Transcript Child of the New Century

Gender differences in the effect of initial
occupation on early career mobility in
Britain
Paper for ‘Gender, Class, Employment and family’ Conference
Erzsebet Bukodi, Shirley Dex and Heather Joshi
Institute of Education, University of London
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Introduction
Part of IoE Gender Network project – using 1946,
1958, 1970 birth cohorts
 Focus on women’s and men’s occupational mobility
over their early careers
 The research problems:

-
-
gender and cohort differences in the impact of
individuals’ initial occupational position on their future
mobility chances
Special focus on the implication of ‘bad entry’, i.e.
taking up a position with low occupational status
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Overview of the presentation








Background: first job: ‘stepping-stone’ vs. ‘trap’
About data we use
How are we going to examine occupational mobility?
Amounts of occupational mobility over life-course – a
descriptive overview
How do we define low quality jobs?
Transition out of first job: the effects of low level entry
jobs
Later career mobility: any effect of ‘bad entry’?
Conclusions
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Low quality entry job: ‘stepping-stone’ vs. ‘trap’?

‘Stepping-stone’:

economic theory of career mobility (Sicherman and Galor, 1990)
 for relatively highly-educated employees low quality entry jobs
(e.g. low paid jobs) may be temporary
 these jobs may provide them with skills to be used later at a
higher occupational level


→ fast upward mobility at the beginning of careers
‘Trap’:
‘core’ and ‘periphery’ of the LM (e.g. Doeringer and Piore, 1971)
 ‘periphery’: lower skill requirements, fewer chances for further
training, fewer career prospects, lower wages
 Limited flows between the two segments of LM


→ employees in the ‘periphery’ stuck there
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Any gender differences?

Selectivity issues: in certain low level entry positions



Career prospects may be affected by employees’ work
contracts (part-time, temporary work)


a ‘bad entry’ may discourage women more from applying for better
jobs
Gender differences in preferences


increased participation in part-time work for British women
Gender differences in the effect of ‘psychological capital’


women may have lower qualifications
women may have fewer opportunities for further training
women may be less concerned with a rapid job promotion
→ Women
make fewer ‘good’ job changes and more
between ‘bad’ jobs
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Any cohort differences?




Gradually improving position of women in the British LM
Men’s LM opportunities have been worsening since the
early eighties
→ diminishing gender differences in the effects of initial
occupational placement on career trajectories
Polarisation of employment structure (e.g. Goos and
Manning, 2007):

growing demands for highly educated employees
 growing demands for more ‘feminized’ low paid service jobs
with few career prospects
 → increasing gender differences in the effects of initial
occupational placement on career trajectories
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Data: NCDS and BCS70

The National Child Development Study
- census of babies born in a certain week of 1958 in Great Britain
- 7 main interview waves up to 2004 (age 46)

The British Cohort Study
- census of babies born in a certain week of 1970 in Great Britain
- 6 sweeps up to 2004 (age 34)

In both surveys:
- retrospective histories of employment
- women’s and men’s occupational histories

This paper:
- makes use of the sweeps conducted at age 23, 33-34 in the case of NCDS
and at age 26, 30 and 34 in the case of BCS70
- reconstructs cohort members’ job histories between age 16 and 34 (relatively
early career)
- only ‘significant’ jobs are considered (lasted at least 6 months)
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Examining occupational mobility: creating an
occupational scale

