The implementation of minimum wage policies is often a contentious issue, with debates surrounding its potential impacts on employment, poverty rates, and overall economic welfare.
A recent study by Ihsaan Bassier, a researcher at the London School of Economics and Political Science, and Vimal Ranchhod, a researcher at the University of Cape Town, scrutinises the immediate aftermath of the wage increase. It offers valuable insights into the effects on wages, employment dynamics, household income, and poverty rates within the agricultural sector.
Food For Mzansi discussed the findings of the study with Bassier and the repercussions of the 2013 minimum wage hike on South African farmworkers. He also explains the implications of their findings for future minimum wage policies.
Octavia Avesca Spandiel: Quite a detailed study, Ihsaan. What were the main findings?
Ihsaan Bassier: On average, across all workers, we estimated one quarter later that the minimum wage increased hourly wages by 5.6%, increased the chance that a worker stayed employed, increased household income by about 6.3%, and decreased the poverty rate. However, these effects varied by how much workers were paid before the new minimum wage.
Why are agriculture and the role farmworkers play so important?
South Africa’s agricultural sector is a low-wage industry contributing about 2% of gross domestic product (GDP). Over the last four decades, the sector has shed jobs and relied increasingly on casual labour (seasonal workers).
Farmworkers have among the lowest average wages in the country, with poor living and working conditions. While farmworkers account for less than 5% of all employment, they comprise about half of employment in rural formal areas.
Related stories
- ICYMI: Minimum wage families hit hard by soaring food prices
- Farmworker indaba sheds light on social challenges on wine farms
- Unheard no more: How farmworkers’ votes can drive change
How does non-compliance with the new minimum wage impact the effectiveness of the policy?
Our results indicated low minimum wage compliance among the lowest-paid workers, that is, some employers who were initially paying workers the least did not comply with the new minimum wage.
On the one hand, this undermines the policy because it is illegal and means workers who should have been paid more were not. On the other hand, it may also have lessened its negative effects if employers who did not comply were the employers with the lowest profit margins and would have had to shut down or retrench many workers if they did in fact comply.
Consistent with this, we found much weaker compliance in small firms, where we would otherwise expect the most negative effects on employment.
Another explanation is that the lowest paid workers were the workers least able to force employers to comply, and these employers were more likely to keep them employed as a result. If this is the case, then higher compliance would have meant workers’ wages and poverty rates would have improved even more with compliance.
How did the minimum wage increase affect household income and poverty rates among farmworkers in the short term?
Workers paid just below the new minimum had the biggest wage gains, about 10%, with little effect on employment, and a 5% point decline in the poverty rate.
On the other hand, counterintuitively, those who were initially the lowest-paid workers had the smallest wage gains, about 6%, with an increase in the probability of retaining employment, and a similar 5% point decrease in the poverty rate.
Looking ahead, what are the implications of these findings for future minimum wage policies?
Firstly, these positive short-run effects of such a large minimum wage increase provide some optimism that such policy changes do substantially improve the lives of poorly paid workers.
Farm employers warned at the time that the higher wages would result in large job losses, and at least in the short term according to our results, this does not seem to be the case. Our study provides reason for optimism about the effects of minimum wage policies on poverty, and one can think similarly for other policy interventions in the agricultural sector.
Secondly, the level of non-compliance is both concerning and complicated. Since some of the non-compliance may have been desirable (if it prevented retrenchments) while some of the non-compliance may have been undesirable (for those who could afford the increase without retrenchments), it would be better for policy purposes if there was both stricter enforcement of the minimum wage together with better engagement on the current “exceptions” policy that allows sub-minimum pay for struggling farm employers.
ALSO READ: Farmers divided over new climate response fund
Sign up for Mzansi Today: Your daily take on the news and happenings from the agriculture value chain
