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
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 PaperThe Impact of Minimum Wages on Job Training: An Empirical Exploration with Establishment Data
February 2003
Working Paper Number:
CES-03-04
Human capital theory suggests that workers may finance on-the-job training by accepting lower wages during the training period. Minimum wage laws could reduce job training, then, to the extent they prevent low-wage workers from offering sufficient wage cuts to finance training. Empirical findings on the relationship between minimum wages and job training have failed to reach a consensus. Previous research has relied primarily on survey data from individual workers, which typically lack both detailed measures of job training and important information about the characteristics of firms. This study addresses the issue of minimum wages and on-the-job training with a unique employer survey. We find no evidence indicating that minimum wages reduce the average hours of training of trained employees, and little to suggest that minimum wages reduce the percentage of workers receiving training.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 PaperPrivate Equity and Workers: Modeling and Measuring Monopsony, Implicit Contracts, and Efficient Reallocation
June 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-37
We measure the real effects of private equity buyouts on worker outcomes by building a new database that links transactions to matched employer-employee data in the United States. To guide our empirical analysis, we derive testable implications from three theories in which private equity managers alter worker outcomes: (1) exertion of monopsony power in concentrated markets, (2) breach of implicit contracts with targeted groups of workers, including managers and top earners, and (3) efficient reallocation of workers across plants. We do not find any evidence that private equity-backed firms vary wages and employment based on local labor market power proxies. Wage losses are also very similar for managers and top earners. Instead, we find strong evidence that private equity managers downsize less productive plants relative to productive plants while simultaneously reallocating high-wage workers to more productive plants. We conclude that post-buyout employment and wage dynamics are consistent with professional investors providing incentives to increase productivity and monitor the companies in which they invest.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 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 PaperNEW EVIDENCE ON SEX SEGREGATION AND SEX DIFFERENCES IN WAGES FROM MATCHED EMPLOYEE-EMPLOYER DATA*
December 1998
Working Paper Number:
CES-98-18
We assemble a new matched employer-employee data set covering essentially all industries and occupations across all regions of the U.S. We use this data set to re-examine the question of the relative contributions to the overall sex gap in wages of sex segregation vs. wage differences by sex within occupation, industry, establishment, and occupation-establishment cells. This new data set is especially useful because earlier research on this topic relied on data sets that covered only a narrow range of industries, occupations, or regions. Our results indicate that a sizable fraction of the sex gap in wages is accounted for by the segregation of women into lower-paying occupations, industries, establishments, and occupations within establishments. Nonetheless, a substantial part of the sex gap in wages remains attributable to the individual's sex. This latter finding contrasts sharply with the conclusions of previous research (especially Groshen, 1991), which indicated that sex segregation accounted for essentially all of the sex wage gap. Further research into the sources of within-establishment within-occupation sex wage differences is therefore much more important than previously thought.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Color of Money: Federal vs. Industry Funding of University Research
September 2021
Working Paper Number:
CES-21-26
U.S. universities, which are important producers of new knowledge, have experienced a shift in research funding away from federal and towards private industry sources. This paper compares the effects of federal and private university research funding, using data from 22 universities that include individual-level payments for everyone employed on all grants for each university year and that are linked to patent and Census data, including IRS W-2 records. We instrument for an individual's source of funding with government-wide R&D expenditure shocks within a narrow field of study. We find that a higher share of federal funding causes fewer but more general patents, more high-tech entrepreneurship, a higher likelihood of remaining employed in academia, and a lower likelihood of joining an incumbent firm. Increasing the private share of funding has opposite effects for most outcomes. It appears that private funding leads to greater appropriation of intellectual property by incumbent firms.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperDisplaced workers, early leavers, and re-employment wages
November 2002
Working Paper Number:
tp-2002-18
In this paper, we lay out a search model that takes explicitly into account the information flow prior to a mass layoff. Using universal wage data files that allow us to identify individuals working with healthy and displacing firms both at the time of displacement as well as any other time period, we test the predictions of the model on re-employment wage differentials. Workers leaving a "distressed" firm have higher re-employment wages than workers who stay with the distressed firm until displacement. This result is robust to the inclusion of controls for worker quality and unobservable firm characteristics.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperScientific Talent Leaks Out of Funding Gaps
February 2024
Working Paper Number:
CES-24-08
We study how delays in NIH grant funding affect the career outcomes of research personnel. Using comprehensive earnings and tax records linked to university transaction data along with a difference-in-differences design, we find that a funding interruption of more than 30 days has a substantial effect on job placements for personnel who work in labs with a single NIH R01 research grant, including a 3 percentage point (40%) increase in the probability of not working in the US. Incorporating information from the full 2020 Decennial Census and data on publications, we find that about half of those induced into nonemployment appear to permanently leave the US and are 90% less likely to publish in a given year, with even larger impacts for trainees (postdocs and graduate students). Among personnel who continue to work in the US, we find that interrupted personnel earn 20% less than their continuously-funded peers, with the largest declines concentrated among trainees and other non-faculty personnel (such as staff and undergraduates). Overall, funding delays account for about 5% of US nonemployment in our data, indicating that they have a meaningful effect on the scientific labor force at the national level.View Full Paper PDF
