Open Letter To Union Representatives And All Those Opposed To The Reintroduction Of Youth Wage Rates
In: Press Releases
23 Feb 201023 February 2010
Open Letter To Union Representatives And All Those Opposed To The Reintroduction Of Youth Wage Rates
Re: Youth Unemployment
The Facts
Since the 1st quarter of 2008 until the last quarter of 2009, youth unemployment amongst Maori has increased by 4,000 (over 50 percent). The unemployment rate now sits at 38.7 percent for Maori youth – almost 2 out of 5 are out of a job.
The figures for all youth are also horrific. Almost 20,000 more young people are out of a job compared to the 1st quarter of 2008, and overall the unemployment rate sits at 26.5 percent.
A simple model of the relationship between youth unemployment and overall unemployment created by the economist Eric Crampton shows that there was a sudden increase – far beyond previous differences between the model and actual unemployment – from the 1st quarter of 2008 – the time at which youth rates were abolished.
The Theory
The idea that unemployment amongst those groups which have the fewest skills and the least experience may be caused by high minimum wages is not new. Standard economic theory suggests that, by mandating a minimum wage above the equilibrium price for wages, some people will lose their jobs. A leading textbook in economics (Greg Mankiw’s Principles of Micro-Economics) presents survey data that shows that 79 percent of all economists agree with the statement: “A minimum wage increases unemployment among young and unskilled workers.”
While there are occasional studies that challenge the mainstream view (such as that undertaken by Card and Krueger), they are typically subject to ongoing criticism for their method. They have also clearly failed to convince a majority of economists – those who are experts at analysing such studies.
The Implications
What this means is that excessive minimum wages for youth workers is unnecessarily locking them out of the labour market, and leading to de facto discrimination against them by employers who are choosing to go with skilled and experienced employees. This will have ongoing effects, because those 16 and 17 year olds then become the 19 and 20 year olds who have never worked, and they will struggle to find jobs at that point as well.
Moreover, many of those who are seeking employment may have left school. Failure to get a job denies them the opportunity to get on-the-job training, to get experience, and to develop a work ethic. Given the higher level of unemployment amongst Maori, this will disproportionately affect Maori job prospects in the future.
This is why I have introduced my Minimum Wage (Mitigation Of Youth Unemployment) Amendment Bill – so that employers have an incentive to hire young people over their older and more experienced counterparts and invest the time and money needed to train them. It will bring our abnormally high rate of youth unemployment back to normal levels. Young people will be given a greater chance of gaining employment, benefitting from the work experience gained and helping them build a strong work ethic for the future.
Regards,
Hon Sir Roger Douglas
- heidib: Interesting to see Rogernomics discussed in England. [...]
- Borzoi: It would be a helpful if Sir Roger would list a few of the countries which have done so well with th [...]
- Michael Davison: Well said again Roger [...]
- James: "Unemployment is not the legacy of Roger Douglas, it is the legacy of t he Unions." Nice line He [...]
- Steve Evans: A good speech but it is painful to see political parties described in the plural - "National have", [...]
- Wage Gap With Australia No Surprise
- Question for Oral Answer to John Key – Productivity
- We Need Student Loans, Not Student Handouts
- BBC Interview
- Reforming Public Services
- NZEI Misleading Public About Bulk Funding
- Mallard Wrong on Teacher Incentives
- Sir Roger’s Bill Pulled From Ballot
- Cycleway: Job Shuffling Not Job Creation
- Govt Spending Impoverishing Our Grandkids





4 Responses to Open Letter To Union Representatives And All Those Opposed To The Reintroduction Of Youth Wage Rates
Irene Heydon
February 24th, 2010 at 9:16 am
I am writing in total support of you on this issue.
I employ 80 staff, many of them young people with no previous work experience. Since the introduction of youth rates I have not employed ANY staff age 16 or 17- they simply do not provide value for money-
The introduction of youth rates has had a large impact on the profitability of my business- a cost I have been unable to recover.
The consequence of the introduction of youth rates has been School students unable to secure holiday/ weekend jobs – wandering aimlessly around. No opportunity to learn real work/life skills of reliability, committment, punctuality, time organisation, accountability and the opportunity to gain self confidence while learning new skills.
Ask any parents of teenagers who spent the summer watching their teenagers sleep in, rarely move from the couch, get into trouble, what they would prefer- a job for their off spring at $9 per hour or no job?
These youth do not need to be paid the adult wage- in very few cases are they supporting themselves- it is generally money to fund a cell phone, make up and clothes- (maybe an ammendment to the law so any 16-17 year olds that are living away from home working fulltime and having to support themselves could be paid more?)
The young people I used to employ aged 16 and 17 generally did well at school and moved on to tertiary education- they were grateful for the work experience, the opportunity to have saved some money for uni, and had increased maturity through their exposure to the working world.
If we weren’t forced to pay youth rates and the adult wages was raised to 20 years as in Australia, those unskilled workers that are actually raising families, paying rent and working hard could be paid a better wage.
Send the youth rates law to the same place as Sue Bradford has gone- -out of our lives!
kevin herls
February 25th, 2010 at 10:57 am
Lower rates of pay don’t equate to employment opportunity for young people. Lower rates of pay equate to exploitation as they did when youth rates applied in the past.The world has moved on since Sir Rogers day and his solutions are equally dated. High rates of unemloyment and public indebtedness is Sir Rogers legacy, the question is “Do you want moreofthe same?’
heidi01
March 1st, 2010 at 12:53 pm
Kevin, you haven’t addressed the issue in a reasonable way.
Lower rates of pay are not exploitation – youth are not as experienced as those who have been in the workforce longer.
The real exploitation is when a youth is legislated out of potential employment to languish on less than $200 a week when they could easily work for twice that amount. The minimum wage legislation is an attack on the independence of low skilled people who might make a go of their lives through working towards a skill set in the workplace.
Unemployment is not the legacy of Roger Douglas, it is the legacy of the Unions.
James
March 8th, 2010 at 7:30 am
“Unemployment is not the legacy of Roger Douglas, it is the legacy of t
he Unions.”
Nice line Heidi….Im stealing it
it for future lefty baiting!