Sabem o que penso acerca dos CUT (Custos Unitários do Trabalho) como medida da maior ou menor competitividade de um país - uma treta!
.
Ainda agora em "O FT a colar-se ao anónimo de província" listei uma série de postais sobre o tema. Entretanto em "Seven technical reasons why ‘(Real) Unit Labour Costs’ are not a valid macro-indicator of competitiveness" encontro estas críticas para acrescentar:
"1) The RULC [real unit labour costs] are calculated by Eurostat, based upon the next operational definition (emphasis added):
“This derived indicator compares remuneration (compensation per employee in current prices) and productivity (Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in current prices per employment) to show how the remuneration of employees is related to the productivity of their labor. It is the relationship between how much each ‘worker’ is paid and the value he/she produces with her work. It’s growth rate is intended to give an impression of the dynamics of the participation of the production factor labour in output value created. Please note that the variables used in the numerator (compensation, employees) relate to employed labour only while those in the denominator (GDP, employment) refer to all labour, including self-employed”.[Moi ici: Hmmm como a taxa de trabalhadores que não têm um emprego tradicional está a aumentar (freelancers, free-agents)... os CUT baixam. Extraordinário]
...
D) Non-tradeables. Between 2000 and 2011, average German wages did not rise too much which led to a low increase of the German macro ULC. But to quite some extent this was caused by stable nominal wages (and falling purchasing power) of teachers. Wages in industry rose a little above average and Germany still is one of the very few countries where industrial wages are higher than the average (even despite very high wages in the financial sector). But does decreasing real wages of teachers really increase the international competitivity and exports of a country? [Moi ici: Como sempre escrevi aqui, acerca da TSU, por exemplo neste postal, por causa dos trabalhadores dos sectores transaccionáveis ou não transaccionáveis] It might affect the current account as German teachers will have had to restrain consumption of, among other things, imported products. But at least I do not see the relation with gross exports!.
E) Felip en Kumar (2011) mention the Kaldor-paradox: [Moi ici: Como gostei dessa minha descoberta de 2011] the empirical evidence about the ULC and competitivity in fact suggests that high increases of the ULC do not cause a decline of competitivity but are, to the contrary, a sign of succesful export performance.[Moi ici: Recordar o exemplo do calçado e do vinho, e o trabalhar para subir preços]
...
G) Global supply chains. The share of ‘domestic’ labour in the cost price of tradeable products shows sustained declines. Giordano and Zollino mention that the ‘domestic labour share’ of Germany declined from 27% to 21% of gross output (not the same as value added, the concept of GDP!) while the Italian share declined from 21% to 18% [Moi ici: Ainda esta semana chamei a atenção para o fenómeno num comentário a esta notícia- Uma empresa tradicional à medida que faz o outsourcing de todas as suas actividades aumenta a produtividade. No limite, um trader sem contacto físico com o que compra e vende é o que tem a maior produtividade... se nos concentrarmos na redução do denominador, a pior forma de subir a produtividade]
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário