The K-Shaped Recovery: Examining the Diverging Fortunes of Workers in the Recovery from the COVID-19 Pandemic Using Business and Household Survey Microdata.
Michael Dalton, Jeffrey A Groen, Mark A Loewenstein, David S Piccone, Anne E Polivka
{"title":"The K-Shaped Recovery: Examining the Diverging Fortunes of Workers in the Recovery from the COVID-19 Pandemic Using Business and Household Survey Microdata.","authors":"Michael Dalton, Jeffrey A Groen, Mark A Loewenstein, David S Piccone, Anne E Polivka","doi":"10.1007/s10888-021-09506-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper examines employment patterns by wage group over the course of the coronavirus pandemic in the United States using microdata from two well-known data sources from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: the Current Employment Statistics and the Current Population Survey. We find establishments paying the lowest average wages and the lowest wage workers had the steepest decline in employment and experienced the most persistent losses. We disentangle the extent to which the effect observed for low wage workers is due to these workers being concentrated within a few low wage sectors of the economy versus the pandemic affecting low wage workers in a number of sectors across the economy. Our results indicate that the experience of low wage workers is not entirely due to these workers being concentrated in low wage sectors - for many sectors, the lowest wage quintiles in that sector also has had the worst employment outcomes. From April 2020 to May 2021, between 23% and 46% of the decline in employment among the lowest wage establishments was due to within-industry changes. Another important finding is that even for those who remain employed during the pandemic, the probability of becoming part-time for economic reasons increased, especially for low-wage workers.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10888-021-09506-6.</p>","PeriodicalId":51559,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Inequality","volume":"19 3","pages":"527-550"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8382096/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Inequality","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-021-09506-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/8/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper examines employment patterns by wage group over the course of the coronavirus pandemic in the United States using microdata from two well-known data sources from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: the Current Employment Statistics and the Current Population Survey. We find establishments paying the lowest average wages and the lowest wage workers had the steepest decline in employment and experienced the most persistent losses. We disentangle the extent to which the effect observed for low wage workers is due to these workers being concentrated within a few low wage sectors of the economy versus the pandemic affecting low wage workers in a number of sectors across the economy. Our results indicate that the experience of low wage workers is not entirely due to these workers being concentrated in low wage sectors - for many sectors, the lowest wage quintiles in that sector also has had the worst employment outcomes. From April 2020 to May 2021, between 23% and 46% of the decline in employment among the lowest wage establishments was due to within-industry changes. Another important finding is that even for those who remain employed during the pandemic, the probability of becoming part-time for economic reasons increased, especially for low-wage workers.
Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10888-021-09506-6.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Economic Inequality provides a forum for analysis of ''economic inequality'', broadly defined. Its scope includes: · Theoretical and empirical analysis· Monetary measures of ''well-being'' such as earnings, income, consumption, and wealth; non-monetary measures such as educational achievement and health and health care; multidimensional measures· Inequality and poverty within and between countries, and globally, and their trends over time· Inequalities of opportunity· Income mobility and poverty persistence· The factor distribution of income· Differences in ''well-being'' between socioeconomic groups, for example between men and women, generations, or ethnic groups· The effects of inequality on macroeconomic and other phenomena, and vice versa· Related statistical methods and data issues · Related policy analysis Papers need to prioritize the ''economic inequality'' dimension. For example, papers about trade and inequality, or inequality and growth, should not primarily be about trade or growth (in which case they should target a different journal). The same is true for papers considering the inter-relationships between the income distribution and the labour market, public policy, or demography.
Officially cited as: J Econ Inequal