The Business Case for Good Jobs

Jobs that include employee training and good working conditions have higher worker productivity and lower operational costs associated with turnover, boosting firm profitability and economic growth.

In this article
Employees work at their desks in a San Francisco office.
Employees work at their desks in a San Francisco office on March 24, 2021. (Getty/Justin Sullivan)

Introduction and summary

Good jobs benefit workers, employers, and the economy. An overview of existing research shows that employers see greater profitability from improved job quality due to more productive workers, better employee recruitment, and greater worker retention.1 These benefits flow through to the economy at large by promoting higher productivity and increased consumer spending, driving economic activity, and creating broad economic benefits that allow employers, employees, and their communities to thrive.2 In short, investing in employee training and ensuring that workers feel safe at work makes them happier and more productive, leading to better products and services, helping organizations grow and succeed, and fueling a strong economy.

Over the past several years, government agencies and nonprofit organizations have proposed varied definitions of what constitutes a good job.3 Notably, in 2022, the departments of Labor and Commerce released their “Good Jobs Principles,” which outline the following components: recruitment and hiring; benefits; diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility; empowerment and representation; job security and working conditions; organizational culture; pay; and skills and career advancement.4

Higher productivity, paired with decreased turnover, equals better organizational performance, which leads to broad economic gains.

This report focuses specifically on two actionable and often underappreciated components of good jobs: worker training and working conditions, the latter including components such as physical safety and sexual harassment. Both training workers and improving working conditions help people get into and stay in jobs, which benefits employers and businesses. Two other components of good jobs—pay and paid leave—are briefly highlighted as well, as these features also benefit businesses and the economy.

Good jobs have good pay

Considerable evidence shows that when workers earn competitive wages, employers benefit from increased worker productivity and higher effort; in many cases, the wage increase pays for itself over the long run. Additionally, better pay improves worker morale, reduces discipline issues, attracts higher-quality candidates, and reduces worker turnover, resulting in a more experienced and productive workforce and savings in restaffing costs.5 Often, the net results are increased business profits: A 2020 study of hotel general managers showed that, on average, every 1 percent increase in annual compensation per worker nets an additional $1,213 in pretax profits over the same time period.6 Another study looking at warehouse workers showed that productivity increased by more than the cost of the wage increase, and the quit rate declined by about 19 percent.7 Better pay is also associated with direct benefits for local economies, through increased consumer spending, that flow through to businesses.8

How worker training benefits employers

Employer-provided training makes good business sense. Employer support for training, however, has decreased over time, meaning that many businesses are missing out on the benefits and opportunities of designing training specific to their organizational needs.9 When workers have access to quality employer-provided learning that enhances their knowledge and skills, employers see increases in worker productivity, decreased rates of absenteeism and turnover, greater innovation, and higher profitability.10 In fact, one study that evaluated the effects of employer-provided training showed an 8.6 percent return on investment.11 Studies focused on general training—training focused on generic, highly transferrable skills such as communication or project management—found mixed results regarding turnover,12 but training specific to a certain sector or firm, such as apprenticeships, has been shown to reduce turnover.13 Furthermore, investments in training benefit employers by helping workers become more productive, making them less likely to be injured, and ensuring they are less likely to leave. This helps organizations complete projects and meet long-term objectives.14

Several mechanisms can shift employee retention through behavioral choices. From a human resources management standpoint, training can increase workers’ commitment.15 Employers investing in employees’ skills and abilities improve worker attitudes and behaviors and decrease turnover,16 which benefits operational outcomes and leads to enhanced quality of products and services as well as increased innovation.17 All these things lead to improved financial outcomes, including return on training investment, increased profits, market returns, and better financial performance overall.18 A 2015 review of 92 training and human resources studies in the United States, United Kingdom, and other countries found that 73 percent showed positive financial performance.19

Benefits of training: By the numbers


Estimated return on investment of employer-provided training


Percentage of human resources studies that showed positive financial performance


Estimated value of apprenticeship investments for the median employer, per apprentice


Median return for every dollar employers invested in apprenticeships

Apprenticeships—which are longer-term, often sector-specific programs that allow workers to earn and learn—make particularly good business sense, as they are associated with decreased turnover and hiring costs as well as increased workplace diversity.20 A survey of employers using apprenticeship programs found a wide degree of productivity benefits, including improving workers’ skills, enhancing employers’ reputations, and investing in relationships with schools and training providers.21 In addition to these qualitative benefits, more measurable financial advantages are associated with apprenticeships. For instance, a U.S. Department of Labor evaluation of the American Apprenticeship Initiative found that two-thirds of the employers surveyed recouped their investment in apprenticeships, with a median return on investment of $1.44—a return of $144 for every $100 invested.22 In a separate study of the same program, businesses that invested in apprenticeships experienced reduced turnover and improved company culture, valued at $25,045 per apprentice for the median employer.23

