Evelyn Reynolds

More stories

  • 138 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    IMF hikes U.S. growth forecast for 2023, leaves global outlook unchanged

    The International Monetary Fund raised its U.S. growth projection for this year by 0.3 percentage points compared with its July update, to 2.1%.
    It lowered its euro zone forecast by 0.2 percentage points, to 0.7%.
    The U.S. has seen stronger business investment and resilient consumption, the IMF’s World Economic Outlook says, while euro zone economies have diverged under pressure from higher interest rates.
    The IMF also reiterated a global growth forecast of 3% for the year.

    Attendees arrive at the event campus on the opening day of the annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank in Marrakesh, Morocco, on Monday, Oct. 9, 2023.
    Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    The International Monetary Fund on Tuesday released its latest World Economic Outlook, which revised its forecast for U.S. growth higher while predicting slower expansion for the euro zone.
    The IMF raised its U.S. growth projection for this year by 0.3 percentage points, compared with its July update, to 2.1%. It hiked next year’s forecast by 0.5 percentage points, to 1.5%.

    Its euro area growth forecast for 2023 was revised down by 0.2 percentage points to 0.7%, meanwhile, and for 2024 was lowered by 0.3 percentage points to 1.2%.

    It attributed the U.S. upgrade to stronger business investment in the second quarter, resilient consumption growth amid a tight labor market, and an expansionary government fiscal stance. Growth is nonetheless expected to slow in the second half of 2023 and into 2024, it added, due to slower wage growth, dwindling pandemic savings, tight monetary policy and higher unemployment.
    In the euro zone, the IMF flagged divergence across its major economies this year — with the German economy expected to contract as trade slows and higher interest rates drag, as French external demand has outperformed and industrial production has caught up.
    Its growth forecast for the United Kingdom was brought slightly higher to 0.5% for 2023, but lowered by 0.4 percentage points to 0.6% for 2024 as it expects “lingering impacts of the terms-of-trade shock from high energy prices.”

    The IMF reiterated a global growth forecast of 3% for the year, and nudged its 2024 forecast lower by 0.1 percentage points to 2.9%.

    “What we’re seeing is an economy that has been quite resilient given the shocks it has experienced over the last year and a half. The Russian invasion of Ukraine, the energy crisis, and the tightening of monetary policy around the world,” IMF Chief Economist Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas told CNBC at the group’s annual meetings in Marrakech.
    “What we’re saying also is that 3% is not a global recession, far from it, but it’s also not the kind of growth that we’re used to when looking at the pre-pandemic period, which was more around 3.6, 3.8%. So we characterize this by saying the global economy is kind of limping along, it’s not sprinting right now.”

    The IMF’s outlook notes several headwinds to growth have subsided this year, as the World Health Organization said Covid-19 was no longer a global health emergency, supply chains largely normalized, and global financial conditions eased after turbulence in the Swiss and U.S. banking sectors was contained.
    Challenges nonetheless remain, it continued, particularly a slowdown in manufacturing, a slow catch-up in services in some areas, and “globally synchronous” central bank tightening to cool inflation.
    China’s growth momentum following its strict lockdown is fading, the IMF said, as it also deals with a property crisis. The body sees Chinese growth of 5% this year and 4.2% next year. More

  • 113 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Fragile Global Economy Faces New Crisis in Israel-Gaza War

