Well, It's Nice...But is Catholic Social Teaching Realistic?

"They should just be happy to have a job!" "Don't those union workers know that everyone else pays a portion of his benefits' package? Why shouldn't they?" "They should just accept their companies' need to decrease the payroll to remain competitive." "Workers who strike are stealing from their employers." "Healthcare is not a right."

I cannot count the number of times I've heard such notions expressed, especially since the southern California grocery clerks strike began in October. I've read them in the letters section of our local paper; I've seen them blogged on the internet; I've heard them in casual conversation. Except from Democrats and other "liberals," I've encountered little support for the striking and locked-out grocery workers, who are fighting not only to maintain their pay scale, but a healthcare benefits package which, hitherto, the companies have provided without employee contributions.

Certainly, the grocery clerks have not been making all that much money. With only one breadwinner in the family, it would be quite difficult to raise a family in southern California on $17.50 an hour; assuming full-time employment (and many grocery workers do not work full-time), that would come to only about $36 to $37,000 a year. Adding medical benefits to that salary, without any employee contributions, would seem merely to approximate a just wage. What is there, here, not to support?

To clarify the issues involved in the grocery workers strike, I called Thomas Storck to get his take on the just wage and the Catholic social justice tradition. Storck, who lives in Greenbelt, Maryland, has written extensively on the Church's social teachings in such publications as Caelum et Terra, New Oxford Review, and Catholic Faith. He has also written books on economic justice and related subjects, including Foundations of Catholic Political Order and The Catholic Milieu. I asked Storck if he thought a just wage should include medical benefits.

Storck said that, in defining a just wage in the encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, Pope Pius XI said a "wage paid to the workingman should be sufficient for the support of himself and his family" and should be enough so workers can save and not just get by. "The principle that healthcare is part of the ordinary expenses of living seems to me absolutely clear," said Storck.

"The question about healthcare is really a practical question," Storck continued. "If the company said to the workers, 'we'll give you whatever you need to go out and buy healthcare as individuals, that would probably be acceptable -- except that is almost impossible, or very expensive, to buy healthcare directly. So, getting in the group, you get it in a discount. So, it seems perfectly legitimate that [health benefits] be part of the compensation and for the workers and unions to consider it a very important part."

The problem is that we Americans tend to think a wage should be gauged only according to what the employer thinks is the economic worth of a remunerated activity and that to gauge it otherwise would result in economic ruination. Thus, it would make no sense to pay unskilled labor a wage as high as one the popes insist upon -- especially when one considers the cost of living in a place like Southern California. This notion, said Storck, descends from the economic thought of Adam Smith, which, he said, "radically distorts what actually goes on in an economy. In other words," said Storck, "in economics, you're presented with the notion that the economy works in a kind of self-regulating way; one thing goes up, another thing goes down."

But this isn't what really happens, said Storck. "The real thing behind the economy is power. A good example of this are CEO compensations, which bear no relationship to what CEOs contribute to the company -- and sometimes their compensation has gone up even while the company's profits have gone down. Why does their compensation go up? Because they have power to appoint their cronies to the compensation committee of the company's board of directors and their cronies reward them by giving them large salaries and bonuses and pensions and so on. To say this is an example of Adam Smith's law of supply and demand is absurd. It has nothing to do with that; it's power. That's why unions are a countervailing power; they're a power in the economy and they have been able (especially in the past) to get higher wages for their people. This is how the economy works. It doesn't work by some kind of automatic law of supply and demand or principle of input/output."

In contrast to the mechanistic notion of economics espoused by Smith and his followers -- and to the actual economics practiced in our day -- the Catholic notion of economic justice has asserted what has been called the universal destination of all created goods. Leo XIII formulated it this way, said Storck: "'the earth, though divided among private owners, ceases thereby not to minister to the needs of all.' In other words, the purpose of the earth, of the whole planet, was obviously intended for the sustenance of the human race, in a human fashion. It doesn't mean, of course, that we don't have to work to produce that; everybody has to work according to his conditions and needs and abilities, and so on. But, nonetheless, the economy exists to serve human life; it is a strictly subordinate part of human life. It exists to make possible our spiritual life, our family life, our intellectual life, our cultural life. As soon as our economy starts interfering with any of those higher goods, then it has gone awry. The capitalist economy doesn't really allow that; it never asks the question, 'what is the economy for?' It only asks, 'what do you, as an individual, want to do? And here's how you can do it.'"

Given the universal aspect of economic activity, the employer becomes the means by which employees participate in the goods of the world, intended for them by God. Under this aspect, a just wage not only makes sense; it is an ethical necessity. "Leo XIII is perfectly clear about the just wage," said Storck. "It's based on the human needs of the worker, not on how much they contribute to the enterprise."

Storck said, however, that it is hard to convince people of this notion. "One of the difficulties that presents itself is that you will get people who will say to you something like this: 'well, Catholic social teaching is nice. You have all kinds of nice, ethical principles, but that's not how the real world works. You can't pay those people more, because if you did, the enterprise would go bankrupt.' While that might be true in some cases, it's not universally true. The real world doesn't operate the way the tradition of Adam Smith says it does. There have been a number of alternative or unorthodox schools of economics, both in the United States and in Europe, that say, 'look, when you want to look at the economy, instead of making these nice graphs and deductions that the Adam Smith tradition would have you do, take a look at what really happens, and you'll find it is quite different from what they've said.' Unions, for example, were able to raise wages and the companies didn't go bankrupt. CEOs are able to raise their compensation and the companies don't go bankrupt."

Yet, in the case of grocery workers strike, the companies have claimed that they need to lower wages to compete with non-unionized mavericks such as Wal-Mart, which pay their workers a pittance. The resulting loss of market share to such companies, too, could threaten the grocery companies' standing with their stockholders. Storck admitted the possibility of such threats but said they do not utterly obviate the requirements of justice. "Let's say you are a concentration camp guard," said Storck. "If I said to you, 'you had better kill some more of those prisoners or you will get a bad rating from your boss,' what must you do? If you are living in the midst of a system like we are that is fundamentally anti-Christian, of course it's going to have all kind of rewards and incentives that [work against justice]. But the thing is, the system needs to be changed."

"The root of this," said Storck, "is something that Pius XI talks about in Quadragesimo Anno -- namely, that you might well have a situation where Wal-Mart comes in and undercuts another company, and that company feels it needs to cut wages and benefits in order to compete. But the problem here is that the economy is unorganized; it's basically a free-for-all, and this is what Quadragesimo Anno was designed to counteract. Namely, companies should not be allowed to do what Wal-Mart is doing. The problem is not that the one company's stores are paying too high of wages; the problem is that companies like Wal-Mart shouldn't be allowed to come in and undercut them."

In restricting certain economic activity, however, Storck is not calling necessarily for government intervention, though he does not exclude it. "State intervention is not the best way of handling this, which is what Pius XI said in Quadragesimo Anno. The so-called occupational groups, which Pius was recommending, are the organizations that ought to handle these questions, not the government directly. On the other hand, you can make the case that the government can directly do certain things, at least for a limited time, if there's no other way. If you read Casti Conubii, for example, which most people think is just an encyclical about marriage, there is a good deal in there about welfare and the state aiding poor people."

Occupational groups were a means proposed by Pius XI to overcome the struggle between labor and capital. Having legal recognition, the groups, formed in each trade or profession, include representatives of both management and employees. Only under the direction and by the determination of the groups do management and labor work out their differences; strikes and lockouts might be forbidden. State intervention is admitted only when the contending parties cannot come to an agreement.

The promotion of occupational groups implies a critique of labor unions. "The popes were always against the class struggle," said Storck, "and unions, while absolutely necessary and endorsed by the popes, are not the best solution. The ultimate solution has to be something like distributism, where you have well-distributed property and where you have a society characterized by the ownership of very small businesses. And in situations where you need large entities, because of the technology involved, they would preferably be owned by the workers." In calling for this solution -- what one might call a proprietary as opposed to a capitalist or a socialist order -- Storck hearkens back to Leo XIII. This pope, speaking of productive property, or capital, wrote in Rerum Novarum, "the law ought to favor [the right of private property] and, so far as it can, see that the largest possible number among the masses of the population prefer to own property." This solution was also embraced by Pope Pius XI and by such Catholic thinkers as Hilaire Belloc and G.K. Chesterton.

But is distributism a viable solution to our current economic problems? No, said Storck -- but only because people today either would not want to consider such a solution, or because they are "so confused and blind that they don't know where to go, or they don't think there is a problem." It's like proposing a solution for the "widespread problems of unchastity that we have," said Storck. "There's only one solution, but you know you are not going to solve the problem by simply saying people should be chaste and modest. Though this must be said, solving the problem of unchastity is going to take a sea change in peoples' views. It's the same with economics. If people wanted to, it would be fairly easy to go to a solution. In his Restoration of Property, Hilaire Belloc provides a blueprint of differential taxation [to bring about a condition of well-distributed property.] But people need to have their opinions change. Even Catholics don't think this way, and they ought to think this way."

