IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

What can monopsony explain of the gender wage differential in Italy?

  • Giovanni Sulis

Purpose – This paper seeks to study gender wage differentials in Italy using first-order predictions of monopsony-search models. It compares empirical predictions of these models against other competing ones of wage determination in non-competitive settings. Design/methodology/approach – The paper looks at the empirical relevance of the model in terms of third degree wage discrimination among men and women by estimating the labour supply elasticity to the individual firm. It also tests the monopsony model using a “natural” experiment. Italian administrative longitudinal data from INPS are used. Findings – Women have lower elasticity of labour supply to the individual firm: employer size regressions indicate larger effects (and consequently lower elasticity) for women as predicted by the monopsony model. Using the theoretical dynamic monopsony-search model of Burdett and Mortensen, wage elasticity of separations and recruits confirm this result. Using relative men/women employment effects resulting from institutional changes in wage indexation mechanism (Scala Mobile), it is found that relative male employment responded differently in the two periods to the exogenous relative increase in the wage differential, as predicted by the monopsony model. Search frictions explain about 50 per cent of the gender differential. Research limitations/implications – No role for discrimination. Better controls for rents and union status would be needed. More rich firm data would be needed. Originality/value – The paper is one of the few attempts of testing implications of monopsony models in unionised labour markets, such as Italy, after some important reforms in wage bargaining agreements. The change in institutional agreements is an interesting test for different theories of wage determination.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.

File URL: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?issn=0143-7720&volume=32&issue=4&articleid=1939663&show=abstract
Download Restriction: Cannot be freely downloaded

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.

Article provided by Emerald Group Publishing in its journal International Journal of Manpower.

Volume (Year): 32 (2011)
Issue (Month): 4 (July)
Pages: 446-470

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eme:ijmpps:v:32:y:2011:i:4:p:446-470
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com

Order Information: Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK
Web: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ijm.htm Email:


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.:

as in new window
  1. Fakhfakh, Fathi & FitzRoy, Felix, 2005. "Dynamic Monopsony: Evidence from a French Establishment Panel," IZA Discussion Papers 1622, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  2. Manning, Alan, 1996. "The Equal Pay Act as an Experiment to Test Theories of the Labour Market," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 63(250), pages 191-212, May.
  3. Charles Brown & James L. Medoff, 1989. "The Employer Size-Wage Effect," NBER Working Papers 2870, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Douglas Staiger & Joanne Spetz & Ciaran Phibbs, 2008. "Is There Monopsony In The Labor Market? Evidence From A Natural Experiment," Working Papers 1115, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
  5. Sullivan, Daniel, 1989. "Monopsony Power in the Market for Nurses," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(2), pages S135-78, October.
  6. William M. Boal, 1995. "Testing for Employer Monopsony in Turn-of-the-Century Coal Mining," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(3), pages 519-536, Autumn.
  7. Hirsch, Barry & Schumacher, Edward J., 2004. "Classic Monopsony or New Monopsony? Searching for Evidence in Nursing Labor Markets," IZA Discussion Papers 1154, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  8. Green, Francis & Machin, Stephen & Manning, Alan, 1996. "The Employer Size-Wage Effect: Can Dynamic Monopsony Provide an Explanation?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 48(3), pages 433-55, July.
  9. Jolivet, Gregory & Postel-Vinay, Fabien & Robin, Jean-Marc, 2006. "The empirical content of the job search model: Labor mobility and wage distributions in Europe and the US," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 877-907, May.
  10. Richard B. Freeman & Lawrence F. Katz, 1995. "Differences and Changes in Wage Structures," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number free95-1, December.
  11. Christopher Erickson & Andrea Ichino, 1995. "Wage Differentials in Italy: Market Forces, Institutions, and Inflation," NBER Chapters, in: Differences and Changes in Wage Structures, pages 265-306 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Torberg Falch, 2003. "Estimating the Elasticity of Labour Supply to an Enterprise Utilizing a Quasi–Natural Experiment," Working Paper Series 3303, Department of Economics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
  13. Joseph G. Altonji & Rebecca M. Blank, . "Race and Gender in the Labor Market," IPR working papers 98-18, Institute for Policy Resarch at Northwestern University.
  14. G. Sulis, 2007. "Gender Wage Differentials in Italy: a Structural Estimation Approach," Working Paper CRENoS 200715, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
  15. Aaberge, Rolf & Colombino, Ugo & Strom, Steinar, 1999. "Labour Supply in Italy: An Empirical Analysis of Joint Household Decisions, with Taxes and Quantity Constraints," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(4), pages 403-22, July-Aug..
  16. Erling Barth & Harald Dale-Olsen, 1999. "Monopsonistic Discrimination and the Gender-Wage Gap," NBER Working Papers 7197, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  17. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521590730 is not listed on IDEAS
  18. Bowlus, A.J., 1995. "A Search Interpretation of Male-Female Wage Differentials," UWO Department of Economics Working Papers 9504, University of Western Ontario, Department of Economics.
  19. Daniele Checchi & Claudio Lucifora, 2002. "Unions and labour market institutions in Europe," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 17(35), pages 361-408, October.
  20. Oi, Walter Y. & Idson, Todd L., 1999. "Firm size and wages," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 33, pages 2165-2214 Elsevier.
  21. Hirsch, Barry T. & Schumacher, Edward J., 2005. "Classic or new monopsony? Searching for evidence in nursing labor markets," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 969-989, September.
  22. William M. Boal & Michael R. Ransom, 1997. "Monopsony in the Labor Market," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 35(1), pages 86-112, March.
  23. Alan Manning & Ted To, 2002. "Oligopsony and Monopsonistic Competition in Labor Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 155-174, Spring.
  24. Burdett, Kenneth & Mortensen, Dale T, 1998. "Wage Differentials, Employer Size, and Unemployment," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(2), pages 257-73, May.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:ijmpps:v:32:y:2011:i:4:p:446-470. 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: (Virginia Chapman)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.