Good jobs have paid leave

Paid leave is an essential component of good jobs that helps both employers and employees. It includes paid sick time and paid family and medical leave, which enable workers to care for themselves or others in the short or long term.24 Yet almost two-thirds of low-wage workers in the United States lack access to paid sick leave, and America is the only industrialized nation without a federal paid family and medical leave policy.25

Despite opponents’ claims, research and data show that paid sick leave helps, rather than harms, businesses.26 There is extensive evidence of the benefits of paid sick leave, including increased worker productivity through reduced presenteeism and improved morale.27 Paid sick time is also specifically associated with a reduction in the number and severity of workplace injuries, with studies showing that stress and illness can impair decision-making.28 Additionally, paid sick leave reduces direct business costs through decreased employer-sponsored health insurance premiums, as the leave allows workers paid time off to see doctors and access preventive care.29 Paid sick time also increases firms’ profitability and performance alongside the broader economic benefits of improved public health and reduced contagion.30

It follows, then, that paid sick leave is associated with stronger, more robust labor markets.31 Because paid sick leave benefits businesses in locations that mandate it, most companies have supported the policy after its enactment and enforcement.32

Similarly, paid family and medical leave benefits employers through increased worker productivity, employee retention, and improved recruitment.33 While the United States does not have a federal paid family and medical leave policy, 13 states and the District of Columbia have enacted their own guarantees.34 In the absence of government paid family and medical leave programs, employers can choose to provide the benefit. When they do, workers are more likely to recommend their employer to friends, bolstering talent acquisition.35 Crucially, access to paid family and medical leave increases employee commitment and retention, with employees more likely to return to work after taking paid leave for health or caregiving reasons.36

Employers in states with paid family and medical leave experience productivity increases of about 5 percent compared with employers in states without it, partly because of associated improvements in morale and increases in productivity for employees with chronic conditions.37 Paid family and medical leave helps drive improved revenue and profits; and in states that offer it, employers support the programs because they have proven successful for employees and employers alike.38

How good working conditions benefit employers

Good working conditions are broad in scope. They include, but are not limited to, conditions that allow workplaces to be free of sexual harassment and retaliation, as well as safe and healthy, for all workers.39 When employers create these elements within workplaces, worker productivity and retention are higher and employers have better reputations and perform better financially.

This section highlights two components of good working conditions: allowing workers to be free from sexual harassment and protecting their physical safety.

Workplaces free from sexual harassment

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) defines sexual harassment in the following way:

Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when this conduct explicitly or implicitly affects an individual’s employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual’s work performance, or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment.40

While people of all gender identities and racial and ethnic groups face sexual harassment in the workplace, respondents to a 2022 survey who identified as transgender or gender nonconforming reported experiencing higher rates of harassment.41 Sexual harassment also disproportionately affects women, with more than 1 in 3 women experiencing workplace harassment.42 These experiences are often exacerbated at the intersection of sex and race, with cis women of color—especially Black women—often experiencing sexual harassment layered with racial discrimination.43 The majority of workplace sexual harassment goes unreported as workers attempt to avoid employer retaliation, and with good reason: Between fiscal years 2018 and 2021, 44 percent of harassment complaints filed with the EEOC also included a charge that employers had retaliated.44

Ensuring that employees are free from sexual harassment is good for business. Sexual harassment has a significant detrimental impact on worker productivity, directly inflicting harm on survivors, bystanders, and employers.45 Evidence shows that sexual harassment harms mental health and decreases job satisfaction for survivors and bystanders.46 This is problematic for employers because employees’ well-being and job satisfaction are directly linked to higher worker productivity and retention.47 Additionally, employee satisfaction influences customer loyalty, profitability, and long-term stock returns, with companies that employ satisfied workers surpassing industry benchmarks by 2.1 percent from 1984 to 2009, likely because satisfied workers are more motivated and less likely to leave.48

