IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unm/umagsb/2025007.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Tricked into trouble: Deception, threat, and coercion in exploitative labor relations

Author

Listed:
  • Schmitt, Maximilian L.

    (RS: GSBE other - not theme-related research, Microeconomics & Public Economics)

  • Cao, Gewei

    (RS: GSBE other - not theme-related research, Microeconomics & Public Economics)

  • Meissner, Thomas

    (RS: GSBE UM-BIC, Microeconomics & Public Economics)

  • Rusch, Hannes

    (RS: GSBE UM-BIC, Microeconomics & Public Economics, RS: GSBE other - not theme-related research)

Abstract

Exploitative labor conditions are a massive global challenge, generating substantial illicit gains for delinquent employers. However, their strategic logic remains poorly understood. Here, we study the three practically most relevant forms of exploitative employer behavior in a principal-agent setting: deception, threat, and coercion. We analyze principals’ incentives for using these means, their welfare consequences, and the effects of introducing licensing to mitigate prevalent deception. We find that exploiters’ use of deception harms not only agents but also legitimate employers who are forced to compensate agents for the risk of exploitation. Moreover, we observe that increasing the costs of exploitation does not necessarily improve social welfare, as it can incentivize more employers to use milder forms of exploitation. Overall, we improve the economic understanding of exploitative labor relations by separating threat and coercion, integrating deception, providing insights into resulting market distortions, and identifying crucial pitfalls for seemingly first-best policy interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Schmitt, Maximilian L. & Cao, Gewei & Meissner, Thomas & Rusch, Hannes, 2025. "Tricked into trouble: Deception, threat, and coercion in exploitative labor relations," Research Memorandum 007, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
  • Handle: RePEc:unm:umagsb:2025007
    DOI: 10.26481/umagsb.2025007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cris.maastrichtuniversity.nl/ws/files/276159447/RM25007.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26481/umagsb.2025007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James R. Taylor, 1977. "Exploitation through Contrived Dependence," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 51-59, March.
    2. Ernst Fehr & Oliver Hart & Christian Zehnder, 2008. "Contracts as reference points � experimental evidence," IEW - Working Papers 393, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    3. Nathan Nunn & Leonard Wantchekon, 2011. "The Slave Trade and the Origins of Mistrust in Africa," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(7), pages 3221-3252, December.
    4. Ernst Fehr & Oliver Hart & Christian Zehnder, 2011. "Contracts as Reference Points--Experimental Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 493-525, April.
    5. Kathryn Gary & Peter Sandholt Jensen & Mats Olsson & Cristina Victoria Radu & Battista Severgnini & Paul Sharp, 2022. "Monopsony Power and Wages: Evidence from the Introduction of Serfdom in Denmark," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(648), pages 2835-2872.
    6. Oliver Hart & John Moore, 2008. "Contracts as Reference Points," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(1), pages 1-48.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fu, Tong, 2020. "The dilemma of government intervention in a firm's financing: Evidence from China," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    2. Wenqin Zhong & Ligang Ren & Mengyi Wang, 2025. "Regulating unproductive contract adaptation: A payment deduction mechanism," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 46(4), pages 2237-2248, June.
    3. Schmitz, Patrick W., 2021. "On the optimality of outsourcing when vertical integration can mitigate information asymmetries," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    4. Yutaka Suzuki, 2021. "Collusion, Shading, and Optimal Organization Design in a Three-tier Agency Model with a Continuum of Types," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 22(2), pages 317-365, November.
    5. Fuxia Gao & Chuan Lin & Haomiao Zhai, 2022. "Digital Transformation, Corporate Innovation, and International Strategy: Empirical Evidence from Listed Companies in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-19, July.
    6. Anastasia Stepanova & Vladislav Savelyev & Malika Shaikhutdinova, 2018. "The Anchoring Effect in Mergers and Acquisitions: Evidence from an Emerging Market," HSE Working papers WP BRP 63/FE/2018, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    7. von Siemens, Ferdinand A., 2009. "Bargaining under incomplete information, fairness, and the hold-up problem," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 486-494, August.
    8. Kim, Yoonha, 2021. "Linking theories of incomplete contracts to empirics in IPO contracting," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    9. David C. Chan, 2018. "The Efficiency of Slacking off: Evidence From the Emergency Department," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(3), pages 997-1030, May.
    10. Olivier Meier & Aurélie Sannajust, 0. "The smart contract revolution: a solution for the holdup problem?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-16.
    11. Maija Halonen-Akatwijuka & Oliver D. Hart, 2013. "More is Less: Why Parties May Deliberately Write Incomplete Contracts," NBER Working Papers 19001, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. David J. Cooper & Jordi Brandts, 2020. "Managerial Leadership, Truth-Telling, and Efficient Coordination," Working Papers 1211, Barcelona School of Economics.
    13. Hernán Bejarano & Brice Corgnet & Joaquín Gómez-Miñambres, 2019. "Labor Contracts, Gift-Exchange and Reference Wages: Your Gift Need Not Be Mine!," Working Papers 19-26, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    14. Besir Ceka and Brian Burgo, 2014. "Discovering Cooperation: A Contractual Approach to Institutional Change in Regional International Organizations," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers p0388, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    15. Malmendier, Ulrike M. & Karsten, Christel & Sautner, Zacharias, 2020. "Lawyer Expertise and Contract Design – Evidence from M&A Negotiations," CEPR Discussion Papers 14936, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Sudipto Bhattacharya & Sergei Guriev, 2013. "Control Rights Over Intellectual Property," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 564-591, September.
    17. Luis Garicano & Luis Rayo, 2016. "Why Organizations Fail: Models and Cases," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(1), pages 137-192, March.
    18. Gesche, Tobias, 2018. "Reference Price Shifts and Customer Antagonism: Evidence from Reviews for Online Auctions," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181650, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    19. Sun, Lexuan & Li, Wei & Song, Jie, 2025. "Contract selection decision of hybrid energy power supply chain under cap-and-trade: From the perspective of supply disruption risk," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    20. Halonen-Akatwijuka, Maija & Pafilis, Evagelos, 2020. "Common ownership of public goods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 555-578.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
    • D80 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - General
    • J47 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Coercive 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:unm:umagsb:2025007. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Andrea Willems or Angie Figueroa Alarcon (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/meteonl.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.