1. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Relative employment positions of partners and gender relations in Russia and France Ariane Pailhé (INED) Oxana Sinyavskaya (IISP)

2. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Research objectives To compare  employment status  professional position of each cohabitant partner Differences between Russia and France:  Economic conditions, labour market situation  Household composition: presence of children, presence of other adults Differences in gender relations  Relative resources of partners: age gap and education gap  Values: gender attitudes & religiosity

3. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Data & Sample GGS, Wave 1 st : Russia (2004), France (2005) Sample:  Co-resident couples with both partners aged 20-60  Exclusion of students and disabled  Russia: 5155 obs.; France: 4499 obs. Employed = R’s and P’s main activity - paid work or entrepreneurship/self-employment or maternity leave  & working pensioners (Russia only)

4. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 A comparable distribution of couple employment status

5. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Much more female part-time in France (wage earners)

6. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Longer working time in Russia medians of working hours France Males = 39 h (FT: 40h) Females = 35 h (FT: 36) Median = 5 h Russia Males = 41 h Females = 40 h Median = 1 h Both partners employed; wage earners + self- employed; main job only Working hours gap (male – female)

7. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 More men in public employment in Russia Both employed; wage earners + self- employed; main job 42% 63%

8. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Comparative occupational statuses in France and Russia, % FranceRussia Females Mana gers & Profes sional s Speci alists Clerks servic e worke rs Worke rs Total Mana gers & Profes sional s Speci alists Clerks, Servic e Worke rs Worke rs Total MalesMales Managers & Professionals10,85,56,92,125,38,12,34,01,616,0 Specialists3,65,46,21,817,03,30,91,60,86,6 Clerks, Service Workers 1,61,94,51,99,93,61,83,92,011,3 Workers6,25,720,015,947,817,09,519,620,066,1 Total22,118,437,721,8100,032,014,529,124,4100,0

9. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Comparative occupational statuses in France and Russia, % FranceRussia Females Mana gers & Profes sional s Speci alists Clerks servic e worke rs Worke rs Total Mana gers & Profes sional s Speci alists Clerks, Servic e Worke rs Worke rs Total MalesMales Managers & Professionals10,85,56,92,125,38,12,34,01,616,0 Specialists3,65,46,21,817,03,30,91,60,86,6 Clerks, Service Workers 1,61,94,51,99,93,61,83,92,011,3 Workers6,25,720,015,947,817,09,519,620,066,1 Total22,118,437,721,8100,032,014,529,124,4100,0

10. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 More gender segregation in Russia Duncan index ISCO classification 2 digits (29 cat.)  France: 47.0  Russia: 55.7

11. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 More income difference between working partners in Russia France Mean = 2.06 Median = 1.36 Russia Mean = 2.24 Median = 1.44 Both employed; wage earners; main job incomes (incl. bonuses, etc.) Labor income ratio (male / female)

12. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Couple labour market participation: Estimation procedure Multinomial logit model Couple employment status:  both employed,  man employed only,  woman employed only,  both not-employed

13. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Variables of interest Partners’ relative resources  Age gap : man 3 + years older /woman 3 + years older / same age  Educational gap: man 2 + levels higher / woman 2 + levels higher / same level Values  Gender values index  Religiosity: country specific (frequency of religious services attendance/ values + attendance)

14. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Gender value index France Mean = 22.2 Median = 23.0 Russia Mean = 15.4 Median = 16.0 Index = sum of 8 variables Ex: When parents are in need, daughters should take more caring responsibility than sons Min 0 (traditional), max 32 (progressive)  quartiles (1, 2-3, 4)

15. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Other explanatory variables Human capital  Male age, agesq  Male education Household compositions  Number of children (0-2, 3-5, 6-13, 14-19)  Number of adults (Russia only)  Partners are immigrant/not Regional characteristics  Settlement  Regional unemployment rate Other  Non labor incomes (Russia only)

16. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Estimation results (1/2) Different effect of gender values:  Non significant in Russia  In France, most traditional - Relative resources of partners:  Different effect of age gap not significant in Russia, men older + in France  Same effect of education gap women more educated than men +, less educated – Stronger effect for Russia

17. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Estimation results (2/2) Household composition:  Common feature: presence of children –  Stronger effect for children 14 Effect of regional unemployment rate  - in Russia & France, stronger effect in France Other factors  Common features: Age and education +  Differences: immigrants – in France

18. ECODEF/CI, Moscow, November 28- 29, 2007 Conclusions Similar couple participation patterns in France and Russia  Women work a little less in Russia  Household composition (having young children) matters in both countries, more in Russia Russian people have more traditional gender attitudes comparing to French people  But gender values do not play on participation in Russia while they do in France  The relative resources of partners matter in both countries, more in Russia Russia: objective resources, not attitudes, matter for labour market participation In France both matter Next steps:  Different types of jobs for men and women in Russia and France  More gender wage inequality in Russia