This paper compares estimates of the union wage effect using cross-section and panel estimators for male manual full-time and female employees using data from the British Household Panel Survey, 1991-97. A comparison of cross-section and panel estimates suggests that unobserved heterogeneity biases cross-section estimates upwards. However, it is also found that the divergence between estimates is overstated because measurement error biases the fixed-effects estimates downward. Reducing measurement error in the union variable by taking averages and restricting changes in union status to occur only when a change in employer and/or job takes place increases fixed-effects estimates of the union wage effect. Copyright 2001 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 63 (2001) Issue (Month): 4 (September) Pages: 437-57 Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML
(with abstract),
plain text
(with abstract),
BibTeX,
RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite),
ReDIF
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).
Related research
Keywords:
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)