    A war in the Middle East could complicate efforts to contain inflation at a time when world output is “limping along.”The International Monetary Fund said on Tuesday that the pace of the global economic recovery is slowing, a warning that came as a new war in the Middle East threatened to upend a world economy already reeling from several years of overlapping crises.The eruption of fighting between Israel and Hamas over the weekend, which could sow disruption across the region, reflects how challenging it has become to shield economies from increasingly frequent and unpredictable global shocks. The conflict has cast a cloud over a gathering of top economic policymakers in Morocco for the annual meetings of the I.M.F. and the World Bank.Officials who planned to grapple with the lingering economic effects of the pandemic and Russia’s war in Ukraine now face a new crisis.“Economies are at a delicate state,” Ajay Banga, the World Bank president, said in an interview on the sidelines of the annual meetings. “Having war is really not helpful for central banks who are finally trying to find their way to a soft landing,” he said. Mr. Banga was referring to efforts by policymakers in the West to try and cool rapid inflation without triggering a recession.Mr. Banga said that so far, the impact of the Middle East attacks on the world’s economy is more limited than the war in Ukraine. That conflict initially sent oil and food prices soaring, roiling global markets given Russia’s role as a top energy producer and Ukraine’s status as a major exporter of grain and fertilizer.“But if this were to spread in any way then it becomes dangerous,” Mr. Banga added, saying such a development would result in “a crisis of unimaginable proportion.”Oil markets are already jittery. Lucrezia Reichlin, a professor at the London Business School and a former director general of research at the European Central Bank, said, “the main question is what’s going to happen to energy prices.”Ms. Reichlin is concerned that another spike in oil prices would pressure the Federal Reserve and other central banks to further push up interest rates, which she said have risen too far too fast.As far as energy prices, Ms. Reichlin said, “we have two fronts, Russia and now the Middle East.”Smoke rising from bombings of Gaza City and its northern borders by Israeli planes.Samar Abu Elouf for The New York Times Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas, the I.M.F.’s chief economist, said it’s too early to assess whether the recent jump in oil prices would be sustained. If they were, he said, research shows that a 10 percent increase in oil prices would weigh down the global economy, reducing output by 0.15 percent and increasing inflation by 0.4 percent next year. In its latest World Economic Outlook, the I.M.F. underscored the fragility of the recovery. It maintained its global growth outlook for this year at 3 percent and slightly lowered its forecast for 2024 to 2.9 percent. Although the I.M.F. upgraded its projection for output in the United States for this year, it downgraded the euro area and China while warning that distress in that nation’s real estate sector is worsening.“We see a global economy that is limping along, and it’s not quite sprinting yet,” Mr. Gourinchas said. In the medium term, “the picture is darker,” he added, citing a series of risks including the likelihood of more large natural disasters caused by climate change.Europe’s economy, in particular, is caught in the middle of growing global tensions. Since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, European governments have frantically scrambled to free themselves from an over-dependence on Russian natural gas.They have largely succeeded by turning, in part, to suppliers in the Middle East.Over the weekend, the European Union swiftly expressed solidarity with Israel and condemned the surprise attack from Hamas, which controls Gaza.Some oil suppliers may take a different view. Algeria, for example, which has increased its exports of natural gas to Italy, criticized Israel for responding with airstrikes on Gaza.Even before the weekend’s events, the energy transition had taken a toll on European economies. In the 20 countries that use the euro, the Fund predicts that growth will slow to just 0.7 percent this year from 3.3 percent in 2022. Germany, Europe’s largest economy, is expected to contract by 0.5 percent.High interest rates, persistent inflation and the aftershocks of spiraling energy prices are also expected to slow growth in Britain to 0.5 percent this year from 4.1 percent in 2022.Sub-Saharan Africa is also caught in the slowdown. Growth is projected to shrink this year by 3.3 percent, although next year’s outlook is brighter, when growth is forecast to be 4 percent.Staggering debt looms over many of these nations. The average debt now amounts to 60 percent of the region’s total output — double what it was a decade ago. Higher interest rates have contributed to soaring repayment costs.This next-generation of sovereign debt crises is playing out in a world that is coming to terms with a reappraisal of global supply chains in addition to growing geopolitical rivalries. Added to the complexities are estimates that within the next decade, trillions of dollars in new financing will be needed to mitigate devastating climate change in developing countries.One of the biggest questions facing policymakers is what impact China’s sluggish economy will have on the rest of the world. The I.M.F. has lowered its growth outlook for China twice this year and said on Tuesday that consumer confidence there is “subdued” and that industrial production is weakening. It warned that countries that are part of the Asian industrial supply chain could be exposed to this loss of momentum.In an interview on her flight to the meetings, Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen said that she believes China has the tools to address a “complex set of economic challenges” and that she does not expect its slowdown to weigh on the U.S. economy.“I think they face significant challenges that they have to address,” Ms. Yellen said. “I haven’t seen and don’t expect a spillover onto us.” More

  • 100 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    U.A.W. Workers at Mack Truck Go on Strike

    The strike at the truck manufacturer by 4,000 members of the United Automobile Workers comes in the middle of the union’s strikes at three large U.S. car companies.Nearly 4,000 members of the United Automobile Workers union went on strike against Mack Trucks on Monday after rejecting a tentative contract that union’s leaders had worked out with the company.The union informed the truck maker on Sunday that members had opposed the contract by a 73 percent vote, and that a strike would begin at Mack’s factories in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Florida.“The members have spoken, and as the highest authority in our union, they have the final word,” the U.A.W. president, Shawn Fain, wrote in a letter to Mack’s parent company, Volvo Trucks.The two sides have been negotiating for three months over a range of issues including wage increases, cost-of-living allowances, job security, pensions, prescription drug coverage and overtime. The proposed contract included raises of 19 percent over five years and a bonus of $3,500 for ratifying the agreement.Mack’s president, Stephen Roy, said in a statement that the company was “surprised and disappointed,” noting that the U.A.W. negotiators had called the tentative agreement a “record contract for the heavy truck industry.”Commercial truck sales have been recovering slowly from the disruptions caused by the coronavirus pandemic. Volvo has forecast about a 10 percent increase in industrywide truck sales this year in North America. Mack has about a 6 percent share of the North American market.The Mack strike comes as the U.A.W. is conducting a strike at plants and distribution centers owned by the three automakers, General Motors, Ford Motor, and Stellantis, the maker of Chrysler, Jeep, and Ram vehicles.The auto strike began nearly a month ago at three plants and the U.A.W. has expanded it in a bid to increase the pressure on the manufacturers. About 25,000 of the 150,000 U.A.W. workers employed by the three automakers are on strike. The stoppage affects two plants owned by G.M., two owned by Ford, and one owned by Stellantis, as well as the 38 spare-parts warehouses owned by G.M. and Stellantis.The automakers have offered wage increases of more than 20 percent over four years. They have also agreed to shorten the time — to four years from eight — that it takes a new worker to rise up from the entry-level wage of about $17 an hour to the highest-level wage of $32 an hour.The union is pushing for greater wage increases, noting that raises over the last 15 years have not kept pace with inflation. It is also demanding the companies provide pensions for more workers, pay the cost of retiree health care, and convert temporary employees into permanent staff. More

  • 113 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Yellen May Face Questions in Morocco Over U.S. Dysfunction

    Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen calls on Congress to authorize more economic support for Ukraine.As Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen arrives in Morocco this week to meet with her international counterparts, she will be representing a nation that has led the world’s post-pandemic economic recovery but is now struggling with potentially destabilizing political dysfunction.America came perilously close to defaulting on its debt over the summer and tiptoed toward a government shutdown last month as Republicans fought over the proper levels of federal spending and whether to bankroll more aid to Ukraine. Those events culminated in last week’s ouster of Representative Kevin McCarthy as House speaker, a development that is raising questions about whether the United States can actually govern itself, let alone lead the world.The political dynamic is expected to strain the credibility of the United States at the annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, which begin on Monday in Marrakesh. Ms. Yellen is expected to press European governments to provide more funding for Ukraine and push creditors like China to relieve the debts of poor countries, including many African nations.The meetings are taking place amid heightened global uncertainty because of the weekend attacks that Hamas waged upon Israel, which threaten to spiral into a regional conflict. The possibility of a wider war could pose new economic challenges for policymakers by pushing oil prices higher, disrupting trade flows and inflaming tensions between other nations. As she traveled to Morocco, Ms. Yellen affirmed America’s support for Israel.“The United States stands with the people of Israel and condemns yesterday’s horrific attack against Israel by Hamas terrorists from Gaza,” Ms. Yellen said in a post on X, formerly Twitter, on Sunday. “Terrorism can never be justified and we support Israel’s right to defend itself and protect its citizens.”In an interview on Sunday during her flight to Marrakesh, Ms. Yellen acknowledged that other nations feel concerned and anxious about the political gridlock that has gripped the United States. However, she pointed out that other democracies face similar obstacles and that she believed America’s allies would continue to be supportive of the Biden administration’s efforts on issues such as protecting Ukraine and addressing climate change.“I think they have been delighted over the last two years to see the United States resume a very strong global leadership role and they want to work with us and they want us to be successful,” Ms. Yellen said.Yet America’s role as an economic bulwark against Russia’s war in Ukraine has been undercut by its own domestic politics, including Republican opposition to providing more economic support to Ukraine. The United States’s huge debt load and its inability to find a more sustainable fiscal path has also hurt its economic credibility.“The rest of the world can only look aghast with trepidation at our dysfunction — lurching from threats of default, to shutdowns, the adjournment of the House because there is no speaker,” said Mark Sobel, a former longtime Treasury Department official who is now the U.S. chairman of the Official Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum, a think tank. “While foreign governments have always expected a degree of hurly-burly U.S. behavior, the current level of dysfunction will surely erode trust in U.S. leadership, stability and reliance on the dollar’s global role.”Eswar Prasad, the former head of the I.M.F.’s China division, added that instability in the U.S. economy could be problematic for some of the world’s most vulnerable economies that rely on America to be a source of stability.“For countries that are already struggling to prop up their economies and financial markets, the added uncertainty from the political drama in Washington is most unwelcome,” Mr. Prasad said.The gathering comes at a delicate moment for the global economy. While the world appears poised to avoid a recession and achieve a so-called soft landing, the fight against inflation remains a challenge and output remains tepid. Economic weakness in China and Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine continue to be headwinds.The higher borrowing costs that central banks have deployed to tame inflation have also made it more difficult for countries to manage their debt loads.That is a problem across the globe, including in the United States, where the gross national debt stands just above $33 trillion. Foreign appetite for government bonds has been weak in recent months and concerns about the sustainability of America’s debt have become more prevalent. That is making it somewhat more challenging for the United States to counsel other nations on how they should manage their finances.The most challenging task for Ms. Yellen will be persuading other nations to continue to provide robust economic aid to Ukraine as its war with Russia drags on. European nations are coping with economic stagnation, and with Congress in disarray, it is unclear how the U.S. will continue to help Ukraine prop up its economy.Ms. Yellen said she would tell her counterparts that supporting Ukraine remains a top priority. Explaining that the Biden administration lacks good options for providing assistance on its own, she called on Congress to authorize additional funding.“Fundamentally we have to get Congress to approve this,” Ms. Yellen said. “There’s no gigantic set of resources that we don’t need Congress for.”Dismissing concerns that the U.S. cannot afford to support Ukraine, Ms. Yellen argued that the cost of letting the country fall to Russia would ultimately be higher.“If you think about what the national security implications are for us if we allow a democratic country in Europe to be overrun by Russia and what that’s going to mean in the future for our own national defense needs and those of our neighbors, we can’t not afford it,” Ms. Yellen said. More

