Skip to main content

Table 4 Sample conditional proportions of negative change in labour cost margins in 2010–2013 (proportions calculated as weighted relative frequencies)

From: Non-base wage components as a source of wage adaptability to shocks: evidence from European firms, 2010–2013

 

Cut base wages

Cut non-base wages

Cut number of employees

Cut number of hours

Freeze base wages

P (.)

0.053

0.130

0.329

0.114

0.262

Having faced negative shocks (either strong or moderate)

 P (.)

0.075

0.182

0.423

0.162

0.296

 P (.|cut non-base wages)

0.260

1.000

0.745

0.270

0.471

 P (.|cut base wages)

1.000

0.631

0.784

0.293

0.508

 P (.|cut non-base and base wages)

1.000

1.000

0.862

0.331

0.580

Having faced at least one strong negative shock

 P (.)

0.108

0.250

0.552

0.226

0.365

 P (.|cut non-base wages)

0.319

1.000

0.783

0.313

0.491

 P (.|cut base wages)

1.000

0.739

0.854

0.352

0.548

 P (.|cut non-base and base wages)

1.000

1.000

0.879

0.389

0.604

Having faced only strong negative shocks

 P (.)

0.209

0.414

0.704

0.302

0.449

 P (.|cut non-base wages)

0.441

1.000

0.819

0.337

0.529

 P (.|cut base wages)

1.000

0.875

0.893

0.426

0.559

 P (.|cut non-base and base wages)

1.000

1.000

0.905

0.455

0.542

  1. WDN3, authors’ calculation. The shocks considered are change in demand, customers’ ability to pay and access to external finance. The measure of change in a firm’s (internal) number of employees combines permanent and temporary employees. The results are weighted to reflect overall employment in the country and rescaled to exclude non-response