Moreover, survivors of sexual harassment are more likely to experience additional harm that can lead them to be less productive, with one study showing that women in the construction trades who experience gender discrimination or harassment are two times more likely to be injured at work.49 Insensitive, inappropriate, or retaliatory responses to reports of sexual harassment exacerbate and increase survivors’ trauma and distress. This, in turn, allows a toxic work culture—“disrespectful, non-inclusive, unethical, cutthroat, and abusive”—to persist, causing widespread harm across workplaces.50

This means that, as mentioned above, the harms and costs of sexual harassment spread beyond those directly affected and infect the broader workplace.51 Workers who witness harassing behaviors have higher presenteeism, absenteeism, and turnover and decreased satisfaction.52 Furthermore, productivity decreases for individuals and teams when sexual harassment occurs: One study found that workplaces lose an estimated $22,500 in lost productivity per survivor and that team financial performance suffers due to increased conflict and decreased team cohesion when sexual harassment occurs.53

Workplace sexual harassment: By the numbers


Estimated lost productivity in workplaces as a result of sexual harassment, per survivor


Share of harassment complaints filed with the EEOC that also included a charge that employers had retaliated


Loss in an employer’s market value, on average, after a public announcement of sexual harassment


Loss in stock returns for employers associated with persistent rates of sexual harassment allegations

Other increased operational costs include more difficulty attracting talent. A full range of unfair and discriminatory behaviors, including sexual harassment, increase workers’ likelihood of leaving their jobs.54 Sexual harassment is more common in male-dominated fields, including STEM, where it is linked to workers wanting to leave their jobs; yet each STEM departure has a hefty price tag, ranging from $110,000 to $1.5 million.55 The concentration of sexual harassment in male-dominated fields impedes recruitment and further ingrains occupational segregation and the gender pay gap.56 Sexual harassment is also linked to direct employer costs around legal liabilities.57

In addition to decreased productivity and retention, sexual harassment in the workplace is associated with decreased financial performance for employers. In the short-term, a public announcement of sexual harassment is linked to a 1.5 percent loss in market value, on average, and harms public sentiment about the firm.58 One evaluation reviewed 1,100 firms and found that persistent rates of sexual harassment allegations are associated with a loss of 17 percent in stock returns, decreased operating profitability, and increased labor costs for up to five years.59

The evidence is clear: It is in the best interests, financial and otherwise, of employers to both proactively prevent and appropriately respond to sexual harassment.

Protection of physical safety

Ensuring that workplaces are physically safe can reduce incidents that hinder productivity and increase direct operational costs. In 2021, the direct costs of work-related injuries were $58 billion in the United States.60 Across all private and public sectors in 2021, employers reported that nearly 3.2 million workers had work-related illnesses and injuries.61 Additionally, 5,190 people died on the job, with Black and Latino workers disproportionately represented among workplace fatalities.62 These illnesses, injuries, and deaths—many of which are preventable—harm families, communities, and employers.63 Efforts to increase workplace physical safety can target a multitude of issues that vary across industries. Preventive measures can address prolonged exposure to high temperatures and extreme weather, ergonomic issues, musculoskeletal injuries, back problems, and injuries arising from slips, falls, and other accidents.64

Investing in safety prevention is a cost-effective way to reduce productivity losses and other costs associated with safety incidents.

Employers who prioritize physical safety in the workplace can expect fewer accidents, injuries, and illnesses.65 This leads to cost savings in various areas, including lower workers’ compensation expenses and reduced medical costs. In addition, investing in safety prevention is a cost-effective way to reduce productivity losses and other costs associated with safety incidents.66 Businesses also benefit from increased safety by avoiding fines and reputational costs. For example, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recently increased its maximum penalties for fines—up to $156,259 per violation—and publicly names offending companies.67 Safety protections also can help employers attract and retain workers. A 2017 survey showed that employees count a safe working environment among their top considerations when weighing job options, giving safer employers a recruiting edge.68

Protection of physical safety: By the numbers


Direct costs of U.S. work-related injuries in 2021


Number of reported work-related illnesses and injuries in 2021


Increased safety measures’ rate of return on capital


Greater performance by companies that prioritize worker wellness and safety versus the S&P 500

Moreover, employers’ efforts to improve physical safety in the workplace are linked to significant increases in productivity and financial performance. An economic analysis of net present value showed that increased safety measures have a 7.5 percent rate of return on capital.69 More holistically, companies that prioritize worker wellness and safety outperform the S&P 500 by more than 200 percent, delivering greater value for their investors.70 Employers of all sizes benefit from prioritizing safety. Injury prevention is linked to small business’ success, and small businesses that survive for more than five years have average injury rates that are less than half of those that fail within a year or two.71

