U.S. Mothers’ Long-Term Employment Patterns

Abstract

Previous research on maternal employment has disproportionately focused on the immediate postpartum period and typically modeled either cross-sectional employment status or time until a specific employment transition. We instead conceptualize maternal employment as a long-term pattern, extending the observation window and embedding employment statuses in temporal context. Using data from NLSY79 and sequence analysis, we document five common employment patterns of American mothers over the first 18 years of maternity. Three typical patterns revolve around a single employment status: full-time (36 %), part-time (13 %), or nonemployment (21 %); the other two patterns are characterized by 6 (15 %) or 11 (14 %) years of nonemployment, followed by a period of transition and then full-time employment. Analyses of the immediate postpartum period cannot distinguish between the nonemployment and reentry groups, which have different employment experiences and different prematernity characteristics. Next, we describe how mothers’ human capital, attitudes and cultural models, family experiences, and race/ethnicity are associated with the employment patterns they follow, elucidating that these characteristics may be associated not only with how much mothers work but also the patterning of their employment. Our results support studying maternal employment as a long-term pattern and employing research approaches that address the qualitative distinctness of these diverse patterns.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Notes

  1. 1.

    For an example of the use of sequence analysis to study women’s careers—the types of jobs individuals hold throughout their lives—rather than employment statuses, see Blair-Loy (1999). For an example of an alternative method for analyzing women’s long-term patterns of paid work hours, see Damaske and Frech (2016).

  2. 2.

    Halpin (2010), in a primarily methodological article on optimal matching, used mothers’ employment in the first four years post-maternity as an example.

  3. 3.

    Despite some differences, multivariable results are broadly similar when unweighted or weighted with custom weights for respondents appearing in all survey waves (see online appendix, Tables S1S6).

  4. 4.

    We exclude gaps that have missing information on start or stop dates (2 % of gaps).

  5. 5.

    When pre-1978 jobs continued in 1978, we know their start dates and use the available information, although we do not assume that we have the full set of jobs for pre-1978 months.

  6. 6.

    Some dissimilarity measures allow sequences to be transformed with insertions and deletions of statuses as well as substitutions. However, insertions and deletions distort the timing of events within the sequence, so we do not allow them.

  7. 7.

    Multinomial logit models assume the independence of irrelevant alternatives. The average changes in predicted probabilities are similar when sequential logit models are used instead (see the online appendix text and Tables S9S12).

  8. 8.

    For mothers with first births in 1995 and 1997, we show spousal characteristics reported in 1994 and 1996, respectively, which describe spousal traits two years prior to birth, because of the biennial format of NLSY79 since 1994.

  9. 9.

    Among respondents in our “white” category, 19 % report at least one nonwhite ethnicity, 7 % identify a nonwhite ethnicity as their first ethnicity, and 13 % have missing or unspecified first ethnicity.

  10. 10.

    Figure S5 in the online appendix compares the employment statuses between ages 20 and 40 of women in the Extended Sample to women who remain childless until age 40.

  11. 11.

    We capture a 6 % larger sample by requiring that the respondent is followed only 14 years post-maternity (see the online appendix text, Table S17, and Fig. S6). When we use this sample and assign right-censored months missing employment status, the medoids are identical, and sequence assignment to clusters is nearly identical to the main results. When we use this sample and analyze only the first 14 years of maternal employment, medoids and sequence assignment change as expected given the shorter observation window: the transitions out of nonemployment occur earlier in the medoids of the Early Return and Late Return clusters compared with the main results, and most changes in cluster membership are to the cluster with the next-earliest reentry (i.e. Full-Time to Early Return, Early Return to Late Return, and Late Return to Nonemployed).

  12. 12.

    We tested for an interaction between maternal education and maternal employment but found that the interaction terms in the multinomial logit model were not jointly statistically significant.

  13. 13.

    In models that allow marriage to have different associations by race/ethnicity, we find that marriage is associated with reduced odds of membership in the Nonemployed group for African American mothers, heightened odds of membership in the Part-Time group for Hispanic mothers, and diminished odds of membership in the Full-Time group and heightened odds of membership in the Early Return group for white mothers. In models that allow marriage to have different associations for mothers with at most a high school diploma versus those with more education, we find that marriage is associated with reduced odds of membership in the Nonemployed cluster for less-educated mothers. For more-educated mothers, marriage is associated with diminished odds of membership in the Full-Time cluster (see the online appendix, Tables S18S19).

  14. 14.

    We experiment with an alternative definition of spousal overwork, measured as 60 or more hours per week. In this specification, having a spouse who overworks is associated increased odds of membership in the Nonemployed cluster.

  15. 15.

    Neither the interaction between spouse earnings and mothers’ own education nor the interaction between own prematernity wage and spousal earnings is statistically significant.

References

  1. Aassve, A., Billari, F. C., & Piccarreta, R. (2007). Strings of adulthood: A sequence analysis of young British women’s work-family trajectories. European Journal of Population, 23, 369–388.

  2. Abbott, A., & Hrycak, A. (1990). Measuring resemblance in sequence data: An optimal matching analysis of musicians’ careers. American Journal of Sociology, 96, 144–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Aisenbrey, S., & Fasang, A. E. (2010). New life for old ideas: The “second wave” of sequence analysis bringing the “course” back into the life course. Sociological Methods & Research, 38, 420–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Anyadike-Danes, M., & McVicar, D. (2010). My brilliant career: Characterizing the early labor market trajectories of British women from Generation X. Sociological Methods & Research, 38, 482–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Biemann, T., Zacher, H., & Feldman, D. C. (2012). Career patterns: A twenty-year panel study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 81, 159–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Blair-Loy, M. (1999). Career patterns of executive women in finance: An optimal matching analysis. American Journal of Sociology, 104, 1346–1397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (1997). Swimming upstream: Trends in the gender wage differential in the 1980s. Journal of Labor Economics, 15, 1–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2007). Changes in the labor supply behavior of married women: 1980–2000. Journal of Labor Economics, 25, 393–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Boushey, H. (2008). “Opting out?” The effect of children on women’s employment in the United States. Feminist Economics, 14(1), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/13545700701716672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Budig, M. J., & England, P. (2001). The wage penalty for motherhood. American Sociological Review, 66, 204–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. (2017a). National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 appendix 18: Work history data. Columbus: Center for Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University. Retrieved from https://www.nlsinfo.org/content/cohorts/nlsy79/other-documentation/codebook-supplement/nlsy79-appendix-18-work-history-data

  12. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. (2017b). National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 cohort, 1979–2014 (Rounds 1–26) [Data set]. Columbus: Center for Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University.

  13. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. (2017c). National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979: Retention & reasons for noninterview. Columbus: Center for Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University. Retrieved from https://nlsinfo.org/content/cohorts/nlsy79/intro-to-the-sample/retention-reasons-noninterview

  14. Cha, Y. (2010). Reinforcing separate spheres: The effect of spousal overwork on men’s and women’s employment in dual-earner households. American Sociological Review, 75, 303–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Damaske, S. (2011). For the family? How class and gender shape women’s work. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Damaske, S., & Frech, A. (2016). Women’s work pathways across the life course. Demography, 53, 365–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Desai, S., & Waite, L. J. (1991). Women’s employment during pregnancy and after the first birth: Occupational characteristics and work commitment. American Sociological Review, 56, 551–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Drobnič, S. (2000). The effects of children on married and lone mothers’ employment in the United States and (West) Germany. European Sociological Review, 16, 137–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Eggebeen, D. J. (1988). Determinants of maternal employment for white preschool children: 1960–1980. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 149–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gangl, M., & Ziefle, A. (2009). Motherhood, labor force behavior, and women’s careers: An empirical assessment of the wage penalty for motherhood in Britain, Germany, and the United States. Demography, 46, 341–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Glass, J. (1988). Job quits and job changes: The effects of young women’s work conditions and family factors. Gender & Society, 2, 228–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Glass, J. L., & Riley, L. (1998). Family responsive policies and employee retention following childbirth. Social Forces, 76, 1401–1435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Halpin, B. (2010). Optimal matching analysis and life-course data: The importance of duration. Sociological Methods & Research, 38, 365–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Han, S.-K., & Moen, P. (1999). Work and family over time: A life course approach. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 562, 98–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hynes, K., & Clarkberg, M. (2005). Women’s employment patterns during early parenthood: A group-based trajectory analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 222–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kimmel, J. (1998). Child care costs as a barrier to employment for single and married mothers. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80, 287–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Klerman, J. A., & Leibowitz, A. (1994). The work-employment distinction among new mothers. Journal of Human Resources, 29, 277–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Landivar, L. C. (2013). Labor force participation among Asian, black, Hispanic, and white mothers in 20 occupations. In M. H. Kohlman, D. B. Krieg, & B. J. Dickerson (Eds.), Notions of family: Intersectional perspectives (Vol. 17, pp. 263–286). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.

