Union wage premium by demographic group, 2016
Union premium* | ||
---|---|---|
Demographic group | Dollars | Percent |
All | 0.83 | 11.7% |
Men | 1.72 | 15.1% |
Women | 0.41 | 8.1% |
White | 0.40 | 9.6% |
Men | 1.33 | 13.2% |
Women | (0.03) | 5.6% |
Black | 1.56 | 14.7% |
Men | 1.68 | 15.8% |
Women | 1.74 | 14.0% |
Hispanic | 3.92 | 21.8% |
Men | 5.52 | 26.7% |
Women | 1.97 | 14.9% |
Asian | 0.45 | 10.9% |
Men | (0.36) | 8.7% |
Women | 1.61 | 13.1% |
New immigrants (less than 10 years) | ||
Men | 0.75 | 15.0% |
Women | 2.80 | 17.1% |
Other immigrants (more than 10 years) | ||
Men | 1.66 | 14.7% |
Women | 0.35 | 7.8% |
* Regression-adjusted hourly wage advantage of being in a union, controlling for experience, education, region, industry, occupation, race/ethnicity, and marital status. Being in a union measured as Union member or covered by a collective bargaining agreement.
Note: “Union premium” values are the coefficients on union in a model of log hourly wages with controls for education, experience as a quartic, marital status, region, industry (12) and occupation (9), race/ethnicity, and gender where appropriate. For this analysis we only use observations that do not have imputed wages because the imputation process does not take union status into account and therefore biases the union premium toward zero. See Hirsch (2004). Race/ethnicity categories are mutually exclusive (i.e., white non-Hispanic, black non-Hispanic, and Hispanic any race). Sample excludes observations with imputed wage data.
Data source: EPI analysis of Current Population Survey Outgoing Rotation Group microdata and Hirsch (2004) http://www2.gsu.edu/~ecobth/PaperReprints/UnionWageEffects.pdf
Previous chart: « CEO compensation, CEO-to-worker compensation ratio, and stock prices, 1965–2015 (2015 dollars)
Next chart: Hourly wages by wage percentile, 2000–2016 (2016 dollars) »