No abstract

No abstract

In recent years, the popular press has led us to believe that downsizing and mergers are throwing unprecedented numbers of Americans out of secure jobs. In this paper, we survey current research that addresses these concerns, reconciling the sometimes disparate results of papers examining job tenure and separations, exploring the consequences of involuntary job loss, and reviewing research on trends in part-time, temporary, and contingent employment. There is no evidence of a dramatic change in job security over the last two decades. The various studies do not point to consistent losses in job security for any particular demographic group.

Levinson (1998) finds that large states with lenient balanced budget rules experience less cyclical variability. He concludes that state fiscal policy works. However, Levinson's finding is not robust to alternative methods of detrending the data. In addition, the 1984 Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (ACIR) analysis of state budget rules used by Levinson (and other researchers) is of questionable merit. Reestimation of Levinson's regressions using budget rule classifications in a U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) study reverses his result. The results from this study suggest that existing empirical work using the ACIR index should be revisited.