  29. Leibowitz, A., & Klerman, J. A. (1995). Explaining changes in married mothers’ employment over time. Demography, 32, 365–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Leibowitz, A., Klerman, J. A., & Waite, L. J. (1992). Employment of new mothers and child care choice: Differences by children’s age. Journal of Human Resources, 27, 112–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lu, Y., Wang, J. S.-H., & Han, W.-J. (2017). Women’s short-term employment trajectories following birth: Patterns, determinants, and variations by race/ethnicity and nativity. Demography, 54, 93–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Malo, M. A., & Muñoz-Bullón, F. (2003). Employment status mobility from a life-cycle perspective: A sequence analysis of work-histories in the BHPS. Demographic Research, 9(article 7), 119–162. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2003.9.7

    Google Scholar 

  33. McGinn, K. L., Ruiz Castro, M., & Lingo, E. L. (2018). Learning from mum: Cross-national evidence linking maternal employment and adult children’s outcomes. Work, Employment and Society. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017018760167

  34. Morrill, M. S., & Morrill, T. (2013). Intergenerational links in female labor force participation. Labour Economics, 20, 38–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Parker, K., & Wang, W. (2013). Modern parenthood: Roles of moms and dads converge as they balance work and family. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2013/03/FINAL_modern_parenthood_03-2013.pdf

  36. Reddy, C. K., & Vinzamuri, B. (2013). A survey of partitional and hierarchical clustering algorithms. In C. C. Aggarwal & C. K. Reddy (Eds.), Data clustering: Algorithms and applications (pp. 87–110). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Shafer, E. F. (2011). Wives’ relative wages, husbands’ paid work hours, and wives’ labor-force exit. Journal of Marriage and Family, 73, 250–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Simonson, J., Gordo, L. R., & Titova, N. (2011). Changing employment patterns of women in Germany: How do baby boomers differ from older cohorts? A comparison using sequence analysis. Advances in Life Course Research, 16, 65–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Taniguchi, H., & Rosenfeld, R. A. (2002). Women’s employment exit and reentry: Differences among whites, blacks, and Hispanics. Social Science Research, 31, 432–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Vandenheuvel, A. (1997). Women’s roles after first birth: Variable or stable? Gender & Society, 11, 357–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Wellington, A. J. (1994). Accounting for the male/female wage gap among whites: 1976 and 1985. American Sociological Review, 59, 839–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Wenk, D., & Garrett, P. (1992). Having a baby: Some predictions of maternal employment around childbirth. Gender & Society, 6, 49–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Yoon, Y.-H., & Waite, L. J. (1994). Converging employment patterns of black, white, and Hispanic women: Return to work after first birth. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56, 209–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded in part by an Early Career Research Award from the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, and an early version of this manuscript was published as Upjohn Institute Working Paper 15-247 (https://doi.org/10.17848/wp15-247). We are grateful to Siwei Cheng, Margaret Gough, Ian Lundberg, and Demography reviewers and editors for comments on earlier versions of the manuscript. The NLSY79 survey is sponsored and directed by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and conducted by the Center for Human Resource Research at The Ohio State University. Interviews are conducted by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexandra Killewald.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(PDF 1.23 mb)

ESM 2

(PDF 314 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Killewald, A., Zhuo, X. U.S. Mothers’ Long-Term Employment Patterns. Demography 56, 285–320 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-018-0745-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Motherhood
  • Employment
  • Sequence analysis