Do In-Kind Benefits Influence Pharmacistsâ€™ Labor Supply Decisions?
This paper explores whether in-kind benefits influence the labor supply decisions of pharmacists. Particular attention is paid to decisions to supply more than thirty hours of labor per week, when in-kind benefits are usually standard. A distinction is also made between pharmacists in managerial and/or ownership positions and those in traditional staff positions. Using survey data from registered pharmacists in North Dakota, we find that the labor supply determinants for owners/managers and employees are significantly different. We also find that while in-kind benefits do not appear to influence the typical staff pharmacistâ€™s decision of how many hours to work each week, certain, but not all, types of these benefits do influence the decision of the representative owner/manager. Furthermore, the determinants of hours worked, in general, do not differ across the thirty hour per week threshold.
Volume (Year): 41 (2011)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://jrap-journal.org/index.htm|
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Rosenman Robert & Friesner Daniel, 2004. "Commitment and Discretion in Health Care Policy Making," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-30, March.
- Heckman, James J, 1978.
"Dummy Endogenous Variables in a Simultaneous Equation System,"
Econometric Society, vol. 46(4), pages 931-59, July.
- James J. Heckman, 1977. "Dummy Endogenous Variables in a Simultaneous Equation System," NBER Working Papers 0177, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Dan Axelsen & Dan Friesner & Robert Rosenman & Hal Snarr, 2007. "Welfare recipient work choice and in-kind benefits in Washington state," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(8), pages 1021-1036.
- Heckman, James, 2013.
"Sample selection bias as a specification error,"
Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:jrapmc:133143. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.