Pajamas Media

22 Comments

Why not mention the current unemployment rate in France? Might it not have something to do with the required 25 days paid vacation? They certainly seems like it would drive up the cost of employing the average worker to me.

I’d rather have a job with little paid vacation than no job at all in a system that requires 25 paid days off..

Mr. Sawicky doesn’t address the increased cost of employing someone in France, and the impact that has on opportunities for the least skilled workers. I’d like to see someone educated on the facts talk about that a bit.

Thoughts?

While I agree with the basic premise that the French are hard working, I disagree that productivity is higher than in the US.

In local currency (OECD data), the US productivity rate (measured as GDP/hour) is higher; 42.9 vs. 40.1. I don’t know what the table in the article shows.

However, the growth rate in productivity is higher in France than the US and much higher in Germany than either the US or France.

That is interesting, Duncan!

The growth rate of productivity is higher. Hmm..

I suppose that this could be indicative of our higher starting point? Not sure.

My knee jerk reaction would be to say that we’ve already been growing it as fast as possible all along, and they have been weighed down by their nanny-state economics, so they should be growing in productivity quicker than us as they start to rethink and change some of those nanny-state policies.

But I’ll be the first to admit my ignorance of those facts, so I only put that up for people to shoot down.

Still interested in hearing the cost of employment in these states that demand things like required paid days off.. Any takers?

Let’s do the math with the numbers presented.

The French work week is 35 hrs.
The French work year is 46 weeks.
The French “productivity” is $49.00

35 * 46 = 1610 * 49 = $78,890 per worker.

The US work week is 40 hrs.
The US work year is 50 weeks.
The US “productivity” is $48.30

40 * 50 = 2000 * 48.3 = $96,600 per worker.

I’m dubious. If cross-Atlantic productivity is roughly equivalent, then why are living standards so much higher in the U.S.? Why do people in 46 of our 50 states live better from their labor than the average European?

Some possiblities come to mind:

1. In Europe, some small group is benefiting disproportionately from the labor of others, leaving the rest exploited and impoverished. Since Europeans claim to have built a system that makes that impossible, we’ll let it pass.

2. Much of Europe’s productivity, as measured by GNP figures, does little to help and perhaps even harms living standards. An obviously example would be EU regulations that generate quite a bit of economic activity (by regulators and those who carry out their mandate), but that do nothing or may even lower living standards.

There’s also the unemployment issue. If the French are so productive in a real sense rather than simply an artifact of GNP numbrs, they should be finding markets and putting more and more people to work. That doesn’t seem to be happening.

http://www.eurotrib.com/story/2007/5/4/113029/9034

seems we have not the same way of counting unemployment rates

Nomad,

If everything is so great in France, and there is no need for “reform”, as your linked author suggested, then why did the “reform” candidate just win the election? The reform candidate, that is, who promised such supposed evils as less power for unions, and lower taxes..

Help me understand why the French think they need such reforms, when obviously they do not and everything is just great…

I am confused…

I’m going to deal with the unemployment rate in a separate post. Very short preview: it is higher in France, but the gap is exaggerated. There is a problem integrating the less-skilled into the economy.

Nomad — nice link. Here’s another.

Mike P — depends on how you define living standards. If it’s just GDP, we’re back to the problem I talk about — the trade-off between money income and leisure.

Bryan — France’s productivity is broadly shared thru their Big Gov.

Dell — If you check the tables under my OECD link, you’ll see that the growth rates of productivity for a number of Euro countries are much higher since 1970 (as far back as the tables go). The numbers even surprised me. It could be because they started lower, since they had to rebuild after WWII. Whatever the reason, it’s quite possible they could continue. At this point, you can hardly call them laggards.

Del Simmons, we still need some reforms, but not so radical as the reaganesque or thatcheresque ones

plus, we are tied to EU for legislation and policy, so I expect Sarko will keep the EU cap, if he wants to stay credible in EU instances and play a role there

So what’s your point, Max? Are you honestly saying you want the U.S. government to mandate how many days off businesses must provide their employees? That’s pretty cool. Can you throw in a longer lunch hour, too? I’d appreciate it. Is a nanny-state that provides you with a few more days off your dream, or something? It would appear the French weren’t happy enough with their extra days off to elect the hard-line socialist that would enable those practices to continue. Maybe living in a country that tells you how much you can or cannot work is not as rainbowish as it sounds, eh? People like you with short-sighted theories about how great it would be if the government had more control need to ask yourself the following: how is it that the U.S. has been, and remains, such an economic superpower? It’s the free market, baby! It’s a natural stimulant for productivity and creativity. Want to put a stop to both of those… implement some governmental control. Sounds like a great idea!

Economists will often tell you that raising the minimum wage above a certain level, or granting general employment benefits over a certain point, results in a net loss of total employment.

This is because there are many jobs whose value may be exceeded by the wage being charged to do them. At some point, employers will choose to do it themselves, leave it undone, or invest in a mechanized solution and do away with the expensive employee and his benefits.

The result is that the least employable individuals end up chronically unemployed and total unemployment rates go way up. Meanwhile, the remaining employed population shows big gains in productivity measures: partially because of the increased investment in automation, but mostly because the missing low skilled workers no longer pull down the average.

This is France and French total productivity. I am not sure this is a good thing. Are you?

hehe, one is questionning how happy your at work :

http://www.conference-board.org/utilities/pressDetail.cfm?press_ID=3075

rhinoishere–

Yeah, Sarkozy’s a real “reformer”, a real “shot in the arm”. The French people have voted for “change”. Whatever. The dude’s been in the French government forever, for quite a long time as the most powerful domestic politician, so I’m not sure what to say about the narrative about “change”. When a country votes for the incumbent party, this is a little unusual, to say the least. Even more unusual when he’s basically the chosen successor to the incumbent. Wouldn’t it make more sense to say the French were looking for “more of the same” and a Royal victory would have been the mandate for “change”??

Even more surpring is the idea that this vote was about “economic reforms”. Read Sarkozy’s own platform. So this great thatcheresque figures main economic policy is….wait for it…wait for it…to allow for tax-free overtime! Explain to me exactly how people who voted for THIS voted for anything like what you seem to be suggesting (basically, the same old stuff, turn France into the USA, blah, blah).

The sad truth is that it was Sarkozy’s law and order bullshit that probably won the day for him, and he knows it.

You don’t seem to understand economics very much. France is in serious trouble and this past election shows even the French finally understand. 50% of all jobs in France are “make-work” jobs. If you take that into account, the “productivity” of the French workers who actually work is sky-high!

People who don’t understand numbers should not write news stories that depend upon an understanding of numbers.

Let’s not use France vs L’Etats Unis to argue about validity of numbers.
Let’s use Norway vs the USA.
Norway at 64 and the USA at 48. Holy smokes, those Norwegians are 33% more productive than us lazy gringos.
Until you take into account the amount of oil that Norway extracts and exports on a per capita basis.

well, kobblok got it a little, no, Sarko, ever, will not make a revolution, he is not a dictator, as a mayor and deputee in a Paris quater, we never heard he ’s been doing extravagances there ! so this man is from France upper-class (alike most our IVe republique politicians), in that way, it is a symptom of back moving, but in comparison with S Royal, I still think the left was not ready for the power, they were not coherent on their program, the person who should had represent the party…

But, I had like that the left makes its revolution, and forget all about the glorious communist ideal times for elevating the working-class, and realize they are over, they ‘d better get informed on what is going on the planet, and try to follow the progress which arises everywhere

From where I sit, it does seem that Sarkozy has a bit of a mandate to noodle around with labor market regulations, but I am not a France expert. As I said and others have noted, Sarko didn’t campaign on reducing paid vacation. Ex ante, more flexibility could look appealing. After the fact, perhaps not so much. We’ll see how far he tries to go.

