歧视与垄断权力

Q1 Social Sciences Review of Black Political Economy Pub Date : 2021-06-18 DOI:10.1177/00346446211025646
Mark Stelzner, Kate Bahn
{"title":"歧视与垄断权力","authors":"Mark Stelzner, Kate Bahn","doi":"10.1177/00346446211025646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Wage inequalities between identical workers of different race, ethnicity, and gender are a persistent feature of labor markets. However, most labor market models either ignore important empirical evidence or focus very narrowly on specific labor market dynamics. To better understand such wage differences, we create a labor market model that integrates firm competition for workers, employee movement between jobs in response to market signals, potential monetary frictions in the job transition process, and workers' collective action which is a function of government support. Our model shows that because of gender- and race-specific historical and social outcomes, like the relatively lower household wealth of Black and Latino families and the increased household responsibilities of women, women and minority workers are more exploitable; employers can push their wage farther below the value of their marginal product. Also, our model shows that the cumulative wage gap for non-White women is greater than the additive gaps of being nonmale and non-White. Lastly, our model shows that a reduction in government support for collective action enables employers to wield monopsony power more freely, independent of changes in employer concentration. Because certain groups are more exploitable, employers' increased capability in wielding monopsony power means increased wage differentials replicating discriminatory biases against marginalized groups of workers.","PeriodicalId":35867,"journal":{"name":"Review of Black Political Economy","volume":"10 1","pages":"152 - 174"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Discrimination and Monopsony Power\",\"authors\":\"Mark Stelzner, Kate Bahn\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00346446211025646\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Wage inequalities between identical workers of different race, ethnicity, and gender are a persistent feature of labor markets. However, most labor market models either ignore important empirical evidence or focus very narrowly on specific labor market dynamics. To better understand such wage differences, we create a labor market model that integrates firm competition for workers, employee movement between jobs in response to market signals, potential monetary frictions in the job transition process, and workers' collective action which is a function of government support. Our model shows that because of gender- and race-specific historical and social outcomes, like the relatively lower household wealth of Black and Latino families and the increased household responsibilities of women, women and minority workers are more exploitable; employers can push their wage farther below the value of their marginal product. Also, our model shows that the cumulative wage gap for non-White women is greater than the additive gaps of being nonmale and non-White. Lastly, our model shows that a reduction in government support for collective action enables employers to wield monopsony power more freely, independent of changes in employer concentration. Because certain groups are more exploitable, employers' increased capability in wielding monopsony power means increased wage differentials replicating discriminatory biases against marginalized groups of workers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35867,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Black Political Economy\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"152 - 174\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Black Political Economy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00346446211025646\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Black Political Economy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00346446211025646","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

不同种族、民族和性别的相同工人之间的工资不平等是劳动力市场的一个持久特征。然而,大多数劳动力市场模型要么忽略了重要的经验证据,要么非常狭隘地关注特定的劳动力市场动态。为了更好地理解这种工资差异,我们创建了一个劳动力市场模型,该模型整合了对工人的激烈竞争,响应市场信号的员工在工作之间的流动,工作转换过程中潜在的货币摩擦,以及工人的集体行动,这是政府支持的功能。我们的模型显示,由于性别和种族特定的历史和社会结果,比如黑人和拉丁裔家庭的家庭财富相对较低,女性的家庭责任增加,女性和少数族裔工人更容易被剥削;雇主可以将他们的工资进一步压低到其边际产品的价值以下。此外,我们的模型显示,非白人女性的累积工资差距大于非男性和非白人的累加差距。最后,我们的模型表明,减少政府对集体行动的支持,使雇主能够更自由地行使垄断权力,而不受雇主集中度变化的影响。由于某些群体更容易被剥削,雇主行使垄断权力的能力的增强意味着工资差距的扩大,复制了对边缘工人群体的歧视性偏见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Discrimination and Monopsony Power
Wage inequalities between identical workers of different race, ethnicity, and gender are a persistent feature of labor markets. However, most labor market models either ignore important empirical evidence or focus very narrowly on specific labor market dynamics. To better understand such wage differences, we create a labor market model that integrates firm competition for workers, employee movement between jobs in response to market signals, potential monetary frictions in the job transition process, and workers' collective action which is a function of government support. Our model shows that because of gender- and race-specific historical and social outcomes, like the relatively lower household wealth of Black and Latino families and the increased household responsibilities of women, women and minority workers are more exploitable; employers can push their wage farther below the value of their marginal product. Also, our model shows that the cumulative wage gap for non-White women is greater than the additive gaps of being nonmale and non-White. Lastly, our model shows that a reduction in government support for collective action enables employers to wield monopsony power more freely, independent of changes in employer concentration. Because certain groups are more exploitable, employers' increased capability in wielding monopsony power means increased wage differentials replicating discriminatory biases against marginalized groups of workers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Review of Black Political Economy
Review of Black Political Economy Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: The Review of Black Political Economy examines issues related to the economic status of African-American and Third World peoples. It identifies and analyzes policy prescriptions designed to reduce racial economic inequality. The journal is devoted to appraising public and private policies for their ability to advance economic opportunities without regard to their theoretical or ideological origins. A publication of the National Economic Association and the Southern Center for Studies in Public Policy of Clark College.
期刊最新文献
The Impact of Public Investment on Private Investment in Botswana: A Disaggregated Approach The Relative Impact of Historically Black College and University Economics Departments and Economists: Has the Hierarchy Changed Since the Turn of the Century? Responsibility and Restitution in the Freedman's Bank Crisis Book Review: The New Age of Empire: How Racism and Colonialism Still Rule the World by Kehinde Andrews Personal Reflections on the Life and Legacy of Bill Spriggs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1