Abstract: The aim of this paper is to highlight wage trends and patterns in the South African labour market through examining wage premia and wage differentials. The analysis utilises data from the October Household Survey of 1995. Findings show that the regular race, gender and educational differentials arise when looking at median wages, with the racial wage gap being more severe than the gender wage gap. One of the key reasons for the racial wage differential, specifically between that of Africans and Whites, is the higher rate of return on education for White workers. The higher rates could be due to unofficial discrimination; a perception that degrees from historically white universities are of a higher quality than degrees from historically black universities; and the accumulation of human capital by White workers in areas of high demand by firms. There also appears to be a racial wage cleavage between Africans and Coloureds on the one hand and Asians and Whites on the other. Significant wage premia exist for skilled workers in the labour market and these are borne out in the percentile differentials of race, gender and education. Sectoral wage data show that high skills-intensive sectors yield higher levels of wage inequality than low skills-intensive sectors. Findings from a tentative international comparison show that, relative to most developed countries, South Africa has high levels of wage inequality.
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.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by University of Cape Town, Development Policy Research Unit in its series Working Papers with number
9679.
Length: 26 pages Date of creation: Oct 2000 Date of revision: Publication status: Published in Working Paper Series by the Development Policy Research Unit, October 2000, pages 1-26 Handle: RePEc:ctw:wpaper:9679