Papers Containing Keywords(s): 'effects employment'
The following papers contain search terms that you selected. From the papers listed below, you can navigate to the PDF, the profile page for that working paper, or see all the working papers written by an author. You can also explore tags, keywords, and authors that occur frequently within these papers.
See Working Papers by Tag(s), Keywords(s), Author(s), or Search Text
Click here to search again
Frequently Occurring Concepts within this Search
Authors
No authors occur more than twice in this search.
Viewing papers 1 through 10 of 13
-
Working PaperIs Affirmative Action in Employment Still Effective in the 21st Century?
November 2022
Working Paper Number:
CES-22-54
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 complianceView Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Impacts of Opportunity Zones on Zone Residents
June 2021
Working Paper Number:
CES-21-12
Created by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017, the Opportunity Zone program was designed to encourage investment in distressed communities across the U.S. We examine the early impacts of the Opportunity Zone program on residents of targeted areas. We leverage restricted-access microdata from the American Community Survey and employ difference-in-differences and matching approaches to estimate causal reduced-form effects of the program. Our results point to modest, if any, positive effects of the Opportunity Zone program on the employment, earnings, or poverty of zone residents.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Impact of 2010 Decennial Census Hiring on the Unemployment Rate
June 2020
Working Paper Number:
CES-20-19
The decennial census is the largest peacetime operation of the U.S. federal government. The Census Bureau hires hundreds of thousands of temporary workers to conduct the decennial census. The magnitude of this temporary workforce influences the national employment situation when enumeration efforts ramp up and when they recede. The impact of decennial census hiring on the headline number of payroll jobs added each month is well established, but previous work has not established how decennial census hiring affects the headline unemployment rate. We link the 2010 Decennial Applicant Personnel and Payroll System data to the 2010 American Community Survey to answer this question. We find that the large hiring surge in May 2010 came mostly from people already employed (40 percent) or from people who were unemployed (33 percent). We estimate that the workers hired for Census 2010 lowered the May 2010 unemployment rate by one-tenth of a percentage point relative to the counterfactual. This one-tenth of a percentage point is within the standard error for the official unemployment rate, and BLS press releases would denote a change in the unemployment rate of 0.1% or less as 'unchanged.' We also estimate that relative to the counterfactual, the more gradual changes in decennial census employment influenced the unemployment rate by less than one-tenth of a percentage point in every other month during 2010.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 PaperDid Timing Matter? Life Cycle Differences in Effects of Exposure to the Great Recession
September 2019
Working Paper Number:
CES-19-25
Exposure to a recession can have persistent, negative consequences, but does the severity of those consequences depend on when in the life cycle a person is exposed? I estimate the effects of exposure to the Great Recession on employment and earnings outcomes for groups defined by year of birth over the ten years following the beginning of the recession. With the exception of the oldest workers, all groups experience reductions in earnings and employment due to local unemployment rate shocks during the recession. Younger workers experience the largest earnings losses in percent terms (up to 13 percent), in part because recession exposure makes them persistently less likely to work for high-paying employers even as their overall employment recovers more quickly than older workers'. Younger workers also experience reductions in earnings and employment due to changes in local labor market structure associated with the recession. These effects are substantially smaller in magnitude but more persistent than the effects of unemployment rate increases.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperDoes Federally-Funded Job Training Work? Nonexperimental Estimates of WIA Training Impacts Using Longitudinal Data on Workers and Firms
January 2018
Working Paper Number:
CES-18-02
We study the job training provided under the US Workforce Investment Act (WIA) to adults and dislocated workers in two states. Our substantive contributions center on impacts estimated non-experimentally using administrative data. These impacts compare WIA participants who do and do not receive training. In addition to the usual impacts on earnings and employment, we link our state data to the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) data at the US Census Bureau, which allows us to estimate impacts on the characteristics of the firms at which participants find employment. We find moderate positive impacts on employment, earnings and desirable firm characteristics for adults, but not for dislocated workers. Our primary methodological contribution consists of assessing the value of the additional conditioning information provided by the LEHD relative to the data available in state Unemployment Insurance (UI) earnings records. We find that value to be zero.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperLocked In? The Enforceability of Covenants Not to Compete and the Careers of High-Tech Workers
