retraining displaced workers: the us experience. training policy
TRANSCRIPT
DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 371 115 CE 066 000
AUTHOR Leigh, Duane E.TITLE Retraining Displaced Workers: The US Experience.
Training Policy Study No. 1.INSTITUTION International Labour Office, Geneva (Switzerland).REPORT NO ISBN-92-2-109256-9PUB DATE 94NOTE 30p.PUB TYPE Reports - Evaluative/Feasibility (147)
EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Adult Education; Adult Programs; Demonstration
Programs; *Dislocated Workers; Federal Legislation;*Federal Programs; *On the Job Training; PrivateSector; Program Development; *Program Effectiveness;Program Evaluation; *Retraining; School BusinessRelationship; *State Programs; VocationalEducation
IDENTIFIERS Comprehensive Employment and Training Act; JobTraining Partnership Act 1982
ABSTRACT
The federal government's experience with adultretraining programs began in 1962 with the passage of the ManpowerDevelopment and Training Act and creation of the Trade AdjustmentAssistance program. When the 1973 Comprehensive Employment andTraining Act.expired in 1982, Congress enacted the Job TrainingPartnership Act. During the 1980s, states developed programs to fillthe market gap between perceived need and federally funded services.Evaluation evidence,was available for five government-sponsoredprograms targeted to displaced workers and one program fordisadvantaged workers that distinguished the impact of classroomtraining from that of on-the-job training. Private sector employersmade more substantial investments in training programs as shown byprivate sector retraining programs primarily directed to workers atrisk of being displaced from their jobs. Evidence provided by thedisplaced worker demonstration projects indicated clearly that jobsearch assistance speeded up the reemployment of displaced workers.Results were less favorable for classroom training in vocationalskills. Reasonably favorable results for classroom training wereobtained. OJT had a more immediate and sustained positive impact onthe earnings of both adult women and men than classroom training.Women were nsually found to benefit from retraining and otherreemployment services at least to the same extent as men. (Appendixesinclude 17 endnotes and 5 tables. Contains 21 references.) (YLB)
***********************************************************************
Reproductions suppl'ed by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.
***********************************************************************
01111=111111
etrcun n wo erThe US experienceby Duane E. Leigh
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONMc of Educational RsearCh and Improvement
E CATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)
This document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it
0 Minor changes have been made to improvereproduction quality
Points of view Of opinions stateo in this docu-merit do not necessarily represent officialOERI position or policy
"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY
/kWTO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."
Training Policies, and Programme Development BranchInternatiOnal Labour Office Geneva
[el BEST COPY AVAILABLE
2
Training Policy Study No. 1
Retraining displaced workers: The US experience
by Duane Leigh
UMITED DISTRIBUTION
The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and not necessarily those of the ILO.
Training Policy and Programme Development Branch
International Labour Office Geneva
3
Copyright @ International Labour Organization 1994Publications of the International labour Office enjoy copyright under Protocol 2 of the Universal Copyright Convention.Nevertheless, short excerpts from them may be reproduced without authorization, on condition that the source is indicated.For rights of reproduction or translation, application should be made to the Publications Branch (Rights and Permissions),international Labour Office, CH-1211 Geneva 22, Switzerland. The International Labour Office welcomes such applications.
ISBN 92-2-109256-9
First published 1994
The designations employed in IW publications, which are in conformity with United Nations practice, and the presentationof material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the international Labour Officeconcerning the legal status of any country, area or territory or of Its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of itsfrontiers.The responsibility for opinions expressed in signed articles, stddles and other contributions rests solely with their authors,and publication does not constitute an endorsement by the International labour Office of the opinions expressed in them.Reference to names of firms and commercial products and processes does not imply their endorsement by the InternationalLabour Office, and any failure to mention a particular firm, commercial product or process Ps not a sign of disapproval.
IW publications can be obtained through major booksellers or ILl local offices in many countries, or direct from IWPublications, International Labour Office, CH-1211 Geneva 22, Switzerland. A catalogue or list of new publications will besent free of charge from the above address.
Printed by the International Labour Office, Geneve, Switteriond
Introduction
During each year of the 1980s, an average of about two million full-time American workers (orabout two percent of the civilian labour force) were displaced from their jobs because their employerseither went out of business or laid them off for some other reason and had not recalled them over a yearlater:1
The tenn"displaced" is applied to these unemployed workers because they are unlikely to berecalledto their old jobs or even to jobs in their old industries. The annual number ofdisplaced workers dwingthe 1980s varied with the overall state of the economy, but even duringthe relativekstronglabour marketexisting in 1988; 1.5 million workers were unemployed due to displacement Some of these workersfound new jobs easily at wages comparable to their pre-layoff earnings. But many others experience-I
long spells of unemployment, exhaustion of Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits, and substantiallylower wages in their new jobs.
Governments of nearly all industrial nations, includingthe United States, provide displaced workerswith adjustment assistance services intended to facilitate labour mobility from declining to growingindustries. These adjustment assistance services typically include retraining in job skills and job searrhassistance. However; Malt events have dramatically heightened the attention paid by U.S. policymakersto the adjustment assistance needs of displaced workers. These events include:
The job losses in the defense sectorboth federal civilian and military personnel and private sectordefense industry workersassociated with large-scale cutbacks in the defense budget.
Concern that implementation of the NorthAmerican Bee Dade Agreement (NAFTA)would causeU.S. producers to shift operations to other countries thereby eliminating domestic jobs.
The perception that corporate restructuring in the 1990-91 recession and the years immediate4,following is, for the first time, substantially increasing joblessness among white-collar as well asblue-collar workers (see, for erample, Karr 1991).
The objective of this paper is to evaluate the U.S. roperience with retraining displaced workers. Thepaper is organized as follows. Section I provides an overview of retraining progmmmes funded by thefederal government, with brief attention also given to state-funde d programmes. One of the strengths ofthe federal government's approach to retmining is its commitment to pogramme evaluation. SectionII therefore summarizes evaluation results obtained fo r a number of government-sponsored demonstra-tion projects. Section III supplements the formal evaluation evidence with a discussion of the privatesector's role (often in cooperation with labour unions) in worker retmining. Some lessons from the U.S.experience are drawn in Section IV
Contents
Introduction
I. An overview of government programmes
IL Evaluation evidence 3
A. The Displaced Worker Demonstration Projects 3
B. Project characteristics 3
C. Results4
D. Evaluation of the TM Programme 6
E. The National JTPA Study 7
HI. Private sector retraining programmes 9
IV. Lessons from U.S. experience 11
Notes 13
Tables 15
Bibliography 21
iii
1
6
I. An overview of government programmes
Displaced American workers are eligiblefor a universal programme that provides in-come-maintenance benefits to the involuntari-ly unemployed and also for a variety of smallerprogrammes designed specifically to meet theadjustment assistance needs of displacedadults. The universal programme is thefederal/state UI system mandated initially bythe Social Security Act of 1935. Unemployedworkers who satisfy eligibility conditionsspecified in terms of prior work attachment andreason for separation may receive weekly cashbenefits for up to 26 weeks in most states. Asof .1992, extended benefits for workers whohave exhausted their regular UI entitlementare available for up to 20 or 26 additional weeksdepending on the unemployment rate in theirstate. Job-matching services are provided bythe state-operated Employment Service (ES).An unemployed worker must register with alocal ES office in order to demonstrate his orher availability for employment, which is acriterion for receipt of UI benefits.
