Collective Bargaining and Within‐firm Wage Dispersion in Spain

Domínguez, Juan Francisco Canal; Gutiérrez, César Rodríguez

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8543.2004.00326.x

Cited by 32 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Canal Domínguez and Rodriguez Gutiérrez (2004) analyse the effect of firm bargaining on within-establishment wage dispersion in Spain. They find that signing a collective agreement at the firm level tends to reduce wage dispersion; however, other characteristics of the firms covered by SEB, such as their size and average workers' education level, more than outweigh this effect, so that on the whole these firms show greater internal wage dispersion.…”

Section: Centralization Of Bargaining and Wage Dispersion: Previous Ementioning

confidence: 99%

Collective Bargaining and Wage Dispersion in Europe

Dell’Aringa

Pagani

2007

Brit J Industrial Rel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The level at which collective bargaining takes place is usually considered important in determining wage levels and wage inequalities. Two different situations are considered: a first in which bargaining is only 'multi-employer', and a second in which it is 'multi-level', in the sense that workers can be covered by both a 'multi-employer' and a 'single-employer' contract at the same time. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the impact of these different institutional settings on pay dispersion. The study is carried out using the European Structure of Earnings Survey, which is a large dataset containing detailed matched employer-employee information for the year 1995. The countries analysed are Italy, Belgium and Spain. The empirical results generally show that wages of workers covered by only a 'multi-employer' contract are no more compressed than those of workers covered by both 'multi-employer' and 'single-employer' contracts. This implies that where workers are not covered by single-employer bargaining, they receive wage supplements paid unilaterally by their employers. Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd/London School of Economics 2007.

show abstract

Section: Centralization Of Bargaining and Wage Dispersion: Previous Ementioning

confidence: 99%

Collective Bargaining and Wage Dispersion in Europe

Dell’Aringa

Pagani

2007

Brit J Industrial Rel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Overall, the final outcome of company bargaining on the withinfirm wage dispersion seems ambiguous: Dell'Aringa and Lucifora (1994b) found no difference in within-firm wage dispersion between firms covered only by a multi-employer agreement and those covered additionally by a company agreement. Conversely, Dominguez and Rodriguez-Gutiérez (2004) found that company bargaining reduces the within-firm wage dispersion in Spain. They attribute this result to the action of unions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wages and the Bargaining Regime under Multi-level Bargaining: Belgium, Denmark and Spain

Plasman

Rusinek

Rycx

2007

European Journal of Industrial Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

■ We use a harmonized matched employer-employee dataset to study the impact of the collective bargaining regime on wages in the manufacturing sector in three countries with a multi-level system of bargaining: Belgium, Denmark and Spain. Single-employer bargaining has a positive effect both on wage levels and on wage dispersion in Belgium and in Denmark. In Spain, it also increases wage levels but reduces wage dispersion. Our interpretation is that in Belgium and Denmark, single-employer bargaining is used to adapt pay to the specific needs of the firm while, in Spain it is mainly used by trade unions in order to compress the wage distribution.

show abstract

“…Indeed, wage bargaining occurs at different levels: national, sectoral, regional and/or local. Several studies have shown that the level of collective wage bargaining has an impact on the dispersion of wages within and between establishments (Dell'Aringa and Lucifora, 1994; Dominguez and Gutierrez, 2004;Plasman et al, 2005;Card and de la Rica, 2006;Dell'Aringa and Pagani, 2007). However, there is no consensus about the sign of this effect.…”

Section: Theorymentioning

confidence: 86%