En este apartado, evaluaré las consecuencias de la crisis y la consiguiente reforma laboral en el salario medio español.

First of all we need to see how wages changed due to the crisis. For this we should take a look HERE The period prior to the economic crisis was characterised by low average real wage growth in Europe, with wages only seeing large increases just at the beginning of the financial crisis. This wage stagnation occurred at a time of economic growth, resulting in a falling labour share of income. Wages and employment simply did not grow fast enough to maintain a steady labour share of income.

Basically, we lived over our possibilities, so when this welthyness stopped suddenly, the wages back then could not support the way we lived and how we spent money. This way, big companies negotiated higher wages in anticipation of the inflation yet to come. So, when hysteresis came (lagged effects in a system) struck less hard than expected, affecting thoroughly the MW (median wage) throughout europe (our case of interest). This explains why there was so much difference between the expected wage trend and the real one.


Spain was one of the least affected countries in the real GDP. But we were one of the earlier affected due to the construction boom crash. As low wage workers were fired, our average wage increased although no wage increases were granted (statistics magic).

Gracias a esta depresión financiera… reformaron la ley laboral, para lidiar con la crisis. Según el El Pais Lo que hicieron fue promover el empleo (o al menos intentarlo) dejando mas “manga ancha” a las empresas para poder contratar y despedir con cierta libertad y facilidad. ¿Cuántas mas personas trabajen más dinero gana el país no? ¿no? Pues no. Si facilitas los contratos a tiempo parcial, bajas las indemnizaciones (como se hizo) y los salarios mínimos en general, consigues que las empresas contraten más gente por menos tiempo, despedirles y contratar más gente, manteniendo salarios muy bajos.


Otras referencias: