To what extent do workers work more hours than they are paid for? The relationship
between hours worked and hours paid, and the conditions under which employers can demand more hours 'off the clock,' is not well understood. The answer to this question impacts worker welfare, as well as wage and hour regulation. In addition, work off the clock has important implications for the measurement and cyclical movement of productivity and wages. In this paper, I construct a unique administrative dataset of hours paid by employers linked to a survey of workers on their reported hours worked to measure work off the clock. Using cross-sectional variation in local labor markets, I find only a small cyclical component to work off the clock. The results point to labor hoarding rather than efficiency wage theory, indicating work off the clock cannot explain the counter-cyclical movement of productivity. I find workers employed by small firms, and in industries with a high rate of wage and hour violations are associated with larger differences in hours worked than hours paid. These findings suggest the importance of tracking hours of work for enforcement of labor regulations.
-
Downward Nominal Wage Rigidity in the United States:
New Evidence from Worker-Firm Linked Data
February 2019
Working Paper Number:
CES-19-07
This paper examines the extent and consequences of Downward Nominal Wage Rigidity (DNWR) using administrative worker-firm linked data from the Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics (LEHD) program for a large representative U.S. state. Prior to the Great Recession, only 7-8% of job stayers are paid the same nominal hourly wage rate as one year earlier - substantially less than previously found in survey-based data - and about 20% of job stayers experience a wage cut. During the Great Recession, the incidence of wage cuts increases to 30%, followed by a large rise in the proportion of wage freezes to 16% as the economy recovers. Total earnings of job stayers exhibit even fewer zero changes and a larger incidence of reductions than hourly wage rates, due to systematic variations in hours worked. The results are consistent with concurrent findings in the literature that reductions in base pay are exceedingly rare but that firms use different forms of non-base pay and variations in hours worked to flexibilize labor cost. We then exploit the worker-firm link of the LEHD and find that during the Great Recession, firms with indicators of DNWR reduced employment by about 1.2% more per year. This negative effect is driven by significantly lower hiring rates and persists into the recovery. Our results suggest that despite the relatively large incidence of wage cuts in the aggregate, DNWR has sizable allocative consequences.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
DO LOCAL MANAGERS GIVE LABOR AN EDGE?
April 2013
Working Paper Number:
CES-13-16
Based on the psychological theory of place attachments, native local managers should be more rooted in their communities than non-locals and should act accordingly. Consistent with this, local managers are 33% less likely to lay of employees than their non-local industry peers following industry distress. Additionally, when managers are forced to lay off employees, establishments near managers' homes are less likely to experience layoffs than those located elsewhere. Locals pay for these higher employment levels by spending cash, cutting investment, and selling assets. While there is no direct evidence that labor-friendly policies of locals have a differential impact on firm performance or value, only locals with weaker incentives implement these policies, suggesting that favoritism by locals may be suboptimal. Taken together these results suggest that managerial preferences impact corporate employment decisions.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Payroll Tax Incidence: Evidence from Unemployment Insurance
June 2024
Working Paper Number:
CES-24-35
Economic models assume that payroll tax burdens fall fully on workers, but where does tax incidence fall when taxes are firm-specific and time-varying? Unemployment insurance in the United States has the key feature of varying both across employers and over time, creating the potential for labor demand responses if tax costs cannot be fully passed through to worker wages. Using state policy changes and administrative data of matched employer-employee job spells, I study how employment and earnings respond to unexpected payroll tax increases for highly exposed employers. I find significant drops in employment growth driven by lower hiring, and minimal evidence of passthrough to earnings. The negative employment effects are strongest for young workers and single-establishment firms.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Wage Dispersion, Compensation Policy and the Role of Firms
November 2005
Working Paper Number:
tp-2005-04
Empirical work in economics stresses the importance of unobserved firm- and person-level characteristics
in the determination of wages, finding that these unobserved components account for the overwhelming
majority of variation in wages. However, little is known about the mechanisms sustaining these wage di'er-
entials. This paper attempts to demystify the firm-side of the puzzle by developing a statistical model that
enriches the role that firms play in wage determination, allowing firms to influence both average wages as
well as the returns to observable worker characteristics.
I exploit the hierarchical nature of a unique employer-employee linked dataset for the United States,
estimating a multilevel statistical model of earnings that accounts for firm-specific deviations in average
wages as well as the returns to components of human capital - race, gender, education, and experience -
while also controlling for person-level heterogeneity in earnings. These idiosyncratic prices reflect one aspect
of firm compensation policy; another, and more novel aspect, is the unstructured characterization of the
covariance of these prices across firms.
