Influence of vocational training on
wages and mobility of workers
- evidence from Poland
Jacek Liwiński
Faculty of Economic Sciences,
University of Warsaw
Human capital theories
 Becker’s theory (1962)
 New theories:
eg. Acemoglu, Pischke (1999)
Different assumptions:
– Perfect vs. imperfect competition in the labour
market
University of Ljubljana, 24-25 September 2009
Becker (1962)
 Assumptions:
– Perfect competition in the labour market
– Investments in general vs. specific human
capital
– Human capital may be specific for firms,
economic sectors or occupations
Becker (1962)

Implications:
1.
–
–
–
Investment in general human capital:
is financed by employee only
increases employee’s wage
has no influence on employee’s mobility
2.
–
–
–
Investment in specific human capital:
is financed by both employee and employer
increases employee’s wage
decreases employee’s mobility
Acemoglu, Pischke (1999)
 Assumption: Imperfect competition in the
labour market – different reasons:
– Cost of changing jobs
– Asymmetry of information
– Efficiency wages
– Human capital is not perfectly transferable
Acemoglu, Pischke (1999)
 Implication: Investment in general human
capital may be financed by an employee:
– If expected mobility of the employee is low,
– And if the resulting increase in productivity
exceeds the increase in wage
Goals
1. To analyse the influence of vocational
training on employees’ mobility between:
– firms,
– economic sectors,
– occupations.
2. To analyse the influence of vocational
training on wages in the present job (firm).
Analysis of mobility:
(1) Data
 Polish Labour Force Survey, 2001-2003:
– Employees at the age of 15-59/64,
– Quarterly and yearly panels
Analysis of mobility:
(2) Dependent variables
 Mobility between firms:
1 – employee flows to another firm between
period t0 and t1 in a panel,
0 – no flow between firms (base category)
 Mobility between economic sectors:
1 – employee flows to another economic sector
between period t0 and t1 in a panel,
0 – no flow between sectors (base category)
Analysis of mobility:
(2) Dependent variables
 Mobility between occupations:
1 – employee flows to another 5-digit occupation
between period t0 and t1 in a panel,
2 – employee flows to another 3-digit occupation
between period t0 and t1 in a panel,
3 – no flow between occupations (base category)
Analysis of mobility:
(3) Independent variables
1. Participation in a vocational training
2. General employee’s characteristics (gender,
age, level of education, place of residence)
3. Employee’s characteristics associated with
present job (job tenure, wages, working time,
type of contract, occupation)
4. Characteristics of employer (economic sector,
firm size, ownership sector)
Analysis of mobility:
(4) Econometric model
 In case of mobility between firms and
mobility between economic sectors:
logit model
 In case of mobility between occupations:
multinomial logit model
Analysis of mobility:
(5) Problem of endogeneity
 Employers may be training first of all the
least mobile workers
 Some trainings may be associated with the
willingness to change a job (firm and/or
occupation)
Analysis of mobility:
(6) Results
1. Mobility between firms:
–
Neither general nor specific trainings have a
significant influence on mobility between firms
2. Mobility between economic sectors:
–
–
–
General trainings do not have a significant influence
on mobility between sectors
Specific trainings have a negative influence on
mobility between sectors
On average the probability of flowing between 3digit occupations within a year is 3,2%, while in
case of participants of specific training – 1,9%.
Analysis of mobility:
(6) Results
3. Mobility between occupations:
–
–
–
General trainings do not have a significant influence
on mobility between occupations
Specific trainings do not have a significant influence
on mobility between 5-digit occupations, but they
have a negative influence on mobility between 3digit occupations.
On average the probability of flowing between 3digit occupations within a year is 1,2%, while in
case of participants of specific training – 0,6%.
Analysis of wages:
(1) Data
 Polish Labour Force Survey, 2001-2003:
– Employees at the age of 15-59/64,
– Quarterly and yearly panels
Analysis of wages:
(2) Dependent variable
 Growth rate of hourly net wage in the
period of a quarter or a year after
participation in a vocational training.
Analysis of wages:
(3) Independent variables
1. Participation in a vocational training
2. General employee’s characteristics (gender,
age, level of education, place of residence)
3. Employee’s characteristics associated with
present job (job tenure, wages, working time,
type of contract, occupation)
4. Characteristics of employer (economic sector,
firm size, ownership sector)
Analysis of wages:
(4) Econometric model
 OLS linear regression
Analysis of wages:
(6) Results
1. Participation in general training has a
positive impact on wages.
2. Participation in specific vocational
training does not have any influence on
wages.
Conclusions
The results of the analysis only partially
support the predictions of the Becker’s theory.
1. In agreement with the theory:
–
–
investments in general training do not have any
influence on worker’s inter-firm mobility and have a
positive impact on wages,
investments in specific human capital significantly
decrease the probability of changing an occupation
or an economic sector.
Conclusions
2. It is not consistent with the theory that:
–
–
investments in specific human capital do not have
any influence on inter-firm mobility,
specific vocational training does not have any
influence on wages.
Thank you for your attention.