Canadian Law of Work Forum (CLWF)
  • Home
  • About
    • Professor David Doorey
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Submissions
  • Student Blog Initiative
  • Home
  • About
    • Professor David Doorey
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Submissions
  • Student Blog Initiative
Canadian Law of Work Forum (CLWF)
Law of Work Archive

B.C. Finally Raises Minimum Wage! Cue the Battling Economists

by David Doorey March 17, 2011
written by David Doorey March 17, 2011

Almost every time a province raises its minimum wage, the business lobby “think tank”, The Fraser Institute, releases some publication arguing that the minimum wage will increase poverty, cause unemployment, and give you warts.  This report will then be published by the National Post, which likes to pretend that the Fraser Institute is an independent, reliable, and neutral economic voice.  For my industrial relations students, the Fraser Institute is a classic example of the neo-classical perspective.
Economists Against the Minimum Wage
So when I read recently that the B.C. government was going to be raising the provincial minimum wage after a ten year freeze under Liberal leadership, I went straight to the National Post to find the Fraser Institute piece.  And there is was!  Predictably, the Fraser Institute recounted its usually story, laying out all the regular economic studies that they claim prove that unemployment and poverty will increase if you raise the minimum wage even by 10%. The argument is that the  minimum wage is mostly paid to people who are not poor, and that raising it causes employers to hire fewer workers.  What is not clear from the Institute piece is that this view of the world is very controversial among economists.  Reading the Institute piece would leave you with the impression that all economists agree that the minimum wage is bad policy and should be abolished.
Economists for the Minimum Wage
However, in fairness to the Post this time, they also published a counter argument by labour economist Jim Stanford of the Canadian Auto Workers. Stanford sets
out the other side of the story, arguing that the theoretical model upon which the Fraser Institute rests it predictions is based on an “Economics 101” perspective on how supply and demand for labour interact in a perfectly competitive market.  In the real world, he argues, the situation is much more complicated, since labour markets are never perfectly competitive, and there are a whole range of other variables that determine how wage levels interact with employment levels that are ignored in the Fraser Institute perspective.   Stanford concludes that:  “In practice, the effect of minimum wages on employment is probably a wash.”
Of course, neither the general public nor the politicians who make our laws have any clue which side of the economic debate is most accurate.  Not that this stops politicians from making bald assertions about the impact of minimum wage policies.    As I have noted again and again on this blog:  Question every economics-based argument used to justify a labour and employment law policy.   Inevitably, there is another side to the argument that you are not being told.

2 comments
0
FacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail
David Doorey

Professor Doorey is an Associate Professor of Work Law and Industrial Relations at York University. He is the Director of the School of HRM at York and Director of Osgoode Hall Law School’s executive LLM Program in Labour and Employment Law and on the Advisory Board of the Osgoode Certificate program in Labour Law. He is a Senior Research Associate at Harvard Law School’s Labor and Worklife Program and a member of the International Advisory Committee on Harvard University’s Clean Slate Project, which is re-imaging labor law for the 21st century

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

previous post
Is it Age Discrimination to Propose that the Oldest Worker Take Early Retirement to Avoid Layoff of Younger Worker?
next post
Law Commission on Vulnerable Work (and Doorey's Submission)

You may also like

A Cross Country Update on the Card-Check versus...

October 3, 2018

A Successful Strike Vote is All That Stands...

September 16, 2018

Unifor Posts Photos of Replacement Workers as Gander...

September 10, 2018

A Wrongful Dismissal Case and the Absence of...

August 29, 2018

China Said to Quickly Withdraw Approval for New...

August 27, 2018

The Latest Hot E-Commerce Idea in China: The...

August 27, 2018

The Trump Administration Just Did Something Unambiguously Good...

August 27, 2018

Unstable Situations Require Police In Riot Gear Face...

August 27, 2018

Trump’s War on the Justice System Threatens to...

August 27, 2018

Putin Invites Trump to Moscow for Second Meeting...

August 27, 2018

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 218 other subscribers

Follow Us On Social Media

Twitter

Latest Tweets

CLWFFollow

CLWF
CanLawWorkForumCLWF@CanLawWorkForum·
2h

New from @RSandill (counsel for applicant), discussing important new "family status" discrimination decision from OHRT:

"Kovintharajah v. Paragon Linen & Laundry: When Failure to Accommodate Child Care Needs is “Family Status” Discrimination"

https://lawofwork.ca/13360-2/

Reply on Twitter 1364605259071561730Retweet on Twitter 13646052590715617304Like on Twitter 13646052590715617303Twitter 1364605259071561730
Retweet on TwitterCLWF Retweeted
CanLawWorkForumCLWF@CanLawWorkForum·
19 Feb

Tenants have associations, but landlords can't just ignore them. Is Landlord Tenant Law the next frontier in Freedom of Association litigation?

@TheLawofWork considers:

“The Striking Absence of Freedom of Association in Landlord and Tenant Law”

https://lawofwork.ca/the-striking-absence-of-freedom-of-association-in-landlord-and-tenant-law/

Reply on Twitter 1362821027458334724Retweet on Twitter 13628210274583347243Like on Twitter 13628210274583347244Twitter 1362821027458334724
CanLawWorkForumCLWF@CanLawWorkForum·
19 Feb

Tenants have associations, but landlords can't just ignore them. Is Landlord Tenant Law the next frontier in Freedom of Association litigation?

@TheLawofWork considers:

“The Striking Absence of Freedom of Association in Landlord and Tenant Law”

https://lawofwork.ca/the-striking-absence-of-freedom-of-association-in-landlord-and-tenant-law/

Reply on Twitter 1362821027458334724Retweet on Twitter 13628210274583347243Like on Twitter 13628210274583347244Twitter 1362821027458334724
Load More...

Categories

  • Alberta
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Australia
  • British Columbia
  • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • Childcare
  • Class Action
  • Collective Bargaining
  • Common Law of Employment
  • Comparative Work Law
  • competition law
  • construction
  • COVID-19
  • Diversity
  • Employee Classification
  • Employment Insurance
  • Employment Regulation
  • Europe
  • Financial Industry
  • Fissured Work
  • Freedom of Association
  • frustration of contract
  • Gig Work
  • Health and Safety
  • Health Care
  • Human Rights
  • Immigration
  • Interest Arbitration
  • International Law
  • Labour Arbitration
  • Labour Economics
  • Law of Work Archive
  • Legal Profession
  • Manitoba
  • Migrant Workers
  • Minimum Wage
  • Nova Scotia
  • OLRB
  • Ontario
  • Pension Bankruptcy
  • Privacy
  • Public Sector
  • Quebec
  • Real Life Pleadings
  • Saskatchewan
  • Scholarship
  • Strikes and Lockouts
  • Student Post
  • Supreme Court of Canada
  • technology
  • Transnational Law
  • Uncategorized
  • Unions and Collective Bargaining
  • United States
  • Videos
  • Women and Work
  • Wrongful Dismissal
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive
Menu
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive

2020. Canadian Law of Work Forum. All Rights Reserved.