Table 3 The immigration impact on native wages and employment
From: How do rigid labor markets absorb immigration? Evidence from France
| Â | Monthly wage | Hours worked | Empl. rate to LF | Empl. rate to pop | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Â | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | ||||
| Â | OLS | IV | OLS | IV | OLS | IV | OLS | IV |
| Â | A. All workers | |||||||
A1. Basic regression | 0.09 (0.55) | −0.02 (−0.06) | −0.02 (−0.26) | 0.03 (0.27) | −0.37*** (−2.88) | −0.62*** (−2.69) | −0.33** (−2.41) | −0.85*** (−2.63) |
| Â | B. Workers with indefinite-term contracts | |||||||
B1. Basic regression | 0.19 (1.18) | 0.17 (0.63) | −0.02 (−0.33) | 0.09 (0.83) | −0.68** (−2.60) | −1.10** (−2.43) | −0.63** (−2.39) | −1.30** (−2.44) |
B2. Log of natives as additional regressor | 0.15 (1.06) | −0.11 (−0.48) | −0.04 (−0.56) | −0.03 (−0.37) | −0.64** (−2.48) | −0.82* (−1.82) | −0.59** (−2.23) | −0.95** (−2.03) |
B3. Exp. between 10 and 35 years | 0.21 (0.84) | 0.01 (0.08) | −0.20* (−2.19) | −0.02 (−0.13) | −0.15 (−0.31) | −0.81** (−2.08) | −0.21 (−0.42) | −0.80** (−2.14) |
B4. log(M jkt /N jkt ) instead of p jkt | 0.01 (0.65) | 0.02 (0.63) | −0.00 (−0.34) | 0.01 (0.85) | −0.06*** (−3.14) | −0.12** (−2.45) | −0.06** (−2.62) | −0.14** (−2.41) |
| Â | C. Workers with fixed-term contracts | |||||||
C1. Basic regression | −0.75* (−2.05) | −0.94* (−1.83) | −0.04 (−0.24) | −0.43** (−2.02) | 0.42 (0.48) | 1.61 (1.44) | 0.39 (0.44) | 1.28 (1.12) |
C2. Log of natives as additional regressor | −0.97** (−2.23) | −1.21** (−2.30) | −0.09 (−0.41) | −0.51** (−2.03) | 0.51 (0.57) | 1.90 (1.63) | 0.53 (0.60) | 1.69 (1.39) |
C3. Exp. between 10 and 35 years | −1.97*** (−3.48) | −1.76** (−2.51) | −0.82** (−2.78) | −1.15** (−2.10) | −1.72 (−1.34) | 2.42 (1.14) | −1.77 (−1.38) | 2.43 (1.14) |
C4. log(M jkt /N jkt ) instead of p jkt | −0.05* (−1.82) | −0.10* (−1.79) | 0.00 (0.06) | −0.05* (−1.89) | −0.03 (−0.44) | 0.17 (1.43) | −0.03 (−0.46) | 0.14 (1.12) |