The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
U3.3-2«f WOMEN WORKERS in 1960 • Geographical irences U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR W. Willard Wirtz, Secretary 'Atr, r > ■ Women’s Bureau, -Mrs. Esther Peterson, Director Bulletin 284 Levi 3 WOMEN WORKERS in 1960 • Geographical Diffterences Women’s Bureau Bulletin 284 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR W. Willard Wirtz, Secretary Women’s Bureau, Mrs. Esther Peterson, Director • 1962 U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington : 1962 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D.C. - Price 15 cents 331.4 Vh 3 YLO .ZLl 4 F oreword This comparison of women’s employment in 1950 and 1960, with special emphasis on geographical differences, is based on Bureau of the Census reports covering the general social and economic charac teristics of the population in each State. As more detailed informa tion collected in the 1960 census becomes available, the Women’s Bureau plans to issue a series of related bulletins. These future reports will give an analysis of changes in other aspects of women’s employment, such as occupational detail; characteristics of women workers by marital status; and the relationship between a woman’s education and her employment. The bulletin was written by Jean A. Wells, Chief, Branch of Special Studies in the Program Planning, Analysis, and Reports Division, directed by Stella P. Manor. Esther Peterson, Director, Women’s Bureau. hi Contents Highlights on women workers, 1950-60______ ______ ___________________ Women workers in 1960 Employment increases, 1950 to 1960 Geographical shifts in women’s employment___________________________ Percentages of women who work___________________________________ Women’s importance in labor force 6 Increase in number of working wives 7 Rise in age of women workers g Changes in women’s occupations and industries________________ _______ Earnings and income levels of women Page vi 1 1 2 5 9 11 CHARTS A. Numbers of women workers in the United States, 1960______________ B. Percent increase in women workers, by State, 1950 to 1960__________ vin 4 APPENDIX TABLES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Number of women workers, by State, 1960 and 1950________________ Women in the population, by State, 1960 and 1950__________________ Married women workers, by State, 1960 Age distribution of women workers, by region, 1960 and 1950________ Occupational distribution of employed women, by region, 1960 and 1950................................ .................................................... ............................. 6. Median earnings and income of women, by State, 1959 and 1949_____ v 13 14 15 16 16 17 Highlights on Women Workers, 1950-60 Women in the Labor Force The number of women workers, continuing a long-term upward trend, rose from 16/2 million in 1950 to almost 22% million in 1960—a gain of 35 percent. This greatly exceeded the 14 per cent increase in the number of women of working age in the population—57 million in 1950 compared to 65 million in 1960. Geographical Shifts in Women’s Employment The rate of growth of women’s employment varied considerably by State, and there was a tendency for women workers to be distributed somewhat more evenly among individual States and regions in 1960 than in 1950. Representation in Population and Labor Force There was an increasing trend for women to work outside the home; the number of women workers advanced from 29 percent of all women in 1950 to 34 percent in 1960. Consistent with their growing importance in the labor force, women’s representation rose from 27 percent of all workers in 1950 to 32 percent in 1960. Working Wives The increase in the number of working wives—from 7.7 million in 1950 to 12.4 million in 1960—accounted for four-fifths of the 5.8-million gain over the decade in the total number of women workers. The proportion of married women who work jumped from 22 percent in 1950 to 31 percent in 1960. Working wives constituted over half (55 percent) of all women workers in 1960, as compared with less than half (47 percent) in 1950. vx Ages of Women Workers The importance of older women in the work force has increased; the number of women 45 to 64 years of age advanced from 27 percent of all women workers in 1950 to 35 percent in 1960. The median age of women workers rose from 36 years in 1950 to 40 years in 1960. Occupations of Women Relatively more women had clerical, service, or professional jobs in 1960 than in 1950. Women operatives declined the most in terms of relative occupa tional importance, although the total number of them expanded slightly. Earnings and Income of Women Women workers (full-time and part-time combined) received median annual earnings of $2,230 in 1959. Women’s njoney income from all sources averaged $1,357 in 1959, as compared with $1,029 in 1949. VII V III CHART A Numbers of Women Workers in the United States, 1960 [14 Years of Age and Over] 37,103 :318.117: 2!2,997' : 91,509 183,398 Number of women workers 500,000 and over 200,000 and under 500,000 Under 200,000 ALASKA Women Workers in 1960 Many aspects of women’s employment in the United States in 1960, as recorded by liie decennial census, generally followed their long term trends. These include trends in the number of women workers, the percent they are of all workers, their labor-force participation rates, age and marital characteristics, occupational and industrial distributions, and their income and earnings levels. At the same time, some shifts occurred between 1950 and 1960 in the geographical distribution of women workers. The changes, which are closely related both to the movement of American industry and to the redistribution of our total population, reveal a tendency toward distribution of women workers somewhat more evenly among individ ual States and regions than was the case in earlier years. This is corroborated by the fact that percent increases in women’s employ ment have been significantly high in many States that have relatively small numbers of women workers, whereas relative gains were con siderably below the national average in many of the States with large employment totals. The result has been a slight shift in the number of women