缺陷

Sense and nonsense about minimum wages
最低工资的意义何在

What unites Ed Miliband, the Labour leader; Boris Johnson, London’s Tory mayor; and Barclays Bank? All are keen on the “living wage”, the hourly rate needed to pay for the items people reckon they need for an acceptable standard of living. On November 5th researchers paid by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation uprated it to 7.45 pounds ($11.90). A separate calculation by GLA Economics, a research unit that advises Mr Johnson’s government, put the living wage in London at ￡8.55. Mr Miliband suggests naming and shaming those who pay less. Business folk warn darkly about the cost in lost jobs. Who is right?
是什么将工党领袖埃德·米利班德，纽约的保守市长鲍里斯·约翰逊以及巴克莱银行联系在一起呢？他们都对“最低工资”极感兴趣，每小时的工资应该足以支付人们认为的在一个合适的生活水平下应该拥有的东西。在11月5日，Joseph Rowntree基金会的调查者发现每小时工资提高到7.45英镑（约为11.90美元）。约翰逊政府的咨询机构——GLA经济研究协会做了一项独立的计算，得出伦敦的最低工资是7.45英镑。米利班德对那些小气的雇主冷嘲热讽，而商界人士则严肃警告说，员工失业对公司也会造成损失。孰对孰错？

A mandatory national minimum adult hourly wage of 3.60 pounds was introduced in April 1999, and has been regularly uprated since. In October it rose to 6.19 pounds. The wage floor seems not to have cost jobs. A 2010 paper by researchers at the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics found the long-run effect was either negligible or positive (ie, jobs increased). That finding is echoed in studies of minimum wages in America.
在1999年4月，强制实行成年人小时工资不低于3.6英镑的标准，到目前为止此项标准不断提高。到了10月就增加到每小时6.19英镑。薪资水平似乎还没导致失业。2010年，伦敦经济学院中心的一篇论文研究经济发现（最低工资）这一研究与美国的最低工资研究遥相呼应（即就业增加）。而这项研究在美国最低工资水平的研究中一直持续着。

Such results might seem puzzling. If the price of something is forced upwards, demand for it should fall. Why might this not be the case for low-paid workers? The answer is that firms find other ways to absorb higher wage costs. The simplest is to raise prices. Fast-food restaurants in New Jersey did so when the state’s minimum wage was raised in 1992, according to a landmark study by David Card and Alan Krueger of Princeton University. Firms may also skimp on non-wage benefits, trim the number of hours worked by low-paid staff, or cut other costs. Even the best-run firms can find savings when pushed.
这样的结果可能会令人费解。如果东西的价格被迫上升，那么他的需求将会下降。这样的情况难道不会难道不会出现在那些低工资者的身上么？答案是,公司将会寻找其他方式来减少高额的工资成本。最简单的就是提高价格。根据David Card和普林斯顿大学的Alan Krueger的一项里程碑式的研究显示，新泽西的快餐店在1992年国家的提出最低工资标准的时候就是这样做的。公司也可以克扣非工资福利，削减低薪工作人员工作时数以及其他的减少成本方式。运行得最好的公司甚至可以在强制的情况下找到解决的方式。

They may even find benefits. Turnover of low-paid staff often falls in places where minimum wages go up, reducing hiring costs. Higher wages might also make workers more productive. The theory of “efficiency wages” says that well-paying firms can induce staff to work harder by improving morale or by making it costlier for them to risk being sacked. The well-heeled firms that have signed up to the living wage report a better standard of work. Bosses in less cosy workplaces know this, too. A study of prostitution in Chicago found that pimps paid above-market wages to retain the best street workers.
他们甚至在其中有利可图。当最低工资上调时，低薪员工流通率也会同时上涨，这样将可以降低雇佣成本。而高工资也可能使得工人更有效率。“绩效工资”理论认为：高薪公司或可以激发员工士气，或使员工冒解雇之风险而投机牺牲代价变的更高，从而促使员工更努力工作。据报告显示，收入不错的企业都规规矩矩地执行最低工资标准，其工作质量都处于较高水平。而工作环境不怎么舒适的公司的老板都知道这一点。芝加哥的一项研究发现，老鸨们支付高于市场的薪水来留住最好的街头工作者。

These are comforting arguments for those who think firms should be cajoled into paying the living wage. They apply only up to a point. Efficiency-wage theory was devised to explain high unemployment. Wage floors in America are low by European standards. Britain’s minimum wage is carefully set to avoid demolishing jobs. When it was introduced it affected fewer than 2 million workers. But the national living wage is 20% higher, the London rate almost 40% higher. If applied to all those currently in work, they would raise the pay of around 5m employees. It is hard to believe that would have no effect on jobs.
对 那些认为公司应该被连哄带骗地支付最低生活工资来说，这些都是令人欣慰的参数。但是他们只用到了一个方面。效率工资理论被用来解释高失业率。美国的最低工资标准低于欧洲水平。英国的最低工资的设置是十分谨慎的，以防带来失业，受影响的人数应控制在200万之内。但是全国最低生活工资高出（实际水平 的）20%,伦敦率更是高出近40%。如果推广到所有的行业，约有500万人将会提高最低工资。那么，很难相信这对就业没有任何影响。

Indeed, large cuts in real wages help explain why the jobs market has hummed along in an otherwise sluggish economy. Employment growth has been stronger in low-paid industries—in shops, hotels, bars, office services and so on—than in higher-paid work. The law firms, banks and accountants who have embraced the living wage can afford it, as they employ few low-paid workers.
事实上,实际工资大削减有助于解释为什么就业市场在萧条的经济中仍高歌猛进。例如像商店、酒店、酒吧、办公服务，如此等等低收入行业往往比报酬更高的的工作的就业率要高。律师事务所、银行和会计等行业可以承受起最低工资标准，因此他们很少雇佣那些低薪劳动者。

A living wage implies a wage level that keeps up with prices, at least in part. But British workers have had to settle for a lower standard of living in recent years, because of a weaker pound, the rising cost of oil across the world and higher taxes. As a result, surprisingly few have lost their jobs. Brits, it seems, much prefer the hardship of low wages to the misery of no wages.
一个最低生活工资至少要与部分物价水平保持一致。然而，由于英镑疲软，世界范围内石油价格上升以及税收提高，英国工人最近几年不得不过着水平相对较低的生活。但是，令人惊讶的是，很少有人失去了工作。与没有工资相对比，收入低一点对英国人来说没什么关系。