New Evidence on Cyclical Variation in Labor Costs in the U.S
Employer-provided nonwage benefit expenditures now account for one-third of U.S. firms' labor costs. We show that a broad measure of real labor costs including such benefit expenditures has become countercyclical during 1982-2014, contrary to the conventional view that labor costs are procyclic...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | NBER Working Paper Series 2018-01, p.24266 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 24266 |
container_title | NBER Working Paper Series |
container_volume | |
creator | Gu, Grace Weishi Prasad, Eswar S |
description | Employer-provided nonwage benefit expenditures now account for one-third of U.S. firms' labor costs. We show that a broad measure of real labor costs including such benefit expenditures has become countercyclical during 1982-2014, contrary to the conventional view that labor costs are procyclical. Using BLS establishment-job data, we find that even real wages, the main focus of prior literature, have become countercyclical. Benefit expenditures are less rigid than nominal wages, although both components of labor costs have become more rigid. These rigidities, along with the rising relative importance of aggregate demand shocks (including the financial crisis), help explain countercyclical labor costs. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3386/w24266 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_econi</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1994004689</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><nber_id>w24266</nber_id><sourcerecordid>1994004689</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-e729-f49b2bd98b69d9da8c2deab01b376226af39a215c0dde74509ed0cb09e24c3843</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo90E1LAzEQBuAcFKxVf4CngOet-dpsAl5kqVVY9GD1uuRrMaUmNdla-u-NrHh6mZmHGRgArjBaUCr47YEwwvkJmCEhRUUkbc7Aec4bhIgQCM_A3bM7wOW3ty4YB2OA7dFsvVFb-K6SV6MvLR9gp3RMsI15zL_l-OHg2-L1ApwOapvd5V_OwfphuW4fq-5l9dTed5VriKwGJjXRVgrNpZVWCUOsUxphTRtOCFcDlYrg2iBrXcNqJJ1FRpcgzFDB6BzcTGt3KX7tXR77TdynUC72WEqGEONCFgUn5UwMPve75D9VOva4jGtOOOKFXE8kaJf-wfQj-gM5Uleg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1994004689</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>New Evidence on Cyclical Variation in Labor Costs in the U.S</title><source>National Bureau of Economic Research Publications</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Gu, Grace Weishi ; Prasad, Eswar S</creator><creatorcontrib>Gu, Grace Weishi ; Prasad, Eswar S</creatorcontrib><description>Employer-provided nonwage benefit expenditures now account for one-third of U.S. firms' labor costs. We show that a broad measure of real labor costs including such benefit expenditures has become countercyclical during 1982-2014, contrary to the conventional view that labor costs are procyclical. Using BLS establishment-job data, we find that even real wages, the main focus of prior literature, have become countercyclical. Benefit expenditures are less rigid than nominal wages, although both components of labor costs have become more rigid. These rigidities, along with the rising relative importance of aggregate demand shocks (including the financial crisis), help explain countercyclical labor costs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0898-2937</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3386/w24266</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, Mass: National Bureau of Economic Research</publisher><subject>Economic models ; Economic theory ; Employee benefits ; Expenditures ; International Finance and Macroeconomics ; Labor costs ; Real wages</subject><ispartof>NBER Working Paper Series, 2018-01, p.24266</ispartof><rights>Copyright National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. Jan 2018</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>776,780,27904</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gu, Grace Weishi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prasad, Eswar S</creatorcontrib><title>New Evidence on Cyclical Variation in Labor Costs in the U.S</title><title>NBER Working Paper Series</title><description>Employer-provided nonwage benefit expenditures now account for one-third of U.S. firms' labor costs. We show that a broad measure of real labor costs including such benefit expenditures has become countercyclical during 1982-2014, contrary to the conventional view that labor costs are procyclical. Using BLS establishment-job data, we find that even real wages, the main focus of prior literature, have become countercyclical. Benefit expenditures are less rigid than nominal wages, although both components of labor costs have become more rigid. These rigidities, along with the rising relative importance of aggregate demand shocks (including the financial crisis), help explain countercyclical labor costs.