Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Analyzing the Best- and Worst-Paid Occupations: A Case of Turkey

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 32 Sayı: 1, 243 - 269, 13.07.2017
https://doi.org/10.24988/deuiibf.2017321565

Öz

The level of remuneration is indicative for the labour market in terms of an objective assessment of the value of work done. The wage level and behaviour play an indisputable role in the economy of every country. This paper deals with the 2011‒2014 wage distribution trends of the best-paid and worst-paid occupations divided according to TUIKEUROSTAT-OECD classification. The three highest- and lowest-paid jobs from each occupational group are identified. Twenty-four wage distributions have been analysed. An integral part of the research is the assessment of the gross monthly wage dependence on a particular employee’s occupation.

Kaynakça

  • ALANIZ, E., GINDLING, T. H., TERRELL, K. (2011). “The Impact of Minimum Wages on Wages, Work and Poverty in Nicaragua”, IZA Discussion paper series, No. 5702: 1-47.
  • BALTAGİ, B.H., BAŞKAYA, Y.S., HULAGU, T. (2011). “The Turkish Wage Curve: Evidence from the Household Labor Force Survey”, Working Paper 1106: Research and Monetary Policy Department, Ankara: Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey.
  • BATTISTI, M., FELBERMAYR, G.J., PERI, G., POUTVAARA, P. (2014). “Immigration, Search, and Redistribution: A Quantitative Assessment of Native Welfare”, NBER Working Paper No. w20131.
  • BRANUCKER, H., JAHN, E. (2011). “Migration and Wage-setting: Reassessing the Labor Market Effects of Migration”, Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 113(2): 286–317.
  • CAI, H., CHEN, Y., ZHOU, L.A. (2010). “Income and Consumption Inequality in Urban China”, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 58: 385‒413.
  • DAGUM, C. (1997). “A Systematic Approach to the Generation of Income Distribution Models”, Journal of Income Distribution, 6:105‒126.
  • DEMİR, O. (2001). “Türkiye’de Kamu Açıkları ve Artış Sebepleri”, D.E.Ü. İİBF Dergisi, 16(2):11-30.
  • EUROSTAT(2015). Labour Market and Labour force survey (LFS) Statistics European Union Labour Force Survey - Annual Results 2015.
  • EVANGELISTA DE CARVALHO FILHO, I. (2012). “Household Income as a Determinant of Child Labor and School Enrollment in Brazil: Evidence from a Social Security Reform”, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 60:399‒435.
  • FIDRMUC, J., SENAJ, M. (2014). “Income, Schooling and Housing Wealth during Economic Reforms, Finance a úvěr”, 64: 160‒176.
  • FIELDS, G.S. (2010). “Does Income Mobility Equalize Longer-term Incomes? New Measures of an Old Concept”, Journal of Economic Inequality, 8: 409-427.
  • GHOSHEH, N. (2013). “Wage protection legislation in Africa”, Conditions of Work and Employment Branch, Geneva: ILO.
  • HASSAN, I. B., AZALİ, M., LEE, C. (2014). “Feldstein-Horioka Puzzle and International Capital Mobility in High Income Countries: A Pool Mean Group Approach”, Engineering Economics, 25: 480‒486.
  • HUSSMANNS, R. (2004). Defining and Measuring Informal Employment, Geneva: International Labour Office.
  • HUSSMANNS, R. (2005), “Measuring the informal economy: From Employment in the Informal Sector to Informal Employment”, ILO Working paper, No. 53.
  • IMMERVOLL, H. (2007). “Minimum Wages, Minimum Labour Costs and the Tax Treatment of Low-Wage Employment”, IZA Discussion Paper, No. 2555.
  • NORDMAN, C.I., ROUBAUD F. (2009). “Reassessing the Gender Wage Gap in Madagascar: Does Labour Force Attachment Really Matter?”, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 57(4): 785-808.
  • OECD (2010). OECD Economics Surveys: Turkey 2010, Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
  • OECD (2012). OECD Economics Surveys: Turkey 2011, Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
  • OECD (2015). OECD Economics Surveys: Turkey 2014, Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
  • ÖZCAN, Y. ÜÇDOĞRUK, Ş., ÖZCAN, K.M. (2003). “Wage Differences by Gender, Wage and Self-Employment in Urban Turkey”, Journal of Economic Cooperation, 24(1): 1-24.
  • ÖZER, H. (2001). “Erzurum’da Hanehalklarının Tüketim Kalıplarının Yapısı ve Gelir Hipotezlerinin Analizi”, D.E.Ü. İİBF Dergisi, 16(1):35-46.
  • RIENER, G. (2012). “Inequality and Mobility of Household Incomes in Europe: Evidence from the EHCP”, Applied Economics, 44:279-288.
  • SALEM, B., BENSIDOUN, I., PELEK, S. (2011). “Informal Employment in Turkey: An Overview”, Région et Dévelopement, 34: 58-84.
  • TANSEL, A., DALGIC, B., GUVEN, A. (2014). “Wage Inequality and Wage Mobility in Turkey”, IZA Discussion paper series, no. 8669:1-53.
  • Totty, E. (2015). “The Effect of Minimum Wages on Employment: A Factor Model Approach”, IRLE Working Paper No. 110-15. http://irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers/110-15.pdf
  • Turkish Statistical Institute (2011). Income and Living Conditions Survey Micro Data Set (2008-2010).
  • Turkish Statistical Institute (2012). Press Release on the Household Labor Force Survey for December 2011.
  • Turkish Statistical Institute (2015). Press Release on the Household Labor Force Survey for December 2014.
  • TURNER, J. R., THAYER, J. F. (2001). Introduction to Analysis of Variance. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  • UYGUÇ, N. (2003). “Cinsiyet, Bireysel Değerler ve Meslek Seçimi”, D.E.Ü. İİBF Dergisi, 18(1):93-103.
  • World Bank (2014). Turkey Country Economic Memorandum (CEM) on Informality: Causes, Consequences and Policies, Washington D.C.: The World Bank.