Policy recommendations for creating good jobs

The federal government is investing in industrial policy to grow the middle class, and investments will be best served by ensuring that good jobs drive those policies forward.72 Many policy recommendations can contribute to consumers’ ability to afford necessities and bolster an economic climate that allows businesses to thrive. Policy solutions focused on creating good jobs can increase worker productivity, reduce turnover, and improve employers’ financial performance. A recent analysis indicates that turnover is higher in states where, on average, jobs have fewer benefits, lower pay, and fewer training opportunities.73

In particular, policymakers should pursue the following measures:

Support effective training opportunities

Policymakers need to focus on the provision of, and effective and additional support for, training and working conditions—two essential components of many other overlapping factors that support workers but often do not receive enough investment.74

Policymakers should provide better support for training that is more likely to have successful outcomes—specifically, training programs that are tailored to the unique needs of individual employees. Policies could include those that better connect secondary and postsecondary education, apprenticeship programs, and local workforce development agencies75 to build training programs aligned with employer needs.76 Finally, voluntary recognition and support of collective action would allow workers to voice their specific needs and promote safer workplaces.77

Address sexual harassment in the workplace

Policies addressing sexual harassment must be based on the fundamental values of equality and respect for diversity.78 In particular, EEOC recommendations and practices, alongside those of the White House “U.S. National Plan to End Gender-Based Violence,” should be operationalized to prevent and address sexual harassment in the workplace.79

Improve physical safety in the workplace

Although physical safety within the workplace will vary greatly depending on context and situations, it should be tailored to workers’ changing needs. OSHA recommends that broader workplace safety measures include robust health and safety programs that address risks and prevent workplace injuries, illnesses, and deaths.80 The process of implementing the programs should include worker participation in hazard identification and control, education and training, and program evaluation and improvement.

While it makes sense for employers and businesses to consider workers’ needs, policy levers are also necessary to create strong incentives for employers to ensure that all employees have access to good jobs, regardless of where they work. Policies such as the Family and Medical Insurance Leave (FAMILY) Act—a proposal to create a national paid leave program—can also help level the playing field, particularly regarding upfront investments from employers.81 Furthermore, fully funding agencies, such as the EEOC and OSHA, that provide technical assistance and have enforcement authority, can strengthen existing laws designed to protect workers.82


Good jobs drive successful employers and businesses. They also benefit all workers—particularly workers of color and women, who are disproportionately represented in low-wage jobs that lack training and safety. Investing in the provision of job training opportunities and better working conditions increases worker productivity and decreases turnover. As a result, employers see improved financial performance. Firms and workers, together, contribute to more economic activity, growing the middle class and strengthening the economy.


  1. Heather Boushey and Sarah Jane Glynn, “There Are Significant Business Costs to Replacing Employees” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2012), available at
  2. Marc Jarsulic, “Investing To Be Competitive: The New U.S. Industrial Strategy” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2023), available at
  3. Maureen Conway and others, “To Build Back Better, Job Quality Is the Key” (Washington: Aspen Institute and others, 2021), available at
  4. U.S. Department of Commerce and U.S. Department of Labor, “Good Jobs Principles,” available at (last accessed June 2023).
  5. James Hesford, Nicolas Mangin, and Mina Pizzini, “Using Fixed Wages for Management Control,” Journal of Management Accounting Research 32 (3) (2020): 137–154, available at; Natalia Emanuel and Emma Harrington, “The Payoffs of Higher Pay: Elasticities of Productivity and Labor Supply With Respect to Wages” (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 2020), available at; Daniel M. G. Raff and Lawrence H. Summers, “Did Henry Ford Pay Efficiency Wages?” (Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1986), available at; Carl Shapiro and Joseph E. Stiglitiz, “Equilibrium Unemployment as a Worker Discipline Device,” The American Economic Review 74 (3) (1984): 433–444, available at; Janet L. Yellen, “Efficiency Wage Models of Unemployment,” The American Economic Review 74 (2) (1984): 200–205, available at
  6. Hesford, Mangin, and Pizzini, “Using Fixed Wages for Management Control.”
  7. Emanuel and Harrington, “The Payoffs of Higher Pay: Elasticities of Productivity and Labor Supply with Respect to Wages.”
  8. Michael Reich, “Likely Effects of a $15 Federal Minimum Wage by 2024,” February 7, 2019, available at
  9. Angela Hanks and David Madland, “Better Training and Better Jobs: A New Partnership for Sectoral Training” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2018), available at
  10. Lorraine Dearden, Howard Reed, and John Van Reenen, “The Impact of Training on Productivity and Wages: Evidence from British Panel Data,” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 68 (4) (2006): 0305–9049, available at; Rita Almeida and Pedro Carneiro, “The return to firm investments in human capital,” Labour Economics 16 (1) (2009): 97–106, available at;

