ENDEAVOR

A lively debate has been sparked by the Senate’s passage of a bill increasing the daily minimum wage by ₱100 and the position taken by House of Representatives leaders that it should be increased by at least ₱350.

The Foundation for Economic Freedom (FEF) has weighed in by pointing out that such proposed increases would “turbocharge inflation” and further reduce, not enhance, real purchasing power. Hence, it has urged government to reduce tariffs on rice from 35 percent to 10 percent; and to abolish or expand the import quotas for corn, chicken, pork, and fish to enhance the purchasing power of low-income workers who make up the vast majority of the country’s labor force.

According to the FEF: “Liberalizing food imports will see an immediate fall in the price of food, thereby increasing the purchasing power of all Filipinos, whether formally or informally employed and whether senior citizens or babies.”

Twenty heads of the country’s leading business and industry groups, as well as the academe, have signed a joint letter to the House Committee Labor and Employment to register their opposition to legislate minimum wage increases.

They pointed out that all 16 Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Boards “have just granted another round of increase in minimum wages for the very same people” who are the intended beneficiaries of the mandatory wage increases contemplated by legislators. They observed that “even labor organizations tend to rely on the increases granted by the wage boards” over and above negotiated pay increments that they are able to obtain through collective bargaining.

While only an estimated five million minimum wage earners stand to benefit from the proposed legislated increases, 47 million workers —who belong mostly to the informal sector, and to micro, small and medium enterprises will not be affected by such increases. These include farmers and “agricultural workers with no employers, fisherfolk, unpaid family workers, ambulant vendors and street hawkers, jeepney and tricycle drivers, temporary construction workers, small-scale miners and quarry workers.” The long list of workers not covered by such minimum wage increases also includes “tour guides, on-call entertainment workers, domestic cleaners and food delivery riders and other gig workers” whose numbers trebled during the pandemic and who continue to perform multiple services to households and communities.

Instead of focusing on what they consider as an ill-advised and ill-timed initiative, the business and industry leaders must broaden their perspectives and adopt “a more comprehensive approach in approaching social inequality” by focusing on “investing in education, skills development and infrastructure, as well as creating an enabling environment for business growth and job creation.”

Beyond the hue and cry over this controversial issue, there is need to reexamine the paradigms that underpin the dynamics of present-day capitalism.

At the height of the coronavirus pandemic, 27 leaders of institutions with more than US$ 10.5 trillion in assets, more than $2 trillion in combined market capitalization, and 200 million employees in 163 countries, met with Pope Francis at the Vatican and invited him to provide them spiritual guidance as they declared their commitment to “include the excluded” in private enterprise’s continuing efforts to attain a progressive global economy. It was observed that, “by accepting the Church’s moral authority, big business is embracing religion to create a trusted economic system.”

When I learned about this auspicious development, I recalled the pathfinding work on The Real Wealth of Nations that guided my dissertation-writing project nearly two decades ago. The book is authored by Dr. Riane Tennenhaus Eisler, an Austrian-born American systems scientist and author who writes about the effect of gender politics historically on society. She prescribes a “caring economics” that is people-centered as she asserts: “The real wealth of nations consists of the contributions of people and our natural environment.”

On economic development, she joins cause with environmentalist and entrepreneur Paul Hawken and European business leader Stephan Schmidheiny. According to Stanford Social Innovation Review, these thinkers “recognize that natural capital is fundamental to our economic well-being, and that the destruction of the environment imposes great costs on society.”

This was the pitch made by the advocates of enlightened capitalism in their audience with Pope Francis, as they affirmed their commitment to Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) “corporate performance evaluation criteria that assess the robustness of a company's governance mechanisms and its ability to effectively manage its environmental and social impacts.”

Dr. Eisler is also known for her 1987 book The Chalice and the Blade, in which she coined the terms "partnership" and "dominator to refer to the basic paradigms underpinning economic and political philosophy.

She pointed out that a partnership culture characterized the early Christian era, “a more egalitarian structure of society founded on mutual respect among its inhabitants.” However, the importance of early child rearing — and the underpinnings of a gentle and caring society — were pushed to the background.

After the Roman conquests, this was supplanted by a dominator culture in which men asserted their superiority over women — a theme that underpins male chauvinist culture that is considered antithetical to the triad of diversity, equity and inclusion that permeates contemporary governance ethos.

Stakeholder capitalism believes in the alignment of the financial interest of owners and those of other business stakeholders. The primary objectives are: first, to create more value for customers, workers, business and the rest of society; and secondly, to provide low-income communities greater access to economic opportunities in a manner that will make businesses more viable and sustainable.

As one who has devoted some time to government service, I hope and pray that in the not too distant future, our people will witness the elevation of the quality of governance — one that focuses on broadening the base of social opportunity, and enables an equitable sharing of the fruits of our earnest endeavors.