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-09
We examine how the enforceability of covenants not to compete (CNCs) affects employee mobility and wages of high-tech workers. We expect CNC enforceability to lengthen job spells and constrain mobility, but its impact on wages is ambiguous. Using a matched employer-employee dataset covering the universe of jobs in thirty U.S states, we find that higher CNC enforceability is associated with longer job spells (fewer jobs over time), and a greater chance of leaving the state for technology workers. Consistent with a 'lock-in' effect of CNCs, we find persistent wage-suppressing effects that last throughout a worker's job and employment history.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Consequences of Long Term Unemployment: Evidence from Matched Employer-Employee Data*
January 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-40
It is well known that the long-term unemployed fare worse in the labor market than the short-term unemployed, but less clear why this is so. One potential explanation is that the long-term unemployed are 'bad apples' who had poorer prospects from the outset of their spells (heterogeneity). Another is that their bad outcomes are a consequence of the extended unemployment they have experienced (state dependence). We use Current Population Survey (CPS) data on unemployed individuals linked to wage records for the same people to distinguish between these competing explanations. For each person in our sample, we have wage record data that cover the period from 20 quarters before to 11 quarters after the quarter in which the person is observed in the CPS. This gives us rich information about prior and subsequent work histories not available to previous researchers that we use to control for individual heterogeneity that might be affecting subsequent labor market outcomes. Even with these controls in place, we find that unemployment duration has a strongly negative effect on the likelihood of subsequent employment. This finding is inconsistent with the heterogeneity ('bad apple') explanation for why the long-term unemployed fare worse than the short-term unemployed. We also find that longer unemployment durations are associated with lower subsequent earnings, though this is mainly attributable to the long-term unemployed having a lower likelihood of subsequent employment rather than to their having lower earnings once a job is found.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperLocate Your Nearest Exit: Mass Layoffs and Local Labor Market Response
September 2015
Working Paper Number:
CES-15-25
Large shocks to local labor markets cause lasting changes to communities and their residents. We examine four main channels through which the local labor force adjusts following mass layoffs: in- and out-migration, retirement, and disability insurance enrollment. We show that these channels account for over half of the labor force reductions following a mass layoff event. By measuring the residual difference between these channels and labor force change, we also show that labor force non-participation grew in the period during and after the Great Recession. This result highlights the growing importance of non-participation as a response to labor demand shocks.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe EITC over the business cycle: Who benefits?
December 2014
Working Paper Number:
carra-2014-15
In this paper, I examine the impact of the Great Recession on Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) eligibility. Because the EITC is structurally tied to earnings, the direction of this impact is not immediately obvious. Families who experience complete job loss for an entire tax year lose eligibility, while those experiencing underemployment (part-year employment, a reduction in hours, or spousal unemployment in married households) may become eligible. Determining the direction and magnitude of the impact is important for a number of reasons. The EITC has become the largest cash-transfer program in the U.S., and many low-earning families rely on it as a means of support in tough times. The program has largely been viewed as a replacement for welfare, enticing former welfare recipients into the labor force. However, the effectiveness of the EITC during a period of very high unemployment has not been assessed. To answer these questions, I first use the Current Population Survey (CPS) matched to Internal Revenue Service data from tax years 2005 to 2010 to assess patterns of employment and eligibility over the Great Recession for different labor-force groups. Results indicate that overall, EITC eligibility increased over the recession, but only among groups that were cushioned from total household earnings loss by marriage. I also use the 2006 CPS matched to tax data from 2005 through 2011 to examine changes in eligibility experienced by individuals over time. In assessing three competing causes of eligibility loss, I find that less-educated, unmarried women experienced a greater hazard of eligibility loss due a yearlong lack of earnings compared with other labor-market groups. I discuss the implications of these findings on the view of the EITC as a safety-net program.View Full Paper PDF
