IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/156.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Pay Differences Between Men and Women: Longitudinal Evidence from the 1946 Birth Cohort

Author

Listed:
  • Joshi, Heather
  • Newell, Marie-Louise

Abstract

The MRC National Survey of Health and Development provides data on the hourly pay of males and females at age 26 in 1972 and in 1977. These have been subjected to regression analysis to see how far the gap between men's and women's pay is statistically explicable by (a) a "human capital" model covering measures of ability, educational attainment and work experience, and (b) a model which also includes characteristics of the sector of employment. Our analysis indicates that the conventional indicator of pay discrimination - the residual differential ascribable only to gender - is smaller in 1977 than in 1972, after the introduction of equal pay legislation, though even in 1977 a considerable portion is still unexplained. Women's pay would have been 17 per cent to 32 per cent higher had they been remunerated at the rates estimated for males. The smaller estimate comes from a version of the human capital model which allows for unobserved heterogeneity by including pay in 1972 among the determinants of pay in 1977. For 1972, where no such allowance is possible, the human capital model leaves an unexplained pay gap of 51 per cent which narrows to 38 per cent when job characteristics are allowed for. All these estimates control for the possibility of selectivity bias among the subset of females observed working, but this bias is not found to be significant in this instance. The disadvantage of being female is greater for women with less advantaged backgrounds, and in job categories which tend to be lower paid.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshi, Heather & Newell, Marie-Louise, 1987. "Pay Differences Between Men and Women: Longitudinal Evidence from the 1946 Birth Cohort," CEPR Discussion Papers 156, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:156
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=156
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Melanie Ward, 2001. "The gender salary gap in British academia," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(13), pages 1669-1681.

    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:cpr:ceprdp:156. 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://www.cepr.org .

    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.