1 multinationals and local firms: differences in wages and labour standards? a first comparison of...

1

Multinationals and local firms:differences in wages and labour standards? A first comparison of

NL, Argentina and Brazil

Rob van Tulder & Fabienne Fortanier[PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE]

Competence Centre for International Business-Society Management Research/ RSM Erasmus University

2

Netherlands: wages

Gross hourly wages, Index. Domestic firms = 100. Minimum nr of observations per firm is 10.N.B.: uncontrolled for any other variables that affect wages such as education, experience, industry, etc.

0 50 100 150 200 250

Domestic firms in NL (average)

Foreign firms in NL (average)

LogicaCMG

Shell

Deloitte

KPMG

ABN AMRO Bank

IBM

Cap Gemini

Vodafone

Microsoft

3

Netherlands: collective agreements

% of respondents that indicates that there is a collective agreement in their workplace. Minimum n per firm is 10.Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables that affect wages such as education, experience, industry, etc.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%



LogicaCMG

Shell

Pricewaterhouse Coopers

Deloitte

ABN AMRO Bank

KPMG

Cap Gemini

IBM

4

Netherlands: union membership

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%



LogicaCMG

Shell


Deloitte

KPMG

ABN AMRO Bank

IBM

Cap Gemini

% of respondents that indicates to be a member of a trade union. Minimum n per firm is 10.Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

5

Netherlands: equal opportunity

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Domestic firms in NL(average)

Foreign firms in NL(average)

LogicaCMG


Cap Gemini

Deloitte

Microsoft

Shell

% of respondents that indicates that there is equal opportunity in the workplace. Minimum n per firm is 10.Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

6

Netherlands: unhealthy conditions

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5



LogicaCMG


Deloitte

Shell

ABN AMRO Bank

IBM

Cap Gemini

KPMG

Never Always

Average time in which respondents work in unhealthy conditions. Minimum n per firm is 10.Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

7

Argentina: wages

gross hourly wages, Index. Domestic firms = 100. Minimum nr of observations per firm is 10.Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables that affect wages such as education, experience, industry, etc.

0 50 100 150 200 250

Domestic firms in AR (average)

Foreign firms in AR (average)

Telefonica

Telecom Argentina

IBM Argentina

Petrobras

Toyota

Repsol YPF

Accenture Argentina

HSBC Argentina

Telmex

8

Brazil: wages

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Domestic firms in BR(average)

Foreign firms in BR(average)

Bradesco

Alcatel

Embratel

TIM

Supermercado Nacional

Accenture Brazil

Hewlett Packard

gross hourly wages, Index. Domestic firms = 100. Minimum nr of observations per firm is 10.Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables that affect wages such as education, experience, industry, etc.

Difference comparable to Argentina

9

Argentina: collective agreements

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%



Telefonica

Telecom Argentina

IBM Argentina

Toyota

Petrobras

Repsol YPF

Accenture Argentina

Arcor

% of respondents that indicates that there is a collective agreement in their workplace. Minimum n per firm is 10.Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

10

Brazil: collective agreements

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%

Domestic firms in BR (average)

Foreign firms in BR (average)

Bradesco

TIM

Embratel


Alcatel

IMB Brazil

Siemens Brazil

% of respondents that indicates that there is a collective agreement in their workplace. Minimum n per firm is 10.Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

Much higher than in Arg.

11

Argentina: union membership

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%



Telefonica

Telecom Argentina

IBM Argentina

Petrobras

Toyota

Repsol YPF

Accenture Argentina

Telmex


12

Brazil: union membership

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Domestic firms in BR (average)

Foreign firms in BR (average)

Bradesco

TIM

Alcatel


IMB Brazil

Embratel

Accenture Brazil


13

Argentina: equal opportunity

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%



Telefonica

Telecom Argentina

Petrobras

Toyota

Accenture Argentina

Repsol YPF

IBM Argentina

Telmex

Arcor

% of respondents that indicates that there is equal opportunity in the workplace. Minimum n per firm is 10.Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

Brasil: no data

14

Argentina: other benefits

% of respondents that indicates to receive the benefit. Minimum n per firm is 10.Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Toyota

Accenture Argentina

IBM Argentina

Petrobras

Telecom Argentina

Telefonica

Foreign firms in AR(average)

Domestic firms in AR(average)

Contribution to medical insurance Goods or wages in kind Contribution to pension scheme

Consistently higher

Interesting

15

Brazil: other benefits

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Accenture Brazil

Embratel

Alcatel

Bradesco

TIM

Foreign firms in BR(average)

Domestic firms in BR(average)

Contribution to medical insurance Goods or wages in kind Contribution to pension scheme

Consistently higher

16

MNEs around the world: IBM and Accenture

IBMNetherlands Argentina Brazil India

wages (index) 172 114 - -collective agreement 0% 12% 67% -equal opportunity 100% 88% - -TU membership 6% 0% 27% -

AccentureNetherlands Argentina Brazil India

wages (index) - 87 81 99collective agreement - 0% 75% 100%equal opportunity - 100% - -TU membership - 0% 57% 0%

Wages compared to domestic firms in country. Minimum n per firm/country is 10.Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

Compared to domestic firms

N.B. Small number of observations!

17

First Conclusions

For all conclusions: based on preliminary analysis of the data without controls for other effects

Foreign firms generally pay more and offer better labour conditions, but are less embedded in local bargaining arena (e.g. TU membership) IN LINE WITH EXISTING LITERATURE ON THIS TOPIC

BASED ON MACRO-ANALYSES AND CASE-STUDIES

Delicate balance between ‘host country standard’ and ‘MNE standard’ MNEs seem to both adapt to local circumstances and keep their own standards: MNEs behave differently in different countries

18

Further Research

Gather more data (as we speak) Key: increase nr of observations (fishing with a ‘wide’

net)

Further analysis: Additional variables of wages/labour conditions More sophisticated models

Explore explanations: Firm level factors: global strategy (integration vs

responsiveness), CSR policy? Host country factors: e.g. policies & institutions, levels of

development? Combinations of both: ‘distance’?

19

RSM Erasmus UniversityBurg. Oudlaan 50

PO BOX 17383000 DR Rotterdam

The NetherlandsTel. +31 10 408 1923

[email protected] / [email protected]

1 multinationals and local firms: differences in wages and labour standards? a first comparison of...

Documents