workers away from the Northeast and North Central States into the South and the West. Employment Increases, 1950 to 1960 The continuing rise in women’s employment in the United States is the result both of rapid population growth and of increased labor-force participation by women. Almost 22% million women workers were recorded in the 1960 decennial census. This figure represents a 35 percent increase over the 16% million women workers reported in 1950. It compares with only a 14 percent increase—from about 57 to 65 million—in the number of women of working age (14 years and over) in the population. These changes are shown in the following summary of the employment status of women of working age: Women 14 years and over.. In labor force_________ Civilian labor force Armed Forces____ Not in labor force_____ Number of women workers 1960 1950 64, 961, 254 22, 409, 760 22, 381, 410 28, 350 42, 551, 494 57, 229, 161 16, 563, 678 16, 535, 636 28, 042 40, 665, 483 Percent increase 14 35 35 1 5 1 Social and economic factors behind the remarkable advance in the numbers of women workers have been discussed frequently. They include the need of an expanding economy for additional workers in occupations employing women; the easing of household tasks by use of modern appliances and equipment; the higher standard of living de sired by our society; and changes in traditional attitudes toward wom en’s work outside the home. Geographical Shifts in Women’s Employment Between 1950 and 1960, the numbers of women workers increased in all 50 States, but decreased in the District of Columbia. The seven States with the largest numbers of women workers were the same in 1960 as in 1950. (Table 1.) As a result, women workers continue to be concentrated most heavily in the Middle Atlantic and North Central regions and in California and Texas. (Chart A.) Similarly, the seven States (including Alaska) with the smallest num bers of women workers were the same in 1950 and 1960. Nevertheless, the rate of growth of women’s employment in the 1950’s varied con siderably among the States and generally resulted in some leveling of the geographical distribution of women workers. A comparison of the percentage distribution of the woman work force by State reveals some small but significant changes from 1950 to 1960. Seven of the 13 States with the highest numbers of women workers had smaller percentages of the total woman work force at the end of the decade. For example, the proportion of the national woman work force dropped from 11.8 to 10.7 percent in New York, from 6.9 to 6.3 percent in Pennsylvania, and from 6.5 to 6.0 percent in Illinois. In contrast, there were no decreases in the proportion in the 13 States with the lowest numbers of women workers, and four of these States had slightly larger percentages of the total woman work force. Other noteworthy 1950-60 increases in women’s repre sentation were from 7.6 to 9.1 percent in California, 2.0 to 2.8 per cent in Florida, and 4.5 to 4.9 percent in Texas. An overall view of the leveling process underway in women’s em ployment can be obtained from a comparison of growth rates among the four major regions of the country. The West had the highest percentage gain in the number of women workers and the Northeast, the lowest. The gain in the North Central States was somewhat below the national average and in the South, above average, although 2 there was considerable variation in growth rates among the large number of States grouped together in the South. The regional in creases recorded during the 1950-60 decade in the woman labor force and the woman population follow: Percent increase 1950 to I960 Women workers United States_______ Northeast__ North Centra™_ South_________ West__________ 35 24 31 40 59 Women in population 14 8 10 14 32 Because the size of the labor force is influenced by the size of the population, it is interesting to note that the population of women 14 years of age and over increased in 47 States. The exceptions were Arkansas (—5 percent), West Virginia ( — 5 percent), Mississippi (—2 percent), and the District of Columbia ( — 10 percent). These declines were probably caused by such factors as decreased employ ment opportunities, increased use of farm machinery, and, in the case of the District of Columbia, movement out of the central city to suburbs in neighboring States. Further comparison of the rates of growth of women’s employment among individual States shows that the four largest States in the northern industrial regions had a lower rate of expansion than the rest of the country. While the total number of women workers in the United States advanced 35 percent between 1950 and 1960, the comparable gain amounted to only 23 percent in New York, 24 per cent in Pennsylvania, 26 percent in Illinois, and 33 percent in Ohio. (Chart B.) These same four large States also had fairly low population in creases. (Table 2.) Although the rate of expansion in the population of women of working age was at the national level in Ohio (14 percent), it was far below average in Pennsylvania (4 percent), New York (8 percent), and Illinois (9 percent). Some of these differences stem from migration away from depressed coal areas and also from rural areas. The largest proportional gains in women’s employment during the 1950’s occurred in the States with the largest expansion in woman population: Nevada, Arizona, Alaska, and Florida. In these States, increases ranged from 91 to 125 percent in the woman labor force and from 68 to 81 percent in the woman population. In addition, significantly high increases in both the labor force and population of women took place in two of the largest States: Cali fornia and Texas. Their increases in women’s employment were 63 and 47 percent, respectively. 3 CHART B Percent Increase in Women Workers, by State, 1950 to 1960 + 31 JwiSC0**S|H SOUTH DAKOTA LLlNOtS INO'V** COLOAA20 .fNTuCKT •"«6S3 N£» **£*"c 0 »B»»NS» j f*Ts. c»*ouM 4-29 0UlV*HA/yl Percent increase of women workers, 1950 to 1960 fC.ssissipp' 47% and over i_3\ 34 and under 47% ^ =4. l+.