为什么职场性骚扰被低报? 报复威胁下外部选项的价值
Why Is Workplace Sexual Harassment Underreported? The Value of Outside Options amid the Threat of Retaliation
American Economic Review · 2021 · [{"name": "Gordon B. Dahl", "affiliation": ["National Bureau of Economic Research", "University of California San Diego"]}, {"name": "Matthew Knepper", "affiliation": []}]
中文摘要
为什么职场性骚扰长期存在少报现象?我们假设,雇主通过威胁报复性解雇来胁迫受害者保持沉默,并通过估计降低劳动者外部选择价值的外部冲击是否会加剧少报现象,来检验这一理论。在温和假设下,正式投诉严重程度的上升表明少报现象有所增加。结合这一洞见与向美国平等就业机会委员会(EEOC)提交指控质量的客观衡量指标,我们进行了两项分析。首先,我们评估在经济衰退期间——此时外部劳动力市场选择受限——劳动者是否更具选择性地报告性骚扰。我们估计,某州—行业月度失业率每上升一个百分点,被EEOC认定为有依据的性骚扰指控比例上升0.5%—0.7%。该效应在男性雇员占比更高的行业以及男性管理者占比更高的机构中被进一步放大。其次,我们检验不那么慷慨的失业保险(UI)待遇是否会为职场性骚扰受害者保持沉默创造经济激励。我们发现,大衰退后北卡罗来纳州失业保险(UI)项目削减50%,性骚扰指控的选择性相应上升超过30%。NBER工作论文系列的机构订阅用户以及发展中国家居民,可在www.nber.org免费下载本文。
Abstract
Why is workplace sexual harassment chronically underreported? We hypothesize that employers coerce victims into silence through the threat of a retaliatory firing, and test this theory by estimating whether external shocks that reduce the value of a worker's outside options exacerbate underreporting. Under mild assumptions, a rise in the severity of formal complaints is indicative of increased underreporting. Combining this insight with an objective measure of the quality of charges filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), we perform two analyses. First, we assess whether workers report sexual harassment more selectively during recessions, when outside labor market options are limited. We estimate the fraction of sexual harassment charges deemed to have merit by the EEOC increases by 0.5-0.7% for each one percentage point increase in a state-industry's monthly unemployment rate. The effect is amplified in industries employing a larger fraction of men and in establishments with a higher share of male managers. Second, we test whether less generous UI benefits create economic incentives for victims of workplace sexual harassment to remain silent. We find the selectivity of sexual harassment charges increases by more than 30% in response to a 50% cut to North Carolina's Unemployment Insurance (UI) program following the Great Recession.Institutional subscribers to the NBER working paper series, and residents of developing countries may download this paper without additional charge at www.nber.org.
在 ireadpaper 查看全部 →