The Urban Wage Premium in Imperfect Labor Markets

Hirsch, Boris; Jahn, Elke J.; Manning, Alan; Oberfichtner, Michael

doi:10.3368/jhr.monopsony.0119-9960r1

Cited by 25 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Manning (2011) also discussed how the idea that denser labor markets are more competitive can explain some aspects of economic geography, notably agglomeration (Manning 2010), so has an important impact on spatial inequalities. Hirsch, Jahn, Manning, and Oberfichtner (2019) provided additional evidence for this view. More generally, Webber (2015) found more monopsony power in lower-wage labor markets, which would lead to greater inequality in wages than marginal products.…”

Section: Applications Of Monopsonymentioning

confidence: 89%

Monopsony in Labor Markets: A Review

Manning

2020

ILR Review

Self Cite

173

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researchers’ interest in monopsony has increased in recent years. This article reviews the accumulating evidence that employers have considerable monopsony power. It summarizes the application of this idea to explaining the impact of minimum wages and immigration, in anti-trust, and in understanding how to model the determinants of earnings in matched employer–employee data sets and the implications for inequality and the labor share.

show abstract

Section: Applications Of Monopsonymentioning

confidence: 89%

Monopsony in Labor Markets: A Review

Manning

2020

ILR Review

Self Cite

173

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Response to the subsidy differs by the conditions of the local labor market and the desirability of the location. Combined with the tendency of workers who do take the moving subsidy to choose locations with high market-or nonmarket amenities, these findings imply that spatial labor supply elasticity is low (Balasubramanian et al, 2018;Dube et al, 2018;Hirsch et al, 2018). The findings can be taken to imply that firms have monopsony power due to workers' high moving costs and the employed's lower likelihood of finding a job after a move.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Labor Market Frictions and Moving Costs of the Employed and Unemployed

Ransom

2019

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…One can therefore estimate these four components to arrive at the wage elasticity of labor supply to the firm. This estimation approach is widely used in the literature (Hirsch, Schank, and Schnabel 2010;Booth and Katic 2011;Hirsch, Jahn, and Schnabel 2018;Hirsch et al 2020;Webber 2020).…”

Section: Empirical Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Labor Market Polarization, Job Tasks, and Monopsony Power

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a semi-structural approach based on a dynamic monopsony model, we examine to what extent workers performing different job tasks are exposed to different degrees of monopsony power, and whether these differences in monopsony power have changed over the last 30 years. We find that workers performing mostly non-routine cognitive tasks are exposed to a higher degree of monopsony power than workers performing routine or non-routine manual tasks. Job-specific human capital and non-pecuniary job characteristics are the most likely explanations for this result. We find no evidence that labor market polarization has increased monopsony power over time.

show abstract

The Urban Wage Premium in Imperfect Labor Markets

Cited by 25 publications

References 46 publications

Monopsony in Labor Markets: A Review

Monopsony in Labor Markets: A Review

Labor Market Frictions and Moving Costs of the Employed and Unemployed

Labor Market Polarization, Job Tasks, and Monopsony Power

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About