American Economic Journal:
Applied Economics
ISSN 1945-7782 (Print) | ISSN 1945-7790 (Online)
Biological Gender Differences, Absenteeism, and the Earnings Gap
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics
vol. 1,
no. 1, January 2009
(pp. 183–218)
Abstract
In most countries, women are absent from work more frequently than men. Using personnel data, we find that the absences of women below the age of 45 follow a 28-day cycle, while the absences of men and of women over the age of 45 do not. We interpret this as evidence that the menstrual cycle increases female absenteeism. To investigate the effect on women's earnings, we use a simple model of statistical discrimination. Consistent with the model, we find absenteeism has a more negative effect on men's earnings and this difference declines with seniority. The increased absenteeism induced by the 28-day cycle explains at least 14 percent of the earnings gender differential. (JEL J16, J22, J31)Citation
Ichino, Andrea, and Enrico Moretti. 2009. "Biological Gender Differences, Absenteeism, and the Earnings Gap." American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1 (1): 183–218. DOI: 10.1257/app.1.1.183Additional Materials
JEL Classification
- J16 Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
- J22 Time Allocation and Labor Supply
- J31 Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials
Comment on Ichino and Moretti (2009)
by Jonah E. Rockoff and Mariesa Herrmann
Abstract
In a recent paper, Ichino and Moretti (2009) present evidence from a large Italian bank that much of the gap in absenteeism between women and men can be explained by absences with a 28-day cycle. These cyclical absences are interpreted as an effect of menstruation which can explain 14% of the gender earnings gap. While the health consequences of menstruation are undeniable, the general importance of menstruation in explaining gender gaps in absenteeism and earnings is unclear. In this paper, we show that 28-day cycles do not explain any of the gender gap in absences among teachers in the New York City public schools. Our results suggest that menstruation may not be an important determinant of absences for a large segment of the female labor force and that institutions greatly influence how biological gender differences affect labor market outcomes.