How Long Can Workers
Tread Water?
By EDUARDO PORTER
James Barnes, a $350-a-week guard at an office building on
Madison Avenue in Midtown Manhattan, has not had a raise in years. But
his income just jumped sharply: Three months ago, he took on a
newspaper delivery route from 3 a.m. to 7 a.m., which pulls in an extra
$235 a week.
Mr. Barnes fits snugly into the pattern of America's current
economic expansion. The wages of typical workers are treading water,
growing roughly at the same rate that inflation eats into their buying
power. Last week, the Labor Department reported that average wages for
production and nonsupervisory workers in the private sector, about 75
percent of the labor force, reached $16.06 an hour in June, just 2.7
percent above the level a year ago.
Yet in terms of the aggregate effect on the total economy,
that statistic does not seem to matter much. Workers' wages may be
barely keeping up, but Americans' average incomes are growing briskly -
in part, because of growth in the overall number of jobs, including Mr.
Barnes's extra one. But it also reflects other forms of income, flowing
mostly to the more affluent, which are fueling the consumer spending
that has provided a crucial pillar of support for economic growth over
the last three years.
"You have a lower half of the wage distribution in the
United States that has not experienced any income gains for a long time
now," said Barry P. Bosworth, an economist at the liberal-leaning
Brookings Institution. "But from a macro perspective this doesn't have
much impact."
Even as the average worker's wages are stuck in neutral,
corporate profits, professionals' incomes, gains from investments and
executive compensation - the kind that frequently comes in the form of
stock options - are all surging, supporting healthy gains in the
economy.
"Profit has roughly doubled in the last year on revenue
growth of about 40 percent," said Alex Mann, co-owner of Clicktime.com,
a company in San Francisco that sells time-sheet applications over the
Internet. "The top-line growth was very satisfying. There's been very
strong growth in the amount left for compensation of the owners and for
profits."
To be sure, income growth has slowed from its torrid pace -
year-on-year growth of real disposable income decelerated to 3.7
percent in the first quarter of 2005, from 4.7 percent in the fourth
quarter of 2004, which enjoyed a jolt from Microsoft's $3 billion
dividend payout.
But that is still plenty strong enough to support
substantial output growth, which is expected to advance about 3.5
percent this year, after accounting for inflation. The income gains
have been powerful enough to overcome the headwind of surging oil
prices, which have pushed gasoline to over $2.25 a gallon.
Surging incomes are also helping the federal government
reduce the budget deficit. Federal tax receipts in the first nine
months of the current fiscal year, which began last October, reached
$1.6 trillion, 15 percent more than in the fiscal 2004 period.
And there are scant signs that spending is on the wane. Mr.
Mann just bought an iPod. With the prospect of more take-home pay, even
Mr. Barnes joined the shopping crowds, spending his income-tax refund
on a secondhand Dodge Caravan minivan. "It's good because I enjoy it,"
Mr. Barnes said, "but I need it for my second job."
Last month, retailers recorded the most robust sales
increases in more than a year. Wal-Mart Stores reported that sales grew
4.5 percent at stores open at least a year, the fastest in 13 months;
over all, its sales were up 11 percent. Moving to the upscale end,
sales at Neiman Marcus increased more than 9 percent.
Similar jumps at Target and J. C. Penney prompted the
companies to raise quarterly profit forecasts.
The skewed nature of the income growth comes as little
surprise to most economists. Reeling from collapsing profits,
businesses emerged from the economy's slump in 2001 with a pronounced
aversion to part with money, instituting spending and hiring freezes
and keeping them in place even as demand recovered.
These cost controls helped propel a burst of productivity
growth and profitability. Corporate profits jumped 35 percent from 2002
to 2004, as increases in revenue dropped unhindered to companies'
bottom lines. Income from workers' compensation, including wages and
benefits, grew 9.5 percent.
In the first quarter of 2005 profits grew a further 15
percent, compared with the period last year, twice the pace of
compensation for employees. And what growth there has been in
compensation for workers has mostly concentrated at the top. At the
bottom end, income growth has mainly come from an increase in
employment - not better wages.
Robert E. Mellman, an economist at J. P. Morgan, noted that
the jumps recorded in wage income in the last quarter of 2004 and the
first quarter of this year were principally from a flurry of exercised
stock options. "It was profit-related pay, a symptom of high profits,"
Mr. Mellman said.
This skewed pattern of income growth readjusted the
distribution of the national pie. After falling to a trough of 8.5
percent in 2001, corporate profits' share of national income soared to
12.3 percent in the first quarter of this year, the highest level since
the mid-1960's. The share of income accruing to workers' compensation,
on the other hand, fell from 66.2 percent in 2001 to 63.9 percent in
the first quarter of 2005.
Yet there are signs that the squeeze on labor might be
easing as unemployment has fallen to 5 percent and the job market has
tightened, nudging the pendulum back in workers' favor and giving them
a chance to claw back some income gains. "At the margin, labor could do
a little better," Mr. Mellman said.
In its latest survey on compensation trends, the consultant
Hewitt Associates found that companies' budgets for salary increases
for nonexecutive workers should grow slightly this year, after four
years of decline. Only 1 percent of companies plan to maintain salary
freezes this year, from 8 percent two years ago.
And according to a study by Elise Gould, an economist at the
Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning research institute in
Washington, jobs in higher-wage industries are growing faster than jobs
in low-wage businesses for the first time since the summer of 2001.
Workers themselves are more optimistic about their job
prospects than they have been for some time.
In June, the University of Michigan's consumer sentiment
index showed a 12-point jump in confidence among families earning less
than $50,000 a year, the biggest jump in at least three years. The
percentage of consumers saying jobs are "plentiful" in the survey rose
to the same level as those saying jobs were "hard to get" for the first
time since 2002.
Yet this peppering of data notwithstanding, economists are
not too sanguine about the immediate prospects for income growth on the
bottom rungs of the wage scale. "The job market is slowly tightening,"
said Jared Bernstein, a labor economist at the Economic Policy
Institute. "We are wringing out the slack. But we're only six months
into a process that could take a year and a half."
At local 32BJ of the Service Employees International Union -
which covers janitors and other building workers in several Northeast
states - the president, Mike Fishman, is not optimistic either. "In our
industry we don't see any pressure on wages going up," he said. "Nobody
is rushing to the table with money."
With increasing competition from cheap labor in poor
countries, falling unemployment in the United States is not giving
American workers much leverage to increase their slice of the income
pie, said Robert J. Barbera of ITG/Hoenig in Rye Brook, N.Y. "I expect
labor's share to still be under pressure," he said.
But that might not matter, macroeconomically speaking. Mr.
Bosworth at Brookings noted that there was no evidence that incomes at
the bottom of the distribution must grow to keep spending afloat. "The
rich are willing to consume," he said.
And, Mr. Barbera pointed out, across the broad range of
variables that underpin economic growth, "it doesn't get any better."
|