Is Affirmative Action in Employment Still Effective in the 21st Century?
November 2022
Working Paper Number:
CES-22-54
Abstract
We study Executive Order 11246, an employment-based affirmative action policy tar geted at firms holding contracts with the federal government. We find this policy to be in effective in the 21st century, contrary to the positive effects found in the late 1900s (Miller, 2017). Our novel dataset combines data on federal contract acquisition and enforcement with US linked employer-employee Census data 2000'2014. We employ an event study around firms' acquiring a contract, based on Miller (2017), and find the policy had no ef fect on employment shares or on hiring, for any minority group. Next, we isolate the impact of the affirmative action plan, which is EO 11246's preeminent requirement that applies to firms with contracts over $50,000. Leveraging variation from this threshold in an event study and regression discontinuity design, we find similarly null effects. Last, we show that even randomized audits are not effective, suggesting weak enforcement. Our results highlight the importance of the recent budget increase for the enforcement agency, as well as recent policies enacted to improve compliance
Document Tags and Keywords
Keywords
Keywords are automatically generated using KeyBERT, a powerful and innovative
keyword extraction tool that utilizes BERT embeddings to ensure high-quality and contextually relevant
keywords.
By analyzing the content of working papers, KeyBERT identifies terms and phrases that capture the essence of the
text, highlighting the most significant topics and trends. This approach not only enhances searchability but
provides connections that go beyond potentially domain-specific author-defined keywords.
:
agency,
black,
minority,
recession,
regulation,
regulatory,
policymakers,
bias,
hiring,
discrimination,
contract,
enforcement,
effects employment,
policy,
mandate,
compliance
Tags
Tags are automatically generated using a pretrained language model from spaCy, which excels at
several tasks, including entity tagging.
The model is able to label words and phrases by part-of-speech,
including "organizations." By filtering for frequent words and phrases labeled as "organizations", papers are
identified to contain references to specific institutions, datasets, and other organizations.
:
Standard Statistical Establishment List,
Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Yale University,
Longitudinal Business Database,
Bureau of Labor,
General Accounting Office,
Research Data Center,
American Community Survey,
Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics,
Disability Insurance,
Employment History File,
Employer Characteristics File,
Individual Characteristics File,
Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board,
Disclosure Review Board,
International Trade Research Report,
Federal Statistical Research Data Center
Similar Working Papers
Similarity between working papers are determined by an unsupervised neural
network model
know as Doc2Vec.
Doc2Vec is a model that represents entire documents as fixed-length vectors, allowing for the
capture of semantic meaning in a way that relates to the context of words within the document. The model learns to
associate a unique vector with each document while simultaneously learning word vectors, enabling tasks such as
document classification, clustering, and similarity detection by preserving the order and structure of words. The
document vectors are compared using cosine similarity/distance to determine the most similar working papers.
Papers identified with 🔥 are in the top 20% of similarity.
The 10 most similar working papers to the working paper 'Is Affirmative Action in Employment Still Effective in the 21st Century?' are listed below in order of similarity.
