PDF《Gerhard Bosch》

1 of this article presents the main findings on on the level and trends of low wage work and the principal characteristics of the low wage workers in each country. Section

2 analyzes the various pay setting institutions which determine pay in the six economies. Section

3 reviews the effect of national institutions that affect the labour supply. Section

4 1 The comparative studies were presented in Bosch and Weinkopf (2008), Caroli and Gautié (2008), Lloyd, Mason and Mayhew (2008), Salverda, van Klaveren and van der Meer (2008), and Westergaard-Nielsen (2008). A comparative volume summarizes and extends on these five studies and the earlier US study (XXXXXXXXX). This article is based on this comparative volume which is based on the work of

26 researchers from six countries.

3 examines the question if there is a trade-off between employment and low pay. Section

5 draws some conclusions on the impact of institutions on the level and development of low wage work. 1. Incidence of low pay The low pay threshold below which wages are considered to be low has been defined as less than two thirds of the national median of gross hourly wages. This approach avoids the the difficulties of defining an absolute level of low pay that is genuily comparable across all six countries and offers the practical advantage of beeing endorsed by the OECD and the EU and adopted in many datasets. The six countries differ greatly in the incidence of low pay (Table 1). According to our coordinated analysis of separate national household surveys the United States has the highest share of low wage work with about 25%. Germany contrary to widespread expectations because it was known for its low income differentiation in the past was the country with the next highest share of low wage work (22.7%) followed closely by the United Kindom. France (11.1%) and Denmark (8.5%) had substantially smaller low-wage shares and the Netherlands (17.6%) fell about midway between these two groups of countries. Table 1: Rate of low pay among employees* and working-age population, %, 2003-2005 Denmark France Germany Nether- lands United Kingdom United States % employees below low pay threshold, head count 8.5 11.1 22.7** 17.6 21.7 25.0 % population below low pay threshold, head count 6.2 6.4 11.8 11.2 13.6 16.3 Year

2005 2005

2005 2005

2005 2003-05 Source CCP / IDA INSEE, Enquête Emploi German Socio- Economic Panel CBS, Loonstruc- tuuronder- zoek NSO, Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings BLS, Current Population Survey *) Excluding apprentices in Denmark and Germany. **) 22.0% if East and West are treated separately **) 22.0% if East and West are treated separately. Source: Mason and Salverda

2009 4 The evolution of the share of low wage work was as different as the incidence. The US level was already high in the 1970'

s and varies since then with the economic cycle. Over the same period the shares in Denmark were constant in Denmark and falling in France. The United Kingdom and the Netherlands saw large increases in the 80'

s and 90'

s, with no further increases in the 2000s. In Germany the low wage share was flat or falling before the unification but from the mid-1990s, the Germany low wage share increased steadily even in the recent economic upswing. In contrast to countries with a minimum wage or higher trade union density the wage dispersion extends a long way downward. In

2006 1.9 million workers around ........