The federal government's experience withadult retraining programmes dates back to1962 with the passage of the ManpowerDevelopment and 'Raining Act (MDTA).MDTA represented the response of Congressto rising national unemployment coupled withgrowing concern over the effects of automat-ion and new technology on the employmentoptions Of mid-career adult workers. By themid-1960s, however, an improved labourmarket and lessened concern over automationled to a shift in interest and funding away fromthe employment problems of displacedworkers and toward the employability ofeconomically disadvantaged young peorAe andadults.2 In addition to MDTA, the other majorfederal programme specifically inteaded to as-sist displaced workers is the 'Rade AdjustmentAssistance (TAA) programme. Also created in1962, TAA provides income support and as-sociated reemployment services to workers
who lost their jobs as a consequence of tradeagreement concessions. Legislation passed in1974 removed the linkage between tariffreductions and job loss by making workerseligible for adjustment assistance if expandingtrade alone contributed importantly tolayoffs.3
In 1973, Congress created the Com-prehensive Employment and 'Raining Act(CETA) which consolidated nine earlierprogrammes including MDTA. Two distincttypes of programmes were funded underCETA. Title I provided disadvantaged workerswith a programme mix including classroomtraining, on-the-job training, and public sectorwork experience. In contrast, Titles II and VIoffered public service employment (PSE) toworkers who had recently lost jobs in high-un-employment geographic areas. As unemploy-ment rose during the 1970s, CETA expend-itures shifted away from Title I training pro-grammes toward the provision of PSE jobsoffering little or no formal training.
The CETA programme expired in 1982with the national economy mired in the troughof the deepest recession since the 1930s. Onceagain, displacement from their jobs of ex-perienced adult workers became an importantnational issue. Rather than renewing CETAwith its widely-criticized emphasis on PSE,Congress enacted a broad new programme -theJob 'Raining Partnership Act (JTPA)- intendedto retrain and place workers in private sectorjobs. Overall responsibility for administeringthe programme is given to state governors, whothen delegate authority to local organizationsto establish programmes tailored to meet theneeds of employers and workers in local labourmarkets. The federal government monitors theperformance of local site operators by a set ofenrollment requirements and performancestandards.
Title III of JTPA relates specifically to theadjustment assistance needs of displacedworkers.tervices provided include skills train-ing, job placement, worker relocation assis-tance, and support services such as child careand transportation while in training. However,limited funding resulted in the finding by theU.S. General Accounting Office (1987) that upto 30 June, 1986, at most seven percent ofeligible workers received JTPA Title III pro-gramme services. Moreover, most Title IR par-ticipants received relatively inexpensive jobplacement assistance rather than more inten-sive and expensive classroom skill training andon-the-job training.
In 1986, a task force appointed by the U.S.Secretary of Labor issued a report recom-mending the devebpment at the state level ofthe capacity to respond quickly to plant clos-ings and mass layoffs ..Pith the coordinateddelivery of adjustment assistance services of-fered on-site to the displaced (see U.S. Depart-ment of Labor 1986).5 Actilki on the rec-ommendations of the task fca:e, the EconomicDislocation and Worker Adjustment Assis-tance (EDWAA) act of 1988 amended Title IIIof JTPA to require states to develop displacedworker units with the ability to react to majorlayoffs and plant closures with on-site offers ofjob search assistance and retraining. Fundingfor displaced worker programmes increasedsharply from just $200 million in 1987 to about$517 million annually in 1991-93 (see Ross andSmith 1993: 31). A second piece of legislationpassed in 1988 -the Omnibus 'Bade and Com-petitiveness Act - extended the authorizationof TAA and made retraining an entitlement to
eligible workers as well as a requirement forreceiving income-maintenance benefits.6 TheTAA programme now essentially extends theduration of UI benefits to up to one and a-halfyears for eligible workers willing to participatein retraining. Bednarzik (1993) estimates forthe 1982-87 period that among manufacturingindustries deemed import sensitive, only aboutnine percent of the long-term unemployedwere certified for TAA benefit:. Expenditureson TAA benefits were $116 million in 1991,which is down substantially from about $1.5billion annually in 1980 and 1981.
The small fraction of displaced workersactually assisted by JTPA Title HI and TAAprogrammes during the 1980s suggested an im-portant gap between perceived need and avail-able federally-funded services. Virtually all ofthe states developed programmes attemptingto fill this market niche. As discussed by Leigh(1989), however, state programmes differ fromthe federal programmes considered in two keyrespects. Fust, state programmes are not ex-clusively targeted to specific groups such asdisplaced or disadvantaged workers. Indeed,retraining services are often made available tocurrently employed workers in order to avoidlayofft and plant closures. Second, trainingprogrammes are usually tailored to meet theneeds of individual employers, who, in turn,commit themselves to hiring programmegraduates. That is, retraining is viewed as aneconomic development tool in addition to itstraditional supply-side role of raising the levelof workers' skills to enable them to compete forexisting jobs.
II. Evaluation evidence
Compared to the stable and comprehen-sive institutional structures in Europe whichcater for employment and training issues,Haveman and Saks (1985: 36) characterize theU.S. as lurching from one direction to another,developing some high-quality but many low-quality programme& At the same time, the U.S.clearly leads the world in its willingness todevote substantial resources to programmeevaluation. This section begins with an ex-amination of the results of four major displacedworker demonstration projects funded by theU.S. Department of Labor (USDOL) duringthe 1980s. Recent evaluation evidence for theTAA and JTPA Title II-A programmes is thendiscussed.
A. The Displaced WorkerDemonstration Projects
Because many displaced workers failed tosatisfy the income test requited for CETAeligibility, experience gained from CETA pro-grammes was c,f limited =dulness in shapingthe direction of new Title rn 1TPA program-me& Rising unemployment and n increasingnumber of plant closures in the early 1930s ledthe USDOL to fund a series of demonstrationprojects intended to test the effectiveness ofalternative reemployment services in placingdisplaced workers in private sector job.. Inchronological order, these projects are (1) tNeDownriver programme, (2) the Buffalo pro-gramme of the Dislocated Worker Demonstra-tion Projects,7 (3) the Texas WorkerAdjustment Demonstration (WAD) projects,and (4) the New Jersey UI ReemploymentDemonstration Project.
B. Project characteristics
'Bible 1 furnishes an overview of some ofthe main features of the four demonstrationprojects.8 One common element is the type ofreemployment services provided. As the tableindicates, the demonstrations supplied a mix ofservices including job search assistance (JSA),classroom training (CT), and on-the-job train-ing (on). JSA services include initial orienta-tion and assessment sessions, a job searchworkshop, and job development and referralservices. The New Jersey UI Demonstrationadded to this mix a cash bonus for earlyreemployment.
An important difference between theprojects is the approach programme designersfollowed in distinguishing displaced workersfrom other unemployed workers. In theDownriver and Buffalo projects workers dis-placed from their jobs by large layoffs in localauto and steel plants were targetted forprogramme eligibility. Displaced workers in-cluded in these two demonstrations were maleblue-collar workers with lengthy job tenurewho enjoyed high wages prior to being laid off.Programme services were provided promptlyafter plant closings to Downriver participantswhile, in Buffalo, there was a lengthy period ofpost-layoff unemployment prior to programmeparticipation.
Rather than targeting services to workersdisplaced from their jobs in particular masslayoffs, the Texas WAD and New Jersey UIprojects identified displaced workers by theireligibility for an ongoing adjustment assistanceprogramme- The 'kzas WAD project servedworkers eligible for JTPA Title III program-mes, while the New Jersey project was targetedto UI claimants over 25 years old who had atleast three years of tenure with their pre-layoffemployer and who could not provide a date at
9
which they expected to be recalled? Two of thesix WAD projects operated between 1983 and1985 are available for evaluation, namely in ElPaso and in Houston. As noted in the table,WAD programme services were provided to-groups of displaced workers other than themostly white male steel and auto workers tar-geted for assistance in the Downriver and Buf-falo projects. The Houston project also servedwhite males; but sizable groups of blacks,Hispanics, and Asians are represented amongsample members. Over 90 percent of theworkers sampled in El Paso are Hispanics, withabout equal numbers of men and women. Turn-ing to the New Jersey project, workers laid offfrom jobs in the trade and services industries,as well as in manufacturing, are includedamong UI claimants who met the eligibilityconditions. Men and women are about equallyrepresented in the eligible population, whichalso includes sizable proportions of blacks andHispanics and workers aged 55 and older.
C. Results .
As indicated in 'Bible 2, the evaluationdesign differs sharply between the Downriverand Buffalo projects and the Texas WAD andNew Jersey projects. The two earlier projectsuse a treatment group/comparison groupdesign, where the two groups oflaidoffworkersare sirawn from different plants. In contrast,the two later programmes implemented a trulyexperimental design in which eligible workerswere randomly assigned to treatment and con-trol groups.
Beginning with the Downriver project,eligible displaced workers who opted to par-ticipate in the programme initially receivedJSA services followed, for those judged likelyto benefit, by some form of retraining (typicallyCI). Net earnings estimates range up to $122per week, but the most striking aspect of theestimates presented by Abt Associates is theirvariability depending on the phase of theprogramme and on the plants from which treat-ment and comparison group members wereselected. The incremental effect of classroom
tiaining above that of JSA is not reported, butKulik, Smith, and Stromsdorfer (1984: 91-92)conclude that CT did not significantly improveparticipants' post-programme reemploymentrates.
An interesting aspect of the Downriverprogramme is the systematic approach takenby programme designers in selecting classroomtraining curricula. Downriver staff membersfirst attempted to identify occupations forwhich demand was expected to grow in thelocal labour market. This task was ac-complished by reviewing economic forecastsand studies conducted by local universities,studying trade journals, and analyzing labourmarket data collected by the MichiganEmployment Security commission. Next, theactual demand for labour in the occupationsthat survived this scrutiny was verified throughinterviews with local employers and repre-sentatives of trade associations. It is importantto emphasize that Downriver officials soughtto retrain workers for occupations for whichthere was projected to be sufficient demand onthe part of a number of employers, so thatparticipants' reemployment opportunitieswere not tied to the fortunes of a single firm.For the most part, the training curriculaselected tovided classroom instruction inblue-collar trades. In contrast, as noted in Sec-tion II, state retraining programmes typicallyfollow the opposite approach of supplying cus-tomized training tailored to meet the specificneeds of an individual employer.
A noteworthy feature of the Buffaloproject is the relatively large percentage ofon-the-job training slots provided, andprogramme participants were channeled intoeither classroom training or OJT positionsafter receiving JSA services. Table 2 displaysprogramme effects on weekly earnings for theproject's "target-plant sample," which is arguedto be more reliable than the nontarget-plantsample because individuals offered pro-gramme services were a random sample ofworkers from the six area plants designated astarget plants.10 ISA-only services are found tohave a very large impact on average weeklyearnings measured over the first six post-
1 0
A .
programme months. At the same time, there islittle eviderce of an incremental effect abovethat of JSA for either classroom or on-the-jobtraining. Note also that the cost per participantfor the ISA/CT and ISA/OJT treatments ismore than three times that of ISA-only. It isclear that ISA is the only potentially cost effec-tive treatment of those evaluated.
The experimental design of the TexasWAD projects randomly assigned eligibleworkers to either of two treatment groups orto a control group. The first treatment groupreceived ISA services only (referred to as TierI). Members of the second treatment groupreceived JSA followed, if necessary, by moreexpensive classroom or on-the-job training(the Tier I/11 sequence). Judging from Table 2,only for women in El Paso is there evidencethat the Tier I/II WAD programme had a per-manent effect in increasing earnings andreducing UI benefits. For these women, theprogramme's effect on earnings at the end ofthe first year slightly exceeds programme costs.WAD also reduced UI benefits by an averageof $227 per participant measured over a 30-week period.
For a combined sample of men from bothEl Paso and Houston, quarter-by-quarter earn-ings estimates reported by Bloom (1990: 163)indicate that WAD participants werereemployed sooner than would have otherwisebeen the case. But ultimately, as seen in Tirb le2, the employment opportunities of male par-ticipants located at both sites were no betterthan for members of the control group. TheHouston programme also allows the differen-tial effect of 'Iler I/II versus Tier I services tobe estimated for males. Despite the highercosts of Tier II services (which were almostexclusively classroom training), the evidencesuggests that essentially no additional gainsaccrued from adding Tier II services to jobsearch assistance.
The selection of classroom training cur-.ricula was carried out much less systematicallyin the Buffalo and Tztas WAD projects than inthe Downriver programme. Corson, Maynard,and Wichita (1984: 75-77) point out in their
overview report on all six displaced workerdemonstration sites (including Buffalo) thatthe one-year duration of the project severelylimited both the careful selection of high-growth occupations and the necessary testingand assessment required to insure that par-ticipants possessed the motivation andacademic skills to benefit from formal class-room training. In general, CT was restricted tothose occupations and training deliverersamenable to short-duration, high-intensitycourses developed at short notice. Similarly,Bloom (1990: 139) points out that the disap-pointing results obtained for Texas WAD 'TierII services do not necessarily demonstrate thatsupplementing ISA with occupational trainingcannot be an effective adjustment assistancestrategy. Rather, he suggests that the blue-col-lar orientation of Tier II training curriculaavailable in the local community college wasnot well matched to the backgrounds and inter-ests of the mostly white-collar participants inthe Houston WAD project.
In the New Jersey UI Demonstration, alleligible claimants assigned to the three treat-ment groups received JSA services followed bya counseling/ assessment interview. Claimantsin the JSA-only groupwere then free to begintheir job search. Claimants in the ISA/retrain-ing group were offered the opportunity to en-roll in a CT or OJT programme. Acceptable CTprogrammeswhich were offered by a widerange of public and private training providers--were subject to the restrictions that their ex-pected duration not exceed six months and thatremedial education be offered only if necessaryto enable claimants to progress to vocationaltraining courses. Fmally, claimants in the JSA/reemployment bonus group were informed ofthe specifics of the bonus propamme andturned lose to begin job search.11
Corson et al. (1989) present quarterly netimpact estimates of treatment effects for thefirst year following the date of filing the initialUI claim. 'Bible 2 indicates that by the secondquarter after filing, participants offered theISA-only and ISA/reemployment bonus treat-ments enjoyed earnings that were significantlyhigher than earnings measured for the control
1 .1
group. By the fourth quarter, however, theearnings effect of both treatments had tailedoff to essentially zero. Looking at Ul benefits,the difference between the JSA-only andJSA/reemployment bonus estimates is largeand statistically significant indicating a sizableincrzmental effect of the bonus in speeding upreemployment. For JSA plus skill training,nevertheless, there is no evidence of either apermanent increase in earnings or expeditedreemployment. (Estimated net effects on earn-ings are even smaller in quarters three andfour.) The authors caution that this conclusionmay be misleading because of the low take-uprate (15 percent) among programme par-ticipants offered JSA/training. That is, anypositive effect of training for claimants whoactually received training services would besubstantially diluted because the vast majorityof participants in this treatment group chosenot to engage in a training programme.