En Çok ve En Az Kazandıran Meslekler Analizi: Türkiye Örneği

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 32 Sayı: 1, 243 - 269, 13.07.2017
https://doi.org/10.24988/deuiibf.2017321565

Öz

Ücret düzeyi, işgücü piyasasında yapılmış bir işin değerini objektif olarak ölçmek için kullanılan bir göstergedir. Ücret düzeyi ve davranışın her ülke ekonomisinde rolü tartışılmazdır. Bu makalede, Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu, Avrupa İstatistik Ofisi, Ekonomik Kalkınma ve İşbirliği Örgütünün sınıflandırmasına göre belirlenmiş en çok ve en az kazandıran mesleklerde 2010-2014 dönemine ait ücret dağılım eğilimleri ele alınmaktadır. Araştırmanın değişkeni, Türk Lirası ( ) olarak ödenen aylık brüt ücrettir. Araştırmada yirmi dört ücret dağılımı incelenmiştir. Ücret düzeyinde farklılıklar ve iki mesleki grup arasında farklılaşma görülmüştür. Aylık brüt ücretin belirli bir çalışanın mesleğine bağımlılığının değerlendirilmesi araştırmanın ayrılmaz bir parçasını oluşturmaktadır.

Kaynakça

  • ALANIZ, E., GINDLING, T. H., TERRELL, K. (2011). “The Impact of Minimum Wages on Wages, Work and Poverty in Nicaragua”, IZA Discussion paper series, No. 5702: 1-47.
  • BALTAGİ, B.H., BAŞKAYA, Y.S., HULAGU, T. (2011). “The Turkish Wage Curve: Evidence from the Household Labor Force Survey”, Working Paper 1106: Research and Monetary Policy Department, Ankara: Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey.
  • BATTISTI, M., FELBERMAYR, G.J., PERI, G., POUTVAARA, P. (2014). “Immigration, Search, and Redistribution: A Quantitative Assessment of Native Welfare”, NBER Working Paper No. w20131.
  • BRANUCKER, H., JAHN, E. (2011). “Migration and Wage-setting: Reassessing the Labor Market Effects of Migration”, Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 113(2): 286–317.
  • CAI, H., CHEN, Y., ZHOU, L.A. (2010). “Income and Consumption Inequality in Urban China”, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 58: 385‒413.
  • DAGUM, C. (1997). “A Systematic Approach to the Generation of Income Distribution Models”, Journal of Income Distribution, 6:105‒126.
  • DEMİR, O. (2001). “Türkiye’de Kamu Açıkları ve Artış Sebepleri”, D.E.Ü. İİBF Dergisi, 16(2):11-30.
  • EUROSTAT(2015). Labour Market and Labour force survey (LFS) Statistics European Union Labour Force Survey - Annual Results 2015.
  • EVANGELISTA DE CARVALHO FILHO, I. (2012). “Household Income as a Determinant of Child Labor and School Enrollment in Brazil: Evidence from a Social Security Reform”, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 60:399‒435.
  • FIDRMUC, J., SENAJ, M. (2014). “Income, Schooling and Housing Wealth during Economic Reforms, Finance a úvěr”, 64: 160‒176.
  • FIELDS, G.S. (2010). “Does Income Mobility Equalize Longer-term Incomes? New Measures of an Old Concept”, Journal of Economic Inequality, 8: 409-427.
  • GHOSHEH, N. (2013). “Wage protection legislation in Africa”, Conditions of Work and Employment Branch, Geneva: ILO.
  • HASSAN, I. B., AZALİ, M., LEE, C. (2014). “Feldstein-Horioka Puzzle and International Capital Mobility in High Income Countries: A Pool Mean Group Approach”, Engineering Economics, 25: 480‒486.
  • HUSSMANNS, R. (2004). Defining and Measuring Informal Employment, Geneva: International Labour Office.
  • HUSSMANNS, R. (2005), “Measuring the informal economy: From Employment in the Informal Sector to Informal Employment”, ILO Working paper, No. 53.
  • IMMERVOLL, H. (2007). “Minimum Wages, Minimum Labour Costs and the Tax Treatment of Low-Wage Employment”, IZA Discussion Paper, No. 2555.
  • NORDMAN, C.I., ROUBAUD F. (2009). “Reassessing the Gender Wage Gap in Madagascar: Does Labour Force Attachment Really Matter?”, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 57(4): 785-808.
  • OECD (2010). OECD Economics Surveys: Turkey 2010, Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
  • OECD (2012). OECD Economics Surveys: Turkey 2011, Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
  • OECD (2015). OECD Economics Surveys: Turkey 2014, Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
  • ÖZCAN, Y. ÜÇDOĞRUK, Ş., ÖZCAN, K.M. (2003). “Wage Differences by Gender, Wage and Self-Employment in Urban Turkey”, Journal of Economic Cooperation, 24(1): 1-24.
  • ÖZER, H. (2001). “Erzurum’da Hanehalklarının Tüketim Kalıplarının Yapısı ve Gelir Hipotezlerinin Analizi”, D.E.Ü. İİBF Dergisi, 16(1):35-46.
  • RIENER, G. (2012). “Inequality and Mobility of Household Incomes in Europe: Evidence from the EHCP”, Applied Economics, 44:279-288.
  • SALEM, B., BENSIDOUN, I., PELEK, S. (2011). “Informal Employment in Turkey: An Overview”, Région et Dévelopement, 34: 58-84.
  • TANSEL, A., DALGIC, B., GUVEN, A. (2014). “Wage Inequality and Wage Mobility in Turkey”, IZA Discussion paper series, no. 8669:1-53.
  • Totty, E. (2015). “The Effect of Minimum Wages on Employment: A Factor Model Approach”, IRLE Working Paper No. 110-15. http://irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers/110-15.pdf
  • Turkish Statistical Institute (2011). Income and Living Conditions Survey Micro Data Set (2008-2010).
  • Turkish Statistical Institute (2012). Press Release on the Household Labor Force Survey for December 2011.
  • Turkish Statistical Institute (2015). Press Release on the Household Labor Force Survey for December 2014.
  • TURNER, J. R., THAYER, J. F. (2001). Introduction to Analysis of Variance. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  • UYGUÇ, N. (2003). “Cinsiyet, Bireysel Değerler ve Meslek Seçimi”, D.E.Ü. İİBF Dergisi, 18(1):93-103.
  • World Bank (2014). Turkey Country Economic Memorandum (CEM) on Informality: Causes, Consequences and Policies, Washington D.C.: The World Bank.
Toplam 32 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Meltem Ince Yenilmez

