Abstract
Using data from O∗NET, we construct two measures of an occupation’s potential exposure to social distancing measures: (i) the ability to conduct that job from home and (ii) the degree of physical proximity to others the job requires. After validating these measures with comparable measures from ATUS as well as realized work-from-home rates during the pandemic, we employ the measures to study the characteristics of workers in these types of jobs. Our results show that workers in low-work-from-home and high-physical-proximity jobs are more economically vulnerable across various measures constructed from the CPS and PSID: they are less educated, of lower income, have fewer liquid assets relative to income, and are more likely renters. Consistent with the idea that high physical proximity or low work-from-home occupations were more exposed to the Coronavirus shock, we show that the types of workers predicted to be employed in them experienced greater declines in employment during the pandemic. We conclude by comparing the aggregate employment losses in these occupations to their employment losses in the 2008 recession, and find evidence that these occupations were disproportionately exposed to the pandemic shock, and not just comprised of more cyclically sensitive workers.
Supplementary Information
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10888-021-09487-6.
Keywords: Coronavirus, Employment, Inequality, Social policy, Occupations, Demographics
Electronic supplementary material
Footnotes
Thanks to Gianluca Violante and Greg Kaplan for making available their codes. Our measures at the three digit occupation level are available on our websites. The views expressed in this study are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Federal Reserve System.
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Contributor Information
Simon Mongey, Email: mongey@uchicago.edu.
Laura Pilossoph, Email: pilossoph@gmail.com.
Alexander Weinberg, Email: weinberga@uchicago.edu.
References
- Adams-Prassl A, Boneva T, Golin M, Rauh C. Inequality in the impact of the coronavirus shock: Evidence from real time surveys. J. Public Econ. 2020;189(C):S0047272720301092. [Google Scholar]
- Akbarpour, M., Cook, C., Marzuoli, A., Mongey, S., Nagaraj, A., Saccarola, M., Tebaldi, P., Vasserman, S., Yang, H.: Socioeconomic network heterogeneity ad pandemic policy response, Working Paper 27374, National Bureau of Economic Research (2020)
- Alexander, D., Karger, E.: Do stay-at-home orders cause people to stay home? effects of stay-at-home orders on consumer behavior. Technical Report (2020)
- Baqaee, D., Farhi, E., Mina, M., Stock, J.: Evaluating the economics and epidemiology of strategies for reopening the economy (2020)
- Baqaee, D., Farhi, E., Mina, M.J., Stock, J.H.: Reopening scenarios. Working Paper 27244, National Bureau of Economic Research (2020)
- Bick, A., Blandin, A., Mertens, K.: Work from Home After the COVID-19 Outbreak, Working Papers 2017, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (2020)
- Chodorow-Reich G. The Employment Effects of Credit Market Disruptions: Firm-level Evidence from the 2008-9 Financial Crisis. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2014;129(1):1–59. doi: 10.1093/qje/qjt031. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Dingel, J., Neiman, B.: How many jobs can be done at home? BFI White Paper, Becker Friedman Institute (2020)
- Goolsbee A, Syverson C. Fear, lockdown, and diversion: Comparing drivers of pandemic economic decline 2020. J. Public Econ. 2021;193:104311. doi: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Gottlieb C, Grobovšek J, Poschke M, Saltiel F. Working from home in developing countries. Eur. Econ. Rev. 2021;133:103679. doi: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2021.103679. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Heathcote J, Perri F, Violante GL. Unequal We Stand: An Empirical Analysis of Economic Inequality in the United States: 1967-2006. Rev. Econ. Dyn. 2010;13(1):15–51. doi: 10.1016/j.red.2009.10.010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Hensvik L, Le Barbanchon T, Rathelot R. Job search during the covid-19 crisis. J. Public Econ. 2021;194:104349. doi: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104349. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Kaplan, G., Moll, B., Violante, G.L.: The great lockdown and the big stimulus: Tracing the pandemic possibility frontier for the U.S., Working Paper 27794, National Bureau of Economic Research (2020)
- Kaplan G, Violante GL. A model of the consumption response to fiscal stimulus payments. Econometrica. 2014;82(4):1199–1239. doi: 10.3982/ECTA10528. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Kaplan G, Violante GL, Weidner J. The Wealthy Hand-to-Mouth. Brook. Pap. Econ. Act. 2014;45(1 (Spring):77–153. doi: 10.1353/eca.2014.0002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Leibovici, F., Santacrue, A.M., Famiglietti, M.: Social distancing and contact-intensive occupations, Technical Report, St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank - On the Economy Blog (2020)
- Lekfuangfu, W.N., Piyapromdee, S., Porapakkarm, P., Wasi, N.: On Covid-19: New Implications of Job Task Requirements and Spouse’s Occupational Sorting, CReAM Discussion Paper Series 2012, Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration (CReAM), Department of Economics, University College London (2020)
- Tomer, A., Kane, J.W.: How to protect essential workers during covid-19, Brookings Report, Brookings Institute (2020)
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.