The follow-up study of the New Jetseyprogramme by Anderson, Corson, and Decker(1991) is instructive because of its longer post-programme observation period and moredetailed look at the BA/training treatment,including separate net impact estimates for crand On Focusing only on claimants who ac-tually participated in a skill training pro-gramme (as opposed to the random sample ofall claimants offered the skill training treat-ment), classroom training is seen in liblz 3 tosignificantly reduce earnings in the initial twoquarters. This result is expected since trainingis likely to be ongoing during these quarters.But in quarters four through ten, CI' increasesearnings by as much as $582 per quarter rela-tive to the earnings of claimants in the BA-onlytreatment. Even larger and highly significantincremental effects are observed for OJTtrainees. The authors explain that the primaryreason for these exceptionally large OJT es-timates is that by the third quarter after theclaim date, OJT trainees were employed foralmost 11 of 13 weeks in that quarter as com-pared to less than seven weeks of employmentfor BA-only claimants. It must also be noted,in addition, that only 45 individuals actuallyreceived OJT services.
These results for skill training are clearlymuch more favorable than the evidencepresented for the other three demonstrationprojects. Nevertheless, Anderson, Corson, andDecker (1991: 37, 51) point out two reasons forcaution in basing policy on their results. First,since claimants receiving training are self-selected, the evidence cannot be used to arguethat training will increase earnings for a ran-domly chosen group of UI claimants. Second,evidence obtained for subgroups of claimantsindicates that BA/training has the largest im-pact for the same subgroups (such as highschool graduates) that are affected to thegreatest extent by the BA-only treatment.That is, retraining has a larger impact forclaimants who already possessed relativelymarketable skills than for claimants who wereless market ready. This reason for caution is notparticularly surprising since the limited-dura-tion, relatively low-cost classroom trainingcourses provided in New Jersey were designedto upgrade claimants' existing skills rather thanto provide training in a totally new occupation(see Corson et al. 1989: 109-11). An exampleof skill upgrading cited in the evaluation reportis that an individual with accounting skillsmight be trained to use a spreadsheet packageon a personal computer.
D. Evaluation of the TAA Programme
In this context, results obtained in a majorUSDOL study of the TAA programme areespecially relevant since TAA funds longer-term retraining intended to equip displacedworkers to enter a new occupation or industry.TAA participants also clearly exhibit the char-acteristics associated with displaced workers;namely, they are in most cases permanentlyseparated from their pre-layoff employers,typically because of a plant closing.
Drawing cases from ten states, the TAAevaluation study by Corson et al. (1993) isbased on interviews with nearly 4,800 samplemembers broken down into three groups: (I) asample of recipients of extended income-main-tenance benefits (called Trade Readjustment
12
Allowances or TRAs); (2) a sample of TAAtrainees, nearly all of whom were receivingTRA benefits; and (3) a comparison sample ofUI exhaustees from manufacturing jobs. Fur-ther disaggregation occurs for programme ser-vices received in 1987-88 and 1988-89.(Remember that in 1988 legislation was passedmaking retraining an entitlement for eligibleworkers and requiring retraining as a conditionfor receiving TRA benefits.) Survey respon-dents in all three samples tend to bepredominantly white and married, in their low40s, and high school graduates. Roughly 40percent of each sample is female.
TAA trainees were typically enrolled inprogrammes intended to develop specific jobskills in occupations different from the occupa-tions of their pre-displacement jobs. Most ofthese programmes were supplied by either avocational training centre or a local communitycollege, and the mean length of training ex-ceeded one year for both the pre-88 and post-88 TAA trainee samples. A majority of TAAtrainees failed to begin training until after theyhad exhausted their 26-week UI entitlementperiod. Thus many TAA trainees chose to entertraining only after they were jobless for a sub-stantial period of time, suggesting thatentrance into a retraining programme becamean option only after trainees recognized thatfinding a job in their old sector was not feasible.A $12,000 voucher allowed trainees to choosetheir own training programme with the assis-tance of Employment Service staff. While overhalf of TAA trainees had been machineoperators in their pre-layoff jobs, fewer thanfive percent pursued training in that occupa-tion. The occupations most frequently selectedby trainees were technical, mechanical/repair,managerial/professional, and administrativesupport.
Corson et al. (1993: Chs. W and VI) com-pare mean quarterly earnings for TRArecipients, TAA trainees, and UI exhausteesover 12 quarters beginning with the initial UIclaim. Focusing on the post-88 samples, themembers of all three groups start off with neg-ligible earnings because employment rates arevery low. The largest differences between the
TRA recipient and UI exhaustee samples ap-pear in the third and fourth quarters, whenmost of the UI exhaustees were no longereligible to receive UI benefits but most TRArecipients were still receiving TRA extendedbenefits. After the fourth quarter, earnings ofTRA recipients began to catch up with thoseof UI exhaustees, and by the ninth quarterTRA recipients were earning slightly more onaverage than UI exhaustees. Differencesfavouring TRA recipients continue to increascreaching a level of about $500 in quarter 12.This difference is not, however, statistically sig-nificant.
Figure 1. Mean quarterly earnings forthe TAA trainee and TRA recipient Post-88 Samples of the evaluation, for 12quarters
4Earnings (Thousands)
1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Quarter
I. TM Trainees ISZE Other TRA Recipients
Source: Corson, Decker, Gleason and Nicholson(1993: Figure V12).
* indicates a significant difference at the five percentlevel
13
Corson et al. (1993) suggest that the ap-propriate comparison group for TAA traineesis TRA recipients rather than UI exhaustees.As shown in Figure 1, mean earnings of TAAtrainees fall below those of TRA recipients inthe third to sixth quarters as would be expected
since trainees were more likely to participatein long-term training which would keep themout of the labour force longer. Thereafter,however, trainees' earnings rise faster thanthose of TRA recipients, so that by the twelfthquarter a statistically significant differencefavouring tra:nees of about $500 is found. This-reault is noteworthy because TAA trainees aremore likely to have switched industry or oc-cupation in their new job, and industry- andoccupation-switchers in general suffer greaterearnings losses than comparable stayers. Thus,TAA training appears to have had a positiveeffect in causing the earnings of industry- andoccupation-switchers to converge to the levelof earnings of displaced workers less likely tohave been obliged to make such a switch.
E. The National JTPA Study
Although it applies to the economicallydisadvantaged rather than displaced workers,useful additional evidence on tbe effectivenessof classroom versus on-the-job training is avail-able in a random-assignment study of the im-pact of programmes funded by Title II-A of.1TPA. The National JTPA Study was commis-sioned by the USDOL in 1986.