    Youngsang Kim and Robert E. Ployhart, “The Effects of Staffing and Training on Firm Productivity and Profit Growth Before, During, and After the Great Recession,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99 (3) (2014): 361–389, available at; Stéphane Renaud and Lucie Morin, “The impact of training on firm outcomes: longitudinal evidence from Canada,” International Journal of Manpower 41 (2) (2020): 117–131, available at; Patrick Kampkötter and Kathrin Marggraf, “Do employees reciprocate to intra-firm trainings? An analysis of absenteeism and turnover rates,” The International Journal of Human Resources Management 26 (22) (2015): 2888–2907, available at; Francis Green and others, “The Impact of Training on Labour Mobility: Individual and Firm-level Evidence from Britain,” British Journal of Industrial Relations 38 (2) (2000): 261–275, available at; Phyllis Tharenou, Alan M. Saks, and Celia Moore, “A review and critique of research on training and organizational-level outcomes,” Human Resource Management Review 17 (3) (2007): 251–273, available at

  11. Almeida and Carneiro, “The return to firm investments in human capital.”
  12. Kampkötter and Marggraf, “Do employees reciprocate to intra-firm trainings? An analysis of absenteeism and turnover rates”; Tharenou, Saks, and Moore, “A review and critique of research on training and organizational-level outcomes”; Kim and Ployhart, “The Effects of Staffing and Training on Firm Productivity and Profit Growth Before, During, and After the Great Recession.”
  13. Dr. Susan Helper and others, “The Benefits and Costs of Apprenticeship: A Business Perspective” (Cleveland, OH: Case Western Reserve University and Washington: U.S. Department of Commerce, 2016), available at
  14. Inge Sieben, “Does training trigger turnover – Or not?: The impact of formal training on graduates’ job search behavior,” Work Employment and Society 21 (3) (2007): 397–416, available at’_job_search_behaviour/links/54b7827a0cf24eb34f6eadd0/Does-training-trigger-turnover-Or-not-The-impact-of-formal-training-on-graduates-job-search-behaviour.pdf; Priyanka Dave, “Impact of Training on Firms’ Performance,” Finance and Human Resource Management 1 (1) (2016), available at; Michael J. Burke and others, “Relative Effectiveness of Worker Safety and Health Training Methods,” American Journal of Public Health 96 (2) (2006): 315–324, available at
  15. Sieben, “Does training trigger turnover – Or not?”; Kaifeng Jiang and others, “How Does Human Resource Management Influence Organizational Outcomes? A Meta-analytic Investigation of Mediating Mechanisms,” Academy of Management Journal 55 (6) (2012), available at
  16. Jiang and others, “How Does Human Resource Management Influence Organizational Outcomes?”; Sieben, “Does training trigger turnover – Or not?”; Renaud and Morin, “The impact of training on firm outcomes.”
  17. Sun Young Sung and Jin Nam Choi, “Effects of training and development on employee outcomes and firm innovative performance: Moderating roles of voluntary participation and evaluation,” Human Resource Management 57 (2018): 1339–1353, available at
  18. Kim and Ployhart, “The Effects of Staffing and Training on Firm Productivity and Profit Growth Before, During, and After the Great Recession”; Renaud and Morin, “The impact of training on firm outcomes”; Aaron Bernstein and Larry Beeferman, “The Materiality of Human Capital to Corporate Financial Performance” (New York: Investor Responsibility Research Center Institute and Cambridge, MA: Harvard Law School, 2015), available at; Gary S. Becker “Investment in Human Capital: A Theoretical Analysis,” in National Bureau Committee for Economic Research, ed., Investment in Human Beings (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), available at; James Combs and others, “How Much Do High-Performance Work Practices Matter? A Meta-Analysis of Their Effects on Organizational Performance,” Personnel Psychology 59 (3) (2006): 501–528, available
  19. Bernstein and Beeferman, “The Materiality of Human Capital to Corporate Financial Performance.”
  20. Dr. Helper and others, “The Benefits and Costs of Apprenticeship: A Business Perspective”; Jin Ouk Choi, Jennifer S. Shane, and Ying-Yi Chih, “Diversity and Inclusion in the Engineering-Construction Industry,” Journal of Management in Engineering 38 (2) (2022): 02021002, available at
  21. Terence Hogarth and Chris Hasluck, “Net Costs of Modern Apprenticeship Training to Employers” (Nottingham, UK: Department for Education and Skills, 2003) available at
  22. Daniel Kuehn and others, Urban Institute, Abt Associates, and W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, “Do Employers Earn Positive Returns to Investments in Apprenticeship? Evidence from Registered Programs under the American Apprenticeship Initiative” (Washington: U.S. Department of Labor, 2022), available at
  23. John Marotta and others, Urban Institute and Abt Associates, “Beyond Productivity: How Employers Gain More from Apprenticeship: Findings from the American Apprenticeship Initiative Evaluation” (Washington: U.S. Department of Labor, 2022), available at
  24. National Partnership for Women and Families, “Understanding the Difference Between Paid Sick Days & Paid Family and Medical Leave” (Washington: 2022), available at
  25. Molly Weston Williamson, “The State of Paid Sick Time in the U.S. in 2023” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2023), available at; Diana Boesch, “Quick Facts on Paid Family and Medical Leave,” Center for American Progress, February 5, 2021, available at
