We revisit the estimation of industry wage differentials using linked employer-employee data
from the U.S. LEHD program. Building on recent advances in the measurement of employer wage premiums, we define the industry wage effect as the employment-weighted average workplace premium in that industry. We show that cross-sectional estimates of industry differentials overstate the pay premiums due to unmeasured worker heterogeneity. Conversely, estimates based on industry movers understate the true premiums, due to unmeasured heterogeneity in pay premiums within industries. Industry movers who switch to higher-premium industries tend to leave firms in the origin sector that pay above-average premiums and move to firms in the destination sector with below-average premiums (and vice versa), attenuating the measured industry effects. Our preferred estimates reveal substantial heterogeneity in narrowly-defined industry premiums, with a standard deviation of 12%. On average, workers in higher-paying industries have higher observed and unobserved skills, widening between-industry wage inequality. There are also small but systematic differences in industry premiums across cities, with a wider distribution of pay premiums and more worker sorting in cities with more highpremium firms and high-skilled workers.
-
Location, Location, Location
October 2021
Working Paper Number:
CES-21-32R
We use data from the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics program to study the causal effects of location on earnings. Starting from a model with employer and employee fixed effects, we estimate the average earnings premiums associated with jobs in different commuting zones (CZs) and different CZ-industry pairs. About half of the variation in mean wages across CZs is attributable to differences in worker ability (as measured by their fixed effects); the other half is attributable to place effects. We show that the place effects from a richly specified cross sectional wage model overstate the causal effects of place (due to unobserved worker ability), while those from a model that simply adds person fixed effects understate the causal effects (due to unobserved heterogeneity in the premiums paid by different firms in the same CZ). Local industry agglomerations are associated with higher wages, but overall differences in industry composition and in CZ-specific returns to industries explain only a small fraction of average place effects. Estimating separate place effects for college and non-college workers, we find that the college wage gap is bigger in larger and higher-wage places, but that two-thirds of this variation is attributable to differences in the relative skills of the two groups in different places. Most of the remaining variation reflects the enhanced sorting of more educated workers to higher-paying industries in larger and higher-wage CZs. Finally, we find that local housing costs at least fully offset local pay premiums, implying that workers who move to larger CZs have no higher net-of-housing consumption.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Places versus People: The Ins and Outs of Labor Market Adjustment to Globalization
December 2024
Working Paper Number:
CES-24-78
We analyze the distinct adjustment paths of U.S. labor markets (places) and U.S. workers (people) to increased Chinese import competition during the 2000s. Using comprehensive register data for 2000'2019, we document that employment levels more than fully rebound in trade-exposed places after 2010, while employment-to-population ratios remain depressed and manufacturing employment further atrophies. The adjustment of places to trade shocks is generational: affected areas recover primarily by adding workers to non-manufacturing who were below working age when the shock occurred. Entrants are disproportionately native-born Hispanics, foreign-born immigrants, women, and the college-educated, who find employment in relatively low-wage service sectors like medical services, education, retail, and hospitality. Using the panel structure of the employer-employee data, we decompose changes in the employment composition of places into trade-induced shifts in the gross flows of people across sectors, locations, and non-employment status. Contrary to standard models, trade shocks reduce geographic mobility, with both in- and out-migration remaining depressed through 2019. The employment recovery instead stems almost entirely from young adults and foreign-born immigrants taking their first U.S. jobs in affected areas, with minimal contributions from cross-sector transitions of former manufacturing workers. Although worker inflows into non-manufacturing more than fully offset manufacturing employment losses in trade-exposed locations after 2010, incumbent workers neither fully recover earnings losses nor predominately exit the labor market, but rather age in place as communities undergo rapid demographic and industrial transitions.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Employer-to-Employer Flows in the United States: Estimates Using Linked Employer-Employee Data
September 2010
Working Paper Number:
CES-10-26
We use administrative data linking workers and firms to study employer-to-employer flows. After discussing how to identify such flows in quarterly data, we investigate their basic empirical patterns. We find that the pace of employer-to-employer flows is high, representing about 4 percent of employment and 30 percent of separations each quarter. The pace of employer-to-employer flows is highly procyclical, and varies systematically across worker, job and employer characteristics. Our findings regarding job tenure and earnings dynamics suggest that for those workers moving directly to new jobs, the new jobs are generally better jobs; however, this pattern is highly procyclical. There are rich patterns in terms of origin and destination of industries. We find somewhat surprisingly that more than half of the workers making employer-to-employer transitions switch even broadly-defined industries (NAICS supersectors).