We devise a ranking schema based on occupational wage
rates

earnings data from the UK New Earnings Survey
 ranked the occupations using the 77 SOC codes according to the
mean hourly wage rates of full-timers in each occupation (Men +
women)
 the scores represent relative positions within occupational
distribution
 high correlation (above 0.800) with scales commonly in use
internationally in sociological research (ISEI, SIOPS)
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Occupational mobility over whole of the early
career: a descriptive view
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Downward mobility
No mobility
Upward mobility
Women,
cohort
1958
Women,
cohort
1970
Men,
cohort
1958
following lives from birth and through the adult years
Men,
cohort
1970
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Low quality jobs at LM entry
Quintiles of first
occupation
Women
Men
Cohort- Cohort- Cohort- Cohort58
70
58
70
1st (lowest)
21
26
14
16
2nd
27
23
24
14
3rd
15
8
24
22
4th
20
22
19
23
5th (highest)
17
21
19
25
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Total (%)
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Entering the low quality jobs: the determinants
Cohort-1958
Women
Cohort-1970
Men
Women
Men
Education (ref.: O level)
less than O level
.489
**
.364
**
.536
**
.391
-.432
**
-.088
**
A level or equivalent
-.262
.299
sub-degree
-.311
-1.680
**
-.807
**
-1.103
**
-.699
**
-1.421
**
-.745
**
degree
-1.502
**
Father’s social class (ref.: Class I)
Class II
-.330
.299
-.064
-.066
Class III
-.463
.193
.200
-.232
Class IV
.306
1.330
.122
.145
Class V
-.110
.240
.038
-.294
Class VI
-.259
.219
.158
-.151
Class VII
.083
.741
.169
-.031
**
**
Logit estimates. ** significant at p < 0.01
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Upward mobility out of first job: the effect of low
quality entry
Levels of first occupational score
(ref.: 3rd quintile )
1st (lowest)
Women
Men
Cohort 1958 Cohort 1970 Cohort 1958 Cohort 1970
1.460 **
1.132 **
1.591 **
1.372 **
2nd
.878 **
.759 **
1.000 **
.805 **
4th
-.606 **
-.480 **
-4.682 **
-3.552 **
5th (highest)
-.199
-3.485 **
-.423 **
-3.416 **
Note: Piecewise constant exponential models. Models controls for age, education, part-time employment.
**: significant at p < 0.01
- Positive effect of lowest occupations: merely a floor
effect?
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Later career mobility: any effect of ‘bad entry’? (1)


All job moves up to age 34 are considered
Piecewise exponential models (with control for unobserved
heterogeneity)
 Other covariates:




job tenure (in months)
cumulative work experience (in months)
% of work career in part-time employment until current job
occupational mobility history up to current job (no mobility, only
upward, only downward, both types)
 qualifications at entry the current job
 current job:


occupational score
part-time/full-time job
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Later career mobility: any effect of ‘bad entry’? (2)
Cohort-1958
Cohort-1970
Lowest occupational quintile at
LM entry
(ref.: 3rd quintile )
WOMEN
MEN
Upward
mobility
-.070
.016
following lives from birth and through the adult years
Downward
mobility
Upward
mobility
Downward
mobility
.184 **
-.287 **
.330 **
.182
-.093
.095
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Any difference by qualifications? (1)

The chances of upward moves and risks of downward
moves for those with ‘bad start’ may vary by
qualifications
 We take a hypothetical person and calculate the
probability of her/his being upwardly and downwardly
mobile if





her/his entry job at the lowest occupational quintile
she/he has 5 years of work experience
no part-time job over her/his career
experienced at least one upward move up to the point entering the
current job
holds a current job with the mean occupational score
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Any difference by qualifications? (2)
0.01
0.01
0.009
0.009
0.008
0.008
0.007
0.007
0.006
O level
0.005
Sub-degree/degree
0.004
0.006
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.001
0.001
1958
1970
Upward
1958
1970
Downward
Sub-degree/degree
0.004
0.003
0
O level
0.005
0
1958
1970
Upward
1958
1970
Downward
Men
Women
Figure 1: Predicted hazard of career mobility by qualifications
for our hypothetical person
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Conclusions





British women’s career opportunities improved a lot in the 1980s and
1990s
Women’s occupational trajectories, at least up to age 34, have
become more similar to those of men
However, considerable differences according to occupational level at
LM entry:
Women face the greatest and growing hindrance to career
advancement from the low quality entry jobs
LM entry at the bottom of occupational hierarchy:
for women: more like a ‘trap’
 for men: more like a ‘stepping-stone’


Policy implication:

Gender inequalities at the lower hierarchical level appear to be strengthening
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk
Register online for email alerts about CLS news, events and publications.
following lives from birth and through the adult years
www.cls.ioe.ac.uk