• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How Europe's employee benefits differ from the U.S.

Lafayette

Lafayette

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
9,594
Reaction score
2,072
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
The EU and Canada signed this last week a trade-agreement called CETA, whilst an identical treaty with the US is floundering. Both treaties are intended to expand trade between Europe and North America. But fundamental differences remain, and those differences revolve around "compensation" that exists between the US and EU.

The differences are fundamental in Europe's view, which seeks a "level playing field" between the US and the EU. The EU insists that employment compensation MUST INCLUDE in consideration coverage of fundamental social overhead in any negotiation of import duties - that is, a "level the playing field". It is out of income taxation, that such Social Overheads as free Health Insurance, Primary, Second and Tertiary Education are provided in Europe. As well as Social Insurance covering a great number of advantages unlike the US.

It is nearly impossible to negotiate trade-duties that regard entire portions of national GDP whilst such a wide difference exists between the US and EU.

The incompatibility between the US and the EU as regards "remuneration overhead components" are therefore far more different than they were with Canada (which has both National HeathCare Insurance as well as national funding of Tertiary Education).

Those fundamental differences in "total compensatione were examined in this study, from here: How U.S. Employee Benefits Compare To Europe's - excerpt:
The U.S. isn’t very competitive with other countries when it comes to taking care of its workers, according to a new report from Glassdoor.

Conducted in cooperation with London-based Llewellyn Consulting, the report, "Which Countries in Europe Offer Fairest Paid Leave and Unemployment Benefits?" shows a sharp divide between American workplace benefits and those offered in 14 European countries.

"In the U.S., workplace benefits like unemployment, maternity/paternity leave, and paid time off are part of the total compensation pie negotiated between employer and employee," said Glassdoor’s chief economist Andrew Chamberlain in a statement. "In most cases, the responsibility to provide these necessary social benefits to workers falls to U.S. employers rather than the government." This is in contrast to social policy across Europe, Chamberlain observed, which generally results in far more generous benefits than what is typical in the U.S.

With unemployment at historic lows, the general sentiment among workers is that they can find another, better job elsewhere, particularly among millennials, 44% of whom Deloitte found would leave their employers in the next two years. Benefits could make the difference between a talented employee staying or leaving to find a better package elsewhere.

A separate Glassdoor survey found that 79% of U.S. employees report they would prefer new or additional benefits instead of a pay raise, and more than half (57%) of people said benefits such as health insurance, paid vacation, paid sick days, and a retirement plan—some of which are mandated in European countries—are among their top considerations before accepting a job.

Using the United States as a benchmark, this study compared of benefits in six key areas:
Paid maternity leave
Paid paternity leave
General parental leave
Paid holiday allowances
Paid sick leave
Unemployment benefits

It’s important to note that Glassdoor analyzed the U.S.’s parental leave policy as stipulated under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which also allows unpaid leave for reasons other than childbirth, such as caring for sick children, spouses, or elderly parents. This was reclassified as "general parental leave" rather than "maternity leave" or "paternity leave."
Click to expand...

PS: There is also a problem, which Canada was able to avoid, as regards agricultural trade. The US uses chemical compounds that are forbidden for human consumption in Europe.
 
Last edited:
Lafayette said:
The EU and Canada signed this last week a trade-agreement called CETA, whilst an identical treaty with the US is floundering. Both treaties are intended to expand trade between Europe and North America. But fundamental differences remain, and those differences revolve around "compensation" that exists between the US and EU.

The differences are fundamental in Europe's view, which seeks a "level playing field" between the US and the EU. The EU insists that employment compensation MUST INCLUDE in consideration coverage of fundamental social overhead in any negotiation of import duties - that is, a "level the playing field". It is out of income taxation, that such Social Overheads as free Health Insurance, Primary, Second and Tertiary Education are provided in Europe. As well as Social Insurance covering a great number of advantages unlike the US.

It is nearly impossible to negotiate trade-duties that regard entire portions of national GDP whilst such a wide difference exists between the US and EU.

The incompatibility between the US and the EU as regards "remuneration overhead components" are therefore far more different than they were with Canada (which has both National HeathCare Insurance as well as national funding of Tertiary Education).

Those fundamental differences in "total compensatione were examined in this study, from here: How U.S. Employee Benefits Compare To Europe's - excerpt:


PS: There is also a problem, which Canada was able to avoid, as regards agricultural trade. The US uses chemical compounds that are forbidden for human consumption in Europe.
Click to expand...

