“Firming Up Inequality”
Published version of a preprint
Abstract
We use a massive, matched employer-employee database for the United States to analyze the contribution of firms to the rise in earnings inequality from 1978 to 2013. We find that one-third of the rise in the variance of (log) earnings occurred within firms, whereas two-thirds of the rise occurred due to a rise in the dispersion of average earnings between firms. However, this rising between-firm variance is not accounted for by the firms themselves but by a widening gap between firms in the composition of their workers. This compositional change can be split into two roughly equal parts: high-wage workers became increasingly likely to work in high-wage firms (i.e., sorting increased), and high-wage workers became increasingly likely to work with each other (i.e., segregation rose). In contrast, we do not find a rise in the variance of firm-specific pay once we control for the worker composition in firms. Finally, we find that two-thirds of the rise in the within-firm variance of earnings occurred within mega (10,000+ employee) firms, which saw a particularly large increase in the variance of earnings compared with smaller firms.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The fissuring of the workplace has been associated with a rising correlation of firm wage effects and person effects (skills) that accounts for a significant portion of the increase in U.S. wage inequality since 1980.
“The fissuring of the workplace has been associated with a rising correlation of firm wage effects and person effects (skills) that accounts for a significant portion of the increase in U.S. wage inequality since 1980 (Song et al., 2019).”
From The Fall of the Labor Share and the Rise of Superstar Firms* (2020) · cites this paper as Song et al., 2019
Cites
Skills, Tasks and Technologies: Implications for Employment and Earnings
Acemoglu, D., & Autor, D. (2011) · Handbook of Labor Economics · doi:10.1016/s0169-7218(11)02410-5 · Cited by 3,799 · see citing works
Technical change, inequality, and the labor market
Acemoglu, D. (2002) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.40.1.7 · Cited by 1,767 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Fall of the Labor Share and the Rise of Superstar Firms*
Autor, D., Dorn, D., Katz, L. F., Patterson, C., & Van Reenen, J. (2020) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1093/qje/qjaa004 · Cited by 2,206 · see citing works
The diffusion of new technologies
Kalyani, A., Bloom, N., Carvalho, M., Hassan, T., Lerner, J., & Tahoun, A. (2025) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1093/qje/qjaf002 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Self-citationWalras–Bowley Lecture: Market Power and Wage Inequality
Deb, S., Eeckhout, J., Patel, A., & Warren, L. (2024) · Econometrica · doi:10.3982/ecta21157 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
- Authors
- Song, J., Price, D. J., Guvenen, F., Bloom, N., & von Wachter, T.
- Affiliations
- United States Social Security Administration (US)
- University of Toronto (CA)
- University of Minnesota (US)
- National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
- University of California, Los Angeles, and National Bureau of Economic Research
- ORCID
- Bloom, Nicholas
- Venue
- The Quarterly Journal of Economics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2018-10-25
- Volume
- 134
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-50
- ISSN
- 0033-5533 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-4650
- OpenAlex
- W2146057620
- Cited by
- 674
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 77 · 2025: 120 · 2024: 104 · 2023: 78 · 2022: 92 · 2021: 93 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 72.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- The Quarterly Journal of Economics (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Economic and Social Research Council (ES/M010341/1)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Labor market dynamics and wage inequality
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Historical Economic and Social Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Income, Poverty, and Inequality
- Keywords
- wage inequality, worker sorting, segregation, firm size, employer-employee data
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review