On January 28, the Trump administration was it Providing a baiout About 2 million federal workers. Those who accept this offer will receive the full amount and benefits for eight months. What is expected is that 5-10 % of the federal workers accept this offer, $ 100 billion Every year.
This approach is at least attractive on the surface. Federal government's labor is enlarged. ELON MUSK's government efficiency or DOGE stations clearly have the opportunity to replace capital with labor. Artificial intelligence will be able to execute many of the tasks currently being implemented by federal workers.
Potential savings are attractive, but probably fantastic.
Companies have become very popular among Fortune 500 companies in the 1990s. It was greatly promised by the co -co -co -co -owner who can achieve important efficiency with a smaller labor force. The efficiency of employee downsizing is theoretically attractive, but it can be proven that it is unbearable.
If you are the CEO of Fortune 500 companies (or the President of the United States) and are logically thinking about how to implement downsizing, you will start by offering the most productive workers. 。
The problem of this approach is that, especially if your minimum production worker is disproportionate and non -white, you can immediately hit a legitimate bog. Employment discrimination lawsuit takes time and costs a lawsuit.
The fact that the full downsizing in the United States has become a common practice is suggesting that the management has performed mathematics, and the interests expected by the employer from the selective downsizing of low -production workers. It was judged that it exceeded the expected litigation costs. This explains why the employer who is trying to shrink frequently relys on a full acquisition offer.
However, since these workers have the most advantageous external opportunities, the full offer is likely to be accepted by the best production workers. In the case of the federal government, these workers can accept their eight -month salary and salary offer and do not miss the day of work.
In contrast, the minimum productivity workers are likely to have almost no external opportunities, so their best strategy may be the government's offer. This tends to leave more share of government low -performance. I am clinging to a job that I am not so skilled or that I can't afford to lose hard workers.
In the late 20th century, the telecommunications industry faced a scenario, unlike what the federal government has experienced today. With the emergence of microchip technology, the industry has noticed that the industry is expanding in a rapid prospect of technical changes.
The general practice was to provide a full -scale acquisition offer to promote the downsizing necessary to achieve an efficient capital labor mix. The productivity growth of these companies has become less noticeable or worse over the years immediately after these downsizing initiatives. One of the plausible explanations of this development is that the workers who accept the offer were disproportionately high -production workers.
This example indicates a full -scale shopping problem to promote downsizing. It causes a disadvantageous choice problem in the postdown sizing, and the employer has a greater percentage of “wrong” type of workers. Similar problems have appeared in the health insurance market. The most sick people are most likely to sign up to health insurance.
Therefore, the employer said, “Hobson selection-The outlook for excessive lawsuits with a ridiculous labor with a selective downsizing or full downsizing.
Is there a better way? Employers may want to consider high -production workers holding bonuses to compete with “brain drain problems” related to downsizing the entire board. These can be taken in various ways, but one model is to provide high -productive workers with additional compensation every four years employed by organizations. This approach enhances the possibility of maintaining high -production workers.
The Trump administration's Douge is an initiative worthy of praise, led by one of our outstanding industry. It provides the hope that it is more than just dressing in the window. Nevertheless, trap doors are abundant in the process of reducing labor.
History tells that the operation of the government, unlike business operations, is not synonymous with reduced labor as more efficient labor. These are only a few of the difficult tasks facing the mask and his brothers.
Dr. Dennis L. Wiseman, Professor Emeritus of Economics of State State University.