  • 163 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Claudia Goldin Wins Nobel in Economics for Studying Women in the Work Force

    Her research uncovered the reasons for gender gaps in labor force participation and earnings. She is the third woman to win the prize.The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences was awarded on Monday to Claudia Goldin, a Harvard professor, for advancing the world’s understanding of women’s progress in the work force.Dr. Goldin is the third woman to have won the economics Nobel, which was first awarded in 1969, and the first one to be honored with it solo rather than sharing in the prize.Who is the winner?Claudia Goldin, 77, is the Henry Lee Professor of Economics at Harvard University. She has long been a trailblazer in the field — she was the first woman to be offered tenure in Harvard’s economics department, in 1989.She was asleep when the call informing her of the prize came in — she had gotten up earlier to let the dog out but had gone back to bed. She said in an interview that she was “delighted.”She saw a woman winning the economics award on her own as a sort of “culmination” after years of “important changes” toward more gender diversity in the field.Why did the committee say she received the prize?The Nobel committee announced the award in Stockholm. The committee praised Dr. Goldin for her research into female employment, which showed that employment among married women decreased in the 1800s, as the economy moved away from agricultural and toward industry. Women’s participation then increased in the 1900s, as the service sector began to expand as a part of the economy.She also illustrated that the process of closing the gender wage gap has been uneven over the course of history. Recently, progress in closing it has been halting: Today, Women in the United States make a little over 80 cents for every dollar a man makes.In the past, gender wage gaps could be explained by education and occupation. But Dr. Goldin has shown that most of the earnings difference is now between men and women in the same jobs, the Nobel committee said. Notably, it kicks in after the birth of a woman’s first child.In a 15-year study of business school students at the University of Chicago, for instance, Goldin and her colleagues found in one paper that the gap in pay started to widen a year or two after a woman had her first baby.“Claudia Goldin’s discoveries have vast societal implications,” said Randi Hjalmarsson, a member of the committee and professor of economics at the University of Gothenburg.Dr. Goldin said that she hoped people would take away from her work how important long-term changes are to understanding the labor market.“We see a residue of history around us,” she said, explaining that societal and family structures that women and men grow up in shape their behavior and economic outcomes.While there has been “monumental progressive change, at the same time there are important differences,” she said, and those differences often tie back to women doing more work in the home. “We’re never going to have gender equality until we also have couple equity.”Who won the 2022 Nobel for economics?Last year, the award went to Ben S. Bernanke, the former Federal Reserve chair, along with Douglas W. Diamond of the University of Chicago and Philip H. Dybvig of Washington University in St. Louis. They won for work that has reshaped how the world understands the relationship between banks and financial crises.The economics prize was established in memory of Alfred Nobel by Sweden’s central bank and is awarded by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.Who else has won a Nobel Prize this year?The award for physiology or medicine went to Katalin Kariko and Drew Weissman for their discoveries that led to the development of effective vaccines against Covid-19.The prize in physics was shared by Pierre Agostini, Ferenc Krausz and Anne L’Huillier for techniques that illuminate the subatomic realm of electrons.The award for chemistry went to Moungi G. Bawendi, Louis E. Brus and Alexei I. Ekimov for the discovery and development of quantum dots, nanoparticles so small that their size determines their properties.The literature prize went to the Norwegian novelist, poet and playwright Jon Fosse “for his innovative plays and prose which give voice to the unsayable.”The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Narges Mohammadi, Iran’s most prominent human rights activist and an inmate in the country’s notorious Evin Prison, “for her fight against the oppression of women in Iran and her fight to promote human rights and freedom for all.” More

  • 125 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Russia’s Economy Is Increasingly Structured Around Its War in Ukraine

    The nation’s finances have proven resilient, despite punishing sanctions, giving it leeway to pump money into its military machine.“Everything needed for the front,” Russia’s finance minister declared, echoing a Soviet slogan from World War II as he talked about the government’s latest spending plans.The government still calls its invasion of Ukraine a “special military operation,” but the new budget figures make clear that the economy is increasingly being restructured around war.Nearly a third of the country’s spending next year — roughly $109 billion — will be devoted to “national defense,” the government announced late last month, redirecting money that might otherwise have flowed to health care, education, roads and other sectors. More tellingly, 6 percent of the nation’s total output is being funneled toward Russia’s war machine, more than double what it was before the invasion.Since Russia sent soldiers across the border in February 2022, its economy has had to adapt to dramatic changes with astonishing speed. The European Union, its biggest trading partner, quickly broke economic relations, upending well-established supply chains and reliable sources of income from abroad. The United States used its financial might to freeze hundreds of billions of dollars in Russian assets and cut the country off from the global financial system.Nineteen months later, the economic picture is decidedly mixed. The Russian economy has proved to be much more resilient than many Western governments assumed after imposing a punishing string of sanctions.Moscow has found other buyers for its oil. It has pumped money into the economy at a rapid pace to finance its military machine, putting almost every available worker into a job and raising the size of weekly paychecks. Total output, which the Russian Central Bank estimates may rise as much as 2.5 percent this year, could outpace the European Union and possibly even the United States.Yet that is only part of the story. As Laura Solanko, a senior adviser at the Bank of Finland Institute for Economies in Transition, said: “When a country is at war, gross domestic product is a fairly poor measure of welfare.” Producing bullets adds to a country’s growth rate without necessarily improving the quality of life.The insistent demand for foreign currency — to pay for imported goods or provide a safe investment — has also caused the value of the ruble to sink at a precipitous pace. Last week, it fell to a symbolic break point of 100 to the dollar, further fueling inflation and raising anxiety levels among consumers.Shoppers buying meat at the central market in Rostov-on-Don, Russia, in 2021. Inflation in Russia has driven up the price of meat and other products since the start of the war in Ukraine.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesThe spike in government spending and borrowing has seriously stressed an already overheated economy. The central bank rapidly raised interest rates to 13 percent over the summer, as annual inflation continued to climb. Higher rates, which make it more expensive for businesses to expand and consumers to buy on credit, is likely to slow growth.Consumers are also feeling the squeeze for daily purchases. “Dairy products, especially butter, meat and even bread have gone up in price,” said Lidia Adreevna as she shopped and examined prices at an Auchan supermarket in Moscow. She blamed the central bank.“Life changes,” she offered, “nothing stays forever, not love, or happiness.”Other pensioners at the store also spoke about increases in meat and poultry prices, something almost half of Russians have noticed in the past month, according to survey data from the Moscow-based Public Opinion Foundation published Friday. Respondents also noted increases in the price of medicine and construction materials.Moscow imposed a temporary ban on diesel and gasoline exports last month in an effort to ease shortages and slow rising energy prices, but the restrictions further reduced the amount of foreign currency coming into the country.The exodus of funds is so worrying that the government has warned of reinstating controls on money leaving the country.With a presidential election scheduled in March, President Vladimir V. Putin acknowledged last month that accelerating inflation fueled by a weakened ruble was a major cause of concern. Getting a handle on price increases may discourage the government from embarking on its usual pre-election social spending.Lower standards of living can be “uncomfortable even for an authoritarian government,” said Charles Lichfield, deputy director of the Atlantic Council’s Geoeconomics Center.Since Russia imports a wide range of goods — from telephones and washing machines to cars, medicine and coffee — he said a devalued ruble makes “it more difficult for consumers to buy what they’re used to buying.”A Karachi Port Trust security guard keeping watch over the Clyde Noble, a Russian crude oil tanker berthed at the Karachi Port in Pakistan in June. Pakistan received discounted Russian crude oil as part of a new deal between Islamabad and Moscow.Rehan Khan/EPA, via ShutterstockThe United States, the European Union and countries allied with Ukraine have doggedly tried to cripple Russia with sweeping sanctions.The impact was swift and sharp in the spring of 2022. The ruble tumbled, the central bank increased rates to 20 percent to attract investors, and the government imposed strict controls on capital to keep money inside the country.But the ruble has since bounced back and interest rates come down. Russia found eager buyers elsewhere for its oil, which was selling at vastly discounted prices; liquefied natural gas; and other raw materials. More recently, Russia has become adept at evading the $60 per barrel price cap on oil imposed by the Group of 7 nations as global oil prices have once again started to rise.China is among the nations that have stepped up to buy energy and sell goods to Russia that they previously might have exchanged with European nations. Trade with China rose at an annual rate of 32 percent in the first eight months of this year. Trade with India tripled in the first half of the year, and exports from Turkey rose nearly 89 percent over the same period.Meanwhile, the war is gobbling up other parts of Russia’s budget aside from direct military spending. An additional 9.2 percent of the budget is slated for “national security,” which includes law enforcement. There is money for injured soldiers and for families of those killed in battle, and for “integrating new regions,” a reference to occupied territory in Ukraine.Sergei Guriev, a Russian economist who fled the country in 2013 and is now provost at Sciences Po in Paris, said accurately assessing the Russian economy is difficult. The existing economic models were designed before the war and based on different assumptions, and the published budget figures are incomplete.What that means for Russian households on a daily basis is harder to discern.“Overall, it’s very hard to compare quality of life before and after the war,” Mr. Guriev said. “It’s hard to know what Russians think. People are afraid.”Valerie Hopkins More