%\ j+95* /?;: 70 ALASKA n ik. Under 34% Percentages of Women Who Work In addition to population growth, the other major reason for the in creasing numbers of working women is the increasing tendency of women to work outside the home. Throughout the United States, the per centage of women workers among all women of working age jumped significantly from 29 percent in 1950 to 34 percent in 1960. (Table 2.) The relative importance of the two major reasons for the dramatic gain in women’s employment may be ascertained generally from an analysis of the numerical increase which took place during the 1950 60 decade. If only 29 percent of the woman population had worked in 1960 as in 1950, there might have been about 18.8 million women workers, or an increase of only 2.3 million. But about 5.8 million more women workers were actually recorded at the end of the decade. Therefore, about two-fifths of the increase can be traced to population growth and about three-fifths to the fact that more women work outside the home. There were only slight variations among regions in the percentages of women engaged in paid employment in 1960. These variations had narrowed since 1950, as may be seen from the following summary: Women workers as percent of all women United States____ Northeast____ North Central. South_______ West________ mo 34 36 34 34 35 mo 29 31 28 28 29 Women’s rates of labor-force participation differed more noticeably among individual States than among regions, although a majority of the State rates centered between 32 and 36 percent. Variations in rates are related primarily to the availability of jobs as well as to tradition and custom. The leading area in terms of the percentage of women in the labor force was the District of Columbia (52 percent), the exclusively metropolitan character of which is not comparable to the urban-rural mixture of the States. Next in rank was Nevada (41 percent), followed by Alaska, Hawaii, and New Hampshire (40 percent). Women in all five areas had relatively high labor-force participation in 1950 also. In this connection, it is noteworthy that, during the 1950’s, Nevada and Alaska had recorded the highest population gains among all the States, and both had relatively more young 644640 0—62------ 2 5 women in their 1960 population. In addition, population expansion is usually accompanied by intensified economic activity and may, thus, attract more women into the labor force. The States where women had low labor-force participation in 1960 were West Virginia (24 percent), Kentucky (27 percent), and Arkansas (29 percent). There is little doubt that both custom and limited employment opportunities for women shared in producing these low rates. Also, the average age of women was markedly higher in 1960 than in 1950, indicating out-migration of some of the younger women seeking employment. In two of these States (Arkansas and West Virginia), the woman population had declined 5 percent since 1950; in Kentucky, it had increased only 2 percent. Women in these same three States had the lowest labor-force participation rates in 1950. Women’s Importance in Labor Force Since greater expansion occurred in women’s employment (35 per cent) than in men’s employment (8 percent) during the 1950-60 decade, women’s representation in the total labor force also rose. Women workers comprised 32 percent of all workers in 1960, as compared with only 27 percent in 1950. (Table 1.) This gain was, of course, consistent with women’s growing importance in the labor force since the early part of the century. In both 1950 and 1960, women workers in the Northeast comprised a larger proportion of the labor force in their region than was true of_women workers elsewhere in the country, as indicated below: Women workers as percent of all workers I960 United States 32 Northeast 34 North Central 31 South 32 West 31 1960 27 30 26 27 27 Women’s representation among all workers was highest in the urban District of Columbia (44 percent). Leading the States was New Hampshire (36 percent), followed by Georgia, Massachusetts, and South Carolina (35 percent). Women in these four States and the District of Columbia had higher labor-force participation rates than those of women in most other States. The representation of women among all workers in these five areas had also been con siderably above average in 1950, reflecting the continued location in these areas of industries which employ high percentages of women. 6 States with the lowest percentages of women among all workers were Alaska (24 percent) and North Dakota (27 percent). These were also the two areas with the lowest representation of women in 1950. In Alaska, their consistently low rank in this respect is probably related to the fairly high ratio of men to women and to the relatively high proportion of temporary residents in the population. Increase in Number of Working Wives The great influx of married women into the labor market accounted for most of the expansion in women’s employment in the 1950’s. The number of working wives rose from 7.7 million in 1950 to 12.4 million in 1960. This numerical increase of 4.7 million working wives amounted to four-fifths of the total gain of 5.8 million women workers between 1950 and 1960. During the 10-year period, there was a concurrent rise among married women in the 'proportions who combine homemaking and paid employment—from 22 percent in 1950 to 31 percent in 1960. This higher rate of labor-force participation accounted for about three-fourths of the increase in the number of working wives. The remaining one-fourth stemmed from the larger number of married women in the population. Generally, higher percentages of married women worked in the South and the West, as shown in the following summary: Percent of married women who work United States____ Northeast____ North Central. South_______ West________ mo 31 30 29 32 32 mo 22 21 21 22 23 In 1960, the highest participation rate among married women pre vailed in the District of Columbia (46 percent)—followed by Hawaii and South Carolina (40 percent). The lowest participation rates were in West Virginia (21 percent), Kentucky (25 percent), and North Dakota (26 percent). (Table 3.) In general, the same factors in fluence labor-force participation among married women as were pre viously discussed for all women. Married women accounted for 55 percent of all women workers in 1960, as compared with 47 percent in 1950. Their