2 edition of Income and job mobility in the early 1990s found in the catalog.
Shipping list no.: 95-0127-P
|Statement||U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of the Census|
|Publishers||U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of the Census|
|The Physical Object|
|Pagination||xvi, 108 p. :|
|Number of Pages||79|
|2||Statistical brief (Washington, D.C.) -- SB-95-1|
|3||Statistical brief -- SB/95-1|
nodata File Size: 1MB.
What proportion of people in the workforce had low-wage employment in the mid- to late 1990s?
01 level, two-tailed test The explanatory variables measuring area characteristics have little predictive power in the regression models Table IV. Two forces seem to have influenced this new shape of inequality. Job characteristics measured at the start of the low-wage employment spell from the longitudinal panel file• But inflation data can also mask changes in living standards, as the ABS attempts to control for quality over time.
These analyses suggest that both heterogeneity and specific capital implying true duration dependence in the hazard of job ending appear to be significant factors in accounting for mobility patterns. Can public policy also encourage the creation of more higher-wage jobs so we do not simply displace workers who currently have these jobs with others whom we help?
Between 1990 and 1997 the District lost 63,000 jobs 9. Because the mid- to late 1990s was a period of strong economic growth with low inflation, our findings must be interpreted carefully. Some researchers have defined the cutoff value as the hourly wage at which a full-time worker would have annual earnings below the poverty level for a family of three or four Bernstein and Hartmann 1999; Mitnik et al.
In this literature review, we draw from research using each of the definitions of low-wage workers described above.
In contrast, 41 percent of commuters from Maryland do not have a college degree.
Finally, we find that those who work for temp agencies initially have lower earnings than others, but 6 percent to 10 percent have higher earnings with their subsequent employer even after controlling for various personal characteristics and work histories.