That is rather far removed from the debate in the parts of Europe, where I live and work. The anti TTIP arguments are focused on quite different points from what you seem to be saying in your first section. As a matter of fact, it is quite clear that the head of the Social Democratic Party very much wanted TTIP, but had to settle for CETA as pressure from normally anti American circles slowed progress and US candidates and politics made it increasingly improbable that the treaty could be ratified or even reached. Obama was not going to be able to deliver so the government decided to follow the CETA tack.

In the second blub you mention an argument that in Germany has been almost wiped out by the revelations of government collusion surrounding the VW scandal which might be leading into crisis.

PS: It would be interesting to hear your thoughts on the differences between CETA and TTIP having sampled both and following the discussion here I tend to find the differences marginal economically.
 
Fundamental social overhead? As opposed to freedom and liberty and of course, independence from unencumbered government control (aka, tyranny)? Anything taken or provided under pain of law and under the threat of imprisonment or death, is not a benefit of social justice but a betrayal of freedom, and tyranny masked as trade, redistribution of wealth.

There are a number of reasons why the USA and Europe have different economic models, and the US Constitution is the number one reason. European countries economic models are fundamentally incompatible with the limitations placed upon the government here in the US, as well as the freedoms and rights of the people that are enshrined and protected by the Constitution of the United States.

Fundamental social overhead? Good luck with that. Europe hasn't seemed to have learned a thing from the last decade - Spain, Greece, etc. -- or from the experiment in "fundamental social overhead" that began in eastern Europe in 1917, became a governing reality in 1921 and collapsed in complete financial ruin on top of the graves of tens of millions of dead in 1991. Fundamental social overhead as described in the OP? Not as long s the US Constitution is still viable.
 
joG said:
That is rather far removed from the debate in the parts of Europe, where I live and work..
Click to expand...

CETA was refused by only one "ethnicity" in Europe, and it was Wallonie (French-speaking Belgium). It was not received enthusiastically elsewhere, but given the "internationality" of CETA, the other countries fell into line because they did not see in any harm.

Besides, the "difficult EU countries" are in the East, and what they know/understand about such treaties would fill a thimble.

Particularly the Right-wing blockheads presently running Poland ...

PS: Merkel was so upset that the Germans are miffed about her allowing the migrants to enter, that she did not attend the yearly meeting of her own party. And, yet, particularly Germany, one wonders who they think is going to pay for their Retirement Insurance since German mothers are not having the number of children necessary to maintain its work-force ...
 
joG said:
As a matter of fact, it is quite clear that the head of the Social Democratic Party very much wanted TTIP, but had to settle for CETA as pressure from normally anti American circles slowed progress and US candidates and politics made it increasingly improbable that the treaty could be ratified or even reached.
Click to expand...

I can't really understand what came unstuck on the American side, but I'll bet it has to do with the incomparability between the two "income elements" as I pointed out. See here from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2011):
Hourly Comp US vs EU.jpg

The EU compensation package is packed with cost-items that are not in the US compensation package. But, that's the price an economy pays for what is called Social Justice.

So I ask the question, given the above, how could Canada (at an hourly compensation average just $5 more than the US) successfully negotiate the CETA agreement with the EU - but the EU is refusing the US's TTIP? There's an inconsistency there that I don't understand.

Something else must be blocking the agreements between the EU and US, and it could be agriculture? The EU has refused in the past US poultry exports because of residual chemical agents found in imports, which are forbidden in EU poultry. Ditto the EU's ban on hormones/antibiotics in its own cattle, which prevent imports from the US. (Which is possibly explained here.)

My Point: I don't really understand, since I was not privy to negotiations and press coverage is lacking. In fact, the US has kept these agreements (even when negotiating TPP in the Far East, which was signed in February) under deep, deep wraps. Perhaps because of the viral nature of the present election campaign if ever the particulars got out. Hillary was for TPP as Sec.State and then when campaigning was against it. Go figure.
 
Last edited:
Beaudreaux said:
Fundamental social overhead? As opposed to freedom and liberty and of course, independence from unencumbered government control (aka, tyranny)? Anything taken or provided under pain of law and under the threat of imprisonment or death, is not a benefit of social justice but a betrayal of freedom, and tyranny masked as trade, redistribution of wealth.
Click to expand...

There is no inherent "tyranny" just because a country wants to expand societal based privileges. If the US does not want to do that, it is because of a general ignorance of Social Justice.

