IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pri/indrel/540.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

New Market Power Models and Sex Differences in Pay

Author

Listed:
  • Michael R. Ransom

    (Brigham Young University and IZA)

  • Ronald L. Oaxaca

    (University of Arizona and IZA)

Abstract

In the context of certain general equilibrium search models, it is possible to infer the elasticity of labor supply to the firm from the elasticity of the quit rate with respect to the wage. We use this framework to estimate the elasticity of labor supply for men and women workers at a chain of grocery stores operating in the southwestern United States, identifying separation elasticities from differences in wages and separation rates across different job titles within the firm. We estimate elasticities of labor supply to the firm of about 2.7 for men and about 1.5 for women, suggesting significant wage-setting power for the firm. Since women have lower elasticities of labor supply to the firm, a Robinson-style monopsony model might explain lower relative pay of women in the grocery industry. The wage gaps we observe among workers in US retail grocery stores are close to what the monopsony model predicts for the elasticities we have estimated.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael R. Ransom & Ronald L. Oaxaca, 2008. "New Market Power Models and Sex Differences in Pay," Working Papers 1110, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
  • Handle: RePEc:pri:indrel:540
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dataspace.princeton.edu/jspui/bitstream/88435/dsp01nk322d34x/1/540.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schlicht, Ekkehart, 1982. "A Robinsonian Approach to Discrimination," Munich Reprints in Economics 3351, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    2. Bowlus, Audra J, 1997. "A Search Interpretation of Male-Female Wage Differentials," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(4), pages 625-657, October.
    3. Mortensen, D. T. & Vishwanath, T., 1995. "Personal contacts and earnings: It is who you know!," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 103-104, March.
    4. Erling Barth & Harald Dale-Olsen, 1999. "Monopsonistic Discrimination and the Gender-Wage Gap," NBER Working Papers 7197, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Viscusi, W Kip, 1980. "Sex Differences in Worker Quitting," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 62(3), pages 388-398, August.
    6. Parsons, Donald O, 1972. "Specific Human Capital: An Application to Quit Rates and Layoff Rates," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(6), pages 1120-1143, Nov.-Dec..
    7. Black, Dan A, 1995. "Discrimination in an Equilibrium Search Model," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(2), pages 309-333, April.
    8. 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.
    9. Bhaskar, V & To, Ted, 1999. "Minimum Wages for Ronald McDonald Monopsonies: A Theory of Monopsonistic Competition," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(455), pages 190-203, April.
    10. Harry J. Holzer & Lawrence F. Katz & Alan B. Krueger, 1991. "Job Queues and Wages," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 106(3), pages 739-768.
    11. Bontemps, Christian & Robin, Jean-Marc & Van den Berg, Gerard J, 1999. "An Empirical Equilibrium Job Search Model with Search on the Job and Heterogeneous Workers and Firms," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 40(4), pages 1039-1074, November.
    12. Peter Kuhn, 2004. "Is monopsony the right way to model labor markets? a review of Alan Manning's monopsony in motion," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 369-378.
    13. Michael Ransom & Ronald L. Oaxaca, 2005. "Intrafirm Mobility and Sex Differences in Pay," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 58(2), pages 219-237, January.
    14. Francine D. Blau & Lawrence M. Kahn, 1981. "Race and Sex Differences in Quits by Young Workers," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 34(4), pages 563-577, July.
    15. 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 257-273, May.
    16. Meitzen, Mark E, 1986. "Differences in Male and Female Job-quitting Behavior," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 151-167, April.
    17. Campbell, Carl M, III, 1993. "Do Firms Pay Efficiency Wages? Evidence with Data at the Firm Level," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 11(3), pages 442-470, July.
    18. Pencavel, John H, 1972. "Wages, Specific Training, and Labor Turnover in US Manufacturing Industries," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 13(1), pages 53-64, February.
    19. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    monopsony papers; labor supply; grocery stores; elasticity;

    JEL classification:

    • J42 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Monopsony; Segmented Labor Markets
    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    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:pri:indrel:540. 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: (Bobray Bordelon). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/irprius.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.