The introduction of a minimum wage increases unemployment
the verdict
CONTESTED
contested - evenly split
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
7 sources for · 2 against
The literature presents mixed findings on whether the introduction or raising of a minimum wage increases unemployment. Some theoretical models and traditional perspectives suggest that higher wage floors reduce job creation or cause unemployment, while empirical studies—such as analyses of U.S. minimum wage changes—find that employment numbers can remain largely unchanged.
Firing-cost-free temporary contracts were introduced in many European countries during the eigthies in order to fight high unemployment rates. Their rationale was to increase job creation in a context of high firing costs that were politically hard to decrease. Temporary contracts have become a prevalent labor market institution in many countries, and with hindsight it seems uncontroversial that they have failed at decreasing unemployment. Evidence indicates that temporary contracts not only increases unemployment fluctuations, but also unemployment levels. In this paper we argue that the rationale for the introduction of temporary contracts is flawed at its root. We provide a novel explanation of why temporary contracts can increase unemployment even in a context where a reduction of firing costs would actually reduce unemployment. We argue that, if minimum wages are kept at high levels, temporary contracts have an effect not unlike the increase of unemployment benefits. By increasing the flows in and out of unemployment into relatively highly paid temporary jobs (minimum wage), they increase the value of being unemployed. This has a negative effect on incentives, increases wages and reduces the willingness of firms to create employment. We present empirical evidence supportive of some of the implications of the model.
Abstract We estimate the effect of minimum wages on low-wage jobs using 138 prominent state-level minimum wage changes between 1979 and 2016 in the United States using a difference-in-differences approach. We first estimate the effect of the minimum wage increase on employment changes by wage bins throughout the hourly wage distribution. We then focus on the bottom part of the wage distribution and compare the number of excess jobs paying at or slightly above the new minimum wage to the missing jobs paying below it to infer the employment effect. We find that the overall number of low-wage jobs remained essentially unchanged over the five years following the increase. At the same time, the direct effect of the minimum wage on average earnings was amplified by modest wage spillovers at the bottom of the wage distribution. Our estimates by detailed demographic groups show that the lack of job loss is not explained by labor-labor substitution at the bottom of the wage distribution. We also find no evidence of disemployment when we consider higher levels of minimum wages. However, we do find some evidence of reduced employment in tradeable sectors. We also show how decomposing the overall employment effect by wage bins allows a transparent way of assessing the plausibility of estimates.
We examine how subsidy policies to support child-rearing of households affect the fertility rate in a textbook OLG model extended to account for a labour market imperfection (e.g., a minimum wage or a monopolistic union’s wage) as well as endogenous fertility. It is shown that increasing the child subsidy actually reduces population growth. The policy implications for countries with imperfect labour markets and low fertility (e.g., the most part of European Union countries) are noteworthy: if the government’s objective is to increase the fertility rate, a child-subsidy support policy should not be introduced at all. Contrary to conventional wisdom, our findings in fact reveal that, for any given value of the minimum (or union’s) wage, the introduction of a child subsidy reduces capital accumulation and increases unemployment in the long-run, and ultimately it negatively affects the demand for children in spite of a reduced cost of child-rearing.
Abstract Firms conduct interviews to select who to hire. Their recruitment strategies affect not only the hiring rate but also job destruction rate as more interviews increase the chances of finding the right worker for the job; a link mostly overlooked in the literature. I model this recruitment behavior and investigate the effects of labor market policies on unemployment. These policies change the value of hiring the right worker, altering firms' incentives to conduct interviews. Policies further affect job creation and destruction when firms adapt their recruitment strategies. Net effect of a policy on unemployment depends on the magnitude of change in job creation versus destruction. Qualitative analysis reveals that the effect of a policy on unemployment is mostly weakened with the introduction of firms' recruitment behavior to the model. Firing taxes still increase unemployment, albeit at a lower rate. The effect of hiring subsidies on unemployment is even reversed: Unemployment increases with hiring subsidies if firms adapt. Minimum wage and unemployment insurance policies are also analyzed.
This paper reexamines the issue of the division of the labor force between the two sub-markets (formal and informal) of a developing economy. The formal sector is represented by a matching model with vertically differentiated workers. Assuming that firms hire their best applicants, we state that the formal sector is too small in terms of its labor force but too large in terms of job creation. Next we show that introducing a minimum wage increases the size of the formal sector with respect both to its labor force and to job creation. In accordance with the well-known paradox of Harris and Todaro, the enlargement of the formal market is accompanied by a rise in unemployment. However, when associated with a tax on job creation, the introduction of a minimum wage in the formal sector improves the efficiency of the labor market by making the formal sector more attractive to workers.
ABSTRACT This study analyzes the effect of minimum wage on growth and welfare under government debt. We assume minimum wage causes unemployment and that the government finances unemployment benefits via taxes and public debt. This study shows that there is an optimal minimum wage level that maximizes long‐term economic growth, which increases with the ratio of fiscal deficit to GDP. Moreover, the effect of introducing a minimum wage on the welfare of each generation varies across generations. Specifically, the introduction of minimum wage worsens the welfare of future generations but improves that of the initial generation compared to the balanced‐budget rule.
Raising Minimum Wage 52 Increases Unemployment Christopher Jaarda 6. Raising Minimum Wage Does … the economic ladder Raising Minimum Wage Increases Unemployment Christopher Jaarda In the following … the minimum wage increase is a perfect example. Rising Unemployment Following Minimum Wage Hikes
] have argued that unemployment increases with increased governmental regulation. For example, minimum wage laws raise the cost of some low-skill laborers
Unemployment is the state of not being in paid employment or self-employment but rather currently available for work. Unemployment is measured by the unemployment rate, which is the number of people who are unemployed as a percentage of the labour force (the total number of people employed above a specified age added to those unemployed) during the reference period.
Pr…
Frank Knapp, CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce representing five thousand business owners, said a higher minimum wage “will put more money in the hands of 300,000 South Carolinians who make less than ten dollars per hour and they will spend it here in our local economies. This minimum wage increase will also benefit another 150,000 employees who will have their wages adjusted. The resulting net $500 million increase in state GDP will be good for small businesses and good for the economy of South Carolina.”37
In addition to paying a higher wage, businesses can help workers move to, or stay in, the middle class in other ways. For decades, some companies have hired many full-time workers as independent contractors because it saves them money on a variety of employee benefits they do not have to offer as a result. However, that practice shifts the burden to the workers, who now have to pay the full cost of their health insurance, workers’ compensation, unemployment benefits, time off, and payroll taxes.
Everything we examined (9)
This check searched the claim as stated. It did not run a separate search for evidence against it.