percentages were highest in Alaska (68 percent) and Idaho (66 percent). These two States have considerably large portions of rural area, where single women tend to be relatively scarce. On the other hand, the woman labor force included the lowest proportions of working wives in the 7 District of Columbia (39 percent), followed by Massachusetts and New York (48 percent)—all areas with high percentages of urban population, including relatively more single women. In all 50 States and the District of Columbia, the number of work ing wives rose during the 1950-60 decade, and, in each case, the per centage increase for working wives exceeded that for all women workers. In comparison to the 60 percent increase of working wives averaged throughout the Nation, the gains were highest in the West (79 percent) and the South (61 percent) and below average in both the Northeast and North Central States (55 percent). Especially noteworthy gains were recorded in Nevada (147 percent), Arizona (133 percent), Alaska (117 percent), Florida (114 percent), and New Mexico (111 percent). These were the same five States with the largest increases in women workers and also with considerable popu lation expansion. Rise in Age of Women Workers Another important characteristic of our expanding woman work force is the rise in the median age of women workers—from 36 years in 1950 to 40 years in 1960. The increased importance of older women in the work force extended throughout the country, as ages of women workers do not differ significantly among the various regions. In 1960, the median age of women workers was highest in the North east (41 years), slightly lower in the South (39 years), and the same as the national average in the North Central States and the West (40 years). These relationships have changed since 1950, when the median age of women workers was highest in the West (37 years), and the same as the national average in the other three regions (36 years). Of the 5.8 million more women workers in 1960 than in 1950, almost three-fifths were 45 to 64 years of age and one-fourth, 35 to 44 years. In addition to these two groups, the oldest and youngest groups of women workers also made spectacular percentage gains during the 10-year period. The following summary lists the numbers of women workers in specific age groups and their percentage increases from 1950 to 1960: Nvmher of women workers 1950 I960 Age group 14-17 years_____________ 18-24 years_____________ 25-34 years_____________ 35-44 years_____________ 45-64 years_____________ 65 years and over_______ 8 3, 4, 5, 7, 772, 594, 116, 265, 742, 918, 207 104 833 586 212 818 3, 3, 3, 4, 475, 518, 885, 805, 421, 508, 965 747 238 586 455 082 increase 62 2 6 38 75 81 While the number of women workers who were 45 to 64 years of age increased from 27 percent of the woman work force in 1950 to 35 percent in I960,, the proportion 35 to 44 years of age remained at 23 percent. (Table 4.) In contrast, there were marked decreases in the relative importance of younger age groups. During the 1950-60 decade, the 25 to 34 year olds declined from 23 to 18 percent of all women workers and the 18 to 24 year olds, from 21 to 16 percent. The 14 to 17 year olds, whose numbers rose sharply, constituted 3 percent of all women workers in both 1950 and 1960. Although age continues to have an important influence on a woman’s decision whether or not to work outside the home, striking changes occurred between 1950 and 1960 in the extent to which mature women returned to work when their family responsibilities lessened. During the decade, the labor-force participation rates rose from 29 to 42 percent for women 45 to 64 years of age and from 35 to 43 percent for women 35 to 44 years. As the following figures show, there were much smaller changes in the percentages of workers among women in the remaining age groups: Percent ofwomen who work Age group United States 34 14-17 years 14 18-24 years--------------------------------------------------------------25-34 years-------------------------35-44 years--------------------------------------45-64 years________ 65 years and over 10 i960 45 35 43 42 1950 29 n 43 32 35 29 8 As might be expected, the sharp rise in labor-force participation of women workers aged 45 to 64 years and 35 to 44 years accounted for most of the expansion in their numbers. The small increases in the numbers of women workers 18 to 24 years and 25 to 34 years also stemmed from the greater propensity of women to work, since the population of women in these age groups actually decreased from 1950 to 1960. For the youngest and oldest age groups, the influence of this factor was shared fairly evenly with population growth. Changes in Women’s Occupations and Industries The changes which took place during the 1950’s in the relative importance of specific occupational groups among women workers reflect trends in the overall labor force. Three groups of occupa tions—clerical, service, and professional—attained added importance. Between 1950 and 1960, their representation among all women workers 9 rose from 28 to 31 percent, 12 to 14 percent, and 13 to 14 percent, respectively. (Table 5.) In occupational comparisons of women workers within the regions, the most noticeable gains were made by clerical workers in the West, by service workers in the Northeast and North Central States, and by professional workers in theNortheast. Women operatives experienced the largest decline in occupational importance, dropping from 20 to 16 percent of all women workers. The decrease occurred in all four regions but was deepest in the North east and in the North Central States. The percentages of women farmers, managers, salesworlters, and private-household workers were also lower in 1960 than in 1950. There were increases between 1950 and 1960 in the numbers of women in all major occupational groups except two: farm laborers and other laborers. The largest advances were made by the service, clerical, and professional groups, as shown below: Number of women workers 1950 I960 Clerical ------------------------------------- ___ Operatives--------------------------------------- ___ Service.