Journal of Labor Research

, Volume 30, Issue 2, pp 101–119 | Cite as

“Family-Friendly” Fringe Benefits and the Gender Wage Gap

  • Aaron Lowen
  • Paul SicilianEmail author


Evidence suggests a large portion of the gender wage gap is explained by gender occupational segregation. A common hypothesis is that gender differences in preferences or abilities explain this segregation; women may prefer jobs that provide more “family-friendly” fringe benefits. Much of the research provides no direct evidence on gender differences in access to fringe benefits, nor how provision affects wages. Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979, we find that women are more likely to receive family-friendly benefits, but not other types of fringe benefits. We find no evidence that the differences in fringe benefits explain the gender wage gap.


Fringe benefits Gender wage gap Compensating wage differentials National longitudinal study of youth 


  1. Anderson D, Binder M, Krause K (2003) The motherhood wage penalty revisited: experience, heterogeneity, work effort, and work-schedule flexibility. Ind Labor Relat Rev 56:273–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Averett S, Hotchkiss J (1995) The probability of receiving benefits at different hours of work. Am Econ Rev 85:276–280Google Scholar
  3. Baughman R, DiNardi D, Holtz-Eakin D (2003) Productivity and wage effects of “family-friendly” fringe benefits. Int J Manpow 24:247–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bayard K, Hellerstein J, Neumark D, Troske K (2003) New evidence on sex segregation and sex differences in wages from matched employee-employer data. J Labor Econ 21:887–922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berger L, Hill J, Waldfogel J (2005) Maternity leave, early maternal employment and child health and development in the US. Econ J 115:29–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berger L, Waldfogel J (2004) Maternity leave and employment of new mothers in the United States. J Popul Econ 17:331–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown C (1980) Equalizing differences in the labor market. Q J Econ 94:113–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carneiro P, Heckman J, Masterov D (2005) Labor market discrimination and racial differences in premarket factors. J Law Econ 48:1–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carrington W, Troske K (1998) Sex segregation in U.S. manufacturing. Ind Labor Relat Rev 51:445–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dale-Olsen H (2006) Wages, fringe benefits and worker turnover. Labour Econ 13:87–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DeLeire T, Levy H (2004) Worker sorting and the risk of death on the job. J Labor Econ 22:925–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dickens W (1990) Assuming the can opener: hedonic wage estimates and the value of life. NBER Working Paper Series, Working Paper 3446Google Scholar
  13. Duncan G, Holmlund B (1983) Was Adam Smith right after all? another test of the theory of compensating wage differentials. J Labor Econ 1:366–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Filer R (1985) Male–female wage differences: the importance of compensating differentials. Ind Labor Relat Rev 38:426–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Filer R (1986) The role of personality and tastes in determining occupational structure. Ind Labor Relat Rev 39:412–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fullerton H (1999) Labor force projections to 2008: steady growth and changing composition. Mon Labor Rev November:19–32Google Scholar
  17. Gariety B, Shaffer S (2001) Wage differentials associated with flextime. Mon Labor Rev 124:68–75Google Scholar
  18. Glass J, Camarigg V (1992) Gender, parenthood, and job–family compatibility. Am J Sociol 98:131–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Golden L (2001) Flexible work schedules: what are we trading off to get them? Mon Labor Rev 124:50–67Google Scholar
  20. Heckman J, Stixrud J, Urzua S (2006) The effects of cognitive and noncognitive abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior. J Labor Econ 24:441–482Google Scholar
  21. Hwang H, Reed W, Hubbard C (1992) Compensating wage differentials and unobserved productivity. J Polit Econ 100:835–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson N, Provan K (1995) The relationship between work/family benefits and earnings: a test of competing predictions. J Socio-Econ 24:571–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Macpherson D, Hirsch B (1995) Wages and gender composition: why do women's jobs pay less? J Labor Econ 13:426–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McCrate E (2005) Flexible hours, workplace authority, and compensating wage differentials in the US. Fem Econ 11:11–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Olson C (2002) Do workers accept lower wages in exchange for health benefits? J Labor Econ 20:S91–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Oyer P (2005) Salary or benefits? NBER Working Paper Series, Working Paper 11818Google Scholar
  27. Rosen S (1986) The theory of equalizing differences. In: Ashenfelter O, Layard R (eds) Handbook of labor economics, vol 1. North Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  28. Rothstein D (1997) Early career supervisor gender and the labor market outcomes of young women. In: Blau F, Ehrenberg R (eds) Gender and family issues in the workplace. Russell Sage Foundation, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Simon K, Kaestner R (2004) Do minimum wages affect non-wage job attributes? Evidence on fringe benefits. Ind Labor Relat Rev 58:52–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. StataCorp (2007) Stata user’s guide release 10. StataCorp LP, College Station, TXGoogle Scholar
  31. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2005) Workers on flexible and shift schedules in 2004 summary. U.S. Department of Labor, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  32. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2006) Usual weekly earnings of wage and salary workers: second quarter 2006. U.S. Department of Labor, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  33. Waldfogel J (1998) The family gap for young women in the United States and Britain: can maternity leave make a difference? J Labor Econ 16:505–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Grand Valley State UniversityGrand RapidsUSA

Personalised recommendations