-
Working PaperUnionization, Employer Opposition, and Establishment Closure
July 2023
Working Paper Number:
CES-23-35
We study the effect of private-sector unionization on establishment employment and survival. Specifically, we analyze National Labor Relations Board union elections from 1981'2005 using administrative Census data. Our empirical strategy extends standard difference-in-differences techniques with regression discontinuity extrapolation methods. This allows us to avoid biases from only comparing close elections and to estimate treatment effects that include larger marginof- victory elections. Using this strategy, we show that unionization decreases an establishment's employment and likelihood of survival, particularly in manufacturing and other blue-collar and industrial sectors. We hypothesize that two reasons for these effects are firms' ability to avoid working with new unions and employers' opposition to unions. We find that the negative effects are significantly larger for elections at multi-establishment firms. Additionally, after a successful union election at one establishment, employment increases at the firms' other establishments. Both pieces of evidence are consistent with firms avoiding new unions by shifting production from unionized establishments to other establishments. Finally, we find larger declines in employment and survival following elections where managers or owners were likely more opposed to the union. This evidence supports new reasons for the negative effects of unionization we document.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperEarnings Growth, Job Flows and Churn
April 2020
Working Paper Number:
CES-20-15
How much do workers making job-to-job transitions benefit from moving away from a shrinking and towards a growing firm? We show that earnings growth in the transition increases with net employment growth at the destination firm and, to a lesser extent, decreases if the origin firm is shrinking. So, we sum the effect of leaving a shrinking and entering a growing firm and remove the excess turnover-related hires because gross hiring has a much smaller association with earnings growth than net employment growth. We find that job-to-job transitions with the cross-firm job flow have 23% more earnings growth than average.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperUsing linked employer-employee data to investigate the speed of adjustments in downsizing firms
May 2006
Working Paper Number:
tp-2006-03
When firms are faced with a demand shock, adjustment can take many forms. Firms can adjust physical capital, human capital, or both. The speed of adjustment may differ as well: costs of adjustment, the type of shock, the legal and economic enviroment all matter. In this paper, we focus on firms that downsized between 1992 and 1997, but ultimately survive, and investigate how the human capital distribution within a firm influences the speed of adjustment, ceteris paribus. In other words, when do firms use mass layoffs instead of attrition to adjust the level of employment. We combine worker-level wage records and measures of human capital with firm-level characteristics of the production function, and use levels and changes in these variables to characterize the choice of adjustment method and speed. Firms are described/compared up to 9 years prior to death. We also consider how workers fare after leaving downsizing firms, and analyze if observed differences in post-separation outcomes of workers provide clues to the choice of adjustment speed.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperEmployees in the US Nonprofit Sector
May 2026
Working Paper Number:
CES-26-33
The nonprofit sector employs roughly 10% of the American workforce, making it the third largest workforce behind the retail and manufacturing sectors. Despite this, relatively little is known about its employees. This paper is the first to use comprehensive administrative tax data, covering the near-universe of workers in the US, to quantify and explain the causes of the nonprofit pay differential. Unconditionally, we find the nonprofit earnings penalty to be 12% relative to for-profit workers. Estimating an 'AKM' worker-firm job ladder model, we show that most of the penalty is causal and not driven by selection. We also document considerable heterogeneity across industries, both in terms of earnings premia/penalties and worker selection, and show that nonprofit and for-profit earnings have been converging over time.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperCovering Undocumented Immigrants: The Effects of a Large-Scale Prenatal Care Intervention
August 2022
Working Paper Number:
CES-22-28
Undocumented immigrants are ineligible for public insurance coverage for prenatal care in most states, despite their children representing a large fraction of births and having U.S. citizenship. In this paper, we examine a policy that expanded Medicaid pregnancy coverage to undocumented immigrants. Using a novel dataset that links California birth records to Census surveys, we identify siblings born to immigrant mothers before and after the policy. Implementing a mothers' fixed effects design, we find that the policy increased coverage for and use of prenatal care among pregnant immigrant women, and increased average gestation length and birth weight among their children.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperUnemployment Insurance Extensions, Labor Market Concentration, and Match Quality
April 2026
Working Paper Number:
CES-26-24