Using data for over 17,000 JTPA ap-plicants scattered across 16 locally ad-ministered sites, the evaluation report byBloom et al. (1992) provides net impact es-timates for four target groupsadult womenand men (aged 22 and older) and female andmale out-of-school youths (aged 16 to 21).Sample members are assigned randomly toeither a treatment group or a control group.12But before random assignment, individualswere classified into three service strategy sub-groups based on the services recommended byprogramme intake staff. The CT subgroup wasrecommended to receive classroom training inoccupational skills and basic education.13Members of the OJT/JSA subgroup wererecommended for on-the-job training or jobsearch assistance, or both (treatment groupmembers recommended for OJT were typically
enrolled in JSA while searching for an OJTposition or an unsubsidized job). Finally, mem-bers of the other services subgroup wererecommended for services including JSA, basiceducation, and work experiencebut not class-room training in occupational skills or OJT
Bloom et al. (1992) point out that adulttreatment group members in both the class-room training and OJT/JSA service subgroupswere much more likely than control groupa:Albers to have received the recommendedservice.14 Over an 18-month period followingrandom assignment, estimated effects on earn-ings of JTPA services are shown for adults inTable 4. For women, the CT results followedthe expected pattern; that is, earnings losses inthe first quarter or two, representing initialinvestment of time in training, followed byearnings gains increasing in size over theremaining quarters. The positive effectsmeasured for the last two quarters are statisti-cally significant. For men, on the other hand,none of the estimated effects is significantlydifferent from zero. Note that these estimatesare obtained for sample members assigned tothe service subgroup, not for those who actual-ly enrolled in a CT programme.
The OJT/JSA treatment has a more imme-diate and sustained positive impact on theearnings of both adult women and men than didclassroom training. This would be expected fora service strategy that emphasizes immediateplacement in either an OJT slot or an unsub-sidiztd job. Women in the OJT/JSA subgroupenjoyed positive and statistically significantearnings impacts of from $109 to $144 perquarter in five of the six quarters. Estimates formen are of similar magnitude in all but the firstquarter, although estimated impacts are lessoften statistically significant. Bloom et al.(1992) suggest that these earnings gains underJTPA are due primarily to increases in hoursworked, rather than to higher hourly earningswhile employed. The authors also mention thatprogramme staff tended to recommend themost jeb-ready applicants for the OJT/JSAser-vice strategy.
14
III. Private sector retraining programmes
Carnevale and Gainer (1989) estimatethat U.S. employers spend about $30 billionannually, or about 1 percent of payroll costs, onthe direct costs of formal training courses.Nevertheless, most companies spend nothingat all on formal training, and those that doconcentrate on managers, technicians, andprofessionals, not front-line employees. Conte(1991) suggests that fuliy 89 percent ofAmerican workers never receive any formaltraining from their employers. Other than inthe building trades, there is not an extensiveapprentice training system as exists in Germanyto supply highly skilled workers and to ease theschool-to-work transition of noncollege-bound youth. Nor among American companiesis there the long-standing commitment ofJapanese employers to design work experienceand training opportunities that continuethroughout a worker's career.
While the evidence is fragmentary, thereare clear indications that after years of neglectAmerican firms are facing up to the challengeposed by changes in technologywhich raise theskill requirements of jobs relative to the skillspossessed by many workers. The joint labour-management training programmes fashionedin a number of industries are probably the mostcomprehensive of private sector trainingprogrammes in the U.S. One of the most am-bitious and long-running of these programmesis the United Auto Workers-Ford Motor Co.Education, Development and ltainingProgramme (EDTP) negotiated as part of the1982 UAW-Ford collective bargaining agree-ment.15 Subsequent agreements have resultedin substantial expansion of programme servicesand growth in the number of UAW membersserved. EDTP's initial budget was ap-proximately $10 million a year (generated by afive-cents-an-hour contribution by Ford), andMiller (1992) estimates that Ford is currentlyspending $50 to $60 million annually on EDTPprogrammes.
While EDTP has national programmeguidelines, each plant establishes its own jointlabour-management EDTP committee todesign and implement local programme ap-plications. 'Bible 5 provides an overview of cur-rent EDTP programmes categorized bywhether they are generally available to all ac-tive workers or specifically targeted to laid-offworkers. An active Ford employee who is inter-ested in upgrading his or her skills can attendan Education Fair at the work site to learnabout local EDTP programmes. At these fairs,workers may interact with a Life/EducationMvisor who is available at every plant to offeran assessment of the individual's strengths andinterests ani to recommend appropriateprogramme services. Workers seeking to im-prove their basic mathematics or reading skills,obtain a high school diploma or prepare for theGED examination, or improve theirknowledge of the English language (for non-English speaking workers) can enroll in theStalls Enhancement Progam (SEP). Eachplant has a learning centre where a SEP in-structor is available to provide assistance at atime convenient to the worker.16 Post-secon-dary educational courses are subsidizedthrough the Education and 'Raining AssistancePlan (ETAP). The ETAP programme alsobrings classes on-site at the plant or local unionhall through the College and University Op-tions Program.
Laid-off workers have access to the sameassessment/counseling services, basic educa-tion through the SEP programme, and post-secondary formal education courses throughthe National Vocational Retraining AssistancePlan and Ilirgeted Vocational RetrainingProjects. In addition, workers seeking employ-ment outside Ford may receive pre- and post-layoff ISA services throlgh the Pre-LayoffCounseling and Job Search Skills Ihiningprogrammes, respectively. These services arelocated physically in Regional Career 5er-
15
vices/Reemployment Assistance Centers.Workers transferring to another Ford facilityare eligible for relocation assistance seminarsand loans.
Another noteworthy joint labour-manage-ment programme is the Quality Through Rain-ing Program (QM) established by the BoeingCo. and the International Association ofMachinists (IAM) as part of their 1989 collec-tive bargaining agreement. Like the UAW-Ford EDTP programme, QTTP offers adiverse range of opportunities for training,retraining, and personal growth. QTTP islikewise funded by Boeing on a cents-per-hourbasis. An important difference between thetwo programmes is the focus of QTTP onemployees whose employment opportunitiesare adversely affected by technological changeleading to job combinations, redeployment,and layoffs. To meet the retraining needs ofthese workers, QTIP services are organizedinto four programmatic areas, of which Laid-Off/Redeployed Employees and Career andPersonal Growth are by far the most importantin terms of budgeted expenditures.17
In the first of these areas, IAM-repre-sented employees who have received a layoffnotice are provided with two paid hours oforientation at a Boeing Outplacement Centeron how to find another job either within oroutside the company. The orientation sessionsare designed to familiarize employees with thewide variety of services available at outplace-ment centres. These services include facilitiesfor preparing and distributing resumes,telephones, resource rooms with directories ofarea and regional employers as well asnewspapers and 'other job-search materials,and videotaping equipment for recording mock
job interviews. Employees may also participatein workshops on such topics as identifyingmarketable skills, preparing resumes, conduct-ing effective job searches, and mastering inter-viewing techniques.
QTIP services available in the Career andPersonal Growth area are broken down intothree separate programmes: Education Assis-tance provides active and laid-off workers withup to $2,000 and $2,500, respectively, for tui-tion and other expenses at approved educa-tional and vocational institutions. The Hor-izons programme offers assessment, referral,and advising services to help employees defineand meet career goals. Fmally, English as aSecond Language provides paid time off foremployees with language limitations to im-prove their English skills.
Other than joint labour-managementtraining programmes, scattered evidence of alargely anecdotal nature indicates that U.S.firms are increasingly supplying their workfor-ces with two broad categories of training. Thefirst is on-site schooling providing basic skills inreading and mathematics and high schoolequivalency courses. Anthony Carnevale, chiefeconomist of the American Society of Trainingand Development, was recently quoted as es-timating that private sector companies spent$300 million on basic education in 1991, upfrom almost nothing ten years earlier (seeCooper 1992). In the second type of trainingprogramme, companies are enlisting the aid oflocal community colleges, vocational/technicalinstitutes, and even some four-year colleges indeveloping courses customized to meet theskill requirements of the firm and oftendelivered on-site.
