Care work as a team sport

Many workers in care industries, such as health, education, and social services, are motivated by a genuine concern for those they tend to, creating what social scientists refer to as large “social externalities, ” increasing the capabilities of the workers, citizens, and consumers they care for in ways that evade easy measurement. Team work is another important feature of the provision of care. Doctors, nurses, and other medical personnel collaborate with patients and their families to improve health in the same way that school administrators, teachers, and teachers’ aides work with students and their families to improve learning.


New Working Paper
The wages of care: Bargaining power, earnings and inequality


All these factors make it hard to identify the contribution that an individual care worker makes to total output, which limits these workers’ ability to bargain for a wage that accurately reflects their true value added to the broader economy. In most workplaces—as in most team sports—complex synergies such as team spirit come into play. But some jobs are like baseball, where individual performance and contribution to team wins can be measured fairly easily, while others are more like football, where it is especially difficult to estimate the contribution of those who play defense.

Workers in care occupations tend to earn less than similar workers elsewhere in the U.S. economy. This finding, reported in a paper I coauthored in 2002 entitled “The Wages of Virtue,” is confirmed in an updated version presented by sociologists Michelle Budig of the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, Melissa Hodges of Villanova University, and Paula England of New York University at the Work-Family Research Network Meetings last June in Washington, DC. The “care penalty” represents the inverse of a “pay premium” that has been observed among workers in the financial sector, who earn wages higher than would be predicted from their individual characteristics.

The interdependence that results from “teaminess” has particularly specific implications for the distribution of earnings in care industries, which employ about 25 percent of all workers in the United States. Because health and education are widely considered public goods, both government and non-profit organizations play a particularly important part in their provision. Unfortunately, most previous analyses of earnings inequality in the United States focus on dynamics in the private sector alone.

In our new working paper, University of New Hampshire sociologist Kristin Smith and I present data from the 2015 U.S. Current Population Survey showing that the distribution of earnings in care industries is more compressed than in other industries. The ratio of earnings at the top 90th percentile to the 50th percentile is lower, as is the ratio of the 50th to the 10th lower percentile. Although women are disproportionately represented in care industries, this pattern holds for men as well.

Our multivariate analysis—controlling for gender, type of employment (public, private non-profit, and private for-profit) and years of education—shows that managers and professionals pay a particularly significant penalty for working in either a care industry or a care occupation. The resulting reduction in earnings in the top half of the earnings distribution, where managers and professionals are disproportionately located, has an equalizing effect. Many factors could contribute to this outcome, including the particular distribution of skill requirements in health and education.

Yet the rarity of significant performance-based pay incentives in care industries suggests that teamwork also plays a role. It seems telling that both top and average salaries in 2014-15 were lower in the National Football League than in Major League Baseball, as were the ratios of top-to-minimum salaries. Keep in mind, however, that the average salary in the NFL in that year was $2 million, despite team revenue sharing rules and regulated bidding. Care workers are in a very different league when it comes to average pay.

—Nancy Folbre is economics professor emerita at the University of Massachusetts Amherst

U.S. millennials, the racial wealth divide, and asking parents for rent

It seems a lot of twenty-somethings in the United States who are trying to make it in the big city have a secret weapon: Mom and Dad. A new article for The Upshot by Quoctrung Bui chronicles a new survey that finds that a growing number of millennials in their twenties—40 percent—still rely on their parents to help pay their everyday living expenses, receiving an average of $3,000 a year.

In a labor market in which mobility is declining and skilled jobs are increasingly moving to expensive cities, family wealth is playing an increasing role in helping post-graduates find their footing, especially if they move to urban areas.  Of course, not every family can afford to help their adult children out. Bui doesn’t go into the demographics of who these families are, but the research tells us that they are likely disproportionately white. This means that the barriers of entry to some of the nation’s best jobs and opportunities, which are becoming concentrated in these expensive, high-rent cities, could deepen even further along racial lines.

