IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v22y2006i2p442-458.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulating Wages in Kind: Theory and Evidence from Britain

Author

Listed:
  • Elaine S. Tan

Abstract

Workers in many countries receive part of their wages in kind. The International Labor Organization criticizes this practice by citing the "exploitative" truck system in industrializing Britain, which paid wage advances in cash and company store goods. This article finds that truck did not reduce British wages by as much as is believed, and that employers' ability to earn rents from hiring was limited. Company store premiums are interpreted as the cost of employer credit, and workers benefited from truck because most of the time independent credit cost at least as much. Firms earned rents from riskless loans to employees and avoided holdup by independent outlets at minimal transaction costs. The British truck system was mutually beneficial, and the evidence does not support the call to abolish similar practices today. Copyright 2006, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Elaine S. Tan, 2006. "Regulating Wages in Kind: Theory and Evidence from Britain," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 442-458, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:22:y:2006:i:2:p:442-458
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jleo/ewj013
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elaine Tan, 2011. "Scrip as private money, monetary monopoly, and the rent‐seeking state in Britain," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 64(1), pages 237-255, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:22:y:2006:i:2:p:442-458. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jleo .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.