IV. Lessons from U.S. experience
Compared to many European nations,government-sponsored etwloyment and train-ing programmes in the US. can fairly bedescribed as fragmented and underfunded.The first displaced worker programmes werebegun in 1962. Since then government fundinghas fluctuated dramatically as alternativeprogrammes have been developed and thenallowed to die. The one feature that sets theU.S. apart from other industrialized nations isits commitment to programme evaluation. Thispaper reviewed the evaluation evidence avail-able for five government-sponsored program-mes targeted to displaced workers and oneprogramme for disadvantagedworkers that dis-tinguishes the impact of classroom trainingfrom that of OM These evaluations make useof either a comparison or a control group tomimic what labour market outcomes wouldhave been for the treatment group in theprogramme's absence.
In addition to programme evaluationevidence, descriptions of particular privatesec-tor retraining programmes in the US are alsodiscussed. Private sector employers are clearlystarting to make more substantial investmentsin training programmes. These programmesare primarily directed to workers who areemployed but at risk of being displaced fromtheir jobs unless their technical skills areupgraded or basic educational deficiencies areremoved. But some employers also provideoutplacement services to laid-off workers.
Several lessons can be learned from theU.S. experience with displaced worker retrain-ing programmes.
Evidence provided by the displaced workerdemonstration projects indicates unam-biguously that job search assistance speedsup the reemployment of displaced workers.It appears that many displaced individualspossess sufficient marketable skills that theycan find new jobs with some assistance. JSA
allows for quick intervention beforeworkers disperse after layoffs and plantclosings; and, given their modest cost perworker, the evidence suggests that JSA ser-vices arc cost effective.
° Results from the displaced workerdemonstrations are less favourable forclassroom training in vocational skills. Onlythe follow-up study of New Jersey UIdemonstration focusing specifically on in-dividuals who actually received classroomtraining services (as distinct from the ran-dom 'sample of all eligible individuals of-fered CT) yields evidence of a positiveincremental effect of CT above that ofJSA-only services. it is worth noting that therelatively short-term, low-cost trainingprovided in New Jersey was designed toupgrade workers' existing skills rather thanto furnish training in a new occupation.
° Nevertheless, results from the TAA evawa-lion suggest that longer-term investments inclassroom training may be effective in al-lowing the earnings of TAA trainees - mostof whom changed occupation or industry toobtain reemployment - to converge to theearnings of a comparison group of displacedworkers who were more likely to have beenindustry and occupations stayers. (Dis-placed workers reemployed in the same oc-cupation and industry typically suffer less ofan earnings loss than occupation and in-dustry switchers). Reasonably favourableresults for classroom training are also ob-tained for adult female (but not adult male)disadvantaged workers in the random as-signment JTPA Title II-A evaluation. Itseems prudent to conclude from this mixedevidence that as a part of a menu of adjust-ment assistance services, the role of class-room training should be limited to carefullyselected workers who can be offered train-ing curricula tailored to their backgroundsand to the needs of local employers. Cer-
7i tamly an important lesson from the dis-placed worker demonstrations is the dif-ficulty of developing classroom trainingprogrammes at short notice that supply par-ticipants with marketable skills uponprogramme completion.
o Although the Buffalo displaced workerproject failed to indicate a positive earningseffect for on-the-job training, results fromthe New Jersey programme for treatmentgroup members who actually received OJTare highly favourable, indicating incremen-tal effects on earnings of as much as $3,000per quarter relative to earnings of the JSA-only treatment group. A note of cautionregarding this very positive result is that it isbased on a small number of OJT recipientswho are undoubtedly highly self-selected.Nevertheless, the OJT treatment is alsofound in the National JTPA Study to have a
more immediate and sustained positive im-pact on the earnings of both adult womenand men than classroom mining.
o In those demonstration projects that distin-guish programme impacts for men andwomen, women are usually found to benefitfrom retraining and other reemploymentservices to at least the same extent as men.
o Basic education is not included in the ser-vice mix supplied to participants in the dis-placed worker demonstrations. However,basic education is a key service generallymade available to current employees inprivate sector training programmes. Anec-dotal evidence available for these program-mes indicates a positive effect of basiceducation on both workers' productivityand their own morale. Employer expendi-tures on basic education appear to be risingrapidly.
18
Notes
1 These estimates are calculated by Ross and Smith (1993) using the 1984, 1986, 1988, 1990, and 1992Displaced Worker Survey supplements to the Consumer Population Survey.
2 Economically disadvantaged refers to individuals who receive (or are members of families that receive)cash welfare payments or to members of a family whose total family income falls below the poverty line.
3 In addition to easing TAA eligibility criteria, the Trade Act of 1974 allowed qualifying workers to receiveincome-maintenance benefits on top of UI benefits up to a maximum of 70 percent of previous earnings, forup to 52 weeks. Legislation passed in 1981 restricted the level of cash benefits to the level of Ul benefits, andstipulated that TAA payments could begin only after UI benefits were exhausted.
4 The other major titles of JTPA are Title II-A which fund.s employment and training services toeconomically disadvantaged adults and youth and the Title II-B summer youth programme.
5 This recommendation is based on the task force's favourable assessment of the Canadian IndustrialAdjustment Service (LAS) programme. Established in 1963, the IAS is a federally-funded agency intended toserve as a catalyst in bringing together local labour and management officials to locate job opportunities forworkers about to be laid off (advance notice of plant closings and layoffs is required by law). Its basic jobdevelopment strategy is to uncover job openings that may never be publicly announced and to make iteasierfor prospective employers to Consider displaced workers by assistingm the screening process.
6 A third majorpiece of legislation passed in 1988 is the Worker Adjustment and Retraini' ng Notification(WARN) act requiritig firms employing 100 or more workers to give 60 cigtys' notice ofa plant closing. In thecase of a layoff, the bill requires the 60 days' notice if the layoff involves 50 or more worlcers representing atleast one-third of the workforce at a place of employment.
7 The Buffalo programme is one of six dislocated worker demonstration projects scattered across thenation that received 'USDOL funding. Due to cott considerations, it was decided that the impact analysis shouldbe limited to one site. The Buffalo project was chosen at that site because of its size, a comprehensive mix ofservices, and the random selection of workers recruited for the programme from six 'larger 13lants.
8 More detail is found in Leigh (1990: Ch. 3).
9In addition to assessing the effectiveness of alternative packages of reemployment services, the second
major objective of the New Jersey project was to examine whether it is possible to use the UI system to identifyearly in the claim period unemployed workers who are likely to face prolonged spells of unemployment and*exhaust UI benefits. The approach used by NewJersey programme designers to distinguish the thsplaced fromother Ul claimants was to apply five screens during the fourth week of claiming benefits, the cumulative effectof which are the restrictions stated in the text.
" Nevertheless, selection bias is a real possibility for the target-plant sample because recruited workersfrom the target plants who opted not to participate in the programme wereplaced in the comparison group.Even after controlling for differences between the measured characteristics of treatment and comparisongroupmembers, it is likeb, that differences in unobserved characteristics (e.g.? motivation to find employment) remain.If such unobserved characteristics are related to workers' earnin&q, estimatedprogramme effects will be biased.A low programme participation rate of 16 percent suggests that the potential for a self-selection bias issubstantial. See Corson, Long, and Maynard (1985: 98-104) for their discussion of the problem and proposedsolutions.
11 The reemployment bonus is directed at the problem that the reemployment of displaced workers maybe delayed, not by inadequate job search skills, but by a lack of motivation toengage in search or by the naturalreluctance to accept a new job offering considerably lower wages and benefits than the pre-layoff job.
