Are temporary work agencies stepping stones into regular employment?

Table 10 cDiD coefficient estimates corresponding to Figure 4

Percentage change in earnings
	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)
Variables	Full sample	Women	Men	Non-western immigrants
Treatment × 1999	-0.101	-0.135	-0.059	-0.844***
	(0.081)	(0.137)	(0.100)	(0.277)
Treatment × 2000	-0.028	-0.059	-0.009	-0.133
	(0.077)	(0.131)	(0.095)	(0.248)
Treatment × 2002	0.816***	0.954***	0.746***	1.158***
	(0.058)	(0.117)	(0.063)	(0.182)
Treatment × 2003	0.383***	0.467***	0.342***	0.568***
	(0.065)	(0.125)	(0.075)	(0.203)
Treatment × 2004	0.292***	0.481***	0.201**	0.317
	(0.075)	(0.130)	(0.088)	(0.193)
Treatment × 2005	0.119*	0.172	0.082	0.368*
	(0.072)	(0.125)	(0.087)	(0.207)
Treatment × 2006	0.074	0.041	0.078	0.161
	(0.068)	(0.132)	(0.075)	(0.177)
Treatment × 2007	0.256***	0.274**	0.228***	0.574***
	(0.061)	(0.111)	(0.072)	(0.190)
Treatment × 2008	0.177***	0.298***	0.091	0.364**
	(0.060)	(0.108)	(0.071)	(0.179)
Observations	28,891	7,431	21,460	2,443
R-squared	0.219	0.193	0.256	0.274
Control variables	YES	YES	YES	YES

Robust standard errors in parentheses.
*** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1.
Control variables ( X_i,t ): Age, number of kids over age groups and dummies for: region of birth, year of arrival, educational orientation, social welfare benefit received current year and level, and a linear time trend.
Standard errors were clustered on individual level to account for possible serial correlation.