- — ------------------------------ ... Professional... ------------------------------- ___ Private household .. __ - ___ Sales-. - --------------------------------- ___ Managers, officials, proprietors. - . ___ Craftsmen. ------------------------------ ___ Farm laborers. . — ___ Farmers___ ____ - — - ---------- -. Laborers______ .. ---------- -- -- ___ 6, 291, 420 3, 255, 949 2,846,289 2, 753, 052 1, 664, 763 1,661,113 779, 701 252,515 242,885 118, 100 109,746 4, 3, 1, 1, 1, 1, 308, 020 026, 231 920, 269 951, 072 337, 795 334, 121 680, 108 236, 328 451, 053 116, 993 127, 557 Percent change 1950-60 + 46 +8 + 48 + 41 + 24 + 25 + 15 +7 -46 +1 -14 The number of private-household workers increased, although (as noted previously) their percentage of all women workers dropped between 1950 and 1960. Regional changes in women’s employment in specific occupational groups were generally consistent with total occupational changes in the country—as influenced, of course, by overall changes in women’s employment in each region. Exceptional changes included: decreases in the number of women operatives and craftsmen in the Northeast and relatively little change in the size of these groups in the North Central States; relatively smaller expansion in the number of women service workers in the West; and the deepest decline in the number of women farm workers in the South. Changes in women’s occupations reflect, of course, changes in the size of major industry groups. The greatest expansion in women’s employment between 1950 and 1960 took place in finance, insurance, and real estate establishments, followed by construction and by the very large group of service industries, especially professional services. Below average gains were recorded in retail trade, wholesale trade, and transportation, as well as in manufacturing, the industry group 10 with the second largest number of women workers. Only in one indus try—agriculture—were there fewer women at the end of the decade than at the beginning, as indicated in the following summary of women’s employment by major industry group: Number of women workers I960 1950 Services _ _____________ _ _____ Manufacturing__ __ _ __ _____ Retail trade___ _ ______ __ _ ____ ____ Finance, insurance, real estate_______ ____ Public administration- _ _ ____ Transportation. ___________________ ____ Wholesale trade ____ ____ ____ Agriculture, _ _____ Construction._____________________ ____ 7, 4, 3, 1, 832, 401, 943, 230, 914, 770, 450, 417, 185, 999 121 663 347 134 699 902 659 409 5, 375, 975 3, 654, 906 3, 177, 048 781, 995 658, 411 699, 028 380, 509 592, 688 122, 220 Percent change 1950-60 + 46 + 20 + 24 + 67 + 39 + 10 + 18 -30 + 52 Within each region, industry changes generally followed the expected pattern. Women’s employment advanced more in the West than in other regions for each of the major industries except wholesale trade. In three industry groups—manufacturing, transportation, and whole sale trade—increases were exceptionally small in the Northeast and only moderate in the North Central States. Agricultural employment declined much more in the South than elsewhere. Earnings and Income Levels of Women Women workers received median earnings of $2,230 in 1959. (Table 6.) This was less than one-half as much as the $4,595 averaged by men. Many women received earnings from part-time or part-year jobs, whereas most men had full-time earnings. Women had the highest median earnings in the urbanized District of Columbia ($3,292), followed by California ($2,789), Connecticut ($2,727), and New York ($2,716). The lowest amounts were in Mississippi ($1,014) and Arkansas ($1,292). Women’s money income from all sources in 1959 averaged $1,357. This was 32 percent more than the $1,029 median income of women in 1949. Despite this increase, women’s income dropped from two-fifths of men’s income in 1949 ($2,434) to one-third of men’s income in 1959 ($4,103). The relative decline may be attributed partly to the expanded percentage of women receiving some income (from 40 percent in 1949 to 54 percent in 1959) and the increased popularity of part-time and intermittent employment among the larger force of women workers. During the 10-year period, the income level of nonwhite women improved in relation to that of all women. In 1949, nonwhite women with some income averaged $590—less than three-fifths the amount 11 for all women receiving income. In 1959, the $909 average of non white women was more than two-thirds that of all women. There was considerable variation in income levels among the various States. The leading area for all women with income in 1959 was the District of Columbia ($2,457) and the second was New York ($1,940). For nonwhite women, these two areas were reversed: New York ($1,960) and the District of Columbia ($1,894). At the other end of the range, Mississippi reported the lowest income for all women ($656) as well as for nonwhite women ($412). 12 Appendix Tables Table 1.—Number of Women Workers, by State, I960 and 1950 [14 years of age and over] State Number of women workers1 2 Percent increase, 1950 to 1960 As percent of all workers 1960 1950 UNITED STATES. 22,409,760 16, 563,665 35 32 New York................... California.................... Pennsylvania............. Illinois......................... Ohio.............................. Texas................ ........... Michigan..................... New Jersey................. Massachusetts........... Florida_________ 2,404,340 2,041,120 1,422, 749 1, 348, 328 1,152, 741 1,106, 657 893,091 812,222 753, 506 635,639 1,947,189 1,254,644 1,148,042 1,070, 747 863,824 750,384 642. 614 617, 584 630,957 332,768 23 63 24 26 33 47 39 32 19 91 34 32 32 33 31 30 30 32 35 34 31 28 27 29 27 25 25 29 32 30 North Carolina.......... Indiana........................ Missouri...................... Georgia........................ Wisconsin_________ Virginia....................... Tennessee................... Minnesota_________ Maryland................ Alabama__________ 600,051 563,026 540,329 525,397 476, 214 473, 734 426,550 411, 258 399, 330 373, 381 440, 890 410, 727 436,149 395, 921 369, 323 331,317 310, 674 313, 700 274,541 288, 690 36 37 24 33 29 43 37 31 45 29 34 31 32 35 31 31 32 32 32 32 28 26 28 30 26 25 26 26 28 27 Connecticut......... . Washington...... ......... Louisiana.................... Iowa............................. South Carolina_____ Kentucky.................... Oklahoma_________ Kansas____________ Mississippi.................. Oregon......................... 