Unions and Wage Inequality: The Roles of Gender, Skill and Public Sector Employment

Card, David; Lemieux, Thomas; Riddell, W. Craig

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3301718

Cited by 17 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Over the entire 1979 to 2017 period, declining unionization explains close to 40% of the increase in the 90-50 wage differential for men, with spillover effects accounting for about half of the union effect. Overall, 32 In the case of men, the contribution of de-unionization to the growth of inequality is very similar to recent estimates in Card, Lemieux, and Riddell (2018). Table 6a shows that de-unionization (without spillover effects) accounts for 0.014 of the 0.118 increase in the standard deviation of log wages between 1979 and 2017.…”

Section: Decomposition Resultssupporting

confidence: 71%

“…Table 6a shows that de-unionization (without spillover effects) accounts for 0.014 of the 0.118 increase in the standard deviation of log wages between 1979 and 2017. Using a different approach (counterfactual variances in absence of unionization) for a different period (1973 to 2015), Card, Lemieux, and Riddell (2018) find that de-unionization accounts for 0.015 of the 0.121 increase in the standard deviation of log wages (their variance estimates reported in Table 1 have been transformed in standard deviations). In the case of women, like Card, Lemieux, and Riddell (2018), we find only small effects of de-unionization on changes in inequality in most periods.…”

Section: Decomposition Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using a different approach (counterfactual variances in absence of unionization) for a different period (1973 to 2015), Card, Lemieux, and Riddell (2018) find that de-unionization accounts for 0.015 of the 0.121 increase in the standard deviation of log wages (their variance estimates reported in Table 1 have been transformed in standard deviations). In the case of women, like Card, Lemieux, and Riddell (2018), we find only small effects of de-unionization on changes in inequality in most periods. One exception is that Card, Lemieux, and Riddell (2018) find a more substantial equalizing effect of unions on female wage inequality in 2015 than in other years.…”

Section: Decomposition Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Labor Market Institutions and the Distribution of Wages: The Role of Spillover Effects

Fortin

Lemieux

Lloyd

2021

Journal of Labor Economics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the role of spillover effects of minimum wages and threat effects of unionization in changes in wage inequality in the United States between 1979 and 2017. A distribution regression framework is introduced to estimate both types of spillover effects. Threat effects double the contribution of de-unionization to the increase in male wage inequality. Spillover effects magnify the explanatory power of declining minimum wages to two-thirds of the increase in inequality at the bottom end of the female wage distribution.

show abstract

Section: Decomposition Resultssupporting

confidence: 71%

Section: Decomposition Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Decomposition Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Labor Market Institutions and the Distribution of Wages: The Role of Spillover Effects

Fortin

Lemieux

Lloyd

2021

Journal of Labor Economics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another factor that helps to shield the economic fallouts in the public sector, unlike the private sector, is the availability of strong union and collective bargaining protection. A comparative study between Canada and the US labour market by Card et al (2020) identifies that women benefit from a unionized work environment with better jobs and wage security. Mueller (1998) finds a significant wage premium for females in the Canadian public sector.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19 and gender disparities: Labour market outcomes

Singh

Shirazi²,

Turetken³

2022

Research in Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Fourth, the structure of local economies-including the representation of different industries and the types of jobs within those industries-influences income inequality by determining the number of jobs (i.e., the risk of unemployment) and the quality of jobs (e.g., where they fall along the wage distribution). For example, a relatively large share of jobs in the public sector is typically associated with lower income inequality, since these positions tend to be relatively well-paid, secure, and characterized by lower within-sector inequality compared to other industries (Card et al 2020). Similarly, growth of the service sector has been implicated in the polarization of U.S. labor market outcomes as less-educated workers are increasingly incorporated into low-paying service positions rather than in the better-paying manufacturing jobs that were more available in prior decades (Autor and Dorn 2013).…”

Section: Explaining Subnational Income Inequalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Decomposing Changes in Subnational Income Inequality in the United States, 1980-2019

Thiede¹,

Brown²,

Jayasekera³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rapid growth of income inequality in the United States has unfolded unevenly across the country. Levels of, and changes in, income inequality within local economies have been spatially and temporally heterogeneous. While previous research has identified the correlates of subnational inequality, it has given less attention to the contribution of compositional changes. Drawing on commuting zone (CZ)-level estimates produced from U.S. Census and American Community Survey data, we extend the literature on subnational income inequality by addressing four main objectives. First, we track changes in the prevalence of five sets of inequality risk factors. Second, we measure the associations between these factors and within-CZ income inequality in 1980 and 2019 and describe changes in these relationships over time. Third, we decompose changes in within-CZ income inequality (1980-2019) into components attributable to changes in the prevalence of risk factors (i.e., composition effects) and changes in the penalties (i.e., coefficient effects) associated with each factor. Fourth, we compare the South to other regions in these respects to explore relevant patterns of socioeconomic change unique to the South. We find substantively large shifts in the prevalence of all five sets of risk factors and significant changes in the penalties associated with many factors, especially the age and industrial structures of CZs. Shifts in penalties explained the largest overall share of changing inequality between 1980 and 2019, but these overall effects mask considerable heterogeneity in the strength and direction of changing penalties We also find significant regional variation in the size of coefficient effects and the relative contributions of composition and coefficient effects. Together, these analyses underscore the importance of simultaneously accounting for the prevalence of and penalties to inequality risk factors.

show abstract

Unions and Wage Inequality: The Roles of Gender, Skill and Public Sector Employment

Cited by 17 publications

References 11 publications

Labor Market Institutions and the Distribution of Wages: The Role of Spillover Effects

Labor Market Institutions and the Distribution of Wages: The Role of Spillover Effects

COVID-19 and gender disparities: Labour market outcomes

Decomposing Changes in Subnational Income Inequality in the United States, 1980-2019

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About