Using proprietary data from AngelList Talent, we study how startup job seekers’ search and application behavior changed during the COVID-19 downturn. We find that workers shifted their searches and applications away from less-established startups and toward more-established ones, even within the same individual over time. At the firm level, this shift was not offset by an influx of new job seekers. Less-established startups experienced a relative decline in the quantity and quality of applications, ultimately affecting their hiring. Our findings uncover a flight-to-safety channel in the labor market that may amplify the procyclical nature of entrepreneurial activities.

In den meisten Ländern wirkt sich die Geburt eines Kindes negativ auf den Arbeitsmarkterfolg von Müttern aus, insbesondere bei Müttern mit niedrigerem Schulabschluss. In diesem Beitrag werden die Ergebnisse eines Feldexperiments in Deutschland vorgestellt, in dem Familien bei der Bewerbung für einen Platz in einer Kindertagesstätte (Kita) unterstützt wurden. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass der verbesserte Zugang zu frühkindlicher Betreuung die Wahrscheinlichkeit erhöht, dass Mütter ohne Abitur in Vollzeit arbeiten, und deren Haushaltseinkommen steigert. Um den Arbeitsmarkterfolg von Müttern zu verbessern, sollte die Politik den Zugang zu frühkindlicher Betreuung erleichtern und die Zahl der Kita-Plätze noch weiter erhöhen.

We examine effects of government-imposed employment targets on firm behavior. Theoretically, such policies create “polarization,“ causing low-productivity firms to exit the market while others temporarily distort their employment upward. Dynamically, firms are incentivized to improve productivity to meet targets. Using novel data from East German firms post-privatization, we find that firms with binding employment targets experienced 25% higher annual employment growth, a 1.1% higher annual exit probability, and 10% higher annual productivity growth over the target period. Structural estimates reveal substantial misallocation of labor across firms and that subsidizing productivity growth would yield twice the long term increases in employment.

The Roy-Borjas model predicts that international migrants are less educated than nonmigrants because the returns to education are generally higher in developing (migrant-sending) than in developed (migrant-receiving) countries. However, empirical evidence often shows the opposite. Using the case of Mexico-U.S. migration, we show that this inconsistency between predictions and empirical evidence can be resolved when the human capital of migrants is assessed using a two-dimensional measure of occupational skills rather than by educational attainment. Thus, focusing on a single skill dimension when investigating migrant selection can lead to misleading conclusions about the underlying economic incentives and behavioral models of migration.