IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/vuw/vuwecf/18625.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Job matching, family gap and fertility choice

Author

Listed:
  • Chang, Chia-Ying
  • Laing, Derek
  • Wang, Ping

Abstract

This paper concentrates on the role of job matching frictions in influencing the interactions between fertility choice and wage offers and show that job market frictions are a crucial factor in wage differentials among female workers. The goals of this paper are to examine how the home-stay alternative and asymmetric market frictions influence this wage differential and whether the well documented negative correlation between fertility choice and female earnings still holds in the face of life-cycle choices. To address these questions, we develop a search-theoretic model that incorporates fertility and job decisions and assume that the workers with children face a lower job matching rate and a higher job quitting rate relative to the rates faced by the workers without children. As a result, we find that a wider wage differential is associated with more asymmetric market frictions and that the wage differential has a positive effect from output differential, a positive scale effect from the output of mothers and a negative effect from the utility from staying home. The wage differential is positively correlated with both fertility and home-stay rates and negatively correlated with market thickness and matching technology. Furthermore, by having both fertility and home-stay choices endogenously determined, we can show that a tighter market will enhance the fertility rate and the home-stay rate and a better job matching technology would not only increase the home-stay rate but decrease the fertility rate. In general equilibrium, the effects of both market tightness and the matching technology on the wage differential are indeterminate. These results indicate that the home-stay choice actually gives workers with children not only an alternative but also the power to negotiate higher wages. This shrinks the wage differential. Finally, the result that a higher fertility rate enlarges the wage differential also implies a negative relationship between the fertility rate and the earnings of workers with children. This result is consistent with standard empirical findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Chang, Chia-Ying & Laing, Derek & Wang, Ping, 2012. "Job matching, family gap and fertility choice," Working Paper Series 18625, Victoria University of Wellington, School of Economics and Finance.
    • Handle: RePEc:vuw:vuwecf:18625
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ir.wgtn.ac.nz/handle/123456789/18625
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sanders Korenman & David Neumark, 1992. "Marriage, Motherhood, and Wages," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 27(2), pages 233-255.
    2. Rosenzweig, Mark R & Wolpin, Kenneth I, 1980. "Life-Cycle Labor Supply and Fertility: Causal Inferences from Household Models," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 88(2), pages 328-348, April.
    3. Ward, Michael P & Butz, William P, 1980. "Completed Fertility and Its Timing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 88(5), pages 917-940, October.
    4. Rosenzweig, Mark R & Schultz, T Paul, 1985. "The Demand for and Supply of Births: Fertility and Its Life Cycle Consequences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(5), pages 992-1015, December.
    5. Waldfogel, Jane, 1995. "The Price of Motherhood: Family Status and Women's Pay in a Young British Cohort," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(4), pages 584-610, October.
    6. Wilbert van der Klaauw, 1996. "Female Labour Supply and Marital Status Decisions: A Life-Cycle Model," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 63(2), pages 199-235.
    7. Pedro Mira & Namkee Ahn, 2002. "A note on the changing relationship between fertility and female employment rates in developed countries," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 15(4), pages 667-682.
    8. Gary S. Becker & Robert J. Barro, 1988. "A Reformulation of the Economic Theory of Fertility," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 103(1), pages 1-25.
    9. José María Da Rocha & Luisa Fuster, 2006. "Why Are Fertility Rates And Female Employment Ratios Positively Correlated Across O.E.C.D. Countries?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 47(4), pages 1187-1222, November.
    10. Waldfogel, Jane, 1998. "The Family Gap for Young Women in the United States and Britain: Can Maternity Leave Make a Difference?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(3), pages 505-545, July.