  • 88 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Amid Strikes, One Question: Are Employers Miscalculating?

    UPS, the Hollywood studios and the Detroit automakers appear to have been taken aback by the tactics and tougher style adopted by new union leaders.The list of gains that the Hollywood writers secured to end a nearly five-month strike with studios once seemed ludicrously ambitious: not just wage increases, but also minimum staffing levels for shows, new royalties on successful series and restrictions on outsourcing writing duties to artificial intelligence.Yet far from an anomaly, the writers’ deal was the latest high-profile labor standoff that seemed to produce substantial gains for workers, and to suggest that they have more leverage than in the past.United Parcel Service employees won large pay increases for part-timers by pushing the company to the brink of a strike, while the lowest-paid academic student employees at the University of California won salary increases of more than 50 percent after a monthlong strike affected thousands of students.Given the unions’ apparent bargaining power and the economic costs to a prolonged work stoppage, the question arises: Why wouldn’t management make its eventual concessions more quickly?The answer, many union and management experts say, is that employers are increasingly miscalculating — acting from a template that applied in previous decades, when employees had little leverage, and underestimating the frustration and resolve in the postpandemic work force.“Psychologically, it’s a big shift: They’ve been in control. They have been able to tell their representatives to go and get concessions on X and Y, to make sure the wage increase is modest,” said Thomas Kochan, an emeritus management professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, referring to corporate executives.“Now, they have to change their expectations internally,” Dr. Kochan added. “They have a lot of work to do.”In example after example, executives appear to have been taken aback by unions’ new, more assertive leaders and their success at rallying members and the public, as well as the ineffectiveness of the employers’ traditional bargaining approach.Sean O’Brien, the Teamsters president, right, attacked UPS over what the union referred to as “part-time poverty” jobs.Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesIn Hollywood, the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, which represents entertainment companies in negotiations with writers, directors and actors, has frequently tried to forge a deal with one of the three guilds, then push the other two to accept similar terms.That appeared to be the group’s strategy this year as well: After the writers went on strike in May, the alliance reached a deal with directors the next month. But any hope that the writers would be isolated collapsed when SAG-AFTRA, the union representing more than 150,000 actors, went on strike in July.“The playbook was clearly outdated,” said Peter Newman, a longtime independent producer who heads a dual-degree master’s program in business and fine arts at New York University’s Tisch School of the Arts.Still, Mr. Newman said, the strikes saved the studios hundreds of millions of dollars on shows in the short term as Wall Street was pressuring them to cut costs.The producers’ alliance declined to comment for this article.In Detroit, the three major U.S. automakers had grown accustomed to closed-door negotiations with the United Automobile Workers union, in which the parties did not disclose the potential terms until they reached an overall agreement.But in the run-up to this year’s mid-September strike deadline, the union’s new president, Shawn Fain, appeared to wrong-foot executives at Ford Motor, General Motors and Stellantis — which makes the Chrysler and Jeep brands — by disclosing and deriding the companies’ offers. In one case, he literally threw a Stellantis proposal in the garbage.Automakers have expressed impatience with the leadership style of Shawn Fain, center, the United Automobile Workers union leader.Cydni Elledge for The New York TimesThe companies’ responses — a Stellantis executive sent employees a letter saying that “theatrics and personal insults will not help,” while Ford and G.M. have also expressed impatience — may have further galvanized members and built public support. Polls have found that the public supports the autoworkers over the companies by large margins, and that the margins increased after the U.A.W. began a limited strike.“It doesn’t seem like they were prepared for the direction he was headed with his public comments,” David Pryzbylski, a labor lawyer who represents employers at Barnes & Thornburg, said of the reaction to Mr. Fain. “The way they have responded may have escalated it further versus letting it die out.”Stellantis declined to comment. Auto industry executives argue that they have made historically generous offers, and that they haven’t been put off by Mr. Fain’s outspokenness so much as what they say are the showmanship and the unrealistic expectations he has created.Mr. Pryzbylski emphasized that it was too early to tell whether the landscape had tilted to labor’s advantage for the longer term, or just temporarily. The outcome of the U.A.W. strike remains unclear, and the workers’ resolve could diminish if the strike drags on for weeks. Talks between the sides are ongoing.Other management-side lawyers said that while a handful of executives might have miscalculated of late, there was no broader trend in this direction. They say that employers remain capable of assessing and acting in their self-interest, and that unions are equally capable of miscalculating.