The U.S. labor market remains mired in a post WWII land of large employer paternalism that is unsuited to the needs of global competition. Major changes to labor laws should be made to lower the full costs of hiring employees. At the same time, major changes to unemployment insurance should be made to provide a meaningful safety net, without reducing the incentives for the unemployed to actively seek re-employment, even at lower wages when needed.
In return for a variety of actions to reduce the unit cost of labor by more than 20%, employers should be required to fund one-half of an unemployment insurance fund that provides meaningful benefits. Employees would fund the other half through payroll deductions. Unemployed workers would receive an initial payment of one-half of six months’ worth of wages. Additional 50% payments would be made at the beginning of third and fourth quarters of unemployment. This lump-sum approach maintains the incentive to actively seek new employment, while providing a true safety net in a world where 6 month bouts of unemployment are recurring career experiences at all levels.
The federal government could lower the transaction costs of employment by maintaining a national ID card system that qualifies individuals for employment and removes the hiring cost and risk to employers. The federal government could certify 3-5 firms to operate a standardized resume/profile system that records and certifies the basic education and employment history for individuals in one place.
Employees would be more attractive to employers if they invested more in their professional skills. A continuing education tax credit would improve candidate skills and remove the need for employers to offer most internal training and educational benefits.
Employers would hire more individuals if the terms of employment were more flexible. Labor laws could more clearly allow “paid time off” banks to be used in place of overtime compensation. The trigger for required overtime premiums could be raised from 40 to 48 hours for the first 10 weeks of annual overtime. Seasonal positions could be exempted from employer unemployment compensation responsibility. A new employment category could be created to clearly allow 100% incentive based sales positions. The IRS rules defining employees and contractors could be simplified to reduce administrative costs and risks.
Federal labor laws and regulations could be simplified to reduce administrative costs and limits could be placed on potential liabilities. The equal employment opportunity, family medical leave, disability and other employee “rights” acts incentivize employers to take extreme defensive steps and avoid hiring in order to avoid potential liabilities.
The federal government could incentivize the creation of new positions directly by paying half of the first six-months of wages. The rules for unpaid internships could be clarified, allowing students to work up to 700 hours per year within win-win educational programs which lead to employment. The labor laws could be clarified to allow “no fault” dismissals within 180 days.
In a globally competitive environment, labor laws need to benefit employers and employees. Steps can be taken to reduce the total cost of employment and protect employed and unemployed workers. The cost to employers and society through taxes is modest.
In addition to macroeconomic steps to improve the economy and administrative steps to provide meaningful unemployment compensation benefits and lower employment costs and risks, the federal government could change tax policies to significantly reduce the incremental costs of employing workers.
The federal government could incentive continuing education through tax credits. Unemployment compensation insurance could be shared by employers and employees. Family medical leave benefits could be funded by the federal government as is done in other developed nations.
Tax changes could be made to incentivize individuals to invest in their own life and disability insurance plans. Tax credits could be used to promote individual charitable contributions and reduce the need for corporate gifts and matching programs. The dollar and percentage limits for tax –deferred retirement plan contributions could be raised, increasing the value of compensation. The rules for qualified plans could be modified to allow a greater share of “highly compensated” employee pay to be made on a pre-tax basis.
Finally, the two biggest fringe benefits – social security and health benefits – could be migrated to government and employee funded programs over a decade, releasing employers from this responsibility. Social security can be funded from federal income tax revenues or simply made employee deduction. Health care insurance programs could lose their tax-deductible status. If no better option is found, employer contributions to consumer choice (HAS/HRA) plans could retain their tax-deductible status.
Allowing American employers to focus on creating jobs, operating their firms and making money will unleash incentives to increase productivity, competitiveness and our standard of living. Finding the political will to fund desired public services will not be easy, but the total benefits justify the short-term challenges.