IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/24991.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Monopsony and Employer Mis-optimization Explain Why Wages Bunch at Round Numbers

Author

Listed:
  • Arindrajit Dube
  • Alan Manning
  • Suresh Naidu

Abstract

We show that administrative hourly wage data exhibits considerable bunching at round numbers that cannot be explained by rounding of survey respondents. We consider two explanations—worker left-digit bias and employer optimization frictions. We experimentally rule out left-bunching by randomizing wages for an identical task on Amazon Mechanical Turk, and fail to find evidence of any discontinuity in the labor supply function as predicted by workers’ left-digit bias despite a considerable degree of monopsony. We replicate the absence of round number discontinuities in firm labor supply in matched worker-firm hourly wage data from Oregon as well as in an online stated preference experiment conducted with Wal-Mart workers. Further, the shape of the missing mass that accounts for the bunching at a round number exhibits none of the asymmetry predicted by worker left-digit bias. Symmetry of the missing mass distribution around the round number suggests that employer optimization frictions are more important. We show that a more monopsonistic market requires less employer mis-optimization to rationalize the bunching in the data. The extent of monopsony power implied by our estimated labor supply elasticities, which are in line with other recent studies, are consistent with a sizable amount of non-optimal bunching, with only modest losses in profits. Overall, the extent and form of round-number bunching suggests that “behavioral firms” can systematically misprice labor without being driven out of the market in the presence of monopsony power.

Suggested Citation

  • Arindrajit Dube & Alan Manning & Suresh Naidu, 2018. "Monopsony and Employer Mis-optimization Explain Why Wages Bunch at Round Numbers," NBER Working Papers 24991, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:24991
    Note: LS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w24991.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bas Scheer & Wiljan van den Berge & Maarten Goos & Alan Manning & Anna Salomons, 2022. "Alternative Work Arrangements and Worker Outcomes: Evidence from Payrolling," CPB Discussion Paper 435, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    2. Francesco Amodio & Nicolás de Roux, 2021. "Labor Market Power in Developing Countries: Evidence from Colombian Plants," Documentos CEDE 19267, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    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. Clémence Berson & Raphaël Lardeux & Claire Lelarge, 2021. "The Cognitive Load of Financing Constraints: Evidence from Large-Scale Wage Surveys," Working papers 836, Banque de France.
    5. Erich Battistin & Agar Brugiavini & Enrico Rettore & Guglielmo Weber, 2009. "The Retirement Consumption Puzzle: Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 2209-2226, December.
    6. David Autor & Arindrajit Dube & Annie McGrew, 2023. "The Unexpected Compression: Competition at Work in the Low Wage Labor Market," NBER Working Papers 31010, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Douglas A. Webber, 2018. "Employment Adjustment Over the Business Cycle: The Impact of Competition in the Labor Market," DETU Working Papers 1806, Department of Economics, Temple University.
    8. Andrew Weaver, 2022. "Who Has Trouble Hiring? Evidence from a National IT Survey," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 75(3), pages 608-637, May.
    9. Duch-Brown, Néstor & Gomez-Herrera, Estrella & Mueller-Langer, Frank & Tolan, Songül, 2022. "Market power and artificial intelligence work on online labour markets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • D22 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
    • J3 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs
    • J42 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Monopsony; Segmented Labor Markets

    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:nbr:nberwo:24991. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.