</description><subject>Economic models</subject><subject>Economic theory</subject><subject>Employee benefits</subject><subject>Expenditures</subject><subject>International Finance and Macroeconomics</subject><subject>Labor costs</subject><subject>Real wages</subject><issn>0898-2937</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>NBR</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNo90E1LAzEQBuAcFKxVf4CngOet-dpsAl5kqVVY9GD1uuRrMaUmNdla-u-NrHh6mZmHGRgArjBaUCr47YEwwvkJmCEhRUUkbc7Aec4bhIgQCM_A3bM7wOW3ty4YB2OA7dFsvVFb-K6SV6MvLR9gp3RMsI15zL_l-OHg2-L1ApwOapvd5V_OwfphuW4fq-5l9dTed5VriKwGJjXRVgrNpZVWCUOsUxphTRtOCFcDlYrg2iBrXcNqJJ1FRpcgzFDB6BzcTGt3KX7tXR77TdynUC72WEqGEONCFgUn5UwMPve75D9VOva4jGtOOOKFXE8kaJf-wfQj-gM5Uleg</recordid><startdate>20180101</startdate><enddate>20180101</enddate><creator>Gu, Grace Weishi</creator><creator>Prasad, Eswar S</creator><general>National Bureau of Economic Research</general><general>National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc</general><scope>CZO</scope><scope>MPB</scope><scope>NBR</scope><scope>XD6</scope><scope>OQ6</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20180101</creationdate><title>New Evidence on Cyclical Variation in Labor Costs in the U.S</title><author>Gu, Grace Weishi ; Prasad, Eswar S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-e729-f49b2bd98b69d9da8c2deab01b376226af39a215c0dde74509ed0cb09e24c3843</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Economic models</topic><topic>Economic theory</topic><topic>Employee benefits</topic><topic>Expenditures</topic><topic>International Finance and Macroeconomics</topic><topic>Labor costs</topic><topic>Real wages</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gu, Grace Weishi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prasad, Eswar S</creatorcontrib><collection>NBER Working Papers</collection><collection>NBER</collection><collection>National Bureau of Economic Research Publications</collection><collection>NBER Technical Working Papers Archive</collection><collection>ECONIS</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gu, Grace Weishi</au><au>Prasad, Eswar S</au><format>book</format><genre>document</genre><ristype>GEN</ristype><atitle>New Evidence on Cyclical Variation in Labor Costs in the U.S</atitle><jtitle>NBER Working Paper Series</jtitle><date>2018-01-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><spage>24266</spage><pages>24266-</pages><issn>0898-2937</issn><abstract>Employer-provided nonwage benefit expenditures now account for one-third of U.S. firms' labor costs. We show that a broad measure of real labor costs including such benefit expenditures has become countercyclical during 1982-2014, contrary to the conventional view that labor costs are procyclical. Using BLS establishment-job data, we find that even real wages, the main focus of prior literature, have become countercyclical. Benefit expenditures are less rigid than nominal wages, although both components of labor costs have become more rigid. These rigidities, along with the rising relative importance of aggregate demand shocks (including the financial crisis), help explain countercyclical labor costs.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, Mass</cop><pub>National Bureau of Economic Research</pub><doi>10.3386/w24266</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0898-2937 |
ispartof | NBER Working Paper Series, 2018-01, p.24266 |
issn | 0898-2937 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1994004689 |
source | National Bureau of Economic Research Publications; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Economic models Economic theory Employee benefits Expenditures International Finance and Macroeconomics Labor costs Real wages |
title | New Evidence on Cyclical Variation in Labor Costs in the U.S |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-22T07%3A04%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_econi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=document&rft.atitle=New%20Evidence%20on%20Cyclical%20Variation%20in%20Labor%20Costs%20in%20the%20U.S&rft.jtitle=NBER%20Working%20Paper%20Series&rft.au=Gu,%20Grace%20Weishi&rft.date=2018-01-01&rft.spage=24266&rft.pages=24266-&rft.issn=0898-2937&rft_id=info:doi/10.3386/w24266&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_econi%3E1994004689%3C/proquest_econi%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1994004689&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_nber_id=w24266&rfr_iscdi=true |