IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cbo/wpaper/42923.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing Benefits and Total Compensation in the Federal Government and the Private Sector: Working Paper 2012-04

Author

Listed:
  • Justin Falk

Abstract

This analysis integrated Current Population Survey data from 2005 through 2010 with data on a wide range of employee benefits to compare the cost of those benefits for federal employees and for workers in the private sector who have certain similar observable characteristics. In that comparison, we found that the average cost of benefits was about 72 percent higher for federal employees than for their private-sector counterparts among workers with no more than a high school education, was about 46 percent higher in the federal sector among workers with a bachelor’s degree,

Suggested Citation

  • Justin Falk, 2012. "Comparing Benefits and Total Compensation in the Federal Government and the Private Sector: Working Paper 2012-04," Working Papers 42923, Congressional Budget Office.
    • Handle: RePEc:cbo:wpaper:42923
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/112th-congress-2011-2012/workingpaper/2012-04fedbenefitswp0.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gourieroux, Christian & Monfort, Alain & Trognon, Alain, 1984. "Pseudo Maximum Likelihood Methods: Theory," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 681-700, May.
    2. Robert Novy-Marx & Joshua D. Rauh, 2009. "The Liabilities and Risks of State-Sponsored Pension Plans," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(4), pages 191-210, Fall.
    3. repec:aei:rpaper:26139 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Andrew G. Biggs & Jason Richwine, 2011. "Comparing Federal and Private Sector Compensation," AEI Economics Working Papers 47508, American Enterprise Institute.
    5. David G. Lenze, 2009. "Accrual Measures of Pension-Related Compensation and Wealth of State and Local Government Workers," BEA Working Papers 0054, Bureau of Economic Analysis.
    6. Justin Falk, 2012. "Comparing Wages in the Federal Government and the Private Sector: Working Paper 2012-03," Working Papers 42922, Congressional Budget Office.
    7. Alicia H. Munnell & Jean-Pierre Aubry & Laura Quinby, 2011. "Comparing Compensation: State-Local versus Private Sector Workers," State and Local Pension Plans Briefs slp20, Center for Retirement Research, revised Sep 2011.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Justin Falk & Nadia Karamcheva, 2018. "Comparing the Effects of Current Pay and Defined Benefit Pensions on Employee Retention: Working Paper 2018-06," Working Papers 54056, Congressional Budget Office.
    2. Falk Justin R., 2012. "Comparing Benefits and Total Compensation between Similar Federal and Private-Sector Workers," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-37, October.
    3. Claire Boeing-Reicher & Vincenzo Caponi, 2024. "Public wages, public employment, and business cycle volatility: Evidence from U.S. metro areas," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 54, October.
    4. Justin Falk, 2012. "Comparing Wages in the Federal Government and the Private Sector: Working Paper 2012-03," Working Papers 42922, Congressional Budget Office.

    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. Falk Justin R., 2012. "Comparing Benefits and Total Compensation between Similar Federal and Private-Sector Workers," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-37, October.
    2. Justin Falk, 2012. "Comparing Wages in the Federal Government and the Private Sector: Working Paper 2012-03," Working Papers 42922, Congressional Budget Office.
    3. repec:nbr:nberch:12836 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Dominique Durant & David Lenze & Marshall B. Reinsdorf, 2014. "Adding Actuarial Estimates of Defined-Benefit Pension Plans to National Accounts," NBER Chapters, in: Measuring Wealth and Financial Intermediation and Their Links to the Real Economy, pages 151-203, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2016. "Is Co-Invention Expediting Technological Catch Up? A Study of Collaboration between Emerging Country Firms and EU Inventors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 192-205.
    6. Bettina Becker & Martin Theuringer, 2000. "Macroeconomic Determinants of Contingent Protection: The Case of the European Union," IWP Discussion Paper Series 02/2000, Institute for Economic Policy, Cologne, Germany.
    7. Broze, Laurence & Gourieroux, Christian, 1998. "Pseudo-maximum likelihood method, adjusted pseudo-maximum likelihood method and covariance estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 75-98, July.
    8. Mitchell, O.S. & Piggott, J., 2016. "Workplace-Linked Pensions for an Aging Demographic," Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, in: Piggott, John & Woodland, Alan (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 865-904, Elsevier.
    9. Hallin, Marc & La Vecchia, Davide, 2020. "A Simple R-estimation method for semiparametric duration models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 736-749.
    10. Magnus, Jan R., 2007. "The Asymptotic Variance Of The Pseudo Maximum Likelihood Estimator," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(5), pages 1022-1032, October.
    11. Wolfgang Keller & Arik Levinson, 1999. "Environmental Compliance Costs and Foreign Direct Investment Inflows to U.S. States," NBER Working Papers 7369, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Barone-Adesi, Giovanni & Fusari, Nicola & Mira, Antonietta & Sala, Carlo, 2020. "Option market trading activity and the estimation of the pricing kernel: A Bayesian approach," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 216(2), pages 430-449.
    13. Silva João M. C. Santos & Tenreyro Silvana & Windmeijer Frank, 2015. "Testing Competing Models for Non-negative Data with Many Zeros," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 29-46, January.
    14. Dionne, Georges, 1998. "La mesure empirique des problèmes d’information," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 74(4), pages 585-606, décembre.
    15. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Schoen, Anja & Wastyn, Annelies, 2014. "Selection bias in innovation studies: A simple test," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 287-299.
    16. Gary King, 1989. "A Seemingly Unrelated Poisson Regression Model," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 17(3), pages 235-255, February.
    17. Alex Hathaway & Carolyn Bourdeaux & Emily Franklin, 2019. "Fiscal Transparency and Accountability," Center for State and Local Finance Working Paper Series cslf1912, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    18. Emilie Alberola & Julien Chevallier & Benoît Chèze, 2008. "The EU Emissions Trading Scheme : Disentangling the Effects of Industrial Production and CO2 Emissions on Carbon Prices," Working Papers hal-04140795, HAL.
    19. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Doherr, Thorsten & Hussinger, Katrin & Schliessler, Paula & Toole, Andrew A., 2016. "Knowledge Creates Markets: The influence of entrepreneurial support and patent rights on academic entrepreneurship," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 131-146.
    20. Lekniūtė, Zina & Beetsma, Roel & Ponds, Eduard, 2019. "U.S. municipal yields and unfunded state pension liabilities," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 15-32.
    21. Alvarez, Javier & Arellano, Manuel, 2022. "Robust likelihood estimation of dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 226(1), pages 21-61.

    More about this item

    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:cbo:wpaper:42923. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cbogvus.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.