Since the 1970s, corporate restructuring has shifted more and more workers into workplaces substantially reliant on outside corporate buyers. During the same period, wages for U.S. workers have stagnated. Standard theories of wage determination allow bargaining power to affect wages within companies, but assume that competitive pricing allocates resources between different companies. I extend organizational theories of wage determination to between-organization interactions and I predict that powerful buyers can demand decreases in suppliers’ wages. Panel data on publicly traded companies shows that dependence on large buyers decreases suppliers’ wages and accounts for 10% of the decline in wage growth in nonfinancial firms since the 1970s. Instrumental variables analysis of mergers among buyers confirms that wage decreases result from strengthened buyer power. These findings document how networked production grew in tandem with consolidation among large buyers. The spread of unequal bargaining relations between corporate buyers and their suppliers slowed wage growth for workers.
Research on wage inequality has neglected the role consumers play in shaping the wage structure. This paper considers the consequences of the US economy’s increasing reliance on demand from high-income consumers. Unlike the mass consumers that defined the post-WWII US economy, high-income consumers pay a premium for high-quality and high-status products. These distinctive spending patterns mean that high-income consumers can increase segmentation between up-market and down-market producers and generate inequality among up-market producers. Vertical differentiation between employers serving different consumers thus underlies new types of industrial segmentation and dualism. Using input-output tables to link consumer expenditure and wage surveys, I implement variance function regression to find that industries more dependent on high-income consumers have greater wage inequality. This analysis identifies a new structural source of wage inequality not considered in previous research: the increasingly segmented composition of consumer demand reproduces wage inequality.
Amid the long decline of US unions, research on union wage effects has struggled with selection problems and inadequate theory. I draw on the sociology of labor to argue that unions use non-market sources of power to pressure companies into raising wages. This theory of union power implies a new test of union wage effects: does union activism have an effect on wages that is not reducible to workers’ market position? Two institutional determinants of union activity are used to empirically isolate the wage effect of union activism from labor market conditions: increased union revenue from investment shocks and increased union activity leading up to union officer elections. Instrumental variable analysis of panel data from the Department of Labor shows that a 1 percent increase in union spending increases a proxy for union members’ wages between 0.15 percent and 0.30 percent. These wage effects are larger in years of active collective bargaining, and when unions increase spending in ways that could pressure companies. The results indicate that non-market sources of union power can affect workers’ wages and that even in a period of labor weakness unions still play a role in setting wages for their members.
In the following chapter, I first briefly outline the history of economic inequality. Recent research has used new kinds of evidence—from historical social tables and tax data, to skeleton height measurements and village surveys—to sketch the longue durée of economic inequality. This historical trajectory introduces the broad patterns of economic inequality, which sociological research has attempted to explain. Next, I introduce five classic sociological explanations for the persistence of economic inequality: Marxist, Weberian, Veblenian, Functionalist, and institutionalist. These core sociological explanations emphasize different types of inequality (i.e. between big class groups, or as a rank ordering), and examine different mechanisms through which inequality is perpetuated. Overall, they delineate the main sociological approaches to the study of economic inequality. Finally, I use these sociological explanations to frame and summarize research on rising US earnings inequality, which has been the main empirical site of recent attempts to explain variation in economic inequality. I also briefly consider research on the effects of inequality, again in the context of rising US wage inequality. Throughout these last two sections, I emphasize ways that the five core sociological explanations for inequality have shaped recent empirical research. In doing so, I identify the distinctively sociological contributions to the analysis of economic inequality.
During the period of rising U.S. earnings inequality, many employers revived management practices in which complex and routine tasks are divided between higher- and lower-paid jobs. This article theorizes this process as job distillation and distinguishes it from other sources of increasing organization-level earnings inequality. To test the earnings effects of job distillation, panel models are fit using linked employer-employee data on employees working for U.S. labor unions. These administrative data include a rare direct measure of task content, which is validated via a survey of union representatives. Variance function regression shows that job distillation increases inequality within organizations. This effect is driven by separating routine and complex tasks across jobs and by lowering earnings as jobs are simplified with respect to tasks. These findings demonstrate that classic concerns in the sociology of work should be brought back into the study of inequality. The distribution of earnings hinges on the allocation of tasks into jobs.