Is There a Gender Wage Gap in Online Labor Markets?

The subtitle of the paper is: “Evidence from Over 250,000 Projects and 2.5 Million Wage Bill Proposals” and here is the abstract:

We explore whether there is a gender wage gap in one of the largest EU online labor markets, PeoplePerHour. Our unique dataset consists of 257,111 digitally tradeable tasks of 55,824 hiring employers from 188 countries and 65,010 workers from 173 countries that made more than 2.5 million wage bill proposals in the competition for contracts. Our data allows us to track the complete hiring process from the employers’ design of proposed contracts to the competition among workers and the final agreement between employers and successful candidates. Using Heckman and OLS estimation methods we provide empirical evidence for a statistically significant 4% gender wage gap among workers, at the project level. We also find that female workers propose lower wage bills and are more likely to win the competition for contracts. Once we include workers’ wage bill proposals in the regressions, the gender wage gap virtually disappears, i.e., it is statistically insignificant and very small in magnitude (0.3%). Our results also suggest that female workers’ higher winning probabilities associated with lower wage bill proposals lead to higher expected revenues overall. We provide empirical evidence for heterogeneity of the gender wage gap in some of the job categories, all job difficulty levels and some of the worker countries. Finally, for some subsamples we find a statistically significant but very small “reverse” gender wage gap.

Here is the paper by Estrella Gomez Herra and Frank Mueller-Langer, via Luke Froeb.

Comments

So there is no wage gap here either.

WHO WOULDA THOUGHT?!?

So sad to see someone pass up the opportunity to proclaim that this paper proves that it is actually men that are discriminated against, not women - 'we find a statistically significant but very small “reverse” gender wage gap.'

Better luck next time.

"female workers’ higher winning probabilities associated with lower wage bill proposals lead to higher expected revenues overall."

In other words, there is a gender pay gap, and it benefits women...

Online labor markets is for cucks.

This does not measure total compensation received by men and women, only the compensation received through this online platform. The fact that men bid with higher prices (and get fewer jobs) may have to do that their wage opportunities outside the platform are better (higher opportunity cost to work through the platform). So, even if women are receiving the same or higher pay in this platform, they may still be at a disadvantage in the world when taken as a whole.

Trump did it. He solved gender wage inequality. He is God-Emperor.

We knew you'd come around.

Some (many?) employers have a paternalistic (seems like the correct description) attitude about employees. By that I mean the employer/employee relationship is similar to father/child. In terms of compensation, that means a lower compensation at the outset, but more job security and greater compensation and benefits as time goes by, the greater compensation later more than making up for the lower compensation at the outset. I'm not sure if this study's findings reflect less demands by women at the outset or greater appreciation of the paternalistic attitude of the employer. To be clear, I understand that not all employers are paternalistic in this way, and that employees who accept lower compensation at the outset can be stuck with lower compensation for the duration of their employment. A recruit who does a little due diligence should be able to distinguish one from the other.

"that means a lower compensation at the outset, but more job security and greater compensation and benefits as time goes by"

How is that like a father-child relationship?

Because you can't fire tour children, nut tou don't have to pay it. Ir is like the Soviet system, job security, but "they pretend to pay us and we pretend to work".

Mr. Suarez, Miami's mayor, has pointed out recently that communism is a failed ideology.

Mr. Suarez has officially decided to support the nomination of Mr. Eduardo Bolsonaro's as Brazil's ambassador to the United States. After a metting with the promissing politician, Mr. Suarez said he is very impressive. Brazil is seen by Mr. Suarez as a powerful bulwark againat Latin American anti-American communist regimes such as Cuba's and Venezuela's. Mr. Suarez said that Miami's people opposes communism.

Everyone knows that the wage gap disappears when you control for other things like experience, ability, etc.

But how do we convince the cucks? Thats the real question.

akin to journalism Fake News, we have much Fake Economic News.

why would an imagined 'gender wage gap in online European labor' be of any genuine economic significance (?)

just who would act upon such information from the study? Nobody.

the claimed "empirical evidence for a statistically significant 4% gender wage gap" is absurd as an objective measure of that overall population under study, and the margin of error is easily +- 10%

If the 4% is statistically significant (at 5%, probably), then the margin of error (at 5%) cannot be larger than 4%...

These comments don't make sense. Statistical significance is scaled by the standard errors of the estimates and don't have anything to do with what y'all mention in this case.

So file under much ado about nothing? Women are simple more price competitive than men so that explains to observed differences? (That does see consistent with a comment Natalie Portman made a few years back about her compesation in one of the movies she stared in. Basically, it was not worth fighting for more, she was getting plenty.)

Here’s a theme song for feminists complaining about how women don’t get paid enough:

Gotta Give Me Some

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oThwrtMaH9c

The band here is actually run by the woman playing the trumpet.

Oops, I got the wrong link. Here's the right link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XigSlWve_A0

It's very bold of them to say that the problem proved to be non-existent. How are they going to rustle up their next research grants?

No "climate scientist" would be so naive.

How does/would this translate (or vice versa) to Kay Hymowitz's preferred metric "gender hours gap"?

How much do "wage parity" notions undercut the competitive advantage female workers continue to enjoy (as long as they maintain "skills parity")?

Serious question: I am not completely familiar with the current literature on this topic, but the 4% gap that is explained by negotiating willingness seems to be exactly what everyone who thinks hard about this topic knows. That, and the fact that women make more in some areas is exactly what this paper finds. So this is perfectly in line with the literature.

Did the study include all those Craigslist-type ads offering thousands for women to donate their eggs or rent themselves out as surrogate moms?

Comments for this post are closed