“People are sophisticated on both sides,” said Marshall Babson, a longtime management-side lawyer and former member of the National Labor Relations Board. “From my experience, good negotiators don’t get distracted by pyrotechnics.”But in many cases, what has changed is not so much the bluster from union leaders as their willingness to follow through — a potentially disruptive shift after years of often empty threats.When Sean O’Brien, the Teamsters president, ran to succeed his longtime predecessor, James P. Hoffa, in 2021, he promised to raise wages for part-time workers at UPS, many of whom had long felt shortchanged.And yet, according to two people close to the negotiations, the company seemed caught off guard when talks broke down over the issue on July 5 — Mr. O’Brien’s initial deadline.Mr. O’Brien and the union spent the next few weeks publicly attacking UPS over what the union referred to as “part-time poverty” jobs before the company agreed to hourly wage increases for part-timers of more than $7.50 over the life of the new five-year contract.The chief executive of UPS, Carol Tomé, said the company had expected contract talks this year “to be late and loud, and they were.”Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesShortly after a tentative deal was reached in late July, the UPS chief executive, Carol Tomé, said the company had expected the negotiations “to be late and loud, and they were.” The company declined to comment for this article.Part of the challenge for employers is public opinion: Confidence in big business is at its lowest point in decades, according to Gallup, while approval of labor unions is close to its highest. Mr. Fain and Mr. O’Brien appear to have devised their public campaigns to press this advantage.Unions also appear to have benefited from new methods of keeping members focused on shared goals — as when writers erupted on social media over the news that the talk show hosted by Drew Barrymore would return before the strike ended. (Ms. Barrymore soon reversed course.)And rank-and-file members appear to have become more committed to their leaders’ negotiating strategy as unions have become more democratic and involved members more in the push for a contract, said Jane McAlevey, a longtime labor organizer and scholar.But perhaps most important, employers seem to be underestimating the determination of workers, who believe they have little to lose from striking amid rising prices and fundamental shifts in their industry that have sometimes made their jobs more precarious.A few weeks after the writers walked off the job this spring, Mae Smith, a strike captain and former writer on the Showtime series “Billions,” predicted in an interview that the economic pain of a protracted strike against the studios would not discourage the writers because “unfortunately they’ve been training us to live off very few months of work for a long time.”The prediction largely held, in something of a departure from the 2007 writers’ strike. Back then, when streaming felt like a distant threat, there were some splits within the Writers Guild over how aggressive to be, said Chris Keyser, a past president of the union.This time, the writers appeared particularly unified by the looming role of artificial intelligence, an issue on which the studios largely refused to engage for months.“A number of C.E.O.s, when we talked to them later about A.I., said that was a mistake,” recalled Mr. Keyser, a co-chair of the writers’ negotiating committee this year.(The writers did compromise on some key issues in the end — there is no ban on studios’ use of scripts they own to train A.I. tools, though the guild reserved the right to challenge instances of this.)Dr. Kochan of M.I.T. said the concession from studios on artificial intelligence was especially significant because it highlighted another shift: employers’ diminished ability to limit negotiations to conventional issues like wages and benefits while often reserving the right to control other aspects of the job, like technology adoption.“For decades, management has been able to say: ‘These are our decisions, our prerogatives. It’s none of your business,’” he said.With the breakthrough on artificial intelligence, he added, “this is a new day — that’s why the writers’ strike was so important.” More

  • 163 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Even as job creation surges, Americans still think the economy stinks. Here’s why

    If a healthy jobs picture is the the cornerstone of a healthy economy, then why do so many people still think things are terrible?
    The answer is inflation which, while heading lower in terms of its annual pace, is still far more than most people can stand.
    “Aggregate economic statistics sometimes don’t reflect what people are living day to day,” said economist Elizabeth Crofoot.

