Does Employment Protection Reduce Productivity? Evidence from US States

Theory predicts that mandated employment protection may reduce productivity by distorting production choices. We use the adoption of wrongful-discharge protection by state courts in the US from 1970 to 1999 to evaluate the empirical link between dismissal costs and productivity. Drawing on establishment-level data from the Census Bureau, our estimates suggest that wrongful-discharge protection reduces employment flows and firm entry rates. Moreover, plants engage in capital deepening and experience a decline in total factor productivity, indicative of altered production techniques. Evidence of strong contemporaneous growth in employment, however, leads us to view our findings as suggestive but tentative. An extensive literature explores the impact of dismissal costs – also frequently called firing costs or employment protection – on the operation of labour markets. Beginning with the seminal work of Lazear (1990), much research has focused on assessing how dismissal costs affect employment levels. Theory suggests, however, that dismissal costs may have ambiguous effects on employment levels. Dismissal costs act as a tax on firing, which reduces dismissals but also reduces hiring. The net effect of these offsetting factors is ambiguous, at least in the short run. It is perhaps not surprising therefore that