Thomas Storck's books, Foundations of a Catholic Political Order, and Christendom and the West are available from Four Faces Press, www.fourfacespress.com. The Catholic Milieu is available either from Four Faces or from Christendom College.

III. THE SOCIAL DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH

2419 "Christian revelation . . . promotes deeper understanding of the laws of social living."199 The Church receives from the Gospel the full revelation of the truth about man. When she fulfills her mission of proclaiming the Gospel, she bears witness to man, in the name of Christ, to his dignity and his vocation to the communion of persons. She teaches him the demands of justice and peace in conformity with divine wisdom.

2420 The Church makes a moral judgment about economic and social matters, "when the fundamental rights of the person or the salvation of souls requires it."200 In the moral order she bears a mission distinct from that of political authorities: the Church is concerned with the temporal aspects of the common good because they are ordered to the sovereign Good, our ultimate end. She strives to inspire right attitudes with respect to earthly goods and in socio-economic relationships.

2421 The social doctrine of the Church developed in the nineteenth century when the Gospel encountered modern industrial society with its new structures for the production of consumer goods, its new concept of society, the state and authority, and its new forms of labor and ownership. The development of the doctrine of the Church on economic and social matters attests the permanent value of the Church's teaching at the same time as it attests the true meaning of her Tradition, always living and active.201

2422 The Church's social teaching comprises a body of doctrine, which is articulated as the Church interprets events in the course of history, with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, in the light of the whole of what has been revealed by Jesus Christ.202 This teaching can be more easily accepted by men of good will, the more the faithful let themselves be guided by it.

2423 The Church's social teaching proposes principles for reflection; it provides criteria for judgment; it gives guidelines for action:

Any system in which social relationships are determined entirely by economic factors is contrary to the nature of the human person and his acts.203

2424 A theory that makes profit the exclusive norm and ultimate end of economic activity is morally unacceptable. The disordered desire for money cannot but produce perverse effects. It is one of the causes of the many conflicts which disturb the social order.204

A system that "subordinates the basic rights of individuals and of groups to the collective organization of production" is contrary to human dignity.205 Every practice that reduces persons to nothing more than a means of profit enslaves man, leads to idolizing money, and contributes to the spread of atheism. "You cannot serve God and mammon."206

2425 The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modem times with "communism" or "socialism." She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of "capitalism," individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor.207 Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for "there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market."208 Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended.

IV. ECONOMIC ACTIVITY AND SOCIAL JUSTICE

2426 The development of economic activity and growth in production are meant to provide for the needs of human beings. Economic life is not meant solely to multiply goods produced and increase profit or power; it is ordered first of all to the service of persons, of the whole man, and of the entire human community. Economic activity, conducted according to its own proper methods, is to be exercised within the limits of the moral order, in keeping with social justice so as to correspond to God's plan for man.209

2427 Human work proceeds directly from persons created in the image of God and called to prolong the work of creation by subduing the earth, both with and for one another.210 Hence work is a duty: "If any one will not work, let him not eat."211 Work honors the Creator's gifts and the talents received from him. It can also be redemptive. By enduring the hardship of work212 in union with Jesus, the carpenter of Nazareth and the one crucified on Calvary, man collaborates in a certain fashion with the Son of God in his redemptive work. He shows himself to be a disciple of Christ by carrying the cross, daily, in the work he is called to accomplish.213 Work can be a means of sanctification and a way of animating earthly realities with the Spirit of Christ.

2428 In work, the person exercises and fulfills in part the potential inscribed in his nature. The primordial value of labor stems from man himself, its author and its beneficiary. Work is for man, not man for work.214

Everyone should be able to draw from work the means of providing for his life and that of his family, and of serving the human community.

2429 Everyone has the right of economic initiative; everyone should make legitimate use of his talents to contribute to the abundance that will benefit all and to harvest the just fruits of his labor. He should seek to observe regulations issued by legitimate authority for the sake of the common good.215

2430 Economic life brings into play different interests, often opposed to one another. This explains why the conflicts that characterize it arise.216 Efforts should be made to reduce these conflicts by negotiation that respects the rights and duties of each social partner: those responsible for business enterprises, representatives of wage- earners (for example, trade unions), and public authorities when appropriate.

