公司内部风险分担:入门

M. Pagano
{"title":"公司内部风险分担:入门","authors":"M. Pagano","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3510275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Labor income risk is key to the welfare of most people. This risk is mainly insured “within the firm†and by public institutions, rather than by financial markets. This monograph starts by asking why such insurance is provided within the firm, and what determines its boundaries. It identifies four main constraining factors: availability of a public safety net, moral hazard on the employees’ side, moral hazard on the firms’ side, and workers’ wage bargaining power. These factors explain three empirical regularities: (i) family firms provide more employment insurance than nonfamily firms; (ii) the former pay lower real wages; and (iii) firms provide less employment insurance where public unemployment benefits are more generous. The monograph also explores the connection between risk sharing and firms’ capital structure: greater leverage calls for high wages to compensate employees for greater job risk; nevertheless, firms may want to lever up strategically in order to offset the bargaining power of labor unions. Hence, the distributional conflict between shareholders and workers may limit risk sharing within the firm. By contrast, bondholders and workers are not necessarily in conflict, as both are harmed by firms’ risk-taking. In principle, firms may also insure employees against uncertainty about their own talent, but their capacity to do so is constrained by workers’ inability to commit to their employer: in the presence of labor market competition, high-talent employees will leave unless paid in line with their high productivity, making uncertainty about talent uninsurable. The monograph concludes by showing that risk sharing within firms has declined steadily in the last three decades, and by discussing the financial, competitive, technological and institutional developments that may have conjured this outcome.","PeriodicalId":121231,"journal":{"name":"CEPR Discussion Paper Series","volume":"297 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk Sharing within the Firm: A Primer\",\"authors\":\"M. Pagano\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3510275\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Labor income risk is key to the welfare of most people. This risk is mainly insured “within the firm†and by public institutions, rather than by financial markets. This monograph starts by asking why such insurance is provided within the firm, and what determines its boundaries. It identifies four main constraining factors: availability of a public safety net, moral hazard on the employees’ side, moral hazard on the firms’ side, and workers’ wage bargaining power. These factors explain three empirical regularities: (i) family firms provide more employment insurance than nonfamily firms; (ii) the former pay lower real wages; and (iii) firms provide less employment insurance where public unemployment benefits are more generous. The monograph also explores the connection between risk sharing and firms’ capital structure: greater leverage calls for high wages to compensate employees for greater job risk; nevertheless, firms may want to lever up strategically in order to offset the bargaining power of labor unions. Hence, the distributional conflict between shareholders and workers may limit risk sharing within the firm. By contrast, bondholders and workers are not necessarily in conflict, as both are harmed by firms’ risk-taking. In principle, firms may also insure employees against uncertainty about their own talent, but their capacity to do so is constrained by workers’ inability to commit to their employer: in the presence of labor market competition, high-talent employees will leave unless paid in line with their high productivity, making uncertainty about talent uninsurable. The monograph concludes by showing that risk sharing within firms has declined steadily in the last three decades, and by discussing the financial, competitive, technological and institutional developments that may have conjured this outcome.\",\"PeriodicalId\":121231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CEPR Discussion Paper Series\",\"volume\":\"297 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CEPR Discussion Paper Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3510275\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CEPR Discussion Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3510275","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

劳动收入风险是关系到大多数人福祉的关键。这种风险主要由公共机构(而不是金融市场) - œwithin公司承保。这本专著首先询问了为什么在公司内部提供这种保险,以及是什么决定了它的边界。它确定了四个主要的制约因素:公共安全网络的可用性、雇员方面的道德风险、公司方面的道德风险以及工人的工资议价能力。这些因素解释了三个经验规律:(1)家族企业比非家族企业提供更多的就业保险;(二)前者实际工资偏低的;(三)在公共失业福利更慷慨的地方,企业提供的就业保险更少。该专著还探讨了风险分担与企业资本结构之间的联系:更高的杠杆要求更高的工资来补偿员工更大的工作风险;尽管如此,企业可能希望在战略上提高杠杆,以抵消工会的议价能力。因此,股东和工人之间的分配冲突可能会限制公司内部的风险分担。相比之下,债券持有人和工人并不一定存在冲突,因为双方都因公司的冒险行为而受到伤害。原则上,公司也可以为员工提供保险,使其免受自身才能不确定性的影响,但他们这样做的能力受到员工无法对雇主做出承诺的限制:在劳动力市场竞争的情况下,高才能的员工将离开,除非他们的高生产率得到相应的报酬,这使得人才的不确定性无法得到保险。这本专著的结论是,在过去三十年中,企业内部的风险分担稳步下降,并讨论了可能导致这一结果的金融、竞争、技术和制度发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Risk Sharing within the Firm: A Primer
Labor income risk is key to the welfare of most people. This risk is mainly insured “within the firm†and by public institutions, rather than by financial markets. This monograph starts by asking why such insurance is provided within the firm, and what determines its boundaries. It identifies four main constraining factors: availability of a public safety net, moral hazard on the employees’ side, moral hazard on the firms’ side, and workers’ wage bargaining power. These factors explain three empirical regularities: (i) family firms provide more employment insurance than nonfamily firms; (ii) the former pay lower real wages; and (iii) firms provide less employment insurance where public unemployment benefits are more generous. The monograph also explores the connection between risk sharing and firms’ capital structure: greater leverage calls for high wages to compensate employees for greater job risk; nevertheless, firms may want to lever up strategically in order to offset the bargaining power of labor unions. Hence, the distributional conflict between shareholders and workers may limit risk sharing within the firm. By contrast, bondholders and workers are not necessarily in conflict, as both are harmed by firms’ risk-taking. In principle, firms may also insure employees against uncertainty about their own talent, but their capacity to do so is constrained by workers’ inability to commit to their employer: in the presence of labor market competition, high-talent employees will leave unless paid in line with their high productivity, making uncertainty about talent uninsurable. The monograph concludes by showing that risk sharing within firms has declined steadily in the last three decades, and by discussing the financial, competitive, technological and institutional developments that may have conjured this outcome.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信