IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iza/izadps/dp16401.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comments on the 2023 Draft Merger Guidelines: A Labor Market Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Berger, David

    (Duke University)

  • Hasenzagl, Thomas

    (University of Minnesota)

  • Herkenhoff, Kyle

    (University of Minnesota)

  • Mongey, Simon

    (Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis)

  • Posner, Eric A.

    (University of Chicago)

Abstract

The DOJ and FTC clarify the role of labor market power ("monopsony") in the 2023 draft merger guidelines. The draft states in Guideline 11 that the structural presumption threshold applies to labor market concentration, while also suggesting that a stricter threshold may be warranted in labor markets. The post-merger Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) that defines a highly concentrated market is 1800, which is lower, and so stricter, than the 2010 guidelines. We provide five comments on the draft guidelines based on our recent work Berger, Hasenzagl, Herkenhoff, Mongey, and Posner (2023). (1) Explicitly addressing monopsony in the draft guidelines is grounded in economic theory and empirical research. (2) Workers benefit from the lower threshold for highly concentrated markets. (3) The narrow nature of labor markets and high degree of monopsony power in the U.S. may warrant an even lower threshold. For example, merger simulations indicate that workers would benefit if the agencies lowered the HHI threshold further—to 1500 or 1000. (4) Worker welfare is central to the 2023 draft guidelines but the language is not always clear about this. The guidelines should make clear that degradations of "worker welfare" or "total compensation" indicate anticompetitive effects. (5) Dominant firms that can slow wage growth – but not freeze or cut wages – are subject to Guideline 7.

Suggested Citation

  • Berger, David & Hasenzagl, Thomas & Herkenhoff, Kyle & Mongey, Simon & Posner, Eric A., 2023. "Comments on the 2023 Draft Merger Guidelines: A Labor Market Perspective," IZA Discussion Papers 16401, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
  • Handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp16401
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://docs.iza.org/dp16401.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Berger & Kyle Herkenhoff & Simon Mongey, 2022. "Labor Market Power," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(4), pages 1147-1193, April.
    2. Nicole Maestas & Kathleen J. Mullen & David Powell & Till von Wachter & Jeffrey B. Wenger, 2023. "The Value of Working Conditions in the United States and the Implications for the Structure of Wages," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(7), pages 2007-2047, July.
    3. David W. Berger & Kyle F. Herkenhoff & Andreas R. Kostøl & Simon Mongey, 2023. "An Anatomy of Monopsony: Search Frictions, Amenities, and Bargaining in Concentrated Markets," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2023, volume 38, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. David W. Berger & Thomas Hasenzagl & Kyle F. Herkenhoff & Simon Mongey & Eric A. Posner, 2023. "Merger Guidelines for the Labor Market," NBER Working Papers 31147, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Tyler Ransom, 2022. "Labor Market Frictions and Moving Costs of the Employed and Unemployed," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 57(S), pages 137-166.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kory Kroft & Yao Luo & Magne Mogstad & Bradley Setzler, 2020. "Imperfect Competition and Rents in Labor and Product Markets: The Case of the Construction Industry," Working Papers tecipa-666, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    2. Koşar, Gizem & Ransom, Tyler & van der Klaauw, Wilbert, 2022. "Understanding migration aversion using elicited counterfactual choice probabilities," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 123-147.
    3. Anna Sokolova & Todd Sorensen, 2021. "Monopsony in Labor Markets: A Meta-Analysis," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 74(1), pages 27-55, January.
    4. Thibaut Lamadon & Magne Mogstad & Bradley Setzler, 2022. "Imperfect Competition, Compensating Differentials, and Rent Sharing in the US Labor Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(1), pages 169-212, January.
    5. Piotr Lewandowski & Katarzyna Lipowska & Mateusz Smoter, 2022. "Working from home during a pandemic – a discrete choice experiment in Poland," IBS Working Papers 03/2022, Instytut Badan Strukturalnych.
    6. Scott, Andrew J., 2023. "The economics of longevity – An introduction," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 24(C).
    7. Männasoo, Kadri, 2022. "Working hours and gender wage differentials: Evidence from the American Working Conditions Survey," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    8. Desiere, Sam & Walter, Christian, 2023. "The Shift Premium: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 16460, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Fernández-Villaverde, Jesús & Mandelman, Federico & Yu, Yang & Zanetti, Francesco, 2021. "The “Matthew effect” and market concentration: Search complementarities and monopsony power," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 62-90.
    10. Emilio Colombo & Alberto Marcato, 2021. "Skill Demand and Labour Market Concentration: Theory and Evidence from Italian Vacancies," DISEIS - Quaderni del Dipartimento di Economia internazionale, delle istituzioni e dello sviluppo dis2104, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimento di Economia internazionale, delle istituzioni e dello sviluppo (DISEIS).
    11. Jha, Priyaranjan & Rodriguez-Lopez, Antonio, 2021. "Monopsonistic labor markets and international trade," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    12. José-Ignacio Antón & Rafael Grande & Rafael Muñoz de Bustillo & Fernando Pinto, 2023. "Gender Gaps in Working Conditions," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 53-83, February.
    13. Janne Tukiainen & Sebastian Blesse & Albrecht Bohne & Leonardo M. Giuffrida & Jan Jäässkeläinen & Ari Luukinen & Antti Sieppi, 2021. "What Are the Priorities of Bureaucrats? Evidence from Conjoint Experiments with Procurement Officials," EconPol Working Paper 63, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    14. Kudlyak, Marianna & Faia, Ester & Shabalina, Ekaterina, 2021. "Dynamic Labor Reallocation with Heterogeneous Skills and Uninsured Idiosyncratic Risk," CEPR Discussion Papers 16008, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Lutz Bellmann & Olaf Hübler, 2022. "Personality traits, working conditions and health: an empirical analysis based on the German Linked Personnel Panel, 2013–2017," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 283-318, February.
    16. Non, Arjan & Rohde, Ingrid & de Grip, Andries & Dohmen, Thomas, 2022. "Mission of the company, prosocial attitudes and job preferences: A discrete choice experiment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    17. Ariel Burstein & Basile Grassi & Vasco Carvalho, 2019. "Bottom-Up Markup Fluctuations," 2019 Meeting Papers 505, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    18. Matthias Kehrig & Nicolas Vincent, 2021. "The Micro-Level Anatomy of the Labor Share Decline," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(2), pages 1031-1087.
    19. Dami'an Vergara, 2022. "Minimum Wages and Optimal Redistribution," Papers 2202.00839, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2022.
    20. Kyle F. Herkenhoff & Gajendran Raveendranathan, 2019. "Who Bears the Welfare Costs of Monopoly? The Case of the Credit Card Industry," Working Papers 2019-071, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    mergers; monopsony; labor market power; concentration;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J42 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Monopsony; Segmented Labor Markets
    • G34 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L4 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp16401. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Holger Hinte (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/izaaade.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.