Monopsony and also the Minimum Wage

We have actually watched that weras will be reduced in monopsony than in otherwise comparable competitive labor markets. In a competitive market, workers receive weras equal to their MRPs. Workers employed by monopsony firms obtain wperiods that are much less than their MRPs. This truth says sharply different conclusions for the evaluation of minimum weras in competitive versus monopsony problems.

You are watching: If the minimum wage is currently above the equilibrium wage, then a decrease in the minimum wage

In a competitive industry, the imposition of a minimum wage over the equilibrium wage necessarily reduces employment, as we learned in the module on perfectly competitive labor industries. In a monopsony industry, yet, a minimum wage over the equilibrium wage could increase employment at the very same time as it boosts wages!

Figure 14.5 reflects a monopsony employer that deals with a supply curve, S, from which we derive the marginal factor cost curve, MFC. The firm maximizes profit by employing Lm systems of labor and also paying a wage of $4 per hour. The wage is listed below the firm’s MRP.


Figure 14.5. Minimum Wage and Monopsony. A monopsony employer encounters a supply curve S, a marginal element expense curve MFC, and a marginal revenue product curve MRP. It maximizes profit by employing Lm units of labor and paying a wage of $4 per hour. The imposition of a minimum wage of $5 per hour provides the damelted sections of the supply and MFC curves irpertinent. The marginal variable expense curve is for this reason a horizontal line at $5 approximately L1 units of labor. MRP and also MFC now intersect at L2 so that employment rises.


Now mean the federal government imposes a minimum wage of $5 per hour; it is illegal for firms to pay less. At this minimum wage, L1units of labor are supplied. To acquire any type of smaller sized quantity of labor, the firm need to pay the minimum wage. That implies that the area of the supply curve reflecting quantities of labor provided at weras below $5 is irrelevant; the firm cannot pay those wages. Notice that the section of the supply curve listed below $5 is displayed as a dashed line. If the firm desires to hire more than L1devices of labor, yet, it should pay wperiods provided by the supply curve.

Marginal variable cost is impacted by the minimum wage. To hire added units of labor as much as L1, the firm pays the minimum wage. The added expense of labor past L1proceeds to be offered by the original MFC curve. The MFC curve therefore has actually 2 segments: a horizontal segment at the minimum wage for amounts up to L1and also the solid percentage of the MFC curve for quantities past that.

The firm will still employ labor as much as the suggest that MFC equates to MRP. In the situation presented in Figure 14.5, that occurs at L2. The firm thus rises its employment of labor in response to the minimum wage. This theoretical conclusion received apparent empirical validation in a study by David Card and Alan Krueger that said that a boost in New Jersey’s minimum wage may have actually increased employment in the fast food market. That conclusion ended up being a crucial political tool for advocates of a rise in the minimum wage. The validity of those results has actually come under major obstacle, but, and the fundamental conclusion that a greater minimum wage would rise unemployment among unexpert employees in many cases stays the position of many economic experts. The conversation in the Case in Point summarizes the dispute.


In a competitive labor industry, a rise in the minimum wage reduces employment and also increases joblessness.A minimum wage could rise employment in a monopsony labor market at the very same time it boosts wperiods.Some financial experts argue that the monopsony model characterizes all labor markets and that this justifies a national increase in the minimum wage.Many economists argue that a nationwide increase in the minimum wage would certainly reduce employment among low-wage workers.

Case in Point: The Monopsony-Minimum Wage Controversy

While the imposition of a minimum wage on a monopsony employer can rise employment and also weras at the very same time, the opportunity is mostly pertained to as empirically unnecessary, provided the rarity of instances of monopsony power in labor markets. However before, some research studies have uncovered that boosts in the minimum wage have actually brought about either raised employment or to no substantial reductions in employment. These outcomes show up to contradict the competitive design of demand also and supply in the labor sector, which predicts that an increase in the minimum wage will certainly lead to a reduction in employment and an increase in unemployment.

The study that sparked the dispute was an evaluation by David Card and also Alan Krueger of employment in the quick food market in Pennsylvania and also New Jersey. New Jersey raised its minimum wage to $5.05 per hour in 1992, as soon as the nationwide minimum wage was $4.25 per hour. The two economic experts surveyed 410 fast food restaurants in the Burger King, KFC, Roy Rogers, and also Wendy’s chains simply prior to New Jersey boosted its minimum and also aget 10 months after the boost.

Tright here was no statistically considerable adjust in employment in the New Jersey franchises, yet employment dropped in the Pennsylvania franchises. Hence, employment in the New Jersey franchises “rose” loved one to employment in the Pennsylvania franchises. Card and also Krueger’s results were commonly taken as showing a boost in employment in New Jersey as a result of the rise in the minimum wage tbelow.

Do minimum wages reduce employment or not? Some economic experts taken the Card and also Krueger results as demonstrating widespcheck out monopsony power in the labor market. Economist Alan Manning notes that the competitive model suggests that a firm that pays a penny less than the sector equilibrium wage will have actually zero employees. But, Mr. Manning notes that tbelow are non-wage characteristics to any project that, in addition to the price of altering tasks, bring about individual employers dealing with upward-sloping supply curves for labor and also therefore offering them monopsony power. And, as we have actually watched, a firm via monopsony power might respond to a boost in the minimum wage by boosting employment.

The obstacle through implementing this conclusion on a national basis is that, also if firms execute have actually a degree of monopsony power, it is difficult to identify just exactly how much power any kind of one firm has actually and by how a lot the minimum wage could be increased for each firm. As a result, even if it were true that firms had actually such monopsony power, it would not follow that a boost in the minimum wage would certainly be correct.

Even the finding that an increase in the minimum wage might not alleviate employment has actually been referred to as right into question. First, there are many empirical research studies that imply that increases in the minimum wage execute minimize employment. For instance, a current study of employment in the restaurant sector by Chicago Federal Reserve Bank economic experts Daniel Aaronson and also Eric French concluded that a 10% rise in the minimum wage would mitigate employment among unexperienced restaurant employees by 2 to 4%. This finding was more in line with various other empirical work-related. Additional, economists allude out that tasks have actually nonwage elements. Hours of work-related, functioning conditions, fellow employees, health insurance, and also other fringe benefits of working have the right to all be adjusted by firms in response to a boost in the minimum wage. Dwight Lee, an economist at the University of Georgia, says that as a result, an increase in the minimum wage may not alleviate employment yet might mitigate various other fringe benefits that workers worth more extremely than wages themselves. So, an increase in the minimum wage might make also employees who get greater wperiods worse off. One indicator that suggests that higher minimum wages may reduce the welfare of low earnings employees is that participation in the labor pressure by teens has been displayed to autumn as an outcome of higher minimum wages. If the possibility to earn greater wages reduces the variety of teens seeking those weras, it may indicate that low-wage occupational has actually come to be much less preferable.

See more: In What Ways Was The Great Depression A Global Phenomenon ? Read: Global Great Depression (Article)

In brief, the opportunity that better minimum wages can not reduce employment among low-wage workers does not necessarily suppose that better minimum weras boost the welfare of low earnings employees. Evidence that casts doubt on the proplace that better minimum wperiods reduce employment does not remove many economists’ doubt that higher minimum weras would certainly be an excellent policy.