Skip to content
Browse All Resources
Essays

MAR 28, 2020

Weekend reading: Supporting and protecting workers during the coronavirus recession edition

Weekend reading: Why stable schedules matter edition

Abstract

This is a post we publish each Friday with links to articles that touch on economic inequality and growth. The first section is a round-up of what Equitable Growth published this week and the second is relevant and interesting articles we’re highlighting from elsewhere. We won’t be the first to share these articles, but we hope by taking a look back at the whole week, we can put them in context.

Equitable Growth round-up

The importance of paid family, medical, and caregiving leave for all U.S. workers throughout the coronavirus pandemic and looming recession cannot be understated. These policies are not just benefits, but also necessities—and are especially needed during this public health and economic crisis. In an issue brief covering the different types of state-level paid time away from work, Jack Smalligan, Chantel Boyens, and Alix Gould-Werth explain the differences between paid sick days, paid medical leave, and paid caregiving leave and why each is important from both an economic and health perspective at this critical moment. In conjunction with the issue brief, Equitable Growth produced factsheets covering benefits for workers and the economy of paid medical and paid caregiving leave, as well as a factsheet on the research about the policy design of these programs.

In addition to these badly needed worker-protection policies, there are many other ways policymakers can confront the coronavirus recession that is either about to hit or already hitting the U.S. economy. Heather Boushey and Somin Park outline the various ways that lawmakers can keep income flowing and pause the expenses of individuals and businesses in the United States, ensuring that once the health crisis passes, people and companies will be ready to get back to work. Boushey and Park’s proposals include providing paid leave, boosting Unemployment Insurance and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, helping small businesses pay their bills, ensuring that corporate assistance puts workers first, distributing direct cash payments to Americans, and increasing support to states for Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program. These and other ideas would protect and support workers and their families in desperate need of assistance.

Another suggestion to prevent a long-term recession as a result of the coronavirus outbreak is to make the U.S. government the payor of last resort. This idea, put forward by Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman during an online conference this week, would essentially have the government pay wages and essential business maintenance costs in order to prevent locked-down businesses from going bankrupt and to allow idle workers to continue to be paid instead of being laid off. The amounts given to businesses do not need to be exact and would be verified and corrected once the lockdowns have ended, allowing businesses to “hibernate without bleeding cash.” The program would also be limited in duration, likely to three months. While this would obviously not fully offset the economic costs of a coronavirus recession, it would lay the foundation for a quick rebound once the public health threat is contained.

With the likely passage this week of a $2.2 trillion stimulus package, Congress has fought back—and, thus far, fought back hard—against the immediate effects of the coronavirus health and economic crisis, writes Claudia Sahm. One of the most commonly discussed elements of the new stimulus package is the direct cash payments that will go to Americans, called recovery rebates in the legislation. These rebates will cost more than $250 billion, or 2 percent of consumer spending in 2019, and will go to 8 in 10 people in the United States. Sahm XX covers XX what, exactly, we know about the rebates, why they are a sound policy idea—and unfortunately, why they will probably not be enough to truly stave off a deep and severe recession.

The federal government’s slow response at the start of the outbreak was a costly misstep, but President Donald Trump can correct this wrong by appointing so-called COVID-19 czar, argue Susan Helper, David Clingingsmith, and Scott Shane. In light of the fast-paced nature of the coronavirus crisis and its grave threat to both the lives and livelihoods of Americans, the president must appoint a coordinator who can “use federal powers to direct the production of needed medical supplies, including personal protective equipment, ventilators, test kits, hospital beds, and negative-pressure rooms, which help prevent cross-contamination.” Doing so would allow the federal government to execute a coordinated, quick, and apolitical response, and deliver much-needed medical supplies to hospitals and care providers across the United States.

There are a variety of other ideas that can be activated to support hospitals and healthcare workers, Helper, Clingingsmith, and Shane explore in another column. These ideas include converting now-empty hotels in the cities worst hit by the outbreak into temporary hospitals with negative-pressure rooms, and retraining medical personnel from different fields to treat COVID-19 patients. But the proposals must be paired with longer-term restrictions on social activity, which inevitably will have economic ramifications—and action must be taken swiftly in order to prevent the coronavirus recession from becoming the coronavirus economic depression.

Related

Your Direct Line to Cutting-Edge Research

Get updates on our latest research, event announcements, and policy insights delivered straight to your inbox. Stay connected with the leading voices on equitable growth.