In this paper, three implementation and interpretation issues are examined associated with Krueger and Summers' method for calculating inter‐industry wage differentials. The literature tends to report a less than complete set of industry wage differentials, use the wrong standard errors, and misinterpret the meaning of the industry wage differentials. The solution to the first two issues follows from making explicit the restriction that the employment‐weighted average of all industry wage effects is zero, the same restriction that Krueger and Summers are implicitly imposing on industry wage effects. All industries have thus a wage effect relative to an average worker net of any industry effect and correct standard errors are available via the Delta method. Finally, a method is proposed for analysing inter‐industry wage differentials as actual differences between the wage levels expressed in percentage points and not as log points, which is the current misleading standard. The procedure calculates actual average percentage wage differences by industry and avoids the distortion in differences across industries that log point comparisons engender. An application is provided, using the United States Outgoing Rotation Files of the Current Population Survey for 1989 and 1996, and so updates the work by Krueger and Summers.
Article navigation
1 June 2003
Conceptual Paper|
June 01 2003
Industry wage differentials: how many, big and significant are they?
Kevin T. Reilly;
Kevin T. Reilly
Economics Division, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Search for other works by this author on:
Luisa Zanchi
Luisa Zanchi
Economics Division, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Search for other works by this author on:
Publisher: Emerald Publishing
Online ISSN: 1758-6577
Print ISSN: 0143-7720
© MCB UP Limited
2003
International Journal of Manpower (2003) 24 (4): 367–398.
Citation
Reilly KT, Zanchi L (2003), "Industry wage differentials: how many, big and significant are they?". International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 24 No. 4 pp. 367–398, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/01437720310485906
Download citation file:
Suggested Reading
Rent sharing as firm‐level pay
International Journal of Manpower (June,2003)
Ethnicity and sheepskin effects in the returns to education in Sri Lanka: A conditional quantile analysis
International Journal of Development Issues (June,2009)
Gender inequalities in labour market outcomes: Evidence for Greek regions before and throughout the crisis
International Journal of Manpower (August,2017)
Hispanics and the Local Labour Market Earnings of Blacks
International Journal of Manpower (May,1991)
The tipping points of business strategy: the rise and decline of competitiveness
Strategic Direction (October,2009)
Related Chapters
Devolution, Recession and the Alleviation of Inequality in Wales
Inequalities in the UK: New Discourses, Evolutions and Actions
Extended Working Lives in Europe
Late Working Life in Four European Countries: Policy Perspectives
Late Working Life Policies in Germany
Late Working Life in Four European Countries: Policy Perspectives
Recommended for you
These recommendations are informed by your reading behaviors and indicated interests.
