Abstract
Abstract. Labor market segmentation theory calls into question the neoclassical theory of compensating wage differentials, which posits that workers are compensated for job‐related risk. From the perspective of segmentation theory, one would expect secondary workers to experience greater risk on the job with less likelihood of compensation. An empirical examination of worker samples, using discriminant analysis to construct primary and secondary subsamples, reveals that the wages of primary workers vary directly with the probability of job related death, injury and disease. No such relationship holds for secondary workers, who are also shown to experience significantly higher levels of job related risk and disamenity than their primary counterparts.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
