1. 1 Multinationals and local firms: differences in wages and labour standards? A first comparison of NL, Argentina and Brazil Rob van Tulder & Fabienne Fortanier [PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS, DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE] Competence Centre for International Business-Society Management Research/ RSM Erasmus University

2. 2 Netherlands: wages Gross hourly wages, Index. Domestic firms = 100. Minimum nr of observations per firm is 10. N.B.: uncontrolled for any other variables that affect wages such as education, experience, industry, etc.

3. 3 Netherlands: collective agreements % of respondents that indicates that there is a collective agreement in their workplace. Minimum n per firm is 10. Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables that affect wages such as education, experience, industry, etc.

4. 4 Netherlands: union membership % of respondents that indicates to be a member of a trade union. Minimum n per firm is 10. Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

5. 5 Netherlands: equal opportunity % of respondents that indicates that there is equal opportunity in the workplace. Minimum n per firm is 10. Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

6. 6 Netherlands: unhealthy conditions Average time in which respondents work in unhealthy conditions. Minimum n per firm is 10. Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

7. 7 Argentina: wages gross hourly wages, Index. Domestic firms = 100. Minimum nr of observations per firm is 10. Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables that affect wages such as education, experience, industry, etc.

8. 8 Brazil: wages gross hourly wages, Index. Domestic firms = 100. Minimum nr of observations per firm is 10. Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables that affect wages such as education, experience, industry, etc. Difference comparable to Argentina

9. 9 Argentina: collective agreements % of respondents that indicates that there is a collective agreement in their workplace. Minimum n per firm is 10. Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

10. 10 Brazil: collective agreements % of respondents that indicates that there is a collective agreement in their workplace. Minimum n per firm is 10. Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables. Much higher than in Arg.

11. 11 Argentina: union membership % of respondents that indicates to be a member of a trade union. Minimum n per firm is 10. Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

12. 12 Brazil: union membership % of respondents that indicates to be a member of a trade union. Minimum n per firm is 10. Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables.

13. 13 Argentina: equal opportunity % of respondents that indicates that there is equal opportunity in the workplace. Minimum n per firm is 10. Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables. Brasil: no data

14. 14 Argentina: other benefits % of respondents that indicates to receive the benefit. Minimum n per firm is 10. Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables. Consistently higher Interesting

15. 15 Brazil: other benefits Consistently higher

16. 16 MNEs around the world: IBM and Accenture Wages compared to domestic firms in country. Minimum n per firm/country is 10. Nota Bene: uncontrolled for any other variables. Compared to domestic firms N.B. Small number of observations!

17. 17 First Conclusions  For all conclusions: based on preliminary analysis of the data without controls for other effects  Foreign firms generally pay more and offer better labour conditions, but are less embedded in local bargaining arena (e.g. TU membership)  IN LINE WITH EXISTING LITERATURE ON THIS TOPIC BASED ON MACRO-ANALYSES AND CASE-STUDIES  Delicate balance between ‘host country standard’ and ‘MNE standard’  MNEs seem to both adapt to local circumstances and keep their own standards: MNEs behave differently in different countries

18. 18 Further Research  Gather more data (as we speak)  Key: increase nr of observations (fishing with a ‘wide’ net)  Further analysis:  Additional variables of wages/labour conditions  More sophisticated models  Explore explanations:  Firm level factors: global strategy (integration vs responsiveness), CSR policy?  Host country factors: e.g. policies & institutions, levels of development?  Combinations of both: ‘distance’?

19. 19 RSM Erasmus University Burg. Oudlaan 50 PO BOX 1738 3000 DR Rotterdam The Netherlands Tel. +31 10 408 1923 rtulder@rsm.nl / F.N.Fortanier@uva.nl