Papers Containing Keywords(s): 'earnings employees'
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 11
-
Working PaperPoach or Promote? Job Sorting and Gender Earnings Inequality across U.S. Industries
April 2023
Working Paper Number:
CES-23-23
I outline the sociological theory that would predict that external labor markets ' those in which more positions are filled with new hires rather from firm-internal promotions ' heighten gender based discrimination and contribute to earnings inequality. I test this theory by treating industries as miniature labor markets within the US with varying levels of gender inequality and different hiring practices. Using high quality administrative data from 1985 to 2013, including detailed work histories from this period, I compare the earnings of alike men and women across industries with different levels of reliance on external markets at different times. I find that men experience greater unexplained earnings relative to women ' unexplained in that it is not accounted for by work history or observable demographic characteristics ' when a greater share of earnings increase events occur outside the firm.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperTrade Liberalization and Labor-Market Outcomes: Evidence from US Matched Employer-Employee Data
September 2022
Working Paper Number:
CES-22-42
We use matched employer-employee data to examine outcomes among workers initially employed within and outside manufacturing after trade liberalization with China. We find that exposure to this shock operates predominantly through workers' counties (versus industries), that larger own industry and downstream exposure typically reduce relative earnings, and that greater upstream exposure often raises them. The latter is particularly important outside manufacturing: while we find substantial and persistent predicted declines in relative earnings among manufacturing workers, those outside manufacturing are generally predicted to experience relative earnings gains. Investigation of employment reactions indicates they account for a small share of the earnings effect.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperPay, Productivity and Management
September 2021
Working Paper Number:
CES-21-31
Using confidential Census matched employer-employee earnings data we find that employees at more productive firms, and firms with more structured management practices, have substantially higher pay, both on average and across every percentile of the pay distribution. This pay-performance relationship is particularly strong amongst higher paid employees, with a doubling of firm productivity associated with 11% more pay for the highest-paid employee (likely the CEO) compared to 4.7% for the median worker. This pay-performance link holds in public and private firms, although it is almost twice as strong in public firms for the highest-paid employees. Top pay volatility is also strongly related to productivity and structured management, suggesting this performance-pay relationship arises from more aggressive monitoring and incentive practices for top earners.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperU.S. Long-Term Earnings Outcomes by Sex, Race, Ethnicity, and Place of Birth
May 2021
Working Paper Number:
CES-21-07R
This paper is part of the Global Income Dynamics Project cross-country comparison of earnings inequality, volatility, and mobility. Using data from the U.S. Census Bureau's Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) infrastructure files we produce a uniform set of earnings statistics for the U.S. From 1998 to 2019, we find U.S. earnings inequality has increased and volatility has decreased. The combination of increased inequality and reduced volatility suggest earnings growth differs substantially across different demographic groups. We explore this further by estimating 12-year average earnings for a single cohort of age 25-54 eligible workers. Differences in labor supply (hours paid and quarters worked) are found to explain almost 90% of the variation in worker earnings, although even after controlling for labor supply substantial earnings differences across demographic groups remain unexplained. Using a quantile regression approach, we estimate counterfactual earnings distributions for each demographic group. We find that at the bottom of the earnings distribution differences in characteristics such as hours paid, geographic division, industry, and education explain almost all the earnings gap, however above the median the contribution of the differences in the returns to characteristics becomes the dominant component.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 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 PaperEstimating Measurement Error in SIPP Annual Job Earnings: A Comparison of Census Bureau Survey and SSA Administrative Data
July 2011
Working Paper Number:
CES-11-20
We quantify sources of variation in annual job earnings data collected by the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) to determine how much of the variation is the result of measurement error. Jobs reported in the SIPP are linked to jobs reported in an administrative database, the Detailed Earnings Records (DER) drawn from the Social Security Administration's Master Earnings File, a universe file of all earnings reported on W-2 tax forms. As a result of the match, each job potentially has two earnings observations per year: survey and administrative. Unlike previous validation studies, both of these earnings measures are viewed as noisy measures of some underlying true amount of annual earnings. While the existence of survey error resulting from respondent mistakes or misinterpretation is widely accepted, the idea that administrative data are also error-prone is new. Possible sources of employer reporting error, employee under-reporting of compensation such as tips, and general differences between how earnings may be reported on tax forms and in surveys, necessitates the discarding of the assumption that administrative data are a true measure of the quantity that the survey was designed to collect. In addition, errors in matching SIPP and DER jobs, a necessary task in any use of administrative data, also contribute to measurement error in both earnings variables. We begin by comparing SIPP and DER earnings for different demographic and education groups of SIPP respondents. We also calculate different measures of changes in earnings for individuals switching jobs. We estimate a standard earnings equation model using SIPP and DER earnings and compare the resulting coefficients. Finally exploiting the presence of individuals with multiple jobs and shared employers over time, we estimate an econometric model that includes random person and firm effects, a common error component shared by SIPP and DER earnings, and two independent error components that represent the variation unique to each earnings measure. We compare the variance components from this model and consider how the DER and SIPP differ across unobservable components.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperDecomposing the Sources of Earnings Inequality: Assessing the Role of Reallocation
September 2010
Working Paper Number:
CES-10-32
This paper uses matched employer-employee data from the U.S. Census Bureau to investigate the contribution of worker and firm reallocation to changes in wage inequality within and across industries between 1992 and 2003. We find that the entry and exit of firms and the sorting of workers and firms based on underlying worker skills are important sources of changes in earnings distributions over time. Our results suggest that the underlying dynamics driving changes in earnings inequality are complex and are due to factors that cannot be measured in standard cross-sectional data.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperComparing Measures of Earnings Instability Based on Survey and Adminstrative Reports
August 2010
Working Paper Number:
CES-10-15
In Celik, Juhn, McCue, and Thompson (2009), we found that estimated levels of earnings instability based on data from the Current Population Survey (CPS) and the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) were reasonably close to each other and to others' estimates from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID), but estimates from unemployment insurance (UI) earnings were much larger. Given that the UI data are from administrative records which are often posited to be more accurate than survey reports, this raises concerns that measures based on survey data understate true earnings instability. To address this, we use links between survey samples from the SIPP and UI earnings records in the LEHD database to identify sources of differences in work history and earnings information. Substantial work has been done comparing earnings levels from administrative records to those collected in the SIPP and CPS, but our understanding of earnings instability would benefit from further examination of differences across sources in the properties of changes in earnings. We first compare characteristics of the overall and matched samples to address issues of selection in the matching process. We then compare earnings levels and jobs in the SIPP and LEHD data to identify differences between them. Finally we begin to examine how such differences affect estimates of earnings instability. Our preliminary findings suggest that differences in earnings changes for those in the lower tail of the earnings distribution account for much of the difference in instability estimates.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperWho Leaves, Where to, and Why Worrry? Employee Mobility, Employee Entrepreneurship, and Effects on Source Firm Performance
September 2009
Working Paper Number:
CES-09-32
We theorize that differences in human assets' ability to generate value are linked to exit decisions and their effects on firm performance. Using linked employee-employer data from the U.S. Census Bureau on legal services, we find that employees with higher earnings are less likely to leave relative to employees with lower earnings, but if they do leave, they are more likely to move to a spin-out instead of an incumbent firm. Employee entrepreneurship has a larger adverse impact on source firm performance than moves to established firms, even controlling for observable employee quality. Findings suggest that the transfer of human capital, complementary assets, and opportunities all affect mobility decisions and their impact on source firms.View Full Paper PDF
