Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/196762 
Year of Publication: 
2019
Series/Report no.: 
IZA Discussion Papers No. 12264
Publisher: 
Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), Bonn
Abstract: 
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1978 expanded employee age protections to age 70, making the widespread practice by U.S. firms of mandating retirement at age 65 illegal. Building on the work of Lazear (1979), we propose that the law change not only weakened the long-term employment contract, but also contributed to the rise in pay-for-performance incentives. We model the firm's choice between offering long-term incentive contracts with low monitoring requirements and pay-for-performance (PFP) contracts with high monitoring requirements, showing how the law change increased the relative attractiveness of PFP contracts. We test the model's predictions using data from the Baker-Gibbs-Holmstrom firm, evaluating the effect of the law change on the slope of the age-pay profile, turnover rates, and the sensitivity of pay to performance. Further, we find direct evidence of strategic response to the law change by the firm, including the introduction of bonus payments, change in performance management system, and increase in the proportion of top managers. The setting also provides an opportunity to empirically investigate how firms navigate career incentives for employees.
Subjects: 
incentive pay
pay for performance
long-term incentive contracts
promotions
slot constraints
career incentives
JEL: 
M51
M52
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
683.55 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.