04/17/2017

Paid Family Leave Reduces Women's Wages, Increases The Gender Pay Gap

Tim Worstall, Forbes.com

There is, as we all know, a considerable head of steam under the idea that the United States should introduce paid family leave as a legal right. And perhaps it should. Yet there is a problem here, which is that the introduction will reduce women's wages and thus increase the gender pay gap. Which, given all the attention also paid to that problem is something that most say they don't desire. However, it is a basic truth that the effects of policies don't depend on how we wish they would turn out. Thus this problem does need to be considered.

Vanessa Brown Calder has a look at this over at Cato:

Who pays for women’s mandated paid leave and other women-centric labor policies? At a superficial level, it depends on who you ask. Proposals for federal mandated paid leave and child care laws run the gamut, and advocates identify government, taxpayers, or private companies as backers. Unfortunately, those answers reveal a glaring oversight: directly or indirectly, women will pay.

Quite so. She points to Larry Summer's paper on mandated benefits:

A different type of wage rigidity involves a
requirement that firms pay different workers
the same wage even though the cost of providing
benefits differs. For example, the cost
of health insurance is greater for older than
for younger workers and the expected cost of
parental leave is greater for women than
men. If wages could freely adjust, these differences
in expected benefit costs would be
offset by differences in wages. If such differences
are precluded, however, there will be
efficiency consequences as employers seek to
hire workers with lower benefit costs. It is
thus possible that mandated benefit programs
can work against the interests of those
who most require the benefit being offered.
Publicly provided benefits do not drive a
wedge between the marginal costs of hiring
different workers and so do not give rise to a
distortion of this kind.

We should note that most proposals for paid family leave are financed publicly, not by the employer directly, However, that doesn't cover the case entirely. There are still costs to the employer. As with publicly financed maternity leave in other countries the employer still needs to get the work done and still suffers the costs of having to find and pay a replacement plus the turmoil that comes from substituting labour. There are still real costs to the employer here.

Read full article



You May Also Like:

The IG Report Is Our Best Shot At The Truth About Hillary's Emails (And It Could Be Explosive) [Watch] Jason Chaffetz, Fox News

Trump’s Trade Confusion Editorial Board, The Wall Street Journal

Let’s Hope The Trump-Kim Summit Stays Cancelled Rich Lowry, New York Post

Masters Of The Universe: Leaked Documents Show Facebook’s Internal Turmoil About ‘Hate Speech’ Lucas Nolan, Breitbart

Trump’s Best Move Yet—Easing Rules To Fire Bureaucrats Stephen Kruiser, The American Spectator

The Race To Be The Next Speaker Haley Byrd, The Weekly Standard

The New Starbucks Bathroom Policy Is A Terrible Idea [Watch] Katherine Timpf, National Review

TOTALITARIAN IN NYC: De Blasio Issues ‘Cultural Plan’ Linking Museum Funding To Skin Color Ben Shapiro, The Daily Wire

These California Rebels Are Working With Trump, Not Against Him Jarrett Stepman, The Daily Signal

Why Conservatives Shouldn’t Fear That Obama-Netflix Deal [Watch] Christian Toto, Hollywood In Toto

For More go to the Home Page >>>

Join Our Email List



section

Bookshelf

FreeMarket Central

Some titles recent, all recommended -

Special Video Feature

FreeMarket Central

Voices From The 2017 International Students For Liberty Conference

section

In Search Of History

The Reagan Tax Cuts Worked

Thanks to "bracket creep," the inflation of the 1970s pushed millions of taxpayers into higher tax brackets even though their inflation-adjusted incomes were not rising. To help offset this tax increase and also to improve incentives to work, save, and invest, President Reagan proposed sweeping tax rate reductions during the 1980s. What happened? Total tax revenues climbed by 99.4 percent during the 1980s, and the results are even more impressive when looking at what happened to personal income tax revenues. Once the economy received an unambiguous tax cut in January 1983, income tax revenues climbed dramatically, increasing by more than 54 percent by 1989 (28 percent after adjusting for inflation).

 

-- Daniel J. Mitchell,

Shadow Stats Snapshot


FreeMarket Central

ShadowStats alternate economic indicators are based on the methodology of noted economist John Williams, specialist in government economic reporting.

  • Unemployment:
    FreeMarket Central BLS: 3.93%
    FreeMarket Central Shadow Stats: 21.5%
  • Inflation:
    FreeMarket Central April Year-to-Year: 2.46% (CPI-U*)
    FreeMarket Central Shadow Stats: 9.9%

*[cpi-u is the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation rate for all urban consumers]

section