2431 The responsibility of the state. "Economic activity, especially the activity of a market economy, cannot be conducted in an institutional, juridical, or political vacuum. On the contrary, it presupposes sure guarantees of individual freedom and private property, as well as a stable currency and efficient public services. Hence the principal task of the state is to guarantee this security, so that those who work and produce can enjoy the fruits of their labors and thus feel encouraged to work efficiently and honestly. . . . Another task of the state is that of overseeing and directing the exercise of human rights in the economic sector. However, primary responsibility in this area belongs not to the state but to individuals and to the various groups and associations which make up society."217

2432 Those responsible for business enterprises are responsible to society for the economic and ecological effects of their operations.218 They have an obligation to consider the good of persons and not only the increase of profits. Profits are necessary, however. They make possible the investments that ensure the future of a business and they guarantee employment.

2433 Access to employment and to professions must be open to all without unjust discrimination: men and women, healthy and disabled, natives and immigrants.219 For its part society should, according to circumstances, help citizens find work and employment.220

2434 A just wage is the legitimate fruit of work. To refuse or withhold it can be a grave injustice.221 In determining fair pay both the needs and the contributions of each person must be taken into account. "Remuneration for work should guarantee man the opportunity to provide a dignified livelihood for himself and his family on the material, social, cultural and spiritual level, taking into account the role and the productivity of each, the state of the business, and the common good."222 Agreement between the parties is not sufficient to justify morally the amount to be received in wages.

2435 Recourse to a strike is morally legitimate when it cannot be avoided, or at least when it is necessary to obtain a proportionate benefit. It becomes morally unacceptable when accompanied by violence, or when objectives are included that are not directly linked to working conditions or are contrary to the common good.

2436 It is unjust not to pay the social security contributions required by legitimate authority.

Unemployment almost always wounds its victim's dignity and threatens the equilibrium of his life. Besides the harm done to him personally, it entails many risks for his family.223

The major problem with this kind of approach is that the meaning of the term "just get by" these days is largely a function of a person's desired standard of living.

I contend that a wage of $17.50 per hour meets the definition of a "living wage" just about anywhere in the United States, so long as someone is willing to live a lifestyle conducive to that wage. I'm not talking about scraping by in poverty, either. I'm talking about a lifestyle that was very common in the United States back in the days of Storck's dream world -- before the suburban supermarket drove the family-owned neighborhood grocery store out of business.

That means no suburban home on a large piece of land. It means public transit instead of an automobile, or a simple car with no power steering, no air conditioning, no anti-lock brakes, no power windows, etc. Oh, and it means no air conditioning at home, either.

It also means "vacations" at the local swimming pool, or a public beach. It means a home entertainment system comprised of a radio. Well, OK -- maybe a 13-inch black & white television, too.

And most relevant to this topic: It means "health care" that is actually closer to hospice care than anything else -- when a hospital could be staffed largely by religious orders because people received very simple care, and because the largest expense item on its annual budget was the laundry bill for cleaning the bed sheets. When you got sick, you hopefully got better or maybe you died -- and "heroic measures" for saving a patient's life involved prayer and not much else.

Heck, if someone would be willing to live a lifestyle of that sort, then $17.50 per hour would allow them to save a huge bundle of cash every week.

In his Restoration of Property, Hilaire Belloc provides a blueprint of differential taxation [to bring about a condition of well-distributed property.] But people need to have their opinions change. Even Catholics don't think this way, and they ought to think this way."

This sounds like pure socialism. What is "well-distributed property"?

But the problem here is that the economy is unorganized; it's basically a free-for-all, and this is what Quadragesimo Anno was designed to counteract. Namely, companies should not be allowed to do what Wal-Mart is doing. The problem is not that the one company's stores are paying too high of wages; the problem is that companies like Wal-Mart shouldn't be allowed to come in and undercut them."

But, of course, Storck back-pedals when asked how Wal-Mart can be stopped, advocating "distributism" and small businesses, which is exactly the thinking that characterized the Soviet economy, such as it was.

Nowhere does Storck mention that, ultimately, companies exist to bring return to shareholders, not jobs to workers. Far from being "unorganized"--as Storck maintains--the capitalist economy is very organized. Products and services are priced exactly to what the market will bear, as are the wages offered to workers. Those with greater education and greater skill are generally paid more, as their resumes are much more portable.

Grocery workers who expect $50,000 a year for doing what any high-school kid can do are, frankly, dreaming, as is the Catholic Church in advocating such lunacy.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.