Parents’ ability to help their children comes down how much they have in assets, and it’s no secret that a major wealth gap between white families and families of colors has persisted for years. Policies both past and present have helped build the white middle class while deepening the racial divide for black and Latino families, who now have 6 percent and 8 percent, respectively, of the wealth of a typical white household, according to a new Demos report. An influential study by the Brookings Institution’s William Gale and University of Wisconsin’s John Karl Scholz finds that 20 percent of net worth is due to non-inheritance transfers from family members throughout one’s lifetime. Wealth, as opposed to income, is important because it can serve as a springboard for the next generation’s long-term financial security.

This does not just mean that white offspring are more likely to receive a sizeable inheritance after their parents’ death. According to Brandeis University sociologist Thomas Shapiro, white children are also more often the recipients of financial assistance throughout their lifetime as well. We don’t necessarily register these “gifts” as inheritance. But whether it’s paying their children’s college tuition, covering medical expenses, or helping with rent or a down payment on a house, this head-start can help white kids find more opportunities to build wealth.

The effects of a parental safety-net—or lack thereof—also influences more immediate choices. A kid that has a parental safety net to fall back on is much more likely to be able to afford to move to a more expensive city, pay for career development activities, or go into occupations that are riskier or have higher barriers of entry. Mel Jones, writing for the Washington Monthly, calls this reality the “second racial wealth gap.”

“If you have to decide between paying for a professional networking event or a cell phone bill, the latter is more likely to win out,” Jones explains. “When this happens once or twice, it’s not a big deal. It’s the collective impact of a series of decisions that matter, the result of which is displayed among ethnic and class lines.” Education only goes so far, as demonstrated by the fact that black and Latino students who want to build wealth similar to that of white high-school dropouts must not only to finish high school but also graduate from college.

When economists and other social scientists talk about the racial wealth gap, they tend to focus on the way that it’s stifled upward mobility for black and Latino households in terms of homeownership, education, and weathering periods of financial hardship. Reversing the numerous discriminatory policies that caused this to happen in the first place will help, but it won’t remove the barriers to entry that are now higher than ever because many white families are starting off far ahead. The small inequalities have always mattered, but in an era in which wealth begets wealth, they may represent an even bigger barrier to long-term economic security for communities of color.

Should-Read: Morgan Kelly and Cormac Ó Gráda: Adam Smith, Watch Prices, and the Industrial Revolution

Should-Read: Morgan Kelly and Cormac Ó Gráda (2016): Adam Smith, Watch Prices, and the Industrial Revolution: “Watches were the first mass-produced consumer durable…

…and were Adam Smith’s preeminent example of technological progress…. Smith makes the notable claim that watch prices may have fallen by up to 95% over the preceding century…. We look at changes in the reported value of over 3,200 stolen watches from criminal trials in the Old Bailey in London from 1685 to 1810… the real price of watches in nearly all categories falls steadily by 1.3% a year… showing that sustained innovation in the production of a highly complex artifact had already appeared in one important sector of the British economy by the early eighteenth century….

Against the view of a narrowly based Industrial Revolution, our results on watchmaking support the view of a more broadly based advance across many manufacturing sectors proposed by Berg and Hudson (1992) and Temin (1997) , among others…. What distinguishes watches… is that, except for scientific instruments, watches were the most complex artifacts of their time. That is what makes their productivity growth so interesting…. Our results support the view that the roots of the Industrial Revolution stretch back further than the mid-eighteenth century. The beginnings of growth in the seventeenth century are consistent with the findings of Broadberry et al. (2015) on English GDP…. As Bailey and Barker (1969) demonstrate, the origins of watchmaking in Lancashire lie in the area’s tradition of brass making that dates back to the late sixteenth century…

Adam Smith Watch Prices and the Industrial Revolution The Quarterly Journal of Economics Oxford Academic

Should-Read: Tim Duy: Fed’s Bullard Knows His Treasury Yield Curve

Should-Read: I agree with Tim Duy here: Bullard is looking at the right things, and that is a very good sign…

Tim Duy: Fed’s Bullard Knows His Treasury Yield Curve: “Having tipped their toes in the water with two interest-rate hikes…

