Routine task intensity and overeducation persistence: evidence from individual-level panel data
Leszek Wincenciak, Gabriela GrotkowskaPurpose
This paper analyses whether overeducation is more persistent in routine-intensive jobs than in non-routine jobs, using individual-level labour-market transitions to compare outcomes across occupations with different task profiles.
Design/methodology/approach
For the quantitative analysis, we use a Heckman probit model with sample selection (Heckman, 1979), which allows us to control for non-random selection into overeducation status in the first period.
Findings
The study finds that workers in more routine jobs are more likely to experience persistent overeducation. Importantly, the risks of remaining overeducated are significantly higher for women, older cohorts of workers, employed in smaller firms, temporary contracts and for job stayers.
Research limitations/implications
The study is limited to the period of 2019–2020, making it challenging to capture long-term trends.
Social implications
The evidence implies that routine-intensive employment can generate durable forms of educational mismatch, contributing to inefficient human-capital allocation and widening inequality unless accompanied by effective lifelong learning, career progression and firm-level training policies. These measures are essential to ensure that workers, especially those in younger cohorts (graduates), can effectively navigate the rapidly changing labour market landscape shaped by technological progress, even if initially overeducated, transition quickly to better matched jobs.
Originality/value
The paper offers novel evidence on the dynamics of overeducation by linking individual-level panel data with task-based indicators of job routine intensity, shifting the focus from static mismatch to persistence of overeducation.