Many Americans like to wrap themselves in Ole Betsy and shout "freedom and liberty", just as you have. Social Justice in Europe, you will be devastated to learn, also included from the very beginning your precious "freedom and liberty".

It's just that in Europe those freedoms became a fundamental assumption that the people learned the hard way, after Hitler and the Soviet Union. They are more recent than ours in the US that go back more than two centuries - but that fact makes them perhaps more advanced and in tune with modern lifestyles ... ?
 
This is why we only do trade deals with countries WORSE off than us, economically.
 
Lafayette said:
There is no inherent "tyranny" just because a country wants to expand societal based privileges. If the US does not want to do that, it is because of a general ignorance of Social Justice.

Many Americans like to wrap themselves in Ole Betsy and shout "freedom and liberty", just as you have. Social Justice in Europe, you will be devastated to learn, also included from the very beginning your precious "freedom and liberty".

It's just that in Europe those freedoms became a fundamental assumption that the people learned the hard way, after Hitler and the Soviet Union. They are more recent than ours in the US that go back more than two centuries - but that fact makes them perhaps more advanced and in tune with modern lifestyles ... ?
Click to expand...

Thank you for proving my point. There is no such thing as social justice. Just legal justice and fundamental rights, that are the foundation of freedom and liberty. When social justice (arbitrary redistribution of wealth, freedom, and liberty) outweighs the law and the fundamental rights of man, then social collapse follows, as we've seen recently in Spain and Greece and other austerity shackled economies due to the very social justice of which you speak. As well as was tried in both Germany and the Soviet Union in the first half of the 20th century. In Germany it was the bankers, the industrialists... +6M dead. In the Soviet Union it was the same thing, plus the land owners and the financially successful... +20M dead. Now we have a less deadly version (so far) being attempted in central and western Europe. We'll see if it stays safe for the financially successful this time or will they, too, meet their deaths at the hands of those demanding their wealth be redistributed to those that did not earn it? The riots have been seen already. The hatred is festering. The demands for more and more from less and less historically leads to hatred and persecution at the very least, and regional if not global war at the worst.

We'll see. I truly hope you all luck, peace, and prosperity. Current events, however, seem to be guiding Europe toward repeating history.

By the way, I'm not wrapping myself in anything, much less Old Glory. I am, however, continuing to uphold the oath I took decades ago to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the Untied States of America. The wording, principles, and truths codified in that document are not, have not, and will not be swayed by ideology or the body politic, foreign or domestic.
 
joG said:
PS: It would be interesting to hear your thoughts on the differences between CETA and TTIP having sampled both and following the discussion here I tend to find the differences marginal economically.
Click to expand...

The proof is always in the pudding.

The most traumatic will be for agriculture, since it must open up. Traditionally, this small but very vocal group have forced government to insist on protecting the relatively higher prices in Europe. This is due to the nature of the different geographies employed.

The US in its center is pretty much one great prairie highly suitable for agriculture (and tornadoes). Europe is not at all that way. In France, there are only two major production areas and both are farmed by small families - far too many small families.

In the US, agriculture has been agglomerated by BigAggie for quite some time. So, the Business Models are entirely different.

As for the rest, if it were easier to sell Airbus commercial jet aircraft in the US, with all the nitty-bitty hassles protecting Boeing (that needs no protection whatsoever), that would be nice. This is one persistent feedback, I keep getting.

As for Volkswagen, collusion with a government should not be THE impediment to a TTIP agreement. If such collusion exists, and there is no reason not to suspect it, it's been going on across the German political parties during quite a few decades. After all, it all centers about diesel engine garanties of noxious effluent levels that were falsified. And diesel engine cars are or were a very large part of total sales.

That did not happen just under Merkel or the just the SDP governments over the past 30/40 years. It's been going on quite a while - Volkswagen is paying the fines, isn't it? And Volkswagen was not the only company falsifying the tests.

Anyway, the combustion engine for car-propulsion is coming to an end. TESLA has shown that fact, and further electric-engine development will assure the rest. The number of hybrid models being sold in Europe increases every day - and one day all cars will be fully electric. What they need is a battery that will recharge like filling up at a petrol-station on the autoroute, and that is nowhere on the engineering horizon (as far as I know).
 
Last edited:
Lafayette said:
The proof is always in the pudding.

The most traumatic will be for agriculture, since it must open up. Traditionally, this small but very vocal group have forced government to insist on protecting the relatively higher prices in Europe. This is due to the nature of the different geographies employed.

