This website uses cookies.

By clicking the "Accept" button or continuing to browse our site, you agree to first-party and session-only cookies being stored on your device to enhance site navigation and analyze site performance and traffic. For more information on our use of cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.

« Back to Results

Working for Whom? New Evidence on the Incidence of Independent Contracting

Paper Session

Sunday, Jan. 6, 2019 8:00 AM - 10:00 AM

Hyatt Regency Atlanta, Hanover C
Hosted By: Labor and Employment Relations Association
  • Chair: David Weil, Brandeis University

How Big is the Gig?

Anat Bracha
,
Federal Reserve Bank of Boston
Mary Burke
,
Federal Reserve Bank of Boston

Abstract

This paper presents results from the Survey of Informal Work Participation (SIWP), which probes respondents about their nonstandard, gig, work arrangements on both the extensive and intensive margins, and asks a subset of the questions from the Current Population Survey (CPS) to estimate their official employment status. Focusing on labor-intensive activities, we find that as of 2015, 19% of U.S. adults are gig workers, working the equivalent of over 7 million full-time jobs. However, nonstandard work is not fully captured in employment counts, 28% of the unemployed and 17% of those not in the labor force work informally. Reclassifying them as employed, the employment-to-population ratio and the labor force participation rate in 2015 would be 4.3 and 3.3 percentage points higher, respectively.

Gig and Other Contract Work: Developing Better Measures in Household Surveys

Katharine G. Abraham
,
University of Maryland
Brad Hershbein
,
W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research
Susan N. Houseman
,
W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research

Abstract

Evidence on the prevalence and growth in contract work arrangements is scant and sometimes conflicting. Tax data suggest that in recent years there has been a sizable increase in the share of workers who are self-employed, largely in what appear to be independent contractor and gig jobs, while household surveys such as the CPS and ACS show no rise in self-employment. We have developed a survey module on various types of contract and casual work that is included on a daily phone survey of individuals administered by Gallup. For some questions, respondents are randomly assigned to alternative versions to determine the sensitivity of responses to alternative wording. The survey is designed to thoroughly document various types of contract and casual work and the characteristics of workers in these arrangements. It also may shed light on possible reasons for the discrepancies in trends across data sources and inform the design of future household surveys. In this paper, we present preliminary findings based on about 30,000 responses.

Independent Contracting as Measured by IRS Records

Andrew Garin
,
Harvard University

Abstract

Independent Contracting as Measured by IRS Records

Consumption Insurance and Multiple Jobs: Evidence from Rideshare Drivers

Dmitri K. Koustas
,
University of Chicago

Abstract

Emerging rideshare jobs promise workers more choice over their hours. Does this increased flexibility help workers smooth income shocks? A sample of approximately 18,000 rideshare drivers is analyzed from a large, online personal financial service containing information on rideshare income, outside income, spending, and liquid assets. Debt and high credit card utilization are key predictors of participation in ridesharing. In the period after starting ridesharing, rideshare income replaces 73 percent of income losses from main payroll jobs. Sensitivity of spending to main income falls by 82 percent, suggesting substantial increases in consumption smoothing. Matching these empirical findings to a structural intertemporal labor supply model with credit and labor frictions implies benefits from flexible second jobs of over $1,800 per year. The results suggest the value of leisure is relatively low for this group of workers, which has important implications for understanding the welfare costs of income fluctuations.
Discussant(s)
Barbara Robles
,
Federal Reserve Board
Shanthi Ramnath
,
U.S. Treasury Department
JEL Classifications
  • J0 - General