From 'more' to greed

National Review, Sept 15, 1997 by William F. Buckley, Jr.

What was most interesting about the strike against United Parcel Service was the politics of it. Ever since Mr. John Sweeney took over the reins of the AFL - CIO he has been lusting for a fight that would attract the attention of the public and, above all, of unorganized workers, these accounting for about 85 per cent of the American work force. Memory reminds us that not all that much has changed. When asked what he wanted for his union, Samuel Gompers replied with the quiet but resonant word, "More." Supply-side teaches that more is indeed always possible. That's so because there is an infinity of human appetite, which tosses and turns against the scarcity of human resources. More can always be had, in the sense that general productivity can rise and other products can be devised, and yearned for.

Whereas Gompers had asked for More, Ron Carey of the Teamsters accepted as his battle cry: "Greed." "An excessive desire to acquire or to possess more than what one needs or deserves," as the American Heritage Dictionary defines it. This definition requires application to real-life stories. The economic model in capitalism is that a living wage must be paid in order for an economy to function. Mr. Carey insisted that part-time workers for United Parcel Service earned "too little to live on," which prompts the question, Why aren't they dead? The specific reply of management's James Kelly was that the average part-time worker for UPS earned more per year than the average American worker -- and so it went on.

Those curious about whether the situation calls into question any of the postulates of the capitalist model are in effect asking, If as a result of seasonal activity there is enough work for only 30 weeks, shouldn't the employer hire the worker for 52 weeks anyway, as a matter of social principle? The employer inevitably replies: To assume an extra obligation on that scale has only one meaning, namely inefficiency. Under capitalism, regulation is done by competition, and the cost of inefficiency is diminished capacity to compete. And that means bad news not only for shareholders, but also for workers. Mr. Carey here shot back that since UPS does 80 per cent of the nation's package-delivery business, and had a modest profit of 5 per cent on its gross, it can reasonably convert the part-time worker to full-time without any real danger to the company's pre-eminence.

The settlement is substantially a union victory, though it is seen as that looking through a lens obligingly crafted to illuminate only palpable benefits. Ten thousand part-time workers will go full-time in the next four years. It is useful to focus on this accommodation with the Christmas-season phenomenon in mind. Consider book-selling. Forty per cent of all the books that are sold move across the counter during the four weeks between Thanksgiving and Christmas. Everyone knows that when Christmas comes around, juniors and seniors are brought into service -- in the Post Office, for instance. Some economic accommodation is obviously in order, to meet these steep short-term demands. What does Teamster procrusteanism do about such phenomena? Is it a new labor-union objective to come up with cognate definitions for the five-day week, the eight-hour day? How exactly would it be stated? If you work more than 26 weeks per year, you must be hired for 52 weeks?

That is the general approach, but of course it leaves out the competitive dimension. If the total pay package is to be shared not among 100 workers but among 110, then that pay package has to reduce in size -- or else be augmented by more efficient activity. UPS has done this by "economies of scale." Up to a point (where the marginal cost equals the price of the marginal unit), the larger the business the less the per-unit cost. But UPS is now exposed. Under the new contract, economies become more difficult. Those difficulties will quite reasonably be exploited by UPS's two principal competitors. It will not serve the long-term interests of the Teamsters if there is a trickle of men and women leaving UPS to work for Federal Express, when FedEx is hiring and UPS is stalled.

The economic balance sheet will be seen later. Meanwhile, with unemployment at 5 per cent, the talk will be of Greed. Economic greed. Political greed is okay.