12Hotz (1992) argues that the National JTPA Study does not produce net impact estimates that ere validfor the entire JTPA system because the 16 sites studied (out of over 600 sites nationally) are not representativeof the system as a whole. The problem is that many sites made the decision not to participate in the Studybecause of concern that assignment of applicants to controlgroups would harm their ability to meet recruitmentgoals and performance standards, and the ethics of denymg services to members of the control groups duringthe follow-up period. Thus, estimates obtained are valid only for the sites that volunteered to participate in theStudy.
19
13 Basic education includes Adult Basic Education providing basic communications and mathematicstraining, high school or General Educational Development (GED) preparation, and English as a SecondLanguage.
14 For the Cr subgroup, 49 percent of the adult women treatment goup received classroom training inoccupational skills as compared to 29 percent of the control group. These rates were 40 percent versus 24percent among adult men. For the treatment group in the OJT/JSA subgroup, 29 percent of women and 27percent of mea received OJT compared to less than one percent of the correspondmg control groups.
/3 This ens' sion of the EDTP programme is largely based on materials kindly supplied by Bill Stevensonof the UAW and K. K. Dickinson of Ford.
16 In cooperation with the UAW, both General Motors and Chrysler have followed Ford in establishingformal literacy programmes. Begun in 1990, GM's Employee Excellence Development programme providesclassrooms in 30 of its facilities across the country, and plans to have them in *11150facilities by the end of 1992.Miller (1992) notes that, unlike Ford, GM pays workers for taking literacy trainingduring normal working hours.Chrysler's Technical Preparation Program was established in 1987 and offers basiceducation in classrooms at22 of its facilities.
17The other two programmatic areas are lbchnology Change and Job Combinations. lbchnology Changeoffers a basic industrial skills course to familiarize employees with a wider variety ofskills required on the shopfloor. In Job Combinations, once the decision has been made to combine similar jobs under a single new jobtitle, OM staff pull together information gathered from the individuals in these jobs and supervisors todetermine the training requirethents of the new job classification.
20
Tab
le 1
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of M
ajor
US.
Dis
plac
ed W
orke
r D
emon
stra
tion
Proj
ects
Proj
ect
Dow
nriv
er
Tim
e pe
riod
Met
hod
for
disd
ngui
dsin
g th
edi
spla
ced
Wor
ker
char
acte
rist
ics
Ree
mpl
oym
ent s
ervi
ces
deliv
ered
Tex
as W
AD
: Hou
ston
El P
aso
New
Ier
soy
July
198
0-Se
pt. 1
981
and
Nov
. 198
1-Se
pt. 1
983
Oct
. 198
2-Se
pt. 1
983
1983
45
July
198
6-fa
ll 19
81
Wal
ken
laid
off
fro
mpa
rtic
ular
aut
o an
d au
to p
arts
plan
ts
Wor
kers
laid
off
fro
m *
aler
ted
stee
l and
aut
o pl
ants
Wor
kers
elig
ible
for
IT
PAM
ae M
Ul c
laim
ants
with
3+
yea
rs o
fpr
e-la
yoff
job
tenu
re
Exp
erie
nced
mal
e pr
oduc
tion
wor
kers
ear
ning
hig
h pr
e-la
yoff
wag
es
Exp
erie
nced
mal
e pr
oduc
tion
wor
kers
ear
ning
hig
h pr
e-la
yoff
wag
es
Adu
lt M
ale
prof
eesi
onal
wor
kers
ear
ning
hig
h w
ages
laid
off
fro
m p
etro
chem
ical
plan
ts
Adu
lt H
ispa
nic
mal
es a
ndfe
mal
es e
arni
ng lo
w w
ages
laid
off
fro
m li
ght m
fg-
plan
ts
Adu
lt m
ales
and
fem
ales
laid
off
from
jobs
in m
fg.,
trad
e,an
d se
rvic
es
ISA
fol
low
ed, w
here
nece
ssar
y, b
y C
T
ISA
fol
low
ed, w
here
nece
sssz
y, b
y C
T o
ror
r
ISA
-onl
y (T
ier
1) o
r IS
Afo
llow
ed b
y C
T (
Tie
r +
/ + +
ISA
fol
low
ed b
y C
T (
Tie
rT
M)
(1)
ISA
-onl
y, I
SA f
ollo
wed
by C
T o
r O
JT, o
r (3
) IS
Afo
llow
ed b
y re
empl
oym
ent
bonu
s
2221
Tab
le 2
Est
imat
ed P
rogr
amm
e N
et I
mpa
cts
and
Cos
ts f
or th
e M
ajor
US
Dis
plac
ed W
orke
r D
emon
stra
tion
Proj
ects
Dem
onst
ratio
n pr
Oec
tE
arni
nge
riet
impa
ctU
l ben
efits
*
Dow
nriv
er-$
19 to
122
"L
evel
s no
t ava
ilabl
e. C
ost o
ftr
aini
ng m
ore
than
twic
e th
atof
ISA
JSA
:$1
34"
JSA
:$8
51IS
A/C
T:
inIS
A/C
T:
3,28
2IS
A/O
JT:
64IS
A/O
JT:
3,17
0
Tex
as W
AD
: Hou
ston
$547
-$20
4T
ier
I:$1
,460
-2,0
72T
ier
I/H
:2,
981-
3,38
1
EL
Pas
oM
m:
$770
Men
:-$
194
Tie
r I:
$1,4
60-2
072
Wom
en:
1,14
8**
Wom
en:
- 22
7"T
ier
UH
:72
5-1,
099
New
Jer
sey
UI
JSA
:$2
63"
JSA
:-$
87'
CT
:$2
,723
ISA
/trai
n.:
103
ISA
/trai
n.:
- 81
OJT
:1,
960
ISA
/bon
us:
278"
.JS
A/b
onus
:-1
70'
Eva
luat
ion
Met
hod
Tre
atm
ent a
nd c
ompa
riso
ngr
oups
ran
dom
ly d
raw
n fr
omdi
ffer
ent p
lant
s
Tre
atm
ent a
nd c
ompa
rieo
ngr
oups
ran
dom
ly d
raw
n fr
omdi
ffer
ent p
lant
s
Ran
dom
ass
ignm
ent o
f el
igib
lew
orke
rs to
trea
tmen
t and
cont
rol g
roup
s.
Ran
dom
ass
ignm
ent o
f el
igib
lew
orke
rs to
trea
tmen
t and
cont
rol g
roup
s.
Sour
ces:
Dow
nriv
er: K
uhl,
Smith
, and
Str
omsd
orfe
r (1
984:
Tab
les
3.4
and
3.6)
; Buf
falo
:C
orso
n, L
ong,
and
May
nard
(19
85: T
able
IV
.4);
Tex
as W
AD
: Blo
om (
1990
: Tab
le 8
.2);
and
New
Jer
sey:
Cor
son
et a
l. (1
989:
Tab
les
2, 3
, and
VII
.1).
'Mea
sure
d w
eekl
y fo
r D
ownr
iver
and
Buf
falo
, ann
ually
for
Tex
as W
AD
, and
qua
rter
ly f
or N
ew J
erse
y U
l. N
ew J
erse
y es
timat
es a
re m
easu
red
for
the
seco
nd q
uart
eraf
ter
initi
alU
l cla
im.
*Mea
sure
d ov
er 3
0 w
eeks
for
Tex
as W
AD
and
ove
r th
e be
nefi
t yea
r fo
r N
ew J
erse
y.'C
ost e
stim
ates
are
per
wor
ker
who
rec
eive
d se
rvic
es.