    11. Jane Waldfogel, 1998. "Understanding the "Family Gap" in Pay for Women with Children," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(1), pages 137-156, Winter.
    12. Catalina Amuedo-Dorantes & Jean Kimmel, 2005. "“The Motherhood Wage Gap for Women in the United States: The Importance of College and Fertility Delay”," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 17-48, September.
    13. Alícia Adserà, 2004. "Changing fertility rates in developed countries. The impact of labor market institutions," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 17(1), pages 17-43, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chang, Chia-Ying & Laing, Derek & Wang, Ping, 2012. "Job matching, family gap and fertility choice," Working Paper Series 2069, Victoria University of Wellington, School of Economics and Finance.
    2. Molina, José Alberto & Montuenga, Víctor M., 2008. "The Motherhood Wage Penalty in a Mediterranean Country: The Case of Spain," IZA Discussion Papers 3574, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Arnaud Dupuy & Daniel Fernandez-Kranz, 2011. "International differences in the family gap in pay: the role of labour market institutions," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 413-438.
    4. Tarja Viitanen, 2014. "The motherhood wage gap in the UK over the life cycle," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 259-276, June.
    5. José Molina & Víctor Montuenga, 2009. "The Motherhood Wage Penalty in Spain," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 237-251, September.
    6. Nizalova, Olena Y. & Sliusarenko, Tamara & Shpak, Solomiya, 2016. "The motherhood wage penalty in times of transition," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 56-75.
    7. Eliane El Badaoui & Eleonora Matteazzi, 2014. "To be a Mother, or not to be? Career and Wage Ladder in Italy and the UK," Working Papers hal-04141331, HAL.
    8. Robert M. Sauer & Christopher Taber, 2021. "Understanding women's wage growth using indirect inference with importance sampling," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(4), pages 453-473, June.
    9. Luis Gamboa & Blanca Zuluaga, 2013. "Is There a Motherhood Penalty? Decomposing the Family Wage Gap in Colombia," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 421-434, December.
    10. Anna Jędrzychowska & Ilona Kwiecień & Ewa Poprawska, 2020. "The Motherhood Pension Gap in a Defined Contribution Pension Scheme—the Case of Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-18, May.
    11. Sara Cools & Marte Strøm, 2016. "Parenthood wage penalties in a double income society," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 391-416, June.
    12. Sauer, Robert M. & Taber, Christopher, 2017. "Indirect Inference with Importance Sampling: An Application to Women's Wage Growth," IZA Discussion Papers 11004, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Gafni Dalit & Siniver Erez, 2018. "The Motherhood Penalty: Is It a Wage-Dependent Family Decision?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 18(4), pages 1-18, October.
    14. Lia Pacelli & Silvia Pasqua & Claudia Villosio, 2007. "What Does the Stork Bring to Women’s Working Career?," LABORatorio R. Revelli Working Papers Series 58, LABORatorio R. Revelli, Centre for Employment Studies.
    15. Andres Erosa & Luisa Fuster & Diego Restuccia, 2002. "Fertility Decisions and Gender Differences in Labor Turnover, Employment, and Wages," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 5(4), pages 856-891, October.
    16. Del Boca, Daniela & Locatelli, Marilena, 2006. "The Determinants of Motherhood and Work Status: A Survey," IZA Discussion Papers 2414, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Doepke, Matthias & Hannusch, Anne & Kindermann, Fabian & Tertilt, Michèle, 2022. "The Economics of Fertility: A New Era," IZA Discussion Papers 15224, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Virginia Sanchez Marcos & Ezgi Kaya & Nezih Guner, 2017. "Labor Market Frictions and Lowest Low Fertility," 2017 Meeting Papers 1015, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    19. Massimiliano Bratti & Konstantinos Tatsiramos, 2012. "The effect of delaying motherhood on the second childbirth in Europe," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 25(1), pages 291-321, January.
    20. Frühwirth-Schnatter, Sylvia & Pamminger, Christoph & Weber, Andrea & Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf, 2014. "When Is The Best Time To Give Birth?," Economics Series 308, Institute for Advanced Studies.

    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:vuw:vuwecf:18625. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Library Technology Services (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/egvuwnz.html .

    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.