View Full
Paper PDF
-
The Long-Term Effects of Job Mobility on the Adult Earnings of Young Men: Evidence from Integrated Employer-Employee Data
June 2005
Working Paper Number:
CES-05-05
The paper follows a population of 18-year-old men to examine the impact that early job mobility has on their earnings prospects as young adults. Longitudinal employer-employee data from the state of Maryland allow me to take into consideration the endogenous determination of mobility in response to unobserved worker as well as firm characteristics, which may lead to spurious results. The descriptive portion of the paper shows that mobility patterns of young workers differ considerably with the characteristics of the firm; however, growth patterns are not significantly different on average. Workers employed in high-turnover firms (such as those in retail and services) experience more job turnover but similar rates of wage growth compared to workers employed in low turnover firms (such as those in manufacturing); however, their wage levels remain below and the wage gap actually increases over time. Regression results controlling for unobservable show that employers in the low-turnover sector discount earnings of workers who displayed early market mobility. By contrast, I find no evidence that mobility has negative effects for workers that remain employed in the high turnover sector.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Between Firm Changes in Earnings Inequality: The Dominant Role of Industry Effects
February 2020
Working Paper Number:
CES-20-08
We find that most of the rising between firm earnings inequality that dominates the overall increase in inequality in the U.S. is accounted for by industry effects. These industry effects stem from rising inter-industry earnings differentials and not from changing distribution of employment across industries. We also find the rising inter-industry earnings differentials are almost completely accounted for by occupation effects. These results link together the key findings from separate components of the recent literature: one focuses on firm effects and the other on occupation effects. The link via industry effects challenges conventional wisdom.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
It's Where You Work: Increases In Earnings Dispersion Across Establishments And Individuals In The U.S.
September 2014
Working Paper Number:
CES-14-33
This paper links data on establishments and individuals to analyze the role of establishments in the increase in inequality that has become a central topic in economic analysis and policy debate. It decomposes changes in the variance of ln earnings among individuals into the part due to changes in earnings among establishments and the part due to changes in earnings within-establishments and finds that much of the 1970s-2010s increase in earnings inequality results from increased dispersion of the earnings among the establishments where individuals work. It also shows that the divergence of establishment earnings occurred within and across industries and was associated with increased variance of revenues per worker. Our results direct attention to the fundamental role of establishment-level pay setting and economic adjustments in earnings inequality.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Is it Who You Are, Where You Work, or With Whom You Work? Reassessing the Relationship Between Skill Segregation and Wage Inequality
June 2002
Working Paper Number:
tp-2002-10
In a recent paper, Kremer & Maskin (QJE, forthcoming) develop an assignment model in
which increases in the dispersion and mean of the skill distribution can lead simultaneously
to increases in wage inequality and skill segregation. They then present evidence that,
concurrent with rising wage inequality, wage segregation increased for production workers in
the United States between 1975 and 1986. My paper argues that relying on wages as a proxy
for skill may be problematic. Using a newly developed longitudinal dataset linking virtually
the entire universe of workers in the state of Illinois to their employers, I decompose wages
into components due, not only to person and firm heterogeneity, but also to the characteristics
of their co-workers. Such "co-worker effects" capture the impact of a weighted sum of the
characteristics of all workers in a firm on each individual employee's wage. While rising wage
segregation can result from greater skill segregation, it may also be due to changes in the
variance of co-worker effects in the economy, or to changes in the covariance between the
person, firm, and co-worker components of wages.
Due to the limited availability of demographic information on workers, I rely on the
person specific component of wages to proxy for co-worker "skills." Because these person
effects are unknown ex ante, I implement an iterative estimation approach where they are
first obtained from a preliminary regression that excludes any role for co-workers. Because
virtually all person and firm effects are identified, the approach yields consistent estimates
of the co-worker parameters. My estimates imply that a one standard deviation increase
in both a firm's average person effect and experience level is associated, on average, with
wage increases of 3% to 5%. Firms that increase the wage premia they pay workers appear
to do so in conjunction with upgrading worker quality. Interestingly, the average effect
masks considerable variation in the relative importance of co-workers across industries. After
allowing the co-worker parameters to vary across 2 digit industries, I find that industry
average co-worker effects explain 26% of observed inter-industry wage differentials. Finally,
I decompose the overall distribution of wages into components due to persons, firms, and coworkers.
While co-worker effects do indeed serve to exacerbate wage inequality, the tendency
for high and low skilled workers to sort non-randomly into firms plays a considerably more
prominent role.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Sex Segregation in U.S. Manufacturing
June 1996
Working Paper Number:
CES-96-04
This paper studies interplant sex segregation in the U.S. manufacturing industry. The study differs from previous work in that we have detailed information on the characteristics of both workers and firms, and because we measure segregation in a new and better way. We report three main findings. First, there is a substantial amount of interplant sex segregation in the U.S. manufacturing industry, although segregation is far from complete. Second, we find that female managers tend to work in the same plants as female supervisees, even once we control for other plant characteristics. And finally, we find that interplant segregation can account for a substantial fraction of the male/female wage gap in the manufacturing industry, particularly among blue-collar workers.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
The China Shock Revisited: Job Reallocation and Industry Switching in U.S. Labor Markets
October 2024
Working Paper Number:
CES-24-65
Using confidential administrative data from the U.S. Census Bureau we revisit how the rise in Chinese import penetration has reshaped U.S. local labor markets. Local labor markets more exposed to the China shock experienced larger reallocation from manufacturing to services jobs. Most of this reallocation occurred within firms that simultaneously contracted manufacturing operations while expanding employment in services. Notably, about 40% of the manufacturing job loss effect is due to continuing establishments switching their primary activity from manufacturing to trade-related services such as research, management, and wholesale. The effects of Chinese import penetration vary by local labor market characteristics. In areas with high human capital, including much of the West Coast and large cities, job reallocation from manufacturing to services has been substantial. In areas with low human capital and a high initial manufacturing share, including much of the Midwest and the South, we find limited job reallocation. We estimate this differential response to the China shock accounts for half of the 1997-2007 job growth gap between these regions.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Impacts of Trade on Wage Inequality in Los Angeles: Analysis Using Matched Employer-Employee Data
April 2006
Working Paper Number:
CES-06-12
Over the past twenty-five years, earnings inequality has risen dramatically in the US, reversing trends of the preceding half-century. Growing inequality is closely tied to globalization and trade through the arguments of Heckscher-Ohlin. However, with only few exceptions, empirical studies fail to show that trade is the primary determinant of shifts in relative wages. We argue that lack of empirical support for the trade-inequality connection results from the use of poor proxies for worker skill and the failure to control for other worker characteristics and plant characteristics that impact wages. We remedy these problems by developing a matched employer-employee database linking the Decennial Household Census (individual worker records) and the Longitudinal Research Database (individual manufacturing establishment records) for the Los Angeles CMSA in 1990 and 2000. Our results show that trade has a significant impact on wage inequality, pushing down the wages of the less-skilled while allowing more highly skilled workers to benefit from exports. That impact has increased through the 1990s, swamping the influence of skill-biased technical change in 2000. Further, the negative effect of trade on the wages of the less-skilled has moved up the skill distribution over time. This suggests that over the long-run, increasing levels of education may not insulate more skilled workers within developed economies from the impacts of trade.
View Full
Paper PDF