Labor market pathways to job quality mobility in the service sector: Evidence from the “Great Resignation”

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
Tyler Woods , Dylan Nguyen , Daniel Schneider , Kristen Harknett
{"title":"Labor market pathways to job quality mobility in the service sector: Evidence from the “Great Resignation”","authors":"Tyler Woods ,&nbsp;Dylan Nguyen ,&nbsp;Daniel Schneider ,&nbsp;Kristen Harknett","doi":"10.1016/j.rssm.2024.100962","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Since the mid-1970s, there has been a sharp rise in the prevalence of “bad jobs” in the U.S. labor market, characterized by stagnant wages, unstable work schedules, and limited fringe benefits. Scholarly, policy, and public debate persists, however, about whether these jobs can serve as steppingstones to intra-generational job quality mobility or are instead “poverty traps.” While scholarship increasingly recognizes the multi-dimensional nature of job quality, prior research on intra-generational job mobility overwhelmingly estimates only wage mobility and generally focuses on estimating the degree of mobility, to the exclusion of the contexts and mechanisms that foster such mobility. We draw on new panel data collected from 8600 hourly service sector workers between 2017 and 2022 to estimate short-run mobility into good jobs, defined as paying at least $15/hour, having a stable work schedule, and offering paid sick leave, employer-sponsored health insurance, and retirement benefits. Overall, we find that mobility into such “good jobs” is low. However, we show that the rate of transition into “good jobs” is strongly conditioned by local labor market conditions: during the “Great Resignation” and in low state-month unemployment periods, nearly twice the share of workers transitioned to “good jobs” as in less favorable contexts, particularly workers who changed sector as opposed to staying at the same firm or taking new jobs in the service sector. Notably, during periods of labor market tightness, workers who stayed at the same employer had similar rates of mobility into “good jobs” as those who changed employers within the sector.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47384,"journal":{"name":"Research in Social Stratification and Mobility","volume":"92 ","pages":"Article 100962"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0276562424000751/pdfft?md5=f187439220d64c6af90056d2083f4da9&pid=1-s2.0-S0276562424000751-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Social Stratification and Mobility","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0276562424000751","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since the mid-1970s, there has been a sharp rise in the prevalence of “bad jobs” in the U.S. labor market, characterized by stagnant wages, unstable work schedules, and limited fringe benefits. Scholarly, policy, and public debate persists, however, about whether these jobs can serve as steppingstones to intra-generational job quality mobility or are instead “poverty traps.” While scholarship increasingly recognizes the multi-dimensional nature of job quality, prior research on intra-generational job mobility overwhelmingly estimates only wage mobility and generally focuses on estimating the degree of mobility, to the exclusion of the contexts and mechanisms that foster such mobility. We draw on new panel data collected from 8600 hourly service sector workers between 2017 and 2022 to estimate short-run mobility into good jobs, defined as paying at least $15/hour, having a stable work schedule, and offering paid sick leave, employer-sponsored health insurance, and retirement benefits. Overall, we find that mobility into such “good jobs” is low. However, we show that the rate of transition into “good jobs” is strongly conditioned by local labor market conditions: during the “Great Resignation” and in low state-month unemployment periods, nearly twice the share of workers transitioned to “good jobs” as in less favorable contexts, particularly workers who changed sector as opposed to staying at the same firm or taking new jobs in the service sector. Notably, during periods of labor market tightness, workers who stayed at the same employer had similar rates of mobility into “good jobs” as those who changed employers within the sector.

服务业工作质量流动的劳动力市场途径:来自 "大辞职 "的证据
自 20 世纪 70 年代中期以来,美国劳动力市场上的 "坏工作 "数量急剧上升,这些工作的特点是工资停滞不前、工作时间不稳定、附带福利有限。然而,学术界、政策界和公众对这些工作是否能成为代际间工作质量流动的垫脚石,抑或是 "贫困陷阱 "的争论依然存在。虽然学术界越来越认识到工作质量的多维性,但以往关于代内工作流动性的研究绝大多数只估计工资流动性,而且一般只注重估计流动性的程度,而忽略了促进这种流动性的环境和机制。我们利用从 2017 年至 2022 年间收集的 8600 名服务业小时工的新面板数据,估算了进入好工作的短期流动性,好工作的定义是工资至少为 15 美元/小时、工作时间稳定、提供带薪病假、雇主资助的医疗保险和退休福利。总体而言,我们发现向这类 "好工作 "的流动性很低。然而,我们的研究表明,向 "好工作 "过渡的比例受到当地劳动力市场条件的强烈制约:在 "大辞职 "期间和州月度失业率较低的时期,向 "好工作 "过渡的工人比例几乎是较差情况下的两倍,尤其是相对于留在同一家公司或在服务行业从事新工作而改变行业的工人。值得注意的是,在劳动力市场紧张时期,留在同一雇主处的工人与在部门内更换雇主的工人的 "好工作 "流动率相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
6.00%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: The study of social inequality is and has been one of the central preoccupations of social scientists. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility is dedicated to publishing the highest, most innovative research on issues of social inequality from a broad diversity of theoretical and methodological perspectives. The journal is also dedicated to cutting edge summaries of prior research and fruitful exchanges that will stimulate future research on issues of social inequality. The study of social inequality is and has been one of the central preoccupations of social scientists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信