Work and reward

Some local minimum wage workers are extremely hard workers. They deserve a pay raise. They deserve a higher minimum wage. So went the argument of a local woman who e-mailed me last week. But how valid is the argument?

Are some local minimum wage workers extremely hard workers? Of course, some of them are hard workers. This premise is certainly true. But hard work alone does not automatically entitle them to a higher minimum wage or higher compensation.

Much of the compensation depends on the quality of the work. After all, someone could work very hard–could exert a great deal of effort–and yet still produce a shoddy product. This is entirely possible. The quality of work is certainly as important as the quantity of work.

Much of the compensation also depends on the type of work involved. Some forms of work are objectively more valuable than others, regardless of the efforts exerted.

Take the work of a ditch digger versus a computer software engineer, for example. The ditch digger may work very, very hard. He may work all day long. But many people can do his job, which takes no specialized skill to perform. Few people, by comparison, are able to write computer software programs for various commercial applications. Should the “harder-working” ditch digger be paid more than the computer software creator? Of course not.

The value of a person’s labor should always be determined by the market for his or her labor. The price should be determined by market demand. This is a principle of justice. Who the hell is the government to arbitrarily determine the value of any person’s labor? That should be for the individual person to negotiate in the open marketplace.

Take the work of Television personality Barbara Walters. I believe ABC TV pays her as much as $20 million–twenty million dollars!–to talk on TV. How could interviewing people for one hour a week possibly be worth $20 million? It seems incredible. But should the government step in and put a wage or salary cap on people like Barbara Walters? Heck, no! That would be evil.

So why, then, should the government have any moral authority to impose a wage floor (minimum wage) on the price of one’s labor? After all, a wage floor, in principle and in logic, is essentially no different from a wage ceiling or cap? They both have the same (im)moral force.

When people say that Charles P. Reyes Jr. is only defending special business interests, they are wrong. When they say I oppose minimum wage increases to protect the garment industry or other business interests, they are dead wrong. I am not defending anyone.

What I am ultimately defending is an idea, a cause, a sacred principle–liberty: the Libertarian non-coercion principle, which says that people’s rights should never be violated; that people should be left free to voluntarily trade in an open market. So long as they are not violating anyone’s right, leave them alone.

No one has a legitimate moral right to any particular wage; that is for the market to decide, according to the value, real or perceived, that is created.

Strictly a personal view. Charles Reyes Jr. is a regular columnist of Saipan Tribune. Mr. Reyes may be reached at charlesraves@hotmail.com