The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
December 8, 1978
Every Oth er Wom an
With their constant concern over the
smallest jiggle in the unemployment
rate, headline writers sometimes miss
some crucial developments in the labor market. A perfect example happened early this fall, when for the first
time in history, more than one-half of
all adult women in this country reported themselves as working (or looking
for work) outside the home.
Of course, labor-force participation
rates for adult women have been increasing for decades. The rate
hovered close to 37 percent in the
mid-1950's, increased gradually for
many years, and then accelerated in
the 1970's. Throughout this decade it
has climbed at least one percent a
year, until finally reaching the 50percent level this September. But
meanwhile, the labor-force participation of adult men has declined over the
past two decades, from 88 to below
80 percent, because of such factors as
rising levels of retirement and disability
benefits.
Reflecting these disparate trends in
participation rates, adult women account for roughly 40 percent of the
entire labor force today, as opposed to
a 30-percent share two decades ago.
More to the point, adult women account for almost 62 percent of the 10million increase that has occurred over
the past four years. Women are no
longer "'secondary" workers, as opposed to male "'primary" workers, and
the nation's society and economy are
being forced to adjust to that basic
fact.
Two are better than one
We no longer have any basis for thinking of the average household as consisting of a male head of household, a
non-working wife and two school-age
children. (The stereotype still persists,
however, as in the statistical family
which buys the average marketbasket
priced by the consumer-price index.)
Indeed, over the past decade, the largest increases in labor-force participation have occurred among married
women with husbands present in the
household. The participation rate increased 15 percentage points for married women in the 20-35 age bracket
and only slightly less for those in the
35-44 bracket.
Economic pressures in recent years,
especially those arising from inflation,
have helped push women workers
into the labor market - and some into
mUltiple job-holding. Labor Depart-·
ment data show that the number of
women holding two or more jobs
nearly doubled between 1970 and
1977, with about one-third of these
women moonlighters reporting that
they did so to meet regular household
expenses.
Inflation pressures have been most
evident in the accelerating rise of
home prices, which has made it difficult for the average family to buy without two incomes. Thus, about 57
(continued on page 2)
retiect the
Feejeral
\lle\/\IS
of Ihe
rflanager!lent f
o
tt12
f3cUll< San Francisco, nor of tilE Board
()f
of
percent of home purchases today are
made by two-income families. Accelerating costs of raising children are another factor in women's labor force
decisions. According to the Commission on Population Growth and the
American Future, raising a child from
birth through college costs anywhere
between $44,000 and $64,000 - and
that excludes the opportunity cost of
the income foregone by mothers who
remain out of the labor force while
their children are growing. In recognition of these harsh economic facts,
nearly 40 percent of all women with
children under six years of age are
now in the labor force.
Where do they wOll'k?
Along with their breakthroughs in previous male-dominated fields, women
surprisingly have increased their representation in several traditional feminine occupations over the past
decade. The percentage of employed'
women working in the clerical field has
risen from 33 to 35 percent, and the
percentage working in service occupations has risen from 1 6 to 1 8 V2
percent over this period. (Thus, well
over half of all working women hold
jobs in clerical or service occ.upations,
whereas less than one-si)(th of working men fall into those categories.) In
contrast, a smaller proportion of
women now work in factory jobs
(where opportunities have been limited for both sexes over the past decade), and in wholesale and retail trade
(where men have increased their representation at the expense of women in recent years).
The most conspicuous breakthroughs
have occurred in skilled white-collar
2
categories. The percent2ge of vvorking women holding jobs in professional
and technical fields has risen from
about 13 1 to 16 percent over the
/2
past decade. (That's a higher proportion for women than for men, although
women remain concentrated in the
lower-paying technician jobs.) Again,
the percentage of working women
holding jobs as managers and administrators has risen from about 4 1 to
/2
. 5 V2 percent over the decade - still
considerably less than half the male
concentration in those fields. Signs of
progress are even evident in the bluecollar skilled trades, such as carpenters,
mechanics and metal craft workers.
The proportion of skilled-craft women
to all wohlen has risen from about 1 to
1 V2 percent over the decade, but this
remains only a small fraction of the
proportion of men working in these
fields.
Occupalnmil and
Despite all the advances made by
working women, they have not progressed in terms of relative income,
because the median income of women
has remained at about 61 percent of
the male income figure over the past
decade. This may be e)(plained in part
by the fact that the average experience level of the female work force
has declined as the participation rate
has increased - that is, as more and
more untrained women have entered
the work force. The average figure, in
other words, may mask a relative increase in earnings of experienced
women.
Other factors may also be involved,
such as the lingering legacy of sex discrimination. For example, despite rela-
tive job comparability, fulltime women
scientists earned only 72 percent as
much as men scientists in the environmental sciences in 1974. However, income disparities tended to be lower in
the younger age categories, which
suggests a growing trend toward equal
pay for equal work.
Altogether, according to a study by
Mary Corcoran in the May 1978
American Economic Review, about
one-fourth to one-third of the gap between men's and women's wages can
be explained by differences in work
history, schooling and labor-force attachment (that is, participation rates).
These factors help account for the
concentration of women workers in
lower-paying fields. For example, average weekly earnings in the service industries - where women are
concentrated - are only 83 percent of
the all-industry average. And although
relatively more women than men
work in professional and technical
jobs, they tend to be concentrated in
the lower-paying specialties. Women
traditionally work as nurses, elementary-school teachers and librarians,
while men are more likely to be highpaid physicians, dentists, lawyers or
college professors.
Yet, even though women remain under-represented in a number of fields,
they have recorded striking gains in
most areas in recent years, and the
trend is likely to continue. For example,
the number of women in law schools
and medical schools has quadrupled in
the past decade. Given these occupational shifts, and given the growing reliance of the labor markets on women
workers, the differential in income levels should be narrowed considerably
in coming years.
Percent
50
40
Adult women
Share of
civilian
labor force
30
20
10
1 956
3
1967
.1978
a 4Bln
!! BMBH
'j!8'e:> 'O:>§PlJI'eJ:
H
a BPBAClN
BUOZPV
€il
a
B! UJOJ!IB:)
0
Q
04BPI
B)jSC?IV
ues
lS":::O N llWH3!ci
'
GI Vd
150«11
'S'(1
llVW SSV1:l
cUW;> <?i)
<?i)<§ CQI
:{}, <?i)
\ill m:{},cUW;>
<dr
<?i)<ill
BAN G OATA- T WElfT H flEDlElRAJL
KBN
RlESlERVI
E
(Dollar amounts in millions)
Seiected Assefts and liabilities
!Large Commercia! lilIanks
Loans (gross, adjusted) and investments*
Loans (gross, adjusted) - total
Security loans
Commercial and industrial
Real estate
Consumer instalment
U.s. Treasury securities
Other securities
Deposits (less cash items) - total*
Demand deposits (adjusted)
U.s. Government deposits
Time deposits - total*
States and political subdivisions
Savings deposits
Other time deposits:j:
Large negotiable CD's
Weekly Averages
of Daily figures
Member Bank Reserve Position
Excess Reserves( +)/Deficiency (-)
Borrowings
Net free( +)/Net borrowed (-)
Federal Funds-Seven Large Banks
Interbank Federal fund transactions
Net purchases (+)/Net sales(-)
Transactions with U.s. security dealers
Net loans (+)/Net borrowings (-)
Amount
Outstanding
Change
from
11122178
11/15/78
122,195
98,867
1,832
28,785
34,450
18,307
8,545
14,783
114,560
30,612
277
81,817
6,827
31,601
40,741
19,432
Change from
year ago
Dollar
Percent
+
+
Week ended
11122178
132
156
- 151
+ 125
+ 177
+ 40
95
+ 71
- 1,137
- 1,336
- 155
+ 448
+ 122
- 23
+ 520
+ 121
+ 18,528
+ 17.87
+ 23.37
+ 18,728
-
-
+
7,722
-
288
88
14,403
2,180
16
12,030
1 ,420.
17
10,497
6,870
+
+
+
+
.+
+
-
+
+
Week ended
11/15/78
28.89
-
3.26
+ 17.01
+ 4,099
-
8.03
+
160
+ 4,185
+ 28.85
+ 0.60
+ 14.38
+
+
+
+
+
+
7.67
6.13
17.24
26.26
0.05
34.71
54.69
. Comparable
year-ago period
2
17
15
+
24
41
17
+ 1,582
+ 1,156
+
32
+
+
+ 518
8
51
59
33
+
343
*Includes items not shown separately. :j:lndividuals, partnerships and corporations.
Editorial comments may be addressed to the editor ( William Burke) or to the author ••••
Free copies of this and other !Federal Reserve publications can be obtained by camng or writing the Public
Information Section, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, P. O. Box 7702, San francisco 94120. Phone
(415) 544-2184.
