No abstract

Abstract-Using a new data set, this paper gives evidence in support of the intuitive notion that overqualified workers are less satisfied with their jobs and are more likely to quit. However, training time is inversely related to overqualification, which suggests why such seeming mismatches occur and may in fact be optimal.

Empirical research has consistently shown that married men have substantially higher wages, on average, than otherwise similar unmarried men. One commonly cited hypothesis to explain this pattern is that marriage allows one spouse to specialize in market production and the other to specialize in home production, enabling the former-usually the husband-to acquire more market-specific human capital and, ultimately, earn higher wages. The authors test this hypothesis using panel data from the National Survey of Families and Households. The data reveal that married men spent virtually the same amount of time on home production as did single men, albeit on different types of housework. Estimates from a fixed effects wage equation indicate that the male marriage wage premium is not substantially affected by controls for home production activities. Household specialization, the authors conclude, does not appear to have been responsible for the marriage premium in this sample.V irtually all wage regressions including an indicator of marital status find that married men have substantially higher wages than do not-married men, even after controls are added for observable human capital andjob characteristics. The magnitude varies but is quite large, with typical values indicating that married men receive a wage premium of 10-30%. While the empirical evidence of a marriage premium for men is incontrovertible, the precise nature of the relation has not yet been convincingly explained. A leading theory is that specialization within the household

Using a large data set, the authors find that smokers select riskier jobs, but receive less hazard pay than do nonsmokers. Based on estimates using the BLS rate of lost workdays, nonsmokers have an implicit value per injury of $39,017 as compared to $20,469 for smokers. Smokers are injured more often controlling for the job's objective risk and are paid less after such injuries. This evidence is consistent with smokers facing a flatter market offer curve. Smokers and nonsmokers, in effect, are segmented labor market groups with different preferences and different market offer curves.