We need a High Pay Commission to examine the myths of and justifications for excessive pay

November 9, 2009 9:57 pm

CashBy Joe Cox / @compassoffice

According to today’s Guardian there is a ‘fierce debate’ within government around how to tackle wealth inequality, with rumours that a High Pay Commission may be established. This is good news for egalitarians that have witnessed growing inequality under this Labour Government with increasing concern. It seems there is now a real possibility that inequality and high pay will be part of the debate (at least within the Labour Party) at the general election.

The explosion of wealth at the top has largely gone unchecked, and has escaped genuine concern under both Labour and Conservative Governments. Under the current Labour Government inequality has decreased within the middle 90% but the richest 10% of society have increased their share of income dramatically to over 30% of total income. Any attempt to make Britain more equal through higher minimum wages or median wages has been undermined by the explosion in wealth at the top.

Large increases in remuneration at the top of society have often been justified by rational market theory. It was believed markets and shareholders could and would effectively set and constrain salaries. Yet the economic crisis has shown that the dominant theories on how the market functions are flawed.

If we accept Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett’s thesis from ‘The Spirit Level’ that huge wealth inequality is bad for society and has a myriad of unwanted social effects, then setting pay floors through a Low Pay Commission must be accompanied by Government action to curb the excess at the top.

The case for a ‘High Pay Commission’ touches upon economics, democracy, ethics and the underlying relationship of the individual, the state and the economy:

It is a question of democracy because the state has failed to constrain the market and now underwrites the banking system.

It is a question of economics because of the obvious effects of the financial crash brought on by excessive pay and risk taking in the financial sector.

And it is a question of ethics because we believe that no matter what job a person does and no matter how many hours they work, there is no possible way that an individual’s skill, expertise, intelligence or experience, or luck, can justify the payment of 400 times the wages of the lowest-paid.

It is hugely welcome that the Labour Party are taking this issue seriously and Compass have floated many ideas concerning high pay:

Firstly, we need a High Pay Commission to examine the myths and justifications around high pay; do the highly paid increase long term economic value and what are the social implications of high pay?

Secondly, we need to tackle the over-reliance on, and source of, much of the exorbitant pay with a bank windfall tax or a Tobin tax. This could be used to invest in a Green New Deal, for example, to rebalance our economy and invest in green jobs.




Related posts:

  1. A blueprint for a High Pay Commission
  2. This Labour government can curb excessive pay
  3. President of EU Commission says Cameron is leaving the leaving the ‘main family’ of Europe
  4. Proposal #10: Commit to building a national high-speed rail network
  5. Rebutting 9 EU Myths

Comments are closed

Latest

  • Comment Local Government Why we’re raising council tax

    Why we’re raising council tax

    Nobody wants to pay more tax and I am not a high tax and spend politician, so my administration’s proposed rejection of the government’s council tax funding has not been based on ideological dogma, but a reasoned decision based on financial prudence. I led my group to win control of City of York Council in May 2011. We inherited from the previous Liberal Democrat administration a budget with £21m of in year cuts to make, a number of previously unexposed [...]

    Read more →
  • Local Government News Boris and the 2 billion pound “clerical error”

    Boris and the 2 billion pound “clerical error”

    Earlier today on BBC’s London Politics Show, it was revealed that billions of pounds were inaccurately added to Boris Johnson’s official budget document – a mistake that a spokesperson for the Tory Mayor attempted to dismiss as a “clerical error”. At over £2 billion – that’s some clerical error… A spokesperson for Ken Livingstone said: “Boris Johnson claims anyone arguing for lower fares for Londoners doesn’t understand the transport finances, but now it turns out it’s Boris Johnson’s transport figures [...]

    Read more →
  • Featured The sad truth behind Andrew Lansley’s eyes

    The sad truth behind Andrew Lansley’s eyes

    “Michael,” said the Prime Minister, without looking up from his desk, “I thought you said this would be easy?” “Easy? That what would be easy?” replied the Education Secretary, whose face had occupied a near-permanent state of mild bafflement, which was slowly becoming the kind of ever-present British institution that decades from now will be ruined by ill-thought out reforms, or having a roof built over it in case it rains. “This NHS business. You said it would be easy.” [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Westminster On prayer in Parliament

    On prayer in Parliament

    The court ruling that prayers should not be on the formal council agenda at Bideford Town Council has been met with predictable outrage. The Mail says it could be extended to Parliament – I’m not sure it’s quite the same scenario, as in Parliament prayers are said when the session begins, at say. 2.30pm, and then another bell goes a few minutes later and those who didn’t want to be in there for prayers enter the Chamber. So you can [...]

    Read more →
  • Video Burnham: ‘Pride’ put before NHS

    Burnham: ‘Pride’ put before NHS

    Read more →