Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/245791 
Year of Publication: 
2021
Series/Report no.: 
IZA Discussion Papers No. 14740
Publisher: 
Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), Bonn
Abstract: 
Why is workplace sexual harassment chronically underreported? We hypothesize that employers coerce victims into silence through the threat of a retaliatory firing, and test this theory by estimating whether external shocks that reduce the value of a worker's outside options exacerbate underreporting. Under mild assumptions, a rise in the severity of formal complaints is indicative of increased underreporting. Combining this insight with an objective measure of the quality of charges filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), we perform two analyses. First, we assess whether workers report sexual harassment more selectively during recessions, when outside labor market options are limited. We estimate the fraction of sexual harassment charges deemed to have merit by the EEOC increases by 0.5-0.7% for each one percentage point increase in a state-industry's monthly unemployment rate. The effect is amplified in industries employing a larger fraction of men and in establishments with a higher share of male managers. Second, we test whether less generous UI benefits create economic incentives for victims of workplace sexual harassment to remain silent. We find the selectivity of sexual harassment charges increases by more than 30% in response to a 50% cut to North Carolina's Unemployment Insurance (UI) program following the Great Recession.
Subjects: 
unemployment insurance
unemployment
sexual harassment
JEL: 
J71
J78
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
576.37 kB





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