I estimate the model's variance parameters using Restricted (or Residual) Maximum Likelihood tech-
niques. Results suggest that there is significant variation in the returns to worker characteristics across
firms. First, estimates of the parameters of the covariance matrix of firm-specific returns are statistically
significant. Firms that tend to pay higher average wages also tend to pay higher than average returns to
worker characteristics; firms that tend to reward highly the human capital of men also highly reward the
human capital of women. For instance, the correlation between the firm-specific returns to education for
men and women is 0.57. Second, the firm-specific returns account for roughly 9% of the variation in wages
- approximately 50% of the variation in wages explained by firm-specific intercepts alone. The inclusion of
firm-specific returns ties variation in wages, otherwise attributable to firm-specific intercepts, to observable
components of human capital.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Destructive Creation at Work: How Financial Distress Spurs Entrepreneurship
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-19
Using US Census employer-employee matched data, I show that employer financial
distress accelerates the exit of employees to found start-ups. This effect is particularly evident when distressed firms are less able to enforce contracts restricting employee mobility into competing firms. Entrepreneurs exiting financially distressed employers earn higher wages prior to the exit and after founding start-ups, compared to entrepreneurs exiting non-distressed firms. Consistent with distressed firms losing higher-quality workers, their start-ups have higher average employment and payroll growth. The results suggest that the social costs of distress might be lower than the private costs to financially distressed firms.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Family-Leave Mandates and Female Labor at U.S. Firms: Evidence from a Trade Shock
September 2020
Working Paper Number:
CES-20-25
We study the role of family-leave mandates in shaping the gender composition at U.S. firms that experience a negative demand shock. In a regression discontinuity framework, we compare firms mandated to provide job-protected leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and firms that are exempt from the law (non-FMLA) following the post-2001 surge in Chinese imports. Using confidential microdata on matched employers and employees in the U.S. non-farm private sector, we find that between 2000 and 2003, an increase in import competition decreases the share of female workers at FMLA compared to non-FMLA firms. The negative differential effect is driven by female workers in prime childbearing years, with less than college education, and is strongest at firms with all male managers. We find similar patterns in changes in the female share of earnings and promotions. These results suggest that, when traditional gender norms prevail, adverse shocks may exacerbate gender inequalities in the presence of job-protected leave mandates.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Agent Heterogeneity and Learning: An Application to Labor Markets
October 2002
Working Paper Number:
tp-2002-20
I develop a matching model with heterogeneous workers, rms, and worker-firm
matches, and apply it to longitudinal linked data on employers and employees. Workers
vary in their marginal product when employed and their value of leisure when unemployed.
Firms vary in their marginal product and cost of maintaining a vacancy. The
marginal product of a worker-firm match also depends on a match-specific interaction
between worker and rm that I call match quality. Agents have complete information
about worker and rm heterogeneity, and symmetric but incomplete information about
match quality. They learn its value slowly by observing production outcomes. There
are two key results. First, under a Nash bargain, the equilibrium wage is linear in a
person-specific component, a firm-specific component, and the posterior mean of beliefs
about match quality. Second, in each period the separation decision depends only on
the posterior mean of beliefs and person and rm characteristics. These results have
several implications for an empirical model of earnings with person and rm eects.
The rst implies that residuals within a worker-firm match are a martingale; the second
implies the distribution of earnings is truncated.
I test predictions from the matching model using data from the Longitudinal
Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) Program at the US Census Bureau. I present
both xed and mixed model specifications of the equilibrium wage function, taking
account of structural aspects implied by the learning process. In the most general
specification, earnings residuals have a completely unstructured covariance within a
worker-firm match. I estimate and test a variety of more parsimonious error structures,
including the martingale structure implied by the learning process. I nd considerable
support for the matching model in these data.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Interstate Migration and Employer-to-Employer Transitions in the U.S.: New Evidence from Administrative Records Data
January 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-44R
Declines in migration across labor markets have prompted concerns that the U.S. economy is becoming less dynamic. In this paper we examine the relationship between residential migration and employer-to-employer transitions using both survey and administrative records data. We first note strong disagreement between the Current Population Survey (CPS) and other migration statistics on the timing and severity of any decline in interstate migration. Despite these divergent patterns for overall residential migration, we find consistent evidence of a substantial decline in economic migration between 2000 and 2010. We find that composition and the returns to migration have limited ability to explain recent changes in interstate migration.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Ranking Firms Using Revealed Preference
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-61
This paper estimates workers' preferences for firms by studying the structure of employer-toemployer transitions in U.S. administrative data. The paper uses a tool from numerical linear algebra to measure the central tendency of worker flows, which is closely related to the ranking of firms revealed by workers' choices. There is evidence for compensating differential when workers systematically move to lower-paying firms in a way that cannot be accounted for by layoffs or
differences in recruiting intensity. The estimates suggest that compensating differentials account
for over half of the firm component of the variance of earnings.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Earnings Inequality and Mobility Trends in the United States: Nationally Representative Estimates from Longitudinally Linked Employer-Employee Data
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-24
Using earnings data from the U.S. Census Bureau, this paper analyzes the role of the employer in explaining the rise in earnings inequality in the United States. We first establish a consistent frame of analysis appropriate for administrative data used to study earnings inequality. We show that the trends in earnings inequality in the administrative data from the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics Program are inconsistent with other data sources when we do not correct for the presence of misused SSNs. After this correction to the worker frame, we analyze how the earnings distribution has changed in the last decade. We present a decomposition of the year-to-year changes in the earnings distribution from 2004-2013. Even when simplifying these flows to movements between the bottom 20%, the middle 60% and the top 20% of the earnings distribution, about 20.5 million workers undergo a transition each year. Another 19.9 million move between employment and nonemployment. To understand the role of the firm in these transitions, we estimate a model for log earnings with additive fixed worker and firm effects using all jobs held by eligible workers from 2004-2013. We construct a composite log earnings firm component across all jobs for a worker in a given year and a non-firm component. We also construct a skill-type index. We show that, while the difference between working at a low-or middle-paying firm are relatively small, the gains from working at a top-paying firm are large. Specifically, the benefits of working for a high-paying firm are not only realized today, through higher earnings paid to the worker, but also persist through an increase in the probability of upward mobility. High-paying firms facilitate moving workers to the top of the earnings distribution and keeping them there.
View Full
Paper PDF