Mehmet Hulusi Demir

Yayımlanma Tarihi 13 Temmuz 2017
Kabul Tarihi 23 Ekim 2016
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2017 Cilt: 32 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Ince Yenilmez, M., & Demir, M. H. (2017). En Çok ve En Az Kazandıran Meslekler Analizi: Türkiye Örneği. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(1), 243-269. https://doi.org/10.24988/deuiibf.2017321565
AMA Ince Yenilmez M, Demir MH. En Çok ve En Az Kazandıran Meslekler Analizi: Türkiye Örneği. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. Temmuz 2017;32(1):243-269. doi:10.24988/deuiibf.2017321565
Chicago Ince Yenilmez, Meltem, ve Mehmet Hulusi Demir. “En Çok Ve En Az Kazandıran Meslekler Analizi: Türkiye Örneği”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 32, sy. 1 (Temmuz 2017): 243-69. https://doi.org/10.24988/deuiibf.2017321565.
EndNote Ince Yenilmez M, Demir MH (01 Temmuz 2017) En Çok ve En Az Kazandıran Meslekler Analizi: Türkiye Örneği. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 32 1 243–269.
IEEE M. Ince Yenilmez ve M. H. Demir, “En Çok ve En Az Kazandıran Meslekler Analizi: Türkiye Örneği”, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, c. 32, sy. 1, ss. 243–269, 2017, doi: 10.24988/deuiibf.2017321565.
ISNAD Ince Yenilmez, Meltem - Demir, Mehmet Hulusi. “En Çok Ve En Az Kazandıran Meslekler Analizi: Türkiye Örneği”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 32/1 (Temmuz 2017), 243-269. https://doi.org/10.24988/deuiibf.2017321565.
JAMA Ince Yenilmez M, Demir MH. En Çok ve En Az Kazandıran Meslekler Analizi: Türkiye Örneği. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. 2017;32:243–269.
MLA Ince Yenilmez, Meltem ve Mehmet Hulusi Demir. “En Çok Ve En Az Kazandıran Meslekler Analizi: Türkiye Örneği”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, c. 32, sy. 1, 2017, ss. 243-69, doi:10.24988/deuiibf.2017321565.
Vancouver Ince Yenilmez M, Demir MH. En Çok ve En Az Kazandıran Meslekler Analizi: Türkiye Örneği. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. 2017;32(1):243-69.