The list of die-hard fans of minimum salary in Italy it is enriched by one new entry: this is it Nicolas Schmit, European Commissioner for Labor and exponent of the Socialist Workers Party of Luxembourg. Well yes. The various Contes were already not enough, Schlein and Landini, now we also have to put up with the socially correct lectures of the little-known Luxembourg EU minister, who would like to explain to us, directly from Brussels, the functioning of the Italian labor market.
During an interview given to ‘The print‘, Commissioner Schmit, first came across the discovery of hot water, highlighting how higher salary levels are more incentivizing for individuals than very low salaries. Subsequently, from the height of his indisputable creative genius, the EU minister pulled the solution out of the hat to resolve in one fell swoop the plagues of youth unemployment, poor work, illegal work and brain drain: minimum wage for all. The panacea for every evil that afflicts the job market in Italy, evidently. Really brilliant. How did we not think about it before. Fortunately, he, the enlightened and enlightening socialist from the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, did it.
It’s just a shame that the attentive European Commissioner didn’t take a whole series of things into consideration risks and critical issues connected to the introduction of a minimum wage in our country. First of all, given the prestigious institutional role held, Schmit should know that decisions regarding salary levels in Italy are largely taken during bargaining collective, and are therefore already regulated. In many cases, however, with minimum salary thresholds that exceed the 9 euros per hour envisaged by the bill put forward by the opposition.
Another aspect that is not of little importance, but probably underestimated by European Labor Commissioner, concerns the impact of the tax wedge on companies. In fact, the possible introduction of a minimum wage would end up weighing entirely on company budgets, with the result of risking compromising the financial stability of companies, which would find themselves, despite themselves, forced to deal with an exponential increase in costs of work. In this case, we could therefore run the risk of having a minimum wage guaranteed by law for every worker, but at the price of losing jobs as a direct effect of companies’ inability to cope with rising costs. Quite a paradox.
Furthermore, like what already happened in the case of Citizenship Income, it could still happen that the introduction of a minimum wage ends up further encouraging the practice of undeclared work. In fact, with the possible imposition of a minimum wage set by lawOn the one hand, there could be workers willing to work even below the minimum rate imposed, and, on the other, companies forced to resort to the same old tricks in order to remain competitive on the market.
In short, there appear to be many critical issues, and there would be just as many repercussions closely related to the introduction of a minimum wage in Italy. But obviously all of this Nicolas Schmit he must not have thought. Perhaps because he is too distracted by the many institutional tasks that he necessarily has to take on while respecting the delicate institutional role he holds. Or more likely, because the good Commissioner Schmit it totally ignores the Italian reality into which, with notable contempt for the danger (this must be acknowledged), he deliberately decided to venture. Maybe because, like a good guy radical-progressive which is, did not feel like abandoning to their cruel fate the confused local progressives in yellow-red sauce who, precisely on the issues of work, continue to receive sound defeats every day and collect epochal fools.