  26. Isabela Salas-Betsch, “Universal Paid Sick Time Would Strengthen Public Health and Benefit Businesses” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2023), available at
  27. Andrew Smith, “A Review of the Effects of Colds and Influenza on Human Performance,” Journal of the Society of Occupational Medicine 39 (2) (1989): 65–68, available at; Eileen Appelbaum and others, “Good for Business? Connecticut’s Paid Sick Leave Law” (Washington: Center for Economic and Policy Research, 2014), available at;
  28. Abay G. Asfaw, P. Timothy Bushnell, and Tapas K. Ray, “Relationship of work injury severity to family member hospitalization,” American Journal of Industrial Medicine 53 (5) (2010): 506–513, available at; Abay Asfaw, Regina Pana-Cryan, and Roger Rosa, “Paid Sick Leave and Nonfatal Occupational Injuries,” American Journal of Public Health 102 (9) (2012): 59–64, available at
  29. Fernando A. Wilson, Yang Wang, Jim P. Stimpson, “Universal paid leave increases influenza vaccinations among employees in the U.S.,” Vaccine 32 (21) (2014): 2441–2445, available at; Lucy A. Peipins and others, “The lack of paid sick leave as a barrier to cancer screening and medical care-seeking: results from the National Health Interview Survey,” BMC Public Health 520 (2012), available at
  30. Liangrong Chunyu, Paolo F. Volpin, and Xingchen Zhu, “Do Paid Sick Leave Mandates Increase Productivity?” (Social Science Research Network: 2022), available at; Dr. Abay Asfaw, Dr. Roger Rosa, and Dr. Regina Pana-Cryan, “Potential Economic Benefits of Paid Sick Leave in Reducing Absenteeism Related to the Spread of Influenza-Like Illness,” Journal of Occupational Environmental Medicine 59 (9) (2018): 822–829, available at; Appelbaum and others, “Good for Business? Connecticut’s Paid Sick Leave Law”; Kristen Harknett and Daniel Schneider, “Mandates Narrow Gender Gaps In Paid Sick Leave Coverage For Low-wage Workers In The US,” Health Affairs 41 (11) (2022), available at; Kevin Miller and Sarah Towne, “San Francisco Employment Growth Remains Stronger with Paid Sick Days Law Than Surrounding Counties” (Washington: Institute for Women’s Policy Research, 2011), available at; Stefan Pichler, Katherine Wen, and Nicolas R. Ziebarth, “COVID-19 Emergency Sick Leave Has Helped Flatten The Curve In the United States,” Health Affairs 39 (12) (2020), available at
  31. Robert Drago and Vicky Lovell, “San Francisco’s Paid Sick Leave Ordinance: Outcomes for Employers and Employees” (Washington: Institute for Women’s Policy Research, 2011), available at; Ann P. Bartel and others, “The Impact of Paid Family Leave on Employers: Evidence From New York” (Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2021), available at
  32. Appelbaum and others, “Good for Business? Connecticut’s Paid Sick Leave Law.”
  33. A Better Balance, “The Business Case for Paid Family and Medical Leave,” September 27, 2021, available at; Benjamin Bennett and others, “Paid Leave Pays Off: The Effects of Paid Family Leave on Firm Performance” (Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2020), available at;
  34. Molly Weston Williamson, “Fast Facts About Paid Leave in Maine,” Center for American Progress, July 11, 2023, available at; Alex Edmans, “Does the stock market fully value intangibles? Employee satisfaction and equity prices,” Journal of Financial Economics 101 (3) (2011): 621–640, available at
  35. Thea Garon, Jess McKay, and Jessica Mason, “Unpaid and Unprotected: How the Lack of Paid Leave for Medical and Caregiving Purposes Impacts Financial Health” (Chicago: Financial Health Network and Washington: National Partnership for Women and Families, 2021), available at
  36. IMPAQ International and Institute for Women’s Policy Research, “Paid Leave and Employment Stability of First-Time Mothers: Issue Brief—Worker Leave and Analysis and Simulation Series” (Washington: U.S. Department of Labor, 2017), available at; Alison Earle, John Z. Ayanian, and Jody Heymann, “Work Resumption after Newly Diagnosed Coronary Heart Disease: Findings on the Importance of Paid Leave,” Journal of Women’s Health 15 (4) (2006): 430–441, available at
  37. Bennett and others, “Paid Leave Pays Off.”
  38. Zakary Campbell and others, “The Impact of Paid Leave: Evidence from Temporary Disability Insurance in Rhode Island” (Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2017), available at; Ann P. Bartel and others, “Support for Paid Family Leave among Small Employers Increases during the COVID-19 Pandemic,” Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World 7 (2021), available at,
  39. U.S. Department of Commerce and U.S. Department of Labor, “Good Jobs Principles.”
  40. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, “Fact Sheet: Sexual Harassment Discrimination” (Washington: 1997), available at
  41. KC Wagner and Zoë West, “The Impact of Sexual Harassment and Gendered Violence on Working New Yorkers” (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University and ILR Worker Institute, 2023), available at
  42. Ibid.
  43. Ibid.
  44. U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, “Sexual Harassment in Federal Workplaces: Understanding and Addressing the Problem” (Washington: 2022), available at; Chai R. Feldblum and Victoria A. Lipnic, “Select Task Force on the Study of Harassment in the Workplace Report of Co-Chairs Chai R. Feldblum & Victoria A. Lipnic Executive Summary & Recommendations” (Washington: U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2016), available at; U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, “Sexual Harassment in Our Nation’s Workplaces” (Washington: 2022), available at
