Abstract:We develop tools for utilizing correspondence experiments to detect illegal discrimination by individual employers. Employers violate US employment law if their propensity to contact applicants depends on protected characteristics such as race or sex. We establish identification of higher moments of the causal effects of protected characteristics on callback rates as a function of the number of fictitious applications sent to each job ad. These moments are used to bound the fraction of jobs that illegally discriminate. Applying our results to three experimental datasets, we find evidence of significant employer heterogeneity in discriminatory behavior, with the standard deviation of gaps in job-specific callback probabilities across protected groups averaging roughly twice the mean gap. In a recent experiment manipulating racially distinctive names, we estimate that at least 85% of jobs that contact both of two white applications and neither of two black applications are engaged in illegal discrimination. To assess the tradeoff between type I and II errors presented by these patterns, we consider the performance of a series of decision rules for investigating suspicious callback behavior under a simple two-type model that rationalizes the experimental data. Though, in our preferred specification, only 17% of employers are estimated to discriminate on the basis of race, we find that an experiment sending 10 applications to each job would enable accurate detection of 7-10% of discriminators while falsely accusing fewer than 0.2% of non-discriminators. A minimax decision rule acknowledging partial identification of the joint distribution of callback rates yields higher error rates but more investigations than our baseline two-type model. Our results suggest illegal labor market discrimination can be reliably monitored with relatively small modifications to existing audit designs.

Compliance measurement and labour regulation enforcement: a randomized field experiment

Increasing the Cost of Informal Employment: Evidence from Mexico

Multinational enforcement of labor law: Experimental evidence from Bangladesh’s apparel sector

Labor productivity response of the micro-and-small-firm sector to business entries and exits

An Experiment on Participation in a Latin American Factory

The Effects of a Short-Term Corporate Social Impact Activity on Employee Turnover: Field Experimental Evidence

Multinational Enforcement of Labor Law: Experimental Evidence on Strengthening Occupational Safety and Health Committees

The Online Laboratory: Conducting Experiments in a Real Labor Market

The Unequal Incidence of Payroll Taxes with Imperfect Competition: Theory and Evidence

Monitoring in Small Firms: Experimental Evidence from Kenyan Public Transit

Firm gender labour supply elasticities and sources of separation: evidence from Chile

Workforce Composition, Productivity, and Labor Regulations in a Compensating Differentials Theory of Informality

Enforceability of Non-Compete Covenants, Discretionary Investments, and Financial Reporting Practices: Evidence from a Natural Experiment

Compliance in Artisanal Fisheries: Do Morality, Legitimacy, and Peer Effects Matter?

Audits as Evidence: Experiments, Ensembles, and Enforcement

Enforcing Regulation Under Illicit Adaptation

The Impact of Extending Employment Protection to Agency Workers on Firms

Employment Protection Legislation and the Macroeconomy: Evidence from Brazil

Firm-Level Labor-Shortage Exposure

The heterogenous effects of a higher volume of regulation: evidence from more than 200k Spanish norms

Mitigating Gig and Remote Worker Misconduct: Evidence from a Real Effort Experiment