The US in its center is pretty much one great prairie highly suitable for agriculture (and tornadoes). Europe is not at all that way. In France, there are only two major production areas and both are farmed by small families - far too many small families.

In the US, agriculture has been agglomerated by BigAggie for quite some time. So, the Business Models are entirely different.

As for the rest, if it were easier to sell Airbus commercial jet aircraft in the US, with all the nitty-bitty hassles protecting Boeing (that needs no protection whatsoever), that would be nice. This is one persistent feedback, I keep getting.

As for Volkswagen, collusion with a government should not be THE impediment to a TTIP agreement. If such collusion exists, and there is no reason not to suspect it, it's been going on across the German political parties during quite a few decades. After all, it all centers about diesel engine garanties of noxious effluent levels that were falsified. And diesel engine cars are or were a very large part of total sales.

That did not happen just under Merkel or the just the SDP governments over the past 30/40 years. It's been going on quite a while - Volkswagen is paying the fines, isn't it? And Volkswagen was not the only company falsifying the tests.

Anyway, the combustion engine for car-propulsion is coming to an end. TESLA has shown that fact, and further electric-engine development will assure the rest. The number of hybrid models being sold in Europe increases every day - and one day all cars will be fully electric. What they need is a battery that will recharge like filling up at a petrol-station on the autoroute, and that is nowhere on the engineering horizon (as far as I know).
Click to expand...

So TTIP sounds good and not any different in substance than CETA. I am not sure, that the EU has not, however, let the window close on it. It should be interesting to see, if the US is willing to open it up again after the election. A pity for both sides, in my opinion.
 
joG said:
So TTIP sounds good and not any different in substance than CETA. I am not sure, that the EU has not, however, let the window close on it. It should be interesting to see, if the US is willing to open it up again after the election. A pity for both sides, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Agreed ...
 
Lafayette said:
What they need is a battery that will recharge like filling up at a petrol-station on the autoroute, and that is nowhere on the engineering horizon (as far as I know).
Click to expand...
Best I've seen is a battery swap, you pull in, pay for a swap, and they drop in a fully charged one and take your other one. Possibly faster than filling up! Sort of like how we do propane.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Fundamental social overhead? As opposed to freedom and liberty and of course, independence from unencumbered government control (aka, tyranny)? Anything taken or provided under pain of law and under the threat of imprisonment or death, is not a benefit of social justice but a betrayal of freedom, and tyranny masked as trade, redistribution of wealth.

There are a number of reasons why the USA and Europe have different economic models, and the US Constitution is the number one reason. European countries economic models are fundamentally incompatible with the limitations placed upon the government here in the US, as well as the freedoms and rights of the people that are enshrined and protected by the Constitution of the United States.

Fundamental social overhead? Good luck with that. Europe hasn't seemed to have learned a thing from the last decade - Spain, Greece, etc. -- or from the experiment in "fundamental social overhead" that began in eastern Europe in 1917, became a governing reality in 1921 and collapsed in complete financial ruin on top of the graves of tens of millions of dead in 1991. Fundamental social overhead as described in the OP? Not as long s the US Constitution is still viable.
Click to expand...

This "social overhead" is an insult to the intelligence and competence of the employee. Just give me the cash and I will buy my own "social overhead". Speaking of cash, how about comparing how many times the monthly rent of a single family home one gets paid in different places across different professions. As a numbers guy, living outside the USA just doesn't sound like a good deal. I say this as someone who actually has an interest in living in Canada because of the low population density, however making a living in Saskatoon or Halifax just doesn't add up to a good deal.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Europe hasn't seemed to have learned a thing from the last decade - Spain, Greece, etc. -- or from the experiment in "fundamental social overhead" that began in eastern Europe in 1917,
Click to expand...

Yes even Krugman says those economies have Eurosclerosis. They have 12% unemployment and 70% of the per capita income of the USA. They invent nothing so must copy off the USA. With that they would have the GDP of Nigeria, but they do have lots of welfare, wine, and cheese.
 
James972 said:
Yes even Krugman says those economies have Eurosclerosis. They have 12% unemployment and 70% of the per capita income of the USA. They invent nothing so must copy off the USA. With that they would have the GDP of Nigeria, but they do have lots of welfare, wine, and cheese.
Click to expand...

I do like their wine and cheese.
 
Beaudreaux said:
I do like their wine and cheese.
Click to expand...

yep sitting around gassing over wine and cheese is what the French are good for! I wonder why Silicon Valley is here rather than in French? I wonder why half decided they were Nazis during ww2?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom