Comments on the previous article by Harry Chemay
Wayne McMillan
In the previous article, Harry Chemay has faithfully kept to the findings and conclusions from the paper titled: “Decomposing wealth inequality in Australia” [Melbourne Institute Working Pap No.13/24, Dec 2024], but he does not mention the decomposition method used, which was the DFL method [1]. The DFL approach estimates what the density of wealth in 2018 would look like, if the distribution of selected socio -economic and demographic household characteristics had remained at their 2006 values.
First, the DFL method enables us to decompose differences across the entire wealth distribution thereby gaining more nuanced insights into the underlying dynamics driving wealth inequality. Second, the DFL method can be applied in a semi-parametric setting.
The household characteristics of interest capture factors that are expected to be particularly important influences on the accumulation and distribution of wealth. They include the age profile of the population, human capital and labour market related characteristics, the rates of home ownership and inter-generational transfers. The counterfactual kernel density of household wealth that emerges from this DFL exercise, is compared against actual wealth distributions to isolate the contribution of changes in household personal characteristics to wealth inequality dynamics.
In regard to the Australian Bureau of Statistics item on Multiple Job Holders {Sep 2024], I found these statistics to differ slightly from Harry’s and to be very relevant.
There were 986,400 multiple job-holders (6.6% of employed people):
7.7% of employed women were multiple job-holders, compared to 5.8% of employed men;
Workers aged 20-24 years old were most likely to be working multiple jobs (8.7%);
People who were a community and personal service worker in their main job were most likely to be a multiple job-holder (10.1%).
Between 1995 and 2019, the multiple job-holding rate remained between 5.0% and 6.0%. However, following a large decline at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in June 2020, the multiple job-holding rate rose and has remained at an all-time high between 6.5% and 6.7% since December 2022.
People working in the Administrative and support services industry in their main job had the highest multiple job-holding rate in Septemb 2024 (8.9%). Multiple job-holding was least common among people whose main job was in electricity, gas, water and waste services (3.4%).
It is important to note that some industries lend themselves to multiple job-holding. For example, some workers in the agriculture, forestry and fishing industries may work several seasonal jobs for different employers in addition to their main job; and some labour hire workers may work for a various businesses in Administrative and support services.
In August 2024, 10.1% of people who were a community or personal service worker in their main job were multiple job-holders. Technicians and trade workers were the least likely to be a multiple job-holder (4.3%)
In September 2024:
Multiple job-holders usually averaged 29.9 hours in their main job, and 9.2 hours in their secondary job(s) – a total of 39.1 hours per week;
Single job-holders usually averaged 34.9 hours per week.
Multiple job-holders were most likely to work part-time hours (less than 35 hours per week) in both their main and
secondary job(s), followed by a combination of full-time and part-time hours. There were a small number of people who had two full-time jobs.
In September 2024, the multiple job-holding rate was higher in regional areas (7.6%) compared to capital cities (6.3%). From December 2021 to December 2022, growth in multiple job-holding rates in capital cities led to a narrowing of the difference between rates in capital cities and the rest of Australia. More recently, the difference between rates in capital cities and the rest of Australia has broadened.
In September 2024, the multiple job-holding rate was highest in:
Capital city: Greater Hobart (8.9%);
Rest of state or territory: South Australia (8.5%)
This article is very relevant in terms of wealth disparities vis-a-vis the growing trend in multiple job holdings and the collapse of the middle-income class.
1. DiNardo, J, Fortin N.M. and Lemieux, T: Labor Market Institutions and the Distribution of Wages, 1973-1992: A Semi-parametric Approach, Econometrica Vol. 64, No. 5 (Sep 1996), pp. 1001-1044
