Search Results
Potential Jobs Impacted by Covid-19
In this blog, we conduct an exercise to determine the potential consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic on near-term labor market outcomes. This is not a forecast, but an attempt to provide some discipline around potential bounds of the number of jobs impacted by the crisis. We estimate that between nine and 26 million jobs are potentially affected,1 with a best guess of around 15 million. If these jobs are lost, the June unemployment rate could reach between 14% and 18%, with a best guess of around 15%.
Working Paper
Work from Home Before and After the COVID-19 Outbreak
Based on novel survey data, we document the evolution of commuting behavior in the U.S. over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. Work from home (WFH) increased sharply and persistently after the outbreak, and much more so among some workers than others. Using theory and evidence, we argue that the observed heterogeneity in WFH transitions is consistent with potentially more permanent changes to work arrangements in some occupations, and not just temporary substitution in response to greater health risks. Consistent with increased WFH adoption, many more – especially higher-educated – ...
Working Paper
Measuring Trends in Work From Home: Evidence from Six U.S. Datasets
This paper documents the prevalence of work from home (WFH) in six U.S. data sets. These surveys measure WFH using different questions, reference periods, samples, and survey collection methods. Once we construct samples and WFH measures that are comparable across surveys, all surveys broadly agree about the trajectory of aggregate WFH since the Covid-19 outbreak. The surveys agree that pre-pandemic differences in WFH rates by sex, education, and state of residence expanded following the Covid-19 outbreak. The surveys also show similar post-pandemic trends in WFH by firm size and industry. ...
Working Paper
Work from Home After the COVID-19 Outbreak
Based on rich novel survey data, we document that 35.2 percent of the US workforce worked entirely from home in May 2020, up from 8.2 percent in February. Highly educated, high-income and white workers were more likely to shift to working from home and maintain employment following the pandemic. Individuals working from home daily before the pandemic lost employment at similar rates as daily commuters. This suggests that, apart from the potential for home-based work, demand conditions also mattered for job losses. We find that 71.7 percent of workers that could work from home effectively did ...
Working Paper
Work from Home and Interstate Migration
Interstate migration by working-age adults in the US declined substantially during the Great Recession and remained subdued through 2019. We document that interstate migration rose sharply following the 2020 Covid-19 outbreak, nearly recovering to pre-Great recession levels, and provide evidence that this reversal was primarily driven by the rise in work from home (WFH). Before the pandemic, interstate migration by WFH workers was consistently 50% higher than for commuters. Since the Covid-19 outbreak, this migration gap persisted while the WFH share tripled. Using quasi-panel data and ...
Working Paper
Measuring Trends in Work From Home: Evidence from Six U.S. Datasets
This paper documents the prevalence of work from home (WFH) in six U.S. data sets. These surveys measure WFH using different questions, reference periods, samples, and survey collection methods. Once we construct samples and WFH measures that are comparable across surveys, all surveys broadly agree about the trajectory of aggregate WFH since the Covid-19 outbreak. The most important source of disagreement in the level of WFH across surveys is in WFH by self-employed workers; by contrast, surveys closely agree on rates of WFH among employees. All surveys agree that in 2024 WFH remains ...
Working Paper
Work from Home After the COVID-19 Outbreak
Based on rich novel survey data on almost 5,000 working age adults, we document that 35.2 percent of the workforce worked entirely from home in May 2020, up from 8.2 percent in February 2020. Highly educated, high-income and white individuals were much more likely to shift to remote work and to maintain employment following the virus outbreak. Using available estimates of the potential number of home-based workers suggests that a large majority (71.7 percent) of U.S. workers that could work from home, effectively did so in May. We provide some evidence indicating that apart from the potential ...
Working Paper
Heterogeneity in Work From Home: Evidence from Six U.S. Datasets
This paper documents heterogeneity in work from home (WFH) across six U.S. data sets. These surveys agree that pre-pandemic differences in WFH rates by sex, education, and state of residence expanded following the Covid-19 outbreak. The surveys also show similar post-pandemic trends in WFH by firm size and industry. We show that an industry's WFH potential was highly correlated with actual WFH during the first year or two of the Covid-19 pandemic, but that this correlation was much weaker before and after the pandemic, suggesting that WFH potential is a necessary but not sufficient ...
Discussion Paper
The Power of Proximity: How Working beside Colleagues Affects Training and Productivity
Firms remain divided about the value of the office for “office” workers. Some firms think that their employees are more productive when working from home. Others believe that the office is a key place for investing in workers’ skills. In this post, which is based on a recent working paper, we examine whether both sides could be right: Could working in the office facilitate investments in workers’ skills for tomorrow that diminish productivity today?
Discussion Paper
Understanding the Racial and Income Gap in Commuting for Work Following COVID-19
The introduction of numerous social distancing policies across the United States, combined with voluntary pullbacks in activity as responses to the COVID-19 outbreak, resulted in differences emerging in the types of work that were done from home and those that were not. Workers at businesses more likely to require in-person work—for example, some, but not all, workers in healthcare, retail, agriculture and construction—continued to come in on a regular basis. In contrast, workers in many other businesses, such as IT and finance, were generally better able to switch to working from home ...