  45. Amna Ajum and others, “An Empirical Study Analyzing Job Productivity in Toxic Workplace Environments,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15 (5) (2018): 1035, available at
  46. Lilia M. Cortina and Maira A. Areguin, “Putting People Down and Pushing Them Out: Sexual Harassment in the Workplace,” Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 8 (2021): 285–309, available at
  47. Edmans, “Does the stock market fully value Intangibles? Employee satisfaction and equity prices”; Amy Isham, Simon Mair, and Tim Jackson, “Wellbeing and productivity: a review of the literature” (Guildford, UK: University of Surrey, 2020), available at
  48. Edmans, “Does the stock market fully value intangibles? Employee satisfaction and equity prices.”
  49. Hannah M. Curtis and others, “Gendered Safety and Health Risks in the Construction Trades,” Annals of Work Exposures and Health 62 (4) (2018): 404–415, available at
  50. U.S. Public Health Service, “The U.S. Surgeon General’s Framework for Workplace Mental Health & Well-Being” (Washington: 2022), available at; Carly Parnitzke Smith and Jennifer J. Freyd, “Institutional betrayal,” American Psychologist 69 (6) (2014): 575–587, available at; Augusto Bianchini and others, “Economic Evaluation of Investments for Workplace Safety,” Chemical Engineering Transactions 36 (2014): 49–54, available at
  51. Cortina and Areguin, “Putting People Down and Pushing Them Out.”
  52. Jana L. Raver and Michele Gelfand, “Beyond the Individual Victim: Linking Sexual Harassment, Team Processes, and Team Performance,” The Academy of Management Journal 48 (3) (2005): 387–400, available at
  53. Chelsea Willness, Piers Steel, and Kibeom Lee, “A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of workplace sexual harassment,” Personnel Psychology 60 (1) (2007): 127–162, available at; Raver and Gelfand, “Beyond the Individual Victim.”
  54. Level Playing Field Institute, “The Cost of Employee Turnover Due Solely to Unfairness in the Workplace” (San Francisco: 2007), available at
  55. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (Washington: The National Academies Press, 2018), available at
  56. Olle Folke and Johanna Rickne, “Sexual Harassment and Gender Inequality in the Labor Market,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 137 (4) (2022): 2163–2212, available at
  57. U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, “Sexual Harassment in Federal Workplaces.”
  58. Mads Borelli-Kjaer, Laurids Moehl Schack, and Ulf Nielsson, “#MeToo: Sexual harassment and company value,” Journal of Corporate Finance 67 (2021): 101875, available at
  59. Shiu-Yik Au, Ming Dong, and Andréanne Trembly, “How Much Does Workplace Sexual Harassment Hurt Firm Value?” (2020), available at
  60. Liberty Mutual Insurance, “Liberty Mutual Workplace Safety Index: Annual report from Risk Control Services” (Boston: 2022), available at
  61. AFL-CIO, “Death on the Job: The Toll of Neglect” (Washington: 2023), available at
  62. Ibid.
  63. Ibid.
  64. U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, “US Department of Labor initiates rulemaking to protect workers, outdoors and indoors, from heat hazards amid rising temperatures,” Press release, October 26, 2021, available at
  65. U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, “Business Case for Safety and Health,” available at (last accessed June 2023).
  66. Bianchini and others, “Economic Evaluation of Investments for Workplace Safety.”
  67. U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, “OSHA Penalties,” available at (last accessed June 2023); U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, “2023 Annual Adjustments to OHSHA Civil Penalties,” December 20, 2022, available at; U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, “Penalties mount: Fined more than $15M since 2017, familiar Dollar General safety failures in 3 inspections in Florida, Alabama, add $387K more,” Press release, January 26, 2023, available at
  68. Business Wire, “Workplace Safety Can Give Small Business Owners a Recruiting Edge, EMPLOYERS Survey Finds,” September 6, 2017, available at
  69. Bianchini and others, “Economic Evaluation of Investments for Workplace Safety.”
  70. Raymond Fabius and others “Tracking the Market Performance of Companies that Integrate a Culture of Health and Safety,” American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 58 (1) (2016): 3–8, available at
  71. Theresa Holizki, Larry Nelson, and Rose McDonald, “Injury rate as an indicator of business success,” Industrial Health 44 (1) (2006): 166–168, available at
  72. Julie Su, “The High Road to the Middle Class,” U.S. Department of Labor Blog, July 13, 2023, available at
  73. Andrew Van Dam, “The real reason red states are hiring so much faster than blue states,” The Washington Post, May 26, 2023, available at
  74. David Madland, “Wage Boards for American Workers: Industry-Level Collective Bargaining for All Workers” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2018), available at
  75. Renaud and Morin, “The impact of training on firm outcomes”; Center for American Progress, “Cashing in Our CHIPS: Community Colleges and the CHIPS and Science Act,” April 26, 2023, available at

