Privatization of refuse removal and labor costs
- 43 Downloads
We examine the labor-cost savings associated with privatization by comparing earnings and employment trends of public and private sector refuse workers. Findings suggest that high union earnings for workers in the public sector are a source of labor-cost savings in the refuse industry. Evidence on job changers does not indicate that earnings for this group of workers are a compensating differential. Metropolitan area employment findings suggest that municipalities are less likely to use union refuse workers in the public sector when a relatively small percentage of area residents belong to a union.
KeywordsPublic Sector Refuse Collection Employment Share Union Worker Nonunion Worker
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Dubin, Jeffrey and Peter Navarro. “How Markets for Impure Public Goods Organize: The Case of Household Refuse Collection.”Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 4 (Fall 1988): 217–41.Google Scholar
- Edwards, Franklin R. and Barbara J. Stevens. “The Provision of Municipal Sanitation Services by Private Firms: An Empirical Analysis of the Efficiency of Alternative Market Structures and Regulatory Arrangements.”Journal of Industrial Economics 37 (December 1978): 133–47.Google Scholar
- Kemper, Peter and John M. Quigley.The Economics of Refuse Collection. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger Publishing, 1976.Google Scholar
- Kodrzycki, Yolanda K. “Privatization of Local Services: Lessons for New England.”New England Economic Review (May-June 1994): 31-46.Google Scholar
- —. “Comparing Public and Private Sector Productive Efficiency: An Analysis of Eight Activities.”National Productivity Review 2 (Autumn 1984): 43–72.Google Scholar