*Tar
get p
lant
ne.
impa
ct e
stim
atee
.
*5*,
**,
and
* in
dica
te s
igni
fica
nce
at th
e 1
perc
ent,
5 pe
rcen
t, an
d 10
per
cent
leve
ls, r
espe
ctiv
ely.
2324
Table 3 Estimated Incremental Effects of Classroom Training and OJT on the Quarterly Earnings ofTraining Recipients In the New Jersey UI Reemployment Demonstratimf
Quarter Classroom training OJT
1 4458" $1,469 "
2 - 635" 2,3473 - 314 2,6324 195 2,995"
5 384 3,174'
6 191 2,480'
7 323 2,652".
8 SOr 2,681'
9 409* 2,932'
10 582" 3,005".
Source: Anderson, Corson, and Decker (1991: Table 111.4).
Estimates are relative to thou, for claimants who received JSA-only services.***, **, and * indicate significance at the 1 percent, 5 percent, and 10 percent levels,- respectively.
25
Table 4 Estimated Imptct of JTPA Title II-A Programmes on Quarterly and 18-Month Earnings, by
Gender and Service Strategy
Service strategy and timeperiod
Adult women Adult Men
Classroom training
Quarter 1 -$ 70* -$101
Quarter 2 5 126
Quarter 3 52 213
Quarter 4 79 50
Quarter 5 144" 151
Quarter 6 188." -21
All Quarters 398 418
OTI7ISA
Quarter 1 $144"- $ 54
Quarter 2 81 135
Quetta 3 129 164*
Quarter 4 109* 94
Quartet 5 142" 133
Quarter 6 3r 201"
All Quarters 742" 781*
Source: Bloom et al. (1992: Exhibit S.6).***, ", and * indicate significance at the 1 percent, 5 percent, and 10 percentlevels, respectively.
26
Table 5 Selected UAW-Ford EDTP Programmes for Active and Laid-Off Workers
Programme Description
Active workers
Education Fairs
Life/Education Planning
Skills Enhancement
Education and Training AssistancePlan (ETAP)
Targeted Education, Training orCounselling Projects
College and University Options
Successful Retirement Planning
Laid-off Workeas
Career Day Conferences
Career Camellias and Guidance
Pre-Layoff Counselling
Job Search Shills Training
National Vocatioeal RetrainingAssistance Plan
Targeted Vocational RetrainingProjects
Relocation Assistance Seminars
Relocation Assistance Loans
Supplies information about EDTP services.
Provides assessment of personal strengths and interests aridcounrelling on appropriate EDTP programmes.
Provides basic education; prepares workers for GED exam orhelp them to complete requirements for high school diploma.Training is self-paced and generally available on-site.
Provides prepaid tuition and fees (up to $2,550 per year) forcourses leeding to a degree at an approved educationalinstitution. Financial assistance of up to $1,800 available fornon-degree courses.
Funds pilot projects that appear to be responsive to the needs ofworkers at a local plant.
Facilities use of ETAP in making college courses available on-site
16-hour workshop to help workers plan the transition toretirement.
Supplies information about EDT? services
Assists workers to develop perso.nal and career goals.
Provides pre-layoff counrelling to workers in the event of anindefinite layoff without the prospect of recall or future Fordplacement
Provides self-directed job search skills, labour marketinfo:123E0m, interviewing skills, and professional job searchassistance.
Provides prepsid tuition and fees (up to $6,000) for courses atapproved educational institutions.
Provides prepaid techniml skills trainink in hi&-dernandoccupations identified as having job oppornmities.
Provides information on housing, medical care, and schools toworkers transferring to another Ford facility.
Provides financial assistance to workers transferring to anotherFord facility in a different labour market area.
27
Bibliography
Anderson, Patricia, Walter Corson, and Paul Decker. 1991. The New Jersey UnemploymentInswance Reemploy-ment Demonstration Project Follow-Up Report. (Washington, Unemployment Insurance Occasional Paper 91-1,US. Department of Labor).
Sednarzik, Robert W. 1993. "An analysis of US. industries sensitive to foreign trade, 1982-87." in Monthly LaborReview 116 (February): pp. 15-31.
Bloom, Howard S. 1990. Back to work: Testing reemployment services for displaced workers. (Kalamazoo, MI: WE. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research).
Bloom, Howard S., Larry L Orr, George Cave, Stephen H. Bell, and Fred Doolittle. 1992. The National17PAStudy: Title II-A Impacts on Earnings and Employment at 18 Months. (Abt Associates).
Carnevale, Anthony R, and Leila J. Gainer. 1989. The learning entelprise. (The American Society for Trainingand Development).
Conte, Christopher. 1991. "Labour Letter." in The Wall Street Journal (October 24/: Al).
Cooper, Helene. 1992. "The new educators: Carpet firm sets up an in-house school to stay competitive." in TheWall Street Journal (October 5: Al, A6).
Corson, Walter, Rebecca Maynard, and Jack Wichita. 1984. "Process and implementation issues In the designand conduct of programmes to aid the reemployment of dislocated workers? in Mathematica Policy Research(October 30).
Corson, Walter, Sharon Long, and Rebecca Maynard. 1985. "An impact evaluation of the Buffalo DislocatedWorker Demonstration Programme! in Mathemadca Policy Research (12 March).
Corson, Walter, Shari Dunstan, Paul Decker, and Anne Gordon. 1989. New Jersey Unemployment InsuranceReemployment Demonstration Project (Washington Unemployment Insurance Occasional Paper 89-3, U.S.Department of Labor).
Corson, Walter, Paul Decker, Phillip Gleason, and Walter Nicholson. 1993. "International trade and workerdislocation: Evaluation of the trade adjustment assistance program." in Mathematica Policy Research (April).
Haveman, Robert H., and Daniel H. Saks. 1985. Mansatlantic lessons for employment and training policy." inIndustrial Relations 24 (Wmter): pp. 20-36.
Hotz, Joseph V. 1992. "Designing an evaluation of the Job Maining Partnership Act" in Charles F. Manski andInvin Garfinkel, eds., Evaluating welfare and training progrwns. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).pp. 76-114.
Karr, Albert R. 1991. "Glum holiday: Unlike past recessions, this one Is battering white-Collar workers! in TheWall Street kunwl (December 2, Al, A2).
Kulik, Jane, D. Alton Smith, and Ernst W Stromsdorfer. 1984. The Dow:river Community Conference EconomicReadjustment Programme: Fmal Evaluation Report. (Abt Associates 18 May).
Leir,h, Duane E. 1989. ASsisting displaced workers: Do the states have a better idea? (Kalamazoo, MI: W. E.Upjohn Institute for Employment Research).
--.1990.Does trainingworkfor displaced woricers?A survey of aistingevidence. (Kalamazoo, MI: W E. UpjohnInstitute for Employment Research).
Miller, Krystal. 1992. "At GM, the Three R's Are the Big Three." in The Wall Street Journal (3 July, Bl, B5).
Ross, Murray N., and Ralph E. Smith. 1993. Displaced workers: Dvnds in the 1980s and implications forthe future(Washington, Congressional Budget Office).
28
U.S. General Accounting Office. 1987. Dislocated workers: Local programmes and outcomesunder the JobTraining Partnership Act. (Washington, GAO/HRD -87-41).
U.S. Department of Labor. 1986. Economic adjustment and worker dislocation in a competitive society.(Washington, Report of tbe Secretary of Labor's Task Force on Economic Adjustmentand Worker Dislocation).
29
ISBN 92-2-109256-9
20