  76. Louis Soares and Stephen Steigleder, “Building a Technically Skilled Workforce: Partnerships between Community Colleges and Industries Are the Key” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2012), available at; Mike Williams, Marina Zhavoronkova, and David Madland, “The Inflation Reduction Act Provides Pathways to High-Quality Jobs” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2022), available at
  77. Aurelia Glass, “Voluntary Recognition of Unions Is Increasingly Popular Amount U.S. Employers” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2023), available at; Madland, “Wage Boards for American Workers.”
  78. Jocelyn Frye, “How to Combat Sexual Harassment in the Workplace,” Center for American Progress, October 19, 2017, available at
  79. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, “Promising Practices for Preventing Harassment” (Washington: 2017), available at; U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, “Chart of Risk Factors for Harassment and Responsive Strategies,” available at (last accessed August 2023); The White House, “U.S. National Plan To End Gender-Based Violence: Strategies for Action” (Washington: 2023), available at
  80. U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, “Recommended Practices for Safety and Health Programs” (Washington: U.S. Department of Labor, 2016), available at
  81. Molly Weston Williamson, “5 Fast Facts About the FAMILY Act and Paid Leave,” Center for American Progress, May 31, 2023, available at
  82. Jocelyn Frye, “10 Essential Actions To Promote Equal Pay” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2021), available at

The positions of American Progress, and our policy experts, are independent, and the findings and conclusions presented are those of American Progress alone. A full list of supporters is available here. American Progress would like to acknowledge the many generous supporters who make our work possible.


Crystal Weise

Former Research Associate


A subway train pulls into the Flushing Avenue station in Brooklyn.

Inclusive Economy

We are focused on building an inclusive economy by expanding worker power, investing in families, and advancing a social compact that encourages sustainable and equitable growth.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.