I investigate whether the effects of UI extensions are different for workers exposed to higher levels of local labor market concentration, a potential source of employer market power. I exploit measurement error in state unemployment rates that led to quasi-random assignment of UI durations in the U.S. during the Great Recession. Using matched employer-employee data from the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics program, I find that UI extensions lengthen nonemployment durations by one week and cause economically meaningful but not statistically significant increases in earnings. The UI-earnings effect is significantly lower at higher levels of concentration, while there is no difference in the UI-duration effect. The lower UI-earnings effect is driven by the extremes of the distribution of concentration. My results suggest that match improvements from UI are attenuated at higher levels of concentration.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperConfidentiality Protection in the Census Bureau Quarterly Workforce Indicators
February 2006
Working Paper Number:
tp-2006-02
The QuarterlyWorkforce Indicators are new estimates developed by the Census Bureau's Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics Program as a part of its Local Employment Dynamics partnership with 37 state Labor Market Information offices. These data provide detailed quarterly statistics on employment, accessions, layoffs, hires, separations, full-quarter employment (and related flows), job creations, job destructions, and earnings (for flow and stock categories of workers). The data are released for NAICS industries (and 4-digit SICs) at the county, workforce investment board, and metropolitan area levels of geography. The confidential microdata - unemployment insurance wage records, ES-202 establishment employment, and Title 13 demographic and economic information - are protected using a permanent multiplicative noise distortion factor. This factor distorts all input sums, counts, differences and ratios. The released statistics are analytically valid - measures are unbiased and time series properties are preserved. The confidentiality protection is manifested in the release of some statistics that are flagged as "significantly distorted to preserve confidentiality." These statistics differ from the undistorted statistics by a significant proportion. Even for the significantly distorted statistics, the data remain analytically valid for time series properties. The released data can be aggregated; however, published aggregates are less distorted than custom postrelease aggregates. In addition to the multiplicative noise distortion, confidentiality protection is provided by the estimation process for the QWIs, which multiply imputes all missing data (including missing establishment, given UI account, in the UI wage record data) and dynamically re-weights the establishment data to provide state-level comparability with the BLS's Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperDo Cash Windfalls Affect Wages? Evidence from R&D Grants to Small Firms
February 2020
Working Paper Number:
CES-20-06
This paper examines how employee earnings at small firms respond to a cash flow shock in the form of a government R&D grant. We use ranking data on applicant firms, which we link to IRS W2 earnings and other U.S. Census Bureau datasets. In a regression discontinuity design, we find that the grant increases average earnings with a rent-sharing elasticity of 0.07 (0.21) at the employee (firm) level. The beneficiaries are incumbent employees who were present at the firm before the award. Among incumbent employees, the effect increases with worker tenure. The grant also leads to higher employment and revenue, but productivity growth cannot fully explain the immediate effect on earnings. Instead, the data and a grantee survey are consistent with a backloaded wage contract channel, in which employees of financially constrained firms initially accept relatively low wages and are paid more when cash is available.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Work Disincentive Effects of the Disability Insurance Program in the 1990s
February 2006
Working Paper Number:
CES-06-05
In this paper we evaluate the work disincentive effects of the Disability Insurance program during the 1990s. To accomplish this we construct a new large data set with detailed information on DI application and award decisions and use two different econometric evaluation methods. First, we apply a comparison group approach proposed by John Bound to estimate an upper bound for the work disincentive effect of the current DI program. Second, we adopt a Regression-Discontinuity approach that exploits a particular feature of the DI eligibility determination process to provide a credible point estimate of the impact of the DI program on labor supply for an important subset of DI applicants. Our estimates indicate that during the 1990s the labor force participation rate of DI beneficiaries would have been at most 20 percentage points higher had none received benefits. In addition, we find even smaller labor supply responses for the subset of 'marginal' applicants whose disability determination is based on vocational factors.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperENFORCING COVENANTS NOT TO COMPETE: THE LIFE-CYCLE IMPACT ON NEW FIRMS
June 2014
Working Paper Number:
CES-14-27
We examine the impact of enforcing non-compete covenants (CNC) on the formation and performance of new firms using matched employer-employee data on 30 US states. To identify the impact of CNC, we exploit the inter-state variation in CNC enforcement along with the fact that courts do not enforce such covenants between law firms and departing lawyers in any state. Using a difference-in-difference-in-difference specification with law firms and firms that are not withinindustry spinouts as the baseline, we find states with stricter CNC enforcement have fewer, but larger within-industry spinouts that are more likely to survive their nascent years, and conditional on survival, grow faster during those years. These results are consistent with CNC enforcement having a selection effect on within-industry spinouts. Particularly, with stricter enforcement, only founders with higher-quality ideas and resources choose to overcome CNC-related barriers, which reduces entry rate but increases observed short-term performance of these spinouts.View Full Paper PDF
