Abstract:
We examine whether managers’ gender shapes the provision of training opportunities, drawing on a large-scale vignette experiment embedded in a representative employer survey of German firms. Managers were asked to choose between pairs of hypothetical employees for on-the-job training, with subordinate and training characteristics randomized to allow causal inference. We findthat women are, on average, slightly more likely than men to receive training offers. However, the gender of the manager crucially conditions this pattern. Female managers are less likely to provide training to young female employees, and this reluctance is particularly pronounced in competitive, male-dominated, and non-unionized firms. Male managers, in contrast, favor male candidates when training is fully employer-funded. These findings imply that training allocations are not purely efficiency-driven, since they systematically depend on who makes the decision. Our results uncover a mechanism through which managerial gender influences access to human capital investments, thereby shedding light on how subtle biases in organizational decision-making may reinforce gender inequalities in career advancement.

CEPA DP No. 90, IZA DP No. 18019

Abstract:
We study the accuracy of job seekers’ wage expectations by comparing subjective beliefs to objective benchmarks using linked administrative and survey data. Our findings show that especially job seekers with low objective earnings potential and those predicted to face a penalty compared to their pre-unemployment wage display overly optimistic wage expectations. Moreover, wage optimism is amplified by increased job search incentives and job seekers with overoptimistic wage expectations tend to overestimate their reemployment chances. We discuss the labor market implications of wage optimism, as well as the role of information frictions and motivated beliefs as sources of overoptimism.

R&R Journal of Public Economics

IZA Discussion Paper No. 17198