This week has brought with it news of a surge in UK wages but sadly for the rest of us it is only for one person. From the Guardian.
Sánchez’s four-and-a-half-year contract ties him to United until the summer of 2022. It is understood his salary is closer to a basic £300,000 a week than the reported £500,000. This means he is, with Zlatan Ibrahimovic, the club’s highest remunerated player.
We are of course looking at the wages of Alexis Sanchez which are supposed to be too high even for Manchester City but not for their neighbours. Actually if we add in the agent of Alexis Sanchez and any other hangers-on we do at least have more than one person benefiting from this. Whatever you might think of the economics of premiership football and it is easy to make a case for it being more inflated than even the modern era football itself it is providing a boost for the UK economy as this from the BBC this week highlights.
Manchester United have topped the table of the world’s 20 richest football clubs for the second year in a row, and 10th time overall, says Deloitte…….Manchester United’s €676m revenues were boosted by €44.5m from Uefa after winning the Europa League against Ajax…..There were a record 10 English Premier League clubs in the top 20. The number in the top 30 was up from 12 to 14.
Maybe it is the performance so far this season influencing me but I was surprised by this part.
Southampton are the only debutant in the top 20 after broadcast revenues soared.
That makes you wonder why they are always selling players doesn’t it?
Changes over time
According to the Resolution Foundation there has been something going on and it started well before the credit crunch hit.
A change in working hours is driving this change, but there are two factors at play. The first is the large increase in the number of male employees working part-time, which has risen from 8.1 per cent in 1997 to 11.7 per cent in 2017. The second driver of the ‘hollowing out’ of male pay over the last two decades is the reduction in average hours worked by the lower-paid (in terms of hourly pay) – over and above the shifting balance between full-time and part-time working. The average number of hours worked by full-time men earning around two-thirds of male median hourly earnings fell from 44.3 hours in 1997 to 42.2 hours in 2016. At the same time hours worked increased for higher paid men. As a result of this change lower-paid men no longer work more hours than their higher-paid counterparts.
As we mull the illogic in those who are at the bottom end of the pay spectrum working fewer hours we are left wondering one more time how much underemployment there is.
Among part-time employees in the bottom fifth of the male weekly earnings distribution, 27 per cent would like full-time work compared to 8 per cent of those in the top fifth. Under-employment (people wanting more hours) is also concentrated amongst lower earners.
Sadly the official UK data releases tell us much less about underemployment than we would like to know.
We get regular reports of pay pressure but this so far has not filtered into the headline official data. An example of this was provided by The Independent yesterday.
The FMB, in its quarterly report on the state of the industry, found that companies are particularly struggling to recruit bricklayers and carpenters. Demand for skilled plumbers, electricians and plasterers is also outstripping supply……As a result of the skills gap, the FMB said that wages are rising sharply for skilled tradespeople.
So there is evidence for some wage pressure in that sector which must be awkward for a news source which regularly assures us immigration does not affect wages. “Without skilled labour from the EU, the skills shortages we face would be considerably worse” seems to tell a different story.
What was especially interesting about the CBI ( Confederation of British Industry) manufacturing survey yesterday was the absence of a mention of wage pressure.
Employment grew at the fastest pace since July 2014 over the last three months, with further growth expected next quarter. However, skill shortages are high on firms’ agendas, with the number of firms citing skilled labour as a factor likely to limit output over the next three months the highest for more than four decades.
What we saw was a continuation of what over the past few years has been a strength of the UK economy.
For September to November 2017, there were 32.21 million people in work, 102,000 more than for June to August 2017 and 415,000 more than for a year earlier.
The previous concerns over new employment/ work being part-time ( and hence likely to be lower paid) has reduced considerably as you can see.
The annual increase in the number of people in employment (415,000) was mainly due to more people in full-time employment (401,000).
Yet if we switch to wages we see little sign of change in yet another disappointment for the Bank of England with its “output gap” style thinking.
Between September to November 2016 and September to November 2017, in nominal terms, regular pay increased by 2.4%, little changed compared with the growth rate between August to October 2016 and August to October 2017 (2.3%)……….Between September to November 2016 and September to November 2017, in nominal terms, total pay increased by 2.5%, unchanged.
This means that the picture for real wages was pretty much unchanged as well with a small fall if you use the official CPIH series but something which is over 1% per annum higher if you use the Retail Price Index or RPI.
We get a different perspective if we look at hours worked as you can see below.
Between June to August 2017 and September to November 2017, total hours worked per week decreased by 4.9 million to 1.03 billion..
Only a small fall but much more significant if we remind ourselves that an extra 102,000 people were contributing to the hours worked. We will have to see how this plays out because one version could argue that underemployment is rising the other is that as the economy is growing we are improving productivity and thus should (hopefully) see higher wages going forwards. I suppose as this is the credit crunch era we should not be too amazed if we end up seeing elements of both! At least we will not be like Reuters who always present good UK economic news like this.
The number of people in work in Britain surged unexpectedly in the three months to November
If we look at the recent UK economic experience we see that there have been gains since around 2012 particularly in employment. Yet to the chagrin of economics 101 the wage growth so confidently predicted by it 101 is still missing and we have moderate wage growth and falling real wages with employment at record highs. Maybe a partial reason is that many individual experiences are different to the collective as seen by averages as this from Sarah Connor in the Financial Times hints at.
When I hear about “continuous change”, I think of the husband of a woman I interviewed last year: a British man who lost his job more than a decade ago after the car factory where he worked closed down. Since then, he has been hired and made redundant 10 times. Is he resilient and willing to learn? Yes. Has it been enough? No.
Perhaps the official surveys miss his like in the same way that the official wages data still shamefully excludes the self-employed and small-size employers. That omission has got worse as the number of self-employed has grown in recent years and now totals 4.77 million. Somehow on that road we find ourselves noting that real wages are still some 6% below the previous peak.
average total pay (including bonuses) for employees in Great Britain was £489 per week before tax and other deductions from pay, £33 lower than the pre-downturn peak of £522 per week recorded for February 2008
Maybe another factor is another even longer-term trend seen by the UK economy.
Looking at a longer-term comparison, between June 1978 (when comparable records began) and September 2017: the proportion of jobs accounted for by the manufacturing and mining and quarrying sectors fell from 26.4% to 7.8%…….the proportion of jobs accounted for by the services sector increased from 63.2% to 83.4%.