The numbers on productivity do not require one to be a France expert, however. They are straightforward. I provided sources. I don’t know of any source for M. Silvay’s comment about ‘make-work’ jobs. Sounds like merde to me.

It’s true an oil-producing country’s resource rents will show up in GDP and productivity, but there are other countries on the list with no oil. Note I am not trying to argue anybody is more productive than the U.S., only that they are comparable so the argument about socialist economic failure is bogus.

rhino — you say nanny, I say promote the general welfare, like it says in the Constitution. No I don’t want the Gov to prescribe, I would like to see mandated minimums for time off with pay. As for economic superpower, as the numbers show, it just isn’t so. Dreams die hard.

Nomad — there seems to be a bit of confusion even within your link over what constitutes unemployment. As far as my economics courses and several years in Europe led me to understand, no western country counts all those not gainfully employed as part of their unemployment tallies, but just those who show some desire (measures vary by country) to be employed but are not successful. Retirees, housewives, gentlemen of independent means, students with no economic need or desire to work, teens living at home, etc., do not count toward unemployment statistics. That’s why employment rates aren’t given as much importance as unemployment rates — and no, they’re not just inverses of each other! So showing that relatively the same percentage of various groups are employed in both countries is meaningless, if in the US (at textbook statistitcally full employment) those who aren’t employed are statistically not seeking employment, and in France, they’d like jobs.

Miracle Max — mandated minimums, but not government prescribed? By whom do you want them mandated, then? Do you really want a country where they send you home even if you want to keep working? My doctor brother-in-law, on rotation in Italy, was horrified to find that they closed the ER on weekends, because they weren’t allowed to work that many hours per week, and he wasn’t allowed to volunteer to stay. I’d rather not live in that situation!

Adrienne — re the Unemployment rates, the problem is defining and measuring consistently across countries those who want to work but can’t find work. The EPOP rates (employment/population) are meaningful if you compare those of working age, obviously not if you include children and the elderly. A sharp change in an EPOP in a short period of time — say two percent since 2000 in the U.S. — raises a good question about what is happening in the labor market. It’s not as if suddenly two million people decided on a whim to take some time off or go to college.

“Prescribe” was not the best word. Yes I’d favor a Federal mandated minimum for paid leave (also sick days, maternity leave, wages, health care, etc.) Some prefer to work more, others prefer their employer be compelled to provide certain benefits. That’s why we have elections. Personally I’m not a big user of time off, but that’s just me. I don’t have to dig ditches for a living.

Do you believe the numbers for France?

This is the same country that claims they have only about 8% unemployment right now. Outside sources has put this number more relistically at 15% or higher.

I also worked for a company with an office in France and visited them for a week. They barely moved to get anything done, so I seriously doubt they French are more productive then the US based on observing the work ethics of the people there. Heck, just look at the joint EU company that makes the Airbus and see where their production problems are causing delivery delays for proof.

They are OECD numbers. I’ve never heard anybody attack OECD numbers, but obviously they could be wrong. I’d be interested to know of any critiques, or of alternative sources with stats that contradicted OECD findings.

Man, what a BS argument this is. Do you have any idea what it costs to hire, and worse FIRE a French worker? You are a moron in France if you don’t have the most up to date and efficient equipment, as you can’t afford to hire actual human capital.

What I find amazing is, given the amount of waiters, busboys, Walmart clerks that the US has employed, that the US is nearly as productive as France when using hours worked as a baseline. That is the real story.

Another way to look at GDP is as an average over total population. This way, you can’t game the number with unemployment or early retirement. It is similar to looking at the average revenue per headcount when you are thinking about buying a company or downsizing two divisions. It tells you how top heavy you are and how productive your workforce actually is.

Average GDP per person in the US based on total population is $44,067, in France it is $36,349. This means the average GDP per US citizen is 18% higher than the average French citizen. Of course, this uses 2006 USD, does the OECD account for the decline in the dollar? If not, this gap is probably even wider when using PPP.

Viva la socialism indeed.