…the Federal Reserve… to date… have tended to look at interest rate-policy as separate from balance-sheet policy. Once the former is heading toward normalization, then they can begin the latter. I tend to be skeptical of that strategy, largely because it risks financial destabilization by flattening the yield curve…. I would prefer an explicit policy strategy that incorporates both interest-rate and balance-sheet tools acting jointly not with the goal of “normalizing” either of those components, but aimed at meeting the Fed’s dual mandates of full employment and stable prices. Under such a framework, for example, the Fed wouldn’t need to follow through with additional rate hikes before to balance-sheet reduction. There would be no preconceived notion of the “correct” order of operations. That’s why I like what I heard in St. Louis Federal Reserve President James Bullard’s most recent speech…. Bullard still sees the balance sheet as a mechanism to normalize policy even if policy rates remain low…. Bullard is building on Yellen by saying not only is that diminishment justification for a gradual pace of rate increases, but as a replacement for rate increases. There is nothing to stop them from initiating such policy now…

Must- and Should-Reads: February 12, 2017


Interesting Reads:

Must-Read: Facundo Alvaredo et al.: Global Inequality Dynamics: New Findings from WID.WORLD

Must-Read: Facundo Alvaredo et al.: Global Inequality Dynamics: New Findings from WID.WORLD: “Global inequality dynamics involve strong and contradictory forces…

…We observe rising top income and wealth shares in nearly all countries in recent decades. But the magnitude of rising inequality varies substantially across countries, thereby suggesting that different country-specific policies and institutions matter considerably. High growth rates in
emerging countries reduce between-country inequality, but this in itself does not guarantee acceptable within-country inequality levels and ensure the social sustainability of globalization…

Cursor and Income share for the bottom 50 of Americans is collapsing new Piketty research finds MarketWatch Cursor and w23119 pdf

hould-Read: Mary Amiti and David Weinstein: Why shocks to large banks cause big GDP swings

Should-Read: Mary Amiti and David Weinstein: Why shocks to large banks cause big GDP swings: “Banks are large relative to the economies they serve…

… [Using] comprehensive data on Japanese banks from 1990 to 2010… the fates of individual banks matter for aggregate performance. Much of the fluctuation in Japanese aggregate investment appears to be driven by the idiosyncratic successes and failures of a limited number of institutions, and there is good reason to believe that the situation is similar in many developed countries…

Weekend reading: “low probability event” edition

This is a weekly post we publish on Fridays with links to articles that touch on economic inequality and growth. The first section is a round-up of what Equitable Growth published this week and the second is the work we’re highlighting from elsewhere. We won’t be the first to share these articles, but we hope by taking a look back at the whole week, we can put them in context.

Equitable Growth round-up

A new paper looks at the forces that could be pushing down long-term interest rates in the United States. The economists find that aging demographics and slower productivity are behind the decline.

The U.S. Department of Labor released new data on the labor market on Tuesday, in the form of the February release of the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey. Check out three graphs showing important trends in the data.

President Trump’s choice to head the Department of Labor, Andrew Puzder, has written quite a bit about the low-wage labor market. T. William Lester of the University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill writes that “some of [Puzder’s] opinions and beliefs are simply at odds with the facts or at the very least ignorant of recent evidence.”

The United States ranks 21st out of the 24 OECD countries in prime-age female labor force participation. Why is this? A lack of paid family and medical leave is a strong suspect, Matt Markezich argues.

According to new projections from the Congressional Budget Office, corporate income tax revenue will continue to stagnant for years to come despite an increase in corporate profits. Kavya Vaghul looks at what’s behind this trend and the prospects for the future.

