Industry Wage Differentials: A Firm-Based Approach
August 2023
Working Paper Number:
CES-23-40
Abstract
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.
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.
:
economist,
industrial,
earnings,
employee,
employed,
labor,
heterogeneity,
unobserved,
bias,
workplace,
workforce,
worker,
wage effects,
industry wages,
wage differences,
wage industries,
wage data,
premium,
disparity
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.
:
Ordinary Least Squares,
National Longitudinal Survey of Youth,
Census Industry Code,
North American Industry Classification System,
American Community Survey,
Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics,
AKM,
Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board
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 'Industry Wage Differentials: A Firm-Based Approach' are listed below in order of similarity.
-
Working PaperLocation, 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
-
Working PaperRe-assessing the Spatial Mismatch Hypothesis🔥
April 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-23
We use detailed location information from the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) database to develop new evidence on the effects of spatial mismatch on the relative earnings of Black workers in large US cities. We classify workplaces by the size of the pay premiums they offer in a two-way fixed effects model, providing a simple metric for defining 'good' jobs. We show that: (a) Black workers earn nearly the same average wage premiums as whites; (b) in most cities Black workers live closer to jobs, and closer to good jobs, than do whites; (c) Black workers typically commute shorter distances than whites; and (d) people who commute further earn higher average pay premiums, but the elasticity with respect to distance traveled is slightly lower for Black workers. We conclude that geographic proximity to good jobs is unlikely to be a major source of the racial earnings gaps in major U.S. cities today.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperSize Matters: Matching Externalities and the Advantages of Large Labor Markets🔥
April 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-22
Economists have long hypothesized that large and thick labor markets facilitate the matching between workers and firms. We use administrative data from the LEHD to compare the job search outcomes of workers originally in large and small markets who lost their jobs due to a firm closure. We define a labor market as the Commuting Zone'industry pair in the quarter before the closure. To account for the possible sorting of high-quality workers into larger markets, the effect of market size is identified by comparing workers in large and small markets within the same CZ, conditional on workers fixed effects. In the six quarters before their firm's closure, workers in small and large markets have a similar probability of employment and quarterly earnings. Following the closure, workers in larger markets experience significantly shorter non-employment spells and smaller earning losses than workers in smaller markets, indicating that larger markets partially insure workers against idiosyncratic employment shocks. A 1 percent increase in market size results in a 0.015 and 0.023 percentage points increase in the 1-year re-employment probability of high school and college graduates, respectively. Displaced workers in larger markets also experience a significantly lower need for relocation to a different CZ. Conditional on finding a new job, the quality of the new worker-firm match is higher in larger markets, as proxied by a higher probability that the new match lasts more than one year; the new industry is the same as the old one; and the new industry is a 'good fit' for the worker's college major. Consistent with the notion that market size should be particularly consequential for more specialized workers, we find that the effects are larger in industries where human capital is more specialized and less portable. Our findings may help explain the geographical agglomeration of industries'especially those that make intensive use of highly specialized workers'and validate one of the mechanisms that urban economists have proposed for the existence of agglomeration economies.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperUnderstanding Criminal Record Penalties in the Labor Market
June 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-39
This paper studies the earnings and employment penalties associated with a criminal record. Using a large-scale dataset linking criminal justice and employer-employee wage records, we estimate two-way fixed effects models that decompose earnings into worker's portable earnings potential and firm pay premia, both of which are allowed to shift after a worker acquires a record. We find that firm pay premia explain a small share of earnings gaps between workers with and without a record. There is little evidence of variable within-firm premia gaps either. Instead, components of workers' earnings potential that persist across firms explain the bulk of gaps. Conditional on earnings potential, workers with a record are also substantially less likely to be employed. Difference-in-differences estimates comparing workers' first conviction to workers charged but not convicted or charged later support these findings. The results suggest that criminal record penalties operate primarily by changing whether workers are employed and their earnings potential at every firm rather than increasing sorting into lower-paying jobs, although the bulk of gaps can be attributed to differences that existed prior to acquiring a record.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperPlaces 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
-
Working PaperEmployer-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
-
Working PaperComputing Person and Firm Effects Using Linked Longitudinal Employer-Employee Data
March 2002
Working Paper Number:
tp-2002-06
In this paper we provide the exact formulas for the direct least squares estimation of statistical models that include both person and firm effects. We also provide an algorithm for determining the estimable functions of the person and firm effects (the identifiable effects). The computational techniques are also directly applicable to any linear two-factor analysis of covariance with two high-dimension non-orthogonal factors. We show that the application of the exact solution does not change the substantive conclusions about the relative importance of person and firm effects in the explanation of log real compensation; however, the correlation between person and firm effects is negative, not weakly positive, in the exact solution. We also provide guidance for using the methods developed in earlier work to obtain an accurate approximation.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperBetween 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
-
Working PaperEscaping poverty for low-wage workers The role of employer characteristics and changes
June 2001
Working Paper Number:
tp-2001-02
View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperIs 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