    People pump gas into their vehicles at a Shell petrol station on October 2, 2023 in Alhambra, California. 
    Frederic J. Brown | Afp | Getty Images

    The U.S. economy has added more than 2.3 million jobs this year, the unemployment rate is still below 4% and there are nearly 10 million open positions out there for anyone still looking for work.
    So if a healthy jobs picture is the the cornerstone of a healthy economy, then why do so many people still think things are terrible?

    It’s because the rent — along with the food, the gas and the appliances — is still too damn high. In a word: Inflation, which while heading lower in terms of its annual pace, is still far more than most people can stand and is making everything else look, if not terrible, at least less wonderful.
    “You see all these high-level headline numbers, and those numbers don’t jibe with your economic reality,” said Elizabeth Crofoot, senior economist at labor analytics firm Lightcast. “I don’t know if there’s a right or wrong, it’s just people’s reality, and aggregate economic statistics sometimes don’t reflect what people are living day to day.”
    The latest batch of seemingly great economic news came Friday, when the Labor Department said nonfarm payrolls rose by 336,000 in September. And that wasn’t all: Revisions to July and August showed an additional 119,000 jobs added, and the unemployment rate held steady at 3.8%.That all came on top of what has been another stellar year for job creation.
    Yet President Joe Biden’s economic approval rating is just 42%, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll. Consumer and business sentiment has shown signs of improving — the latest University of Michigan consumer survey shows confidence has returned to around where it was in late-2021 — but is still well below where it was pre-pandemic.

    That is likely because prices are still at painful levels.

    As an economist, Crofoot says the difficulty high prices are posing can be tough to discern from the macro data. As a consumer, though, she says she can feel it when she takes her two kids out to dinner and sees that not only have prices risen for children’s meals, but things like free drinks for them have been taken away as well.
    “It’s the combination of inflation and shrinkflation,” she said. “As a consumer, you feel like you’re being nickeled and dimed at every turn.”
    About 10% of consumer items were downsized from 2015-2021, while 4% were upsized, according to the Labor Department. Again, though, the data often don’t seem to match experiences, and the shrinkflation phenomenon — less of a product, with the same or higher prices — seems to be getting worse.
    “Consumers just feel like they can’t win, and of course you’re going to feel down on the economy because of that,” Crofoot said.

    Higher housing

    It hasn’t just been gas and groceries that are making it feel like the cost of living is out of control.
    Home prices soared in Covid’s aftermath, pushing people out of urban centers and into outlying regions. The median home sales price has surged 27% since the end of 2019, making owning a home particularly difficult for younger buyers such as millennials.
    The median age of a homebuyer in the U.S. is 36, the oldest-ever in data going back to 1981, according to the National Association of Realtors. At the same time, the share of income as a percentage of home prices is at its highest ever, according to government data that goes back to 1987.

    “Even though millennials are the largest adult generation in the U.S., they had a shrinking share of buyers in the market last year,” NAR deputy chief economist Jessica Lautz wrote in a recent blog post. “This is at odds with what could happen as the largest number of millennials is at an age they traditionally have entered the market or at least had household formation. This year, baby boomers overtook millennials.”
    Higher prices have been one problem. Higher interest rates are another, with 30-year mortgages running at an average 7.83% loan rate, according to Bankrate. Financial markets are on edge that the Federal Reserve could take rates even higher if inflation doesn’t cool.
    “This has very significant implications for wealth building,” Crofoot added.

    Are the jobs numbers really that good?

    Beyond the housing costs, there’s some evidence that the jobs numbers may not be all they’re cracked up to be, either.
    After all, more than a quarter of the job creation for September came from lower-wage occupations in the leisure and hospitality industry.
    Real career advancement opportunities are tougher to get these days, and Census Bureau surveys have shown growing despair among teens and the Gen Z cohort, who worry about their future on an economic level.

    “Inflation continues to be a major source of concern for young adults, offsetting [Friday’s] potentially good employment news,” said William Rodgers III, director of the Institute for Economic Equity at the St. Louis Fed. “It, too, may be contributing to their heightened mental health distress.”
    So even as the good macro data continues to pour in, high prices likely will continue to serve as an offsetting factor.
    While the consumer price index may show inflation running at a 3.7% annual rate now, it’s about 20% higher than it was since early in the pandemic. The CPI numbers for September will be released Wednesday.
    “Prices are high relative to what they were before,” Crofoot said. “So you’re spending more than you can save, and so retirement is going to be further off for you than it was for previous generations.” More