366, 669 344, 478 335, 975 318, 117 310,895 291, 234 257, 587 254,140 244, 959 216, 367 277, 327 238,958 238, 554 249, 524 245, 591 214,162 195, 415 177,824 187, 502 162, 205 32 44 41 27 27 36 32 43 31 33 34 31 31 30 35 28 30 30 33 32 31 25 26 24 31 21 25 24 25 26 Colorado............ ......... Arkansas...................... Nebraska............. ....... District of Columbia. West Virginia............ Arizona................ ........ Rhode Island______ Maine................... ....... Utah............................. New Mexico............... 212, 997 183, 398 168, 472 162, 616 162, 446 140, 336 121, 980 118, 596 94,103 91,509 136, 593 142,415 129,255 167, 555 138, 048 68,095 110, 243 94, 881 57, 294 50,979 56 29 30 23 18 106 11 25 64 80 31 30 30 44 28 30 34 32 30 28 27 22 25 41 21 26 32 27 24 22 New Hampshire........ Hawaii......................... Montana..................... South Dakota______ Idaho............................ North Dakota............ Delaware..................... Vermont...................... Nevada........................ Wyoming.................... Alaska.......................... 89,318 77, 636 73,380 72, 268 71,355 63,163 56, 571 48, 599 40,039 37,103 23, 791 67,874 50,864 50, 911 53,897 47, 478 46, 998 37, 298 39, 937 17, 778 25, 306 12, 219 32 53 44 34 50 34 52 22 125 47 95 36 29 29 29 28 27 32 33 31 29 24 31 24 22 21 22 20 28 27 25 21 18 1960 1950 27 1 Includes members of the Armed Forces. 2 A percent decrease. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 13 Table 2.—Women in the Population, by State, 1960 and 1950 [14 years of age and over] Number of women in the population State 1960 1950 Percent increase, 1950 to 1960 Women workers as percent of all women 1960 1950 UNITED STATES-------- --------------------------------- 64, 961,254 57,229,151 14 34 29 New York------ ------------ ------------------------------------California-------------------------------------------------------Pennsylvania........... ........................................................ Illinois.............................................................................. Ohio Texas------------------- ------------ --------------------------- — Michigan------------------ --------------------------------------New Jersey........................................... -..........................M assachusetts----------------- -------------------------- -----Florida...................................................................... .......... 6, 506, 505 5, 659,129 4, 272,191 3, 723,281 3,501,539 3, 352,809 2, 729, 762 2,280, 584 1,972,462 1,829,192 6,033, 574 4,073,341 4, 108, 599 3,418, 775 3,060,868 2,801, 565 2,349, 955 1,931,114 1,905,814 1,065,169 8 39 4 9 14 20 16 18 3 72 37 36 33 36 33 33 33 36 38 35 32 31 28 31 28 27 27 32 33 31 Indiana-------------------- --------------------------------------Missouri.............. ............................................................... North Carolina............. .................................................... Georgia—......................................................................... Wisconsin........................................................................... Virginia..................... ......................................................Tennessee - --------------------------------------------------Minnesota__________________________ ___________ Alabama.......... ................................... -.............-............... Louisiana...... ......... —................ —.................. -............. 1,671,516 1,621, 490 1,600, 721 1,397,951 1,396, 001 1,392, 549 1,300, 500 1,196, 494 1,157, 899 1,127, 057 1, 486, 515 1, 556,891 1,435,312 1,247, 615 1, 279,013 1, 193, 627 1,209,638 1,099,128 1,093,798 968, 553 12 4 12 12 9 17 8 9 6 16 34 33 37 38 34 34 33 34 32 30 28 28 31 32 29 28 26 29 26 25 Maryland------- ---------------------- ------------------- -----Kentucky.................................... ..................-.................. Washington______________ _________ ___________ Iowa--------- --------- ----------------------------- --------------Connecticut........ ..........................-.................................. Oklahoma-------------------------------------------------------South Carolina..................... ............................................ Kansas------------------------ ----------------------------------Mississippi------------------------------------------------------West Virginia-------------------------------------------------- 1,101, 782 1,074, 244 1,002,319 998, 595 943,664 856, 366 810, 800 784,183 746, 005 668, 074 884,036 1, 048,459 862,214 985, 169 797,537 822, 794 733, 249 720, 732 757, 568 704,919 25 2 16 1 18 4 11 9 » 2 15 36 27 34 32 39 30 38 32 33 24 31 20 28 25 35 24 33 25 25 20 Arkansas---------------------------------------...........-.........Oregon ________________________________-............ Colorado- -........ ..............................................................Nebraska_____________________________________ Arizona 643, 013 634, 732 616,843 508,115 436,091 349. 329 324,077 313,301 301, 779 290,046 675,397 561,087 490, 550 497,059 259, 511 342, 686 314, 531 347,872 223,050 234,486 15 13 26 2 68 2 3 i 10 35 24 29 34 35 33 32 34 38 52 30 32 21 29 28 26 26 28 35 48 23 24 229, 673 224,898 223,604 221, 598 208, 196 194, 788 158.088 141, 398 109,013 96. 984 60,024 227,366 202,470 207,945 198, 781 207,649 153, 511 122, 763 141,356 96, 526 55, 791 33,223 1 11 8 11 31 33 40 32 30 40 36 34 34 41 40 24 25 33 24 23 33 30 28 26 32 37 Rhode Island__________________________________ District of Columbia.......................................... ............. New MexicoUtah----------------- --------------------------------------------Montana.- ---------- ------------------------------------------New Hampshire------------------------- ---------------- ----North Dakota— -- - -- ---------- --------- --------Hawaii------ -----------------------------------------------------Vermont........................... .................................................. Wyoming___________ _____ -...........-.......................... Alaska_____________________________________ — 1 A percent decrease. Less than 1 percent. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 2 14 00 27 29 (0 13 74 81 Table 3.—Married Women Workers, by State, 1960 [14 years of age and over] Number of married women workers 1 Region and State Percent increase, 1950 to 1960 As percent As percent of all of all married women workers2 women UNITED STATES........ ....................................................... 12. 365, 354 60 55 Northeast..........-........................................ -............................. 3,072,338 55 50 30 Connecticut........... ............................................................. Maine_______________ _______ -................................... Massachusetts........ ........................................................... New Hampshire............ .................. .................. .........— New Jersey................................................-........................ New York............ .............................................................. Pennsylvania...................................................................... Rhode Island----------------------------------------- ----------Vermont............................................................................... 201,396 67, 328 362,704 52,001 430,880 1,156,002 710, 516 64, 931 26, 580 64 47 56 59 62 51 59 37 S3 55 57 48 58 53 48 50 53 55 34 31 32 38 30 30 28 34 31 North Central............................................................................ 3,474,781 55 55 29 Illinois----------- ------------------- -----------------------Indiana------------------ ------ --------- -----------------------Iowa.. ................... ........................................ .................. Kansas...................... ........................................................... Michigan........................................ -................................... Minnesota---------------------------------------------------Missouri------ ------------- -------- ----------------- -.......... Nebraska................................ ------- ----------------- -----North Dakota.................................-................................. Ohio...... ...................... ........................................................ South Dakota-------- --------- --------------------------------Wisconsin.................................................. .............. .......... 719, 644 329,246 181,828 152,206 498,966 216,065 301, 561 96, 591 35,973 632,206 42,423 268,072 47 58 51 70 60 55 47 57 71 59 64 52 53 58 57 60 56 53 56 57 57 55 59 56 31 30 28 29 28 29 30 29 26 28 28 30 South............................................................................................ 3,798.609 61 58 32 Alabama............................................................................. Arkansas________________ _____ --------- --------------Delaware------------- -------- ----------------------------------District of Columbia---- ------------------- --------- - Florida-..........-.........-....................................................... Georgia---------- -------- -------- ------ ------------ ------------Kentucky------- ----------------- ------------------------------Louisiana. ....................................-................................. Maryland---- ------ -------------------- ----- ---------............ Mississippi------- -----------------------------------------------North Carolina----- -------------------------------------------Oklahoma_________________ ____ ______________ South Carolina-------------------------------------------------Tennessee.—----------------------------------------------------Texas.......... ............................. ........................................... Virginia--------------- ---------------------------West Virginia.................................................................... 214,736 111, 315 31,791 64, 070 369, 816 308, 656 166, Oil 183,678 226,778 144,241 376,148 157,753 186,085 251,199 647,097 273,540 85, 695 48 51 89 2 114 51 66 66 75 55 56 49 43 60 66 72 39 58 61 56 39 58 59 57 55 57 59 63 61 60 59 58 58 53 31 28 32 46 32 37 25 27 33 33 39 29 40 32 30 32 21 West.-------------------------------------------------------------------- 2,019,626 79 58 32 Alaska.. ------------- -------- ------------- ---------------------Arizona.______ ________________________________ California--------------------- -----------------------................ Colorado.-.------ ---------- -----------------------------------Hawaii............................................................ ............. Idaho------------------------- ------ -----------------------------Montana_______ _______________________________ Nevada_______________________ ___________ ____ New Mexico__________ _______________ ____ ____ Oregon______________ _______ ________ _____ ____ Utah-------- ------------------------ --------------------------W ashington.............................................................. ......... Wyoming..------- ----------------------------------------------- 16,093 82,779 1,156,478 122,986 48, 669 46, 883 43,403 24, 843 54,831 132, 494 56, 667 210,145 23,355 117 133 81 81 103 69 69 147 111 45 87 63 65 68 59 57 58 63 66 59 62 60 61 60 61 63 36 29 32 31 40 31 29 38 27 32 29 32 31 31 1 Refers to those classified as “married woman with husband present.” 2 Includes members of the Armed Forces. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 15 0 Table 4.—Age Distribution of Women Workers, by Region, 1960 and 1950 [14 years of age and over] Percent of women workers in specified age group Number of women workers 1 Total 14-17 yrs. 18-24 yrs. 25-34 yrs. 35-44 yrs. 45-64 yrs. 22, 409, 760 16, 615,073 100 100 3 3 16 21 18 23 23 23 35 27 4 3 40.2 36.1 Northeast: 1960 1950 6,137,979 4, 941, 590 100 100 3 2 16 23 17 23 23 22 37 27 4 3 41.2 36.1 North Central: 1960 1950 6,261,147 4, 774,305 100 100 4 3 17 22 17 22 22 22 35 27 5 3 40.4 36.2 South: 1960 1950............. ........... 6, 546,420 4, 712,695 100 100 3 3 16 20 21 25 24 25 32 24 3 3 39.2 35.5 West: I960 1950............. ........... 3,464, 214 2,186,483 100 100 4 3 15 18 19 24 25 24 34 29 4 3 40.0 37.3 Region and year UNITED STATES: 1960.......................... 