IMF study: No drop in unemployment without specific job creation measures

Published by rudy Date posted on April 15, 2010

The IMF’s first substantial study on unemployment revises upwards the Fund’s earlier predictions of joblessness in industrialized countries as a result of the current economic crisis. It states that there will be no decline in the unemployment rate before at least 2012 unless countries adopt “policies to jump-start job creation”. Today the Fund released the study, “Unemployment Creation during Recessions and Recoveries: Okun’s Law and Beyond”, in advance of the publication next week of its full World Economic Outlook publication, of which the study is a chapter.

The IMF’s unemployment study has significant shortcomings and contradictions, but importantly puts the finger on “persistently high unemployment” as “the key policy challenge” that many industrialized economies will face in the coming years. The paper predicts that the current high unemployment rate, which averages 9 per cent in industrialized countries, will remain at that level until the end of 2012 unless aggressive job-creation measures are adopted. The paper makes no prediction beyond end-2012.

Among the policy measures put forward in the paper are:
– Maintaining macroeconomic stimulus polices in countries where unemployment is high and economic growth is below potential
– Using temporary hiring subsidies, especially for particular target groups, to stimulate job creation
– Following the example of Germany’s reduced work-time programmes (Kurzarbeit) both to stabilize employment and to avoid hiring and retraining costs; however such programmes should not impede movement of workers from declining to expanding industries and wage subsidies could assist in the transition
– Replacing temporary work contracts, which offer flexibility to employers but insecurity and lack of training to workers, with open-ended (permanent) employment contracts that include gradually increased job security provisions over the course of a worker’s tenure

A substantial part of the IMF’s unemployment study consists of attempts to explain the widely differing performance of labour markets during the current recession. For example, Germany’s unemployment rate dropped even though its GDP declined by 7 percent, while Spain’s unemployment increased by 7.5 percentage points although its GDP declined by less than Germany’s (about 4 per cent). The study concludes that a large part of the difference can be explained by the extensive application of Kurzarbeit combined with relatively strict employment protection legislation in Germany, versus a proliferation of temporary work contracts offering no job or income security whatsoever for many Spanish workers. The study also discusses the differing impacts on labour markets of housing price busts, crisis in the financial sector and other factors.

The IMF’s paper does include some confusing and contradictory approaches, reflexively idealizing highly flexible labour markets and ignoring the negative macroeconomic impacts in some instances, while agreeing that lack of flexibility has been an important tool for maintaining aggregate demand in others. For example, on page 7 the report criticizes centralized collective bargaining systems because they can sometimes impede downward adjustment of wages, but on page 21 it praises compensated reduced work-time programmes because they can “counter potential wage deflation pressures during a severe recession. By stabilizing employment and smoothing income through a downturn, such programs also mitigate large adjustments in domestic demand.”

The report concludes: “The prospect of persistently high unemployment increases the need for policies to jump-start job creation above and beyond generally encouraging wage flexibility and improving labor market institutions.”

The IMF research team that prepared “Unemployment Creation during Recessions and Recoveries” will hold discussions on it in the coming weeks in Washington and in some European cities (Brussels, Paris, Berlin and Milan) and is available to debate the study with interested trade union organizations. We will advise union organizations in those countries of the specific dates.

The unemployment study is available on the IMF’s web site at:
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/01/pdf/c3.pdf

September 18 –
International Equal Pay Day

“Increase wages now,
more than other cost items.
For widespread, practical equality!”

Invoke Article 33 of the ILO Constitution
against the military junta in Myanmar
to carry out the recommendations of the 2021 ILO Commission of Inquiry
against serious violations of protocols of
Forced Labour and Freedom of Association.

Accept the National Unity Government (NUG) 
of Myanmar.  Reject Military!

#WearMask #WashHands
#Report Corruption #SearchPosts #TakePicturesVideos

Time to support & empower survivors. Time to spark a global conversation. Time for #GenerationEquality to #orangetheworld!

October –

   

Monthly Observances:

Industry and Commerce Safety Month 

National Statistics Month 

Local Government Month 

Consumer Welfare Month 

Cooperative Month

National Quality and Productivity Improvement Month 

National Health and Wellness Tourism Month
National Indigenous Peoples Month

 

Weekly Observances:

Week 1: Elderly Filipino Week 

Week 2: National Health Education Week 

Local Government Week 

National Mental Health Week 

October 17-23:

National Week for Overcoming Extreme Poverty 

October 18 – 24:

United Nations Week 

Last Week:

Nurses’ Week 

Consumers’ Protection Week 

Week of the 4th Sunday:

Barrio Farmers’ Week

 

Daily Observances:

First Monday (Oct 4): Universal Children’s Day i
n the Philippines 

Oct 5: National Teachers’ Day 

Oct 10: Local Government Day 

Third Thursday (Oct 14): Conflict Resolution Day 

Oct 21: Tenants’ Emancipation day 

Oct 24: United Nations Day 

Oct 29: National Indigenous People’s Thanksgiving Day

Categories

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.