My Account Log in

1 option

New Evidence on Sex Segregation and Sex Differences in Wages from Matched Employee-Employer Data / Kimberly Bayard, Judith Hellerstein, David Neumark, Kenneth Troske.

NBER Working papers Available online

View online
Format:
Book
Author/Creator:
Bayard, Kimberly.
Contributor:
National Bureau of Economic Research.
Hellerstein, Judith.
Neumark, David.
Troske, Kenneth.
Series:
Working Paper Series (National Bureau of Economic Research) no. w7003.
NBER working paper series no. w7003
Language:
English
Subjects (All):
Equal pay for equal work.
Wage differentials--United States.
Wage differentials.
Physical Description:
1 online resource: illustrations (black and white);
Place of Publication:
Cambridge, Mass. National Bureau of Economic Research 1999.
Cambridge, Mass. : National Bureau of Economic Research, 1999.
Summary:
We assemble a new matched employer-employee data set covering essentially all industries and occupations across all regions of the U.S. We use this data set to re-examine the question of the relative contributions to the overall sex gap in wages of sex segregation vs. wage differences by sex within occupation, industry, establishment, and occupation-establishment cells. This new data set is especially useful because earlier research on this topic relied on data sets that covered only a narrow range of industries, occupations, or regions. Our results indicate that a sizable fraction of the sex gap in wages is accounted for by the segregation of women into lower-paying occupations, industries, establishments, and occupations within establishments. Nonetheless, a substantial part of the sex gap in wages remains attributable to the individual's sex. This latter finding contrasts sharply with the conclusions of previous research (especially Groshen, 1991), which indicated that sex segregation accounted for essentially all of the sex wage gap. Further research into the sources of within-establishment within-occupation sex wage differences is therefore much more important than previously thought.
Notes:
Print version record
March 1999.

The Penn Libraries is committed to describing library materials using current, accurate, and responsible language. If you discover outdated or inaccurate language, please fill out this feedback form to report it and suggest alternative language.

Find

Home Release notes

My Account

Shelf Request an item Bookmarks Fines and fees Settings

Guides

Using the Find catalog Using Articles+ Using your account