following lives from birth and through the adult years Paper for Gender, Class, Employment and family Conference Erzsebet Bukodi, Shirley Dex and Heather Joshi Institute of Education, University of London Gender differences in the effect of initial occupation on early career mobility in Britain

following lives from birth and through the adult years Introduction Part of IoE Gender Network project – using 1946, 1958, 1970 birth cohorts Focus on womens and mens 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 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 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 Any gender differences? Selectivity issues: in certain low level entry positions women may have lower qualifications women may have fewer opportunities for further training Career prospects may be affected by employees work contracts (part-time, temporary work) increased participation in part-time work for British women Gender differences in the effect of psychological capital a bad entry may discourage women more from applying for better jobs Gender differences in preferences 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 Gradually improving position of women in the British LM Mens 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 Any cohort differences?

following lives from birth and through the adult years 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 - womens and mens occupational histories This paper: - makes use of the sweeps conducted at age 23, 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 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 Occupational mobility over whole of the early career: a descriptive view

following lives from birth and through the adult years Low quality jobs at LM entry Quintiles of firstWomenMen occupationCohort- 58 Cohort- 70 Cohort- 58 Cohort st (lowest) nd rd th th (highest) Total (%) 100.0

following lives from birth and through the adult years Entering the low quality jobs: the determinants Logit estimates. ** significant at p < 0.01 Cohort-1958Cohort-1970 WomenMenWomenMen Education (ref.: O level) less than O level.489**.364**.536**.391** A level or equivalent **-.088 sub-degree **-.807**-1.103** degree-1.502**-.699**-1.421**-.745** Father s social class (ref.: Class I) Class II Class III Class IV ** Class V Class VI Class VII **

following lives from birth and through the adult years Upward mobility out of first job: the effect of low quality entry Note: Piecewise constant exponential models. Models controls for age, education, part-time employment. **: significant at p < 0.01 Levels of first occupational scoreWomenMen (ref.: 3 rd quintile )Cohort 1958Cohort 1970Cohort 1958Cohort st (lowest)1.460**1.132**1.591**1.372** 2 nd.878**.759**1.000**.805** 4 th -.606**-.480** ** 5 th (highest)-4.682**-3.552**-3.485**-3.416** - Positive effect of lowest occupations: merely a floor effect?

following lives from birth and through the adult years 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 Later career mobility: any effect of bad entry? (2) Lowest occupational quintile at LM entry Cohort-1958Cohort-1970 (ref.: 3 rd quintile )Upward mobility Downward mobility Upward mobility Downward mobility WOMEN **-.287**.330** MEN

following lives from birth and through the adult years 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 Any difference by qualifications? (2) Figure 1: Predicted hazard of career mobility by qualifications for our hypothetical person Women Men

following lives from birth and through the adult years Conclusions British womens career opportunities improved a lot in the 1980s and 1990s Womens 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 Register online for alerts about CLS news, events and publications.