Jagdish Bhagwati Argues That Free Trade and Labor Law Reform Are Two Great Tastes That Go Great Together
Precisely paralleling an argument I had yesterday with a colleague, Jagdash Bagwati makes the case for seeing a linkage between support for free trade and support for the Employee Free Choice Act.
Bagwati’s basic point is that among the competing visions for how you could have a more egalitarian economy is, on the one hand, the idea that we need to sharply restrict imports. On the other hand, though, there’s the idea that we could remain open to trade and let the economy undergo its structural shifts while bringing more widespread unionization to the service sector. It’s not a fact handed down from god that the unionized firms are mostly in the manufacturing sector, it’s just that manufacturing was big during the period of time when U.S. labor law was friendly to union organizing. EFCA could create a new era of organizing-friendly labor law, and an opportunity to shift to an economy that features more decent jobs in the sectors that aren’t import-competing.
20 Responses to “Jagdish Bhagwati Argues That Free Trade and Labor Law Reform Are Two Great Tastes That Go Great Together”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
March 13th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Actually it could very well be because firms that require heavy capital investments (auto manufacturing) that have huge returns to scale tend to have more above normal profit to divy up.
March 13th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
If you want a “more egalitarian economy”, then definitely helping those forces that push “free” trade is the way to go. And, helping those other forces that have made us less “egalitarian” and who are now pushing EFCA will definitely help also!
P.S. Perhaps Jennifer Palmieri could look through the archives and see if MattY has been as misleading about EFCA as Rachel Maddow was recently. Because, we all know that the name of a bill accurately represents its actual intent.
March 13th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
I keep noticing that many liberals still do a lot of hand-waving when it comes to suggesting just what it is our new and better economy will do, and instead find it easier to talk about how we need to have a better social safety net to redistribute the anticipated resources somehow made in the imaginary better economy which someone at some stage might want to get around to discussing.
March 13th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Hawaii is in the top three of most unionized states in the country, because of heavy unionization in the hospitality sector. (Nevada is in the top half for the same reason).
Someone needs to check his premises.
(sort of surprising when I looked it up – Alaska is also consistently in the top 3 for unionization rates)
March 13th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
Rob’s right. Even here in union loving Canada unions are confined to the public sector and to manufacturing. Union membership in the competitive service industry barely extends beyond health care. So what exactly do progressive expect? Unionism is definitely not a panacea to income inequality but I guess it makes sense if you simultaneously planning on making US businesses less competitive.
March 13th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
Fair trade does seem more sustainable than a simple race to the bottom. Raise the bottom.
March 13th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
Funny that all the paid GOP trolls don’t bother to comment on EFCA posts once their workday is done.
March 13th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
IF all of the jobs in the U.S. are unionized service sector jobs trying to get wages to grow faster than everyone else’s wages, all the U.S. would get is inflation. Of course, unionizing the service sector would probably be good from family run business since they could compete on price.
March 13th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
One thing appears to be immutable—all manner of rent will go up when wages go up. Better to focus on things like paid time off, quality workspace, safety, not being held hostage to employers for health care, and general fairness that comes wiht having a voice might be more productive and make the workforce more productive.
March 13th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Shut the fuck up, Lonewacko.
March 13th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
You know, the Obama Adminstration could get substantially similar results to the EFCA by just staffing up the Labor Department to aggressively enforce the existing law and diligently carry out the Department’s existing mandates in a timely manner.
If the NLRB simply investigated every crime of firing union sympathizers, and certified every secret-ballot union election, within 30 days instead of Bush’s preferred 2-years-to-never timetable, EFCA could safely wait for Obama’s second term.
March 13th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
I would have thought a fellow with the last name “Yglesias” would more careful with the spellings of strange names. Jagdish Bhagwati or Jagdash Bagwati?
March 14th, 2009 at 2:57 am
“and an opportunity to shift to an economy that features more decent jobs in the sectors that aren’t import-competing.”
That would only work if immigration is kept low, as Cesar Chavez pointed out in his 1969 Senate testimony calling for better border enforcement. Chavez was able to launch the UFW in 1965 following the end of the bracero guest worker program in 1965. The UFW flourished for awhile because of low supply of farm workers, but fell apart after the Mexican economy collapsed in 1982 and the “reserve army of the unemployed” headed north.
March 14th, 2009 at 9:30 am
Unionization is an important but only one means of dealing with the redistribution of social power — that’s called democracy. Remember when Chrysler was bailed out some years ago, the UAW was given a place on Chrysler’s board.
Similarly, when banks are bailed out, the administration should facilitate the organization and representation of labor on their boards.
Here too we have a lot to learn from the Europeans and institutions like Works Councils and practices like Cooperative Design. Those not only help to preserve the social safety net but can be an engine for employee engagement and innovation.
March 14th, 2009 at 10:00 am
Well, at least he spelled Bhagwati’s name correct in the title.
March 14th, 2009 at 10:13 am
But is there a plausible strategy for passing EFCA? It seems like there are more than enough blue dog Democrats to kill it. Historically, labor law reform has been passed when the business class saw highly regulated labor unions as an attractive compromise after a series of disruptive strikes.
March 16th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
sry i just know how to write my name in arabic
) anyway however in arabic when i read some thing like that i just say “raee” i donot know how to say it in english . thanks
March 16th, 2009 at 10:48 pm
sry i just know how to write my name in arabic
) my bad english donot help to type here but really thanks.
April 9th, 2009 at 6:16 am
Not that I’m impressed a lot, but this is more than I expected for when I found a link on Furl telling that the info is quite decent. Thanks.