1950....... .............. . Average years 65 yrs. of age and over (median) ■ Includes members of the Armed Forces. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Table 5.—Occupational Distribution of Employed Women, by Region, 1960 and 1950 [14 years of age and over] Women employed In specified occupation Occupational group Total, United States Number Percent TOTAL EMPLOYED WOMEN.... 21,172,301 North east North Central South West Percent distribution I960 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 6,291, 420 779, 701 3,255, 949 1,664, 763 2, 753,052 1,661,113 2,846, 289 723,246 31.5 3.9 16.3 8.3 13.8 8.3 14.2 3.6 33.6 3.4 21.8 5.6 13.6 7.7 11.9 2.5 32.6 3.5 14.6 6.3 13.8 9.0 16.1 4.2 26.5 4.1 15.9 13.6 13.2 8.0 14.3 4.4 35.5 5.2 10.5 6.9 15.2 8.7 15.0 3.1 TOTAL EMPLOYED WOMEN___ 15, 772, 899 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Clerical Managers, officials, proprietors Operatives_______________ ____ ______ Private household___ ______ __________ Professional Sales___ ______ ____ _________________ Service______________ _______________ Other i............................. ............................... 4,308,020 680,108 3,026,231 1,337, 795 1,951.072 1, 334,121 1, 920, 269 931, 931 27.8 4.4 19.5 8.6 12.6 8.6 12.4 6.0 29.8 3.7 27.1 6.5 12.2 7.5 9.8 3.4 29.5 4.2 17.9 6.0 12.6 9.6 13.6 6.6 22.5 4.4 17.0 14.5 12.0 8.4 12.7 8.7 31.1 6.4 11.4 6.7 14.8 9.6 15.0 5.0 Clerical_____________________________ Managers, officials, proprietors Operatives__________ ______ __________ Private household_____ ______________ Professional____ _____________ ______ Sales........... ...................................................... Service_________________ ____ _____ _ Other 1____ 1950 1 Includes craftsmen, farmers, farm managers, farm laborers, and other laborers. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 16 Table 6.—Median Earnings and Income of Women, by State, 1959 and 1949 [14 years of age and over] Region and State Median earnings of women, 19591 Median income of women Median income of nonwhite women 1959 1949 $2,230 $1,357 $1,029 $909 $590 2,727 1,922 2,413 2, 231 2,650 2, 716 2, 253 2, 226 1,836 1,893 1,085 1,667 1. 448 1,824 1,940 1, 445 1,548 1,053 1,481 826 1,318 981 1,525 1,560 1,203 1,280 762 1,594 1,112 1,615 1,104 1,593 1,960 1,391 1,149 1,061 1,301 995 845 North Central: Illinois........................................................... .............. Indiana------ ---------------------------------------------Iowa________________ _______ _____ _________ Kansas_______________________ _____ _______ Michigan..................................... .............................. Minnesota____ ______ ________________ _____ Missouri----------- ----- --------- ----------------Nebraska.________________ ____ ___________ North Dakota......................................................... Ohio_____ ______ ___________________ _______ South Dakota--------------------- -------- ------ -------Wisconsin................................................. ................. 2,652 2,252 1,745 1,839 2,399 2,029 2,166 1,745 1,410 2,352 1,396 2,112 1,678 1,320 1,080 1,136 1,377 1,207 1,226 1,153 931 1,372 925 1,234 1,355 1,034 880 864 1,161 956 969 926 778 1,106 802 951 1,662 1,168 1,149 966 1,316 1,384 1,020 1,125 853 1,242 647 1,299 1,172 810 698 698 967 820 758 803 422 896 396 817 South: Alabama-------------------- -------- ----------------------Arkansas......................................... .......................... Delaware--------------------- -------- -------------- ------District of Columbia. .......................................... Florida................. ...................................................... Georgia------------ -- ------------- ---------------------Kentucky----------------------------------------- ------Louisiana_______________ ____ _____________ Maryland. _____________ __________________ Mississippi North Carolina-------------------------------- ----------Oklahoma................. ............................................ . South Carolina___ ____ _______ _____ _______ Tennessee______________ _____ _____________ Texas-------------------- -----------------------------------Virginia West Virginia............ ............................................... 1,434 1,292 2,203 3,292 1,694 1,615 1,876 1,405 2,363 1,014 1,807 1,803 1,552 1,722 1,743 2,004 1,873 870 764 1,430 2,457 1,163 979 982 948 1,601 656 1,032 1,019 915 994 1,039 1,232 960 533 444 1,154 2, 065 805 636 794 721 1,144 428 772 782 660 733 759 926 825 592 456 1,061 1,894 844 660 767 744 1,126 412 517 861 462 674 750 737 734 380 342 677 1,396 522 389 488 512 753 330 421 580 363 470 460 530 539 West: Alaska____________ ____ ________ ___________ Arizona.. ______________ . California ______________ __________________ Colorado_______ _____ _________ ____ _ Hawaii...................................................................... . Idaho_____ _______________ ____ _______ ____ Montana Nevada____ ____________________ ____ _ New Mexico____________________ ______ ____ Oregon____________________________________ Utah........ ................ ..................... ................. ........... Washington..____ ______ ____ ________ _____ _ Wyoming___________________________ ______ 2,949 2,109 2,789 2,234 2, 407 1,515 1,737 2,587 1,949 2,124 1,865 2,330 1,699 1,724 1,291 1,732 1,351 1,773 943 1,069 1,863 1,226 1,147 1,090 1,311 1,118 1,292 864 1,158 885 1,247 658 844 1,192 803 831 791 943 845 834 797 1,583 1,393 1,801 809 685 1,469 901 1,203 1,068 1,292 807 425 441 977 852 1,168 415 409 814 478 734 606 876 469 UNITED STATES....................................................... Northeast: Connecticut................... ....... .................................. Massachusetts—..................................................... New Jersey...................... ......................................... New York......... .................. ............................. ......... Pennsy1 vani a............................................................ Rhode Island------------------- ------ ------------------- 1959 1949 1 Earnings data were not collected in the 1950 Census. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. O 17