Links from around the web

When it comes to the U.S. economy, is there too little destruction or too much? Neil Irwin tries to understand whether a boost in dynamism would be a welcome trend or a worrying acceleration of current trends. [the upshot]

Unemployment may be under 5 percent, but millions of workers still struggle with persistent unemployment. Jenna Smialek and Patricia Laya tell the stories of several workers who are seemingly locked out of the labor market. [bloomberg]

Articles and discussion about joblessness in the United States often center on men. But this crisis of missing men is also a crisis of missing women as well. Sarah O’Connor highlights the declining labor force participation of U.S. women. [ft]

If you’re wondering when a strong dollar or a weak dollar is good for the economy, consider the role of the dollar as a reserve currency. Ryan Avent takes a look at how international dependence on the dollar affects the U.S. economy. [the economist]

Households were once the major source of saving in the world economy, financing the investment of corporations and governments. But over the past 30 years, the corporate sector has become a net lender. Timothy Taylor writes up a new paper explaining the increasing corporate savings rate. [conversable economist]

Friday figure

Figure from “Why the United States still needs paid family and medical leave” by Matt Markezich

Should-Read: Andrew Prokop: Republicans in Utter Disarray on Obamacare Repeal

Should-Read: Republican ACA Repeal Circular Firing Squad of Flying Attack Monkeys Lollapalooza:

Scott Lemieux: There Will Never Be A Republican Replacement for the ACA, Cont’d: “There’s no alternative to the ACA that 1) could get a non-trivial amount of Republican support and…

…2) wouldn’t be massively unpopular, because kicking millions of people off of insurance while making insurance much worse for many of those who still have it can’t be made popular. Having a clown without even the most basic understanding of the issues involved in the White House doesn’t help, but the fundamental dilemma would be there no matter what.


Andrew Prokop: Republicans in Utter Disarray on Obamacare Repeal: “Congressional Republicans went off to Philadelphia…

…hop[ing] to make at least some progress toward… repealing and replacing Obamacare…. The party remains divided, uncertain, and deeply concerned about how to move forward…. [Nearly all] questions remains completely unsettled… [with] at least some within the party have grave concerns about all…. Republican House members representing blue states appear to be particularly worried…. Trump’s top domestic policy staffer, Andrew Bremberg… [spoke] in only the vaguest banalities and broadest strokes, offering no substantive guidance whatsoever besides saying that HHS Secretary nominee Tom Price is a “compassionate” guy and a good doctor…. Even though… Republicans in Congress don’t have to defend any specific points that are unpopular, they’re clearly worried already…


Michael Hiltzik: U.S. judge finds that Aetna deceived the public about its reasons for quitting Obamacare: “Aetna claimed… it was pulling out of… Obamacare individual insurance… [as] a business decision…

…it was simply losing too much money on the Obamacare exchanges. Now a federal judge has ruled that that was a rank falsehood…. Aetna threatened federal officials with the pullout before the lawsuit was filed, and followed through on its threat once it was filed…. Aetna executives had moved heaven and earth to conceal their decision-making process from the court… by discussing the matter on the phone rather than in emails, and by shielding what did get put in writing with the cloak of attorney-client privilege, a practice [Judge] Bates found came close to “malfeasance”…


Matt Lewis: Maybe, on Obamacare, Republicans Should Just Punt: “I’ve been through all the conservative alternatives, and many of them have good components…

…But it’s like a novice trying to solve a Rubik’s Cube. Every conceivable scheme or solution creates new problems…. The most plausible (and simplistic) plan would (A) retain the employer-based system (replacing the “Cadillac tax” with a better designed upper limit), (B) provide tax credits for people outside the system, and (C) provide Medicaid for everyone who can’t afford health insurance.
“You can look at this,” Capretta conceded, “and say, ‘Boy, doesn’t this sound like the Affordable Care Act’? And the answer is ‘yes.’”…

By winning the presidential election, Republicans are now like the dog that caught the car. “It feels like Bush’s Social Security all over again,” one senior industry official told me. “It’s really hard to see how this ends up with as many people being covered at the same or lower costs. It’s a mess.” Even that may be a best-case scenario…. Republicans didn’t repeal Social Security. There is always the danger that this could go catastrophically wrong. Should Republicans actually kick off a new administration by engaging in a fool’s errand that is almost guaranteed to backfire?…

Must- and Should-Reads: February 9, 2017


Interesting Reads: