Search Results

Author: Budig, Michelle Jean
Resulting in 20 citations.
1. Budig, Michelle Jean
Are Women's Employment and Fertility Histories Interdependent? An Examination of Causal Order Using Event History Analysis
Social Science Research 32,3 (September 2003): 376-402.
Also: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X03000127
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: Academic Press, Inc.
Keyword(s): Employment; Employment, Part-Time; Ethnic Differences; Event History; Fertility; Labor Force Participation; Modeling, Hazard/Event History/Survival/Duration; Pregnancy and Pregnancy Outcomes; Preschool Children; Racial Differences; Women

The negative correlation between women's employment and fertility is well documented. However, the causal nature of that relationship is not clearly understood. Does increased fertility decrease labor force participation? Or, does labor force participation decrease fertility? Or are both true? Data from the 1979?1994 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth are examined using event history analysis. Detailed part-time and full-time employment histories and time-sensitive measures of fertility are analyzed. Findings indicate that both pregnancy and the number of preschoolers hinder non-employed women's entrance to the work force. While pregnancy has no effect on employed women's hazard of exit, preschool children increase the hazard of labor force exit for full-time workers. Older children have the opposite effect: they encourage full-time employment. Older children decrease the likelihood that mothers will exit either part- or full-time employment and increase the likelihood that non-employed mothers will enter full-time employment. Finally, both part- and full-time employment reduce women's hazard of pregnancy. Findings are consistent across racial and ethnic categories. [Copyright 2003 Elsevier]
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean. "Are Women's Employment and Fertility Histories Interdependent? An Examination of Causal Order Using Event History Analysis." Social Science Research 32,3 (September 2003): 376-402.
2. Budig, Michelle Jean
Boon or Bust? Sex Differences in Returns to Earnings for Self-Employment
Presented: Atlanta, GA, Population Association of America Annual Meetings, May 2002
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: Population Association of America
Keyword(s): Earnings; Family Characteristics; Gender Differences; Human Capital; Modeling, Fixed Effects; Mothers; Mothers, Income; Occupations; Self-Employed Workers; Sex Roles

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

While sex differences in participation in self-employment are well documented, sex differences in the effects of self-employment on earnings are not. Does self-employment increase or decrease workers' earnings? Do the returns of self-employment to earnings differ by sex? If so, what mechanisms can explain this difference? Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (1979-98), I examine how returns to earnings for self-employment vary by sex, family status, and occupation. Fixed effect models include controls for human capital, occupational characteristics, and industrial/occupational sex segregation. Findings indicate that childless professional women receive an equivalent return to earnings for self-employment compared with professionally employed men. However, while all men benefit from self-employment, all mothers, and all women in non-professional occupations, have negative returns to self-employment. Findings are consistent with arguments that women use self-employment to balance work and family demands and this amenity may compensate for the negative returns mothers receive.
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean. "Boon or Bust? Sex Differences in Returns to Earnings for Self-Employment." Presented: Atlanta, GA, Population Association of America Annual Meetings, May 2002.
3. Budig, Michelle Jean
Gender, Self-Employment, and Earnings The Interlocking Structures of Family and Professional Status
Gender and Society 20,6 (December 2006): 725-753.
Also: http://gas.sagepub.com/content/20/6/725.abstract
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: Sage Publications
Keyword(s): Child Care; Gender Differences; Human Capital; Labor Supply; Mobility, Labor Market; Modeling, Fixed Effects; Occupational Prestige; Self-Employed Workers

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

Using data from the 1979 to 1998 waves of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, the author explores how gender, family, and class alter the impact of self-employment on earnings. Fixed-effect regression results show that while self-employment positively influences men's earnings, not all women similarly benefit. Professionals receive the same self-employment earnings premium, regardless of gender. However, self-employment in nonprofessional occupations negatively affects women's earnings, with wives and mothers incurring the greatest penalties. The high concentration of nonprofessional self-employed women in child care accounts for much of these penalties. Results are robust despite inclusion of controls for human capital and labor supply, job characteristics, occupational and industrial gender segregation, and demographic characteristics. The compensating differentials argument, that women with greater family responsibilities trade earnings for the family-friendly aspects of self-employment, is discussed in light of these findings. While this argument may explain women's returns to nonprofessional self-employment, it is less persuasive for interpreting women's returns to professional self-employment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean. "Gender, Self-Employment, and Earnings The Interlocking Structures of Family and Professional Status." Gender and Society 20,6 (December 2006): 725-753.
4. Budig, Michelle Jean
Intersections on the Road to Self-Employment: Gender, Family and Occupational Class
Social Forces 84,4 (June 2006): 2223-2239.
Also: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/social_forces/v084/84.4budig.pdf
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: University of North Carolina Press
Keyword(s): Employment; Family Constraints; Family Structure; Gender Differences; Self-Employed Workers; Women

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

Are gender differences in the effects of family structure on self-employment participation robust across different forms of self-employment? Using event history analyses of competing risks and data spanning 20 years, I find that women enter non-professional and non-managerial self-employment to balance work and family demands. In contrast, family factors do little to explain women's entrance into professional and managerial selfemployment; these women are more similar to their male peers and appear to follow a careerist model of self-employment.
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean. "Intersections on the Road to Self-Employment: Gender, Family and Occupational Class." Social Forces 84,4 (June 2006): 2223-2239.
5. Budig, Michelle Jean
Male Advantage and the Gender Composition of Jobs: Who Rides the Glass Escalator?
Social Problems 49,2 (May 2002): 258-277.
Also: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3097230
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: University of California Press
Keyword(s): Economics of Gender; Employment; Gender; Gender Differences; Occupations, Female; Occupations, Male; Sexual Division of Labor; Wage Gap; Wage Growth; Wages, Men; Wages, Women

Is the gender gap in pay constant across all jobs, or does the gender composition of the job affect male advantage? Using data from the NLSY and a finely detailed measure of the gender composition of jobs, I investigate gender differences in wages and in wage growth. I show how they differ between female-dominated, male-dominated, and balanced jobs. Predictions from Kanter's theory of tokenism and the Williams and Acker theory of gendered organizations are tested. Findings indicate that men are advantaged, net of controls, in both pay levels and wage growth in all jobs, regardless of gender composition. Contrary to predictions generated from Kanter's tokenism theory, men do not suffer when they are tokens, in terms of pay. Not only are predictions from Kanter's theory untrue for male tokens, they also do not hold for female tokens when it comes to wages. Rather, consistent with the Williams and Acker theory of gendered organizations, men are no more—and no less—advantaged when women are tokens; in terms of earnings, men are uniformly advantaged in male-dominated, female-dominated, and balanced jobs. Analyses of promotions data indicate that men are also not additionally advantaged whether they are the numerically dominant or minority gender; in fact, male advantage in promotions is the smallest when men are tokens.
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean. "Male Advantage and the Gender Composition of Jobs: Who Rides the Glass Escalator?" Social Problems 49,2 (May 2002): 258-277.
6. Budig, Michelle Jean
Professionals, Carpenters, and Childcare Workers: Sex Differences in Self-Employment Participation and Earnings
Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Arizona, 2001. DAI-A 62/08, p. 2885, Feb 2002
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: UMI - University Microfilms, Bell and Howell Information and Learning
Keyword(s): Child Care; Gender Differences; Human Capital; Labor Supply; Occupational Status; Self-Employed Workers

Despite the revitalization of non-agricultural self-employment among men, and especially among women, since 1970, little research has examined sex differences in self-employment participation and outcomes using national longitudinal probability samples. In addition, even less research has examined how these sex differences vary by occupational status. Using data from each census between 1940 and 1990, along with data from the 1979-1998 waves of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, this dissertation examines sex differences in the historical context of and trends in self-employment, factors that affect the likelihood of self-employment entrance, and earnings returns to self-employment. Analyses are run separately for non-professional and professional workers. Sex differences in the effects of human capital and labor supply, occupational and industrial sex segregation, job characteristics, family factors, and demographic characteristics on self-employment participation and earnings are explored. General theories of self-employment participation, based on the experiences of men, are tested to see if they can explain women's self-employment experiences as well. These theories include three versions of the disadvantaged worker theory--that workers with fewer employable skills, workers in bad jobs, and workers that face employer discrimination will turn to and benefit from self-employment. Two gendered theories that take women's structural position in the economy and the family are also examined. These theories argue that women whose family responsibilities conflict with work obligations and highly skilled women who are trying to circumvent employer discrimination will turn to and benefit from self-employment. Findings show support for the gender-neutral discouraged worker and the gendered work and family conflict theories. Workers in bad jobs are more likely to become self-employed, as are married women and mothers. Less support is found for the glass ceiling breaker theory. Female childless professionals are the only group of women who benefit equally from self-employment, compared with men. All other women face earnings penalties for being self-employed. However, the benefits of self-employment, such as lower child care costs, greater flexibility in work schedules, and control over the intensity of work may compensate for the self-employment penalty mothers incur.
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean. Professionals, Carpenters, and Childcare Workers: Sex Differences in Self-Employment Participation and Earnings. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Arizona, 2001. DAI-A 62/08, p. 2885, Feb 2002.
7. Budig, Michelle Jean
The Fatherhood Bonus and The Motherhood Penalty: Parenthood and the Gender Gap in Pay
Report, Third Way, Washington DC, 2014.
Also: http://www.thirdway.org/publications/853
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: Third Way
Keyword(s): Discrimination; Fatherhood; Fertility; Gender Differences; Income; Income Level; Job Knowledge; Job Promotion; Mobility, Job; Modeling, Fixed Effects; Motherhood; Mothers, Income; Wage Differentials; Wage Penalty/Career Penalty; Wages, Women

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

For the past forty years at least, progressive advocates have been concerned about the the wage gap between working men and women in American society. Overall, never-married women in 2012 had almost closed the wage gap—earning 96% of what men earn. So why are we still concerned about the wage gap? Is this issue over? Author Michelle J. Budig clarifies this debate by looking at the wage gap in terms of the one thing that the majority of adults experience in their lifetime—parenthood.
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean. "The Fatherhood Bonus and The Motherhood Penalty: Parenthood and the Gender Gap in Pay." Report, Third Way, Washington DC, 2014.
8. Budig, Michelle Jean
England, Paula A.
The Wage Penalty for Motherhood
American Sociological Review 66,2 (April 2001): 204-225.
Also: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2657415
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: American Sociological Association
Keyword(s): Discrimination; Fertility; Income; Income Level; Job Knowledge; Job Promotion; Mobility, Job; Modeling, Fixed Effects; Motherhood; Mothers; Mothers, Income; Wage Penalty/Career Penalty; Wages; Wages, Women

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

Motherhood is associated with lower hourly pay, but the causes of this are not well understood. Mothers may earn less than other women because having children causes them to (1) lose job experience, (2) be less productive at work, (3) trade off higher wages for mother-friendly jobs, or (4) be discriminated against by employers. Or the relationship may be spurious rather than causal--women with lower earning potential may have children at relatively higher rates. The authors use data from the 1982-1993 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth with fixed-effects models to examine the wage penalty for motherhood. Results show a wage penalty of 7 percent per child. Penalties are larger for married women than for unmarried women. Women with (more) children have fewer years of job experience, and after controlling for experience a penalty of 5 percent per child remains. "Mother-friendly" characteristics of the jobs held by mothers explain little of the penalty beyond the tendency of more mothers than non-mothers to work part-time. The portion of the motherhood penalty unexplained probably results from the effect of motherhood on productivity and/or from discrimination by employers against mothers. While the benefits of mothering diffuse widely--to the employers, neighbors, friends, spouses, and children of the adults who received the mothering--the costs of child rearing are borne disproportionately by mothers.
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean and Paula A. England. "The Wage Penalty for Motherhood." American Sociological Review 66,2 (April 2001): 204-225.
9. Budig, Michelle Jean
Fugiero, Melissa
Racial Differences in the Effects of Education on Earnings: Findings from the NLSY, 1979-2000
Presented: New York City NY, American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, August 2007
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: American Sociological Association
Keyword(s): College Degree; Earnings; Educational Attainment; Racial Differences

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

Past research claims racial minorities benefit less from educational attainment in terms of earnings. However, it is unclear whether this reduced benefit is due to race differences in levels of education obtained or due differences in returns to earnings from educational attainment. Moreover, quite unexplored is whether race differences in the returns to education of vary by field of degree. Using the 1979-2000 waves of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY), we test whether African-Americans and Caucasians experience different returns to earnings for educational attainment. We examine multiple specifications of education: years of education, highest degree obtained, and field of degree obtained. Control variables include human capital, occupational characteristics, economic and industrial sectors, local labor market conditions, family structure, and demographic characteristics. We find there are racial differences in returns to education measured as highest grade completed and this difference is largely unexplained by the addition of extensive control variables. In-depth examination of these differential returns by measuring education as highest degree obtained and as field of highest degree obtain reveal notable patterns. Among men, race gaps in returns to education are explained in many fields and levels by racial differences in human capital, labor supply, and job characteristics. However, white men receive a return to MBAs that is four times higher than black men's return. Among women, the racial differential in returns to education is more pronounced, dramatically so at the PhD level. In almost every field, African-American women receive a significantly lower return to educational credentials, compared to white women.
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean and Melissa Fugiero. "Racial Differences in the Effects of Education on Earnings: Findings from the NLSY, 1979-2000." Presented: New York City NY, American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, August 2007.
10. Budig, Michelle Jean
Hodges, Melissa J.
Differences in Disadvantage: Variation in the Motherhood Penalty across White Women’s Earnings Distribution
American Sociological Review 75,5 (October 2010): 705-728.
Also: http://asr.sagepub.com/content/75/5/705.abstract
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: American Sociological Association
Keyword(s): Earnings; Maternal Employment; Motherhood; Wage Differentials; Wage Penalty/Career Penalty; Wages, Women

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

Earnings inequality has grown in recent decades in the United States, yet research investigating the motherhood wage penalty has not fully considered how the penalty itself, and the mechanisms producing it, may vary among low-wage, middle-wage, and high-wage workers. Pooling data from the 1979 to 2004 waves of the NLSY and using simultaneous quantile regression methods with fixed effects, we test whether the size of the motherhood penalty differs across the distribution of white women’s earnings, and whether the mechanisms explaining this penalty vary by earnings level. Results show that having children inflicts the largest penalty on low-wage women, proportionately, although a significant motherhood penalty persists at all earnings levels. We also find that the mechanisms creating the motherhood penalty vary by earnings level. Family resources, work effort, and compensating differentials account for a greater portion of the penalty among low earners. Among highly paid women, by contrast, the motherhood penalty is significantly smaller and largely explained by lost human capital due to childbearing. Our findings show that estimates of average motherhood penalties obscure the compounded disadvantage mothers face at the bottom of the earnings distribution, as well as differences in the type and strength of mechanisms that produce the penalty.
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean and Melissa J. Hodges. "Differences in Disadvantage: Variation in the Motherhood Penalty across White Women’s Earnings Distribution." American Sociological Review 75,5 (October 2010): 705-728.
11. Budig, Michelle Jean
Hodges, Melissa J.
Overqualified and Underpaid: Understanding the Mechanisms Producing the Earnings Penalty for Care Workers
Presented: Denver CO, American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, August 2012
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: American Sociological Association
Keyword(s): Human Capital; Job Characteristics; Occupational Choice; Occupations; Wage Penalty/Career Penalty

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

The care wage penalty is well established, but less is known about the mechanisms producing it. Commonly used arguments of these mechanisms have not been systematically adjudicated empirically. We examine the differences between care and non-care workers that may produce this penalty, including differences in selection into care work on stable individual characteristics (such as tastes, preferences, and unmeasured abilities), human capital, job amenities and disamenities, occupational and industrial segregation, and participation in the public sector and worker unions. We also consider how specific types of care workers, such as doctors, teachers, and childcare workers, experience different penalties for performing care work. Importantly, we go beyond simply considering how differences in worker and job characteristics may lead to the care penalty. The care penalty may be produced if the wage returns to human capital, or the wage protection effects of worker unions and government subsidized work, are less positive, or more negative, for care workers. We investigate this by testing whether returns (i.e., coefficients) are different between care and non-care workers in regard to human capital (education, experience, and seniority) and potentially protective job characteristics (working in the public sector and membership in a collective bargaining unit). In these analyses we again divide care workers into subgroups of workers to consider which care workers face greater wage penalties and whether human capital investments and protective job characteristics benefit some care workers more than others.
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean and Melissa J. Hodges. "Overqualified and Underpaid: Understanding the Mechanisms Producing the Earnings Penalty for Care Workers." Presented: Denver CO, American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, August 2012.
12. Budig, Michelle Jean
Hodges, Melissa J.
England, Paula A.
Wages of Nurturant and Reproductive Care Workers: Individual and Job Characteristics, Occupational Closure, and Wage-Equalizing Institutions
Social Problems 66,2 (May 2019): 294-319.
Also: https://academic.oup.com/socpro/article/66/2/294/4976108
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Keyword(s): Job Characteristics; Modeling, Fixed Effects; Occupations; Wage Gap; Wage Penalty/Career Penalty

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

Despite the work's social importance, nurturant and reproductive care workers earn less than others with comparable human capital and work demands. We explore three broad questions related to pay for care work. First, we examine nurturant and reproductive care penalties together to investigate what mechanisms produce the lower wages for these workers. Second, we examine how occupational closure through education credentials and licensing requirements creates varying returns to care work. Finally, we explore the roles of wage equalizing institutions--labor unions and government sector care provision--in reducing wage disparities associated with care work. Using the 1979-2012 waves of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY) and fixed-effects regression models, we find that selection on stable factors and human capital differences explain much of the lower wages for reproductive workers, but none of the low wages of nurturant workers. However, compared to non-care workers, college-educated nurturant care workers receive lower returns to work experience, suggesting limitations in how much learning can increase efficiency in care work, given the labor intensive, face-to-face nature of much of it. Occupational closure matters: care jobs with the highest educational and licensing requirements pay a wage bonus, while less closed care occupations incur a penalty. Wage equalizing institutions have both floor and ceiling effects on care worker wages that mitigate care penalties for selected workers: women reproductive workers and women in low-education/high-licensing occupations. More consistently, ceiling effects of these institutions lower the wages of otherwise higher paid care workers: nurturant and high-education/high licensing occupations.
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean, Melissa J. Hodges and Paula A. England. "Wages of Nurturant and Reproductive Care Workers: Individual and Job Characteristics, Occupational Closure, and Wage-Equalizing Institutions." Social Problems 66,2 (May 2019): 294-319.
13. Budig, Michelle Jean
Lim, Misun
Cohort Differences and the Marriage Premium: Emergence of Gender-Neutral Household Specialization Effects
Presented: Washington DC, Population Association of America Annual Meeting, March-April 2016
Cohort(s): NLSY79, NLSY97
Publisher: Population Association of America
Keyword(s): Earnings, Husbands; Earnings, Wives; Gender Differences; Marriage; Modeling, Fixed Effects; Wage Differentials

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

Past research finds marriage premiums for men, occasionally women, attributable to Becker's theory of household specialization. We ask, do these premiums 1) persist among the millennial cohort of workers, 2) reflect changing selection into marriage across cohorts, and 3) differ by the gender division of spousal work hours? Using fixed-effects models and NLSY79 and NLSY97 data, we compare cohort, gender, and household specialization differences in the marriage premium. Despite declining gender-traditional household specialization, the millennial cohort reveals larger marriage premiums, for both women and men. While positive selection on unobserved factors explains less of the marriage premium among millennial men, it fully explains millennial women's marriage premium, relative to baby boomers. Household specialization matters only among millennials, where it is gender neutral: both male and female breadwinners earn significantly larger marriage premiums, while husbands and wives specializing in nonmarket work earn no premium, or even a marriage penalty, when employed.

Also presented at Seattle WA, American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, August 2016.

Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean and Misun Lim. "Cohort Differences and the Marriage Premium: Emergence of Gender-Neutral Household Specialization Effects." Presented: Washington DC, Population Association of America Annual Meeting, March-April 2016.
14. Budig, Michelle Jean
Lim, Misun
Cohort Differences and the Marriage Premium: Emergence of Gender-Neutral Household Specialization Effects
Journal of Marriage and Family 78,5 (October 2016): 1352-1370.
Also: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jomf.12326/abstract
Cohort(s): NLSY79, NLSY97
Publisher: Blackwell Publishing, Inc. => Wiley Online
Keyword(s): Earnings, Husbands; Earnings, Wives; Gender Differences; Marriage; Modeling, Fixed Effects; Wage Differentials

Using fixed-effects models and National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 and National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 data, we compared cohort, gender, and household specialization differences in the marriage premium. Do these premiums (a) persist among millennials, (b) reflect changing selection into marriage across cohorts, and (c) differ by the gender division of spousal work hours? Despite declining gender-traditional household specialization, the millennial cohort garnered larger marriage premiums for women and men. Positive selection explained millenial women's marriage premiums, but less of men's. Household specialization mattered only among millennials, where it is gender neutral: Male and female breadwinners earned significantly larger marriage premiums, whereas husbands and wives specializing in nonmarket work earned no premium, or even penalties, when employed. Results show increasing disadvantage among breadwinner households, with dual earners most advantaged among millennials.
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean and Misun Lim. "Cohort Differences and the Marriage Premium: Emergence of Gender-Neutral Household Specialization Effects." Journal of Marriage and Family 78,5 (October 2016): 1352-1370.
15. Budig, Michelle Jean
Lim, Misun
Hodges, Melissa J.
Racial and Gender Disparities in the Wage Returns for Educational Attainment
Presented: Philadelphia PA, American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, August 2018
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: American Sociological Association
Keyword(s): Earnings; Educational Attainment; Gender Differences; Racial Differences

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

How do race and gender intersect with educational attainment to influence earnings? Do women and minority men earn less than white men because of lower educational attainment or degrees in less lucrative majors, or because they receive lower returns to the same qualifications? Using a longitudinal national probability sample, we test whether earnings returns to education differ among white men, black men, white women, and black women. To examine the role of racial and gender segregation in field of degree, we consider multiple specifications of education: years of education, highest degree obtained, and level-by-field of degree obtained. Covariates include local labor market and demographic characteristics, family structure, human capital, and job characteristics. Findings reveal a robust labor market for less educated white men, such that white men's greater returns to secondary and college educational attainment only emerges with controls for human capital, labor supply, and job characteristics. White women also receive stronger wage returns for educational credentials, but only for post-graduate degrees. Black men receive significantly lower returns for most of their educational credentials, and this can be attributed to the disadvantageous sorting of educated black men into jobs with low-paying characteristics. Finally, black women, who appear to receive stronger returns for educational attainment in baseline models, are uniformly undervalued for their educational attainment in more saturated models. This indicates that that educational attainment may propel black women's success in the labor market in terms of human capital accumulation and occupational attainment, but compared to white women and men with equivalent characteristics, black women's education is strikingly under-rewarded in terms of pay.
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean, Misun Lim and Melissa J. Hodges. "Racial and Gender Disparities in the Wage Returns for Educational Attainment." Presented: Philadelphia PA, American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, August 2018.
16. Budig, Michelle Jean
Lim, Misun
Hodges, Melissa J.
Fugiero, Melissa
It’s Not Enough to Stay in School: Race and Gender Differences in the Wage Returns of Educational Attainment
Presented: New Orleans LA, Population Association of America Annual Meeting, April 2013
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: Population Association of America
Keyword(s): Educational Attainment; Gender Differences; Racial Differences; Wage Differentials; Wages

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

Using the 1979-2010 waves of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY), we test whether African-Americans and Caucasians experience different returns to earnings for educational attainment. We examine multiple specifications of education: years of education, highest degree obtained, and field of degree obtained. Control variables include human capital, job characteristics, family structure, and demographic characteristics. We find African-Americans receive lower returns to education measured as highest grade completed, net of extensive control variables. Most of this racial difference in returns is concentrated among workers with graduate degrees, particularly among PhDs. Among men, whites receive significantly higher returns for MBAs and PhDs in the social sciences and humanities. Among women, whites receive significantly higher returns for graduate degrees in humanities and legal studies. Some of these racial differences are due to differential placement in occupations and industries after degree completion.
Bibliography Citation
Budig, Michelle Jean, Misun Lim, Melissa J. Hodges and Melissa Fugiero. "It’s Not Enough to Stay in School: Race and Gender Differences in the Wage Returns of Educational Attainment." Presented: New Orleans LA, Population Association of America Annual Meeting, April 2013.
17. England, Paula A.
Bearak, Jonathan M.
Budig, Michelle Jean
Hodges, Melissa J.
Do Highly Paid, Highly Skilled Women Experience the Largest Motherhood Penalty?
American Sociological Review 81,6 (December 2016): 1161-1189.
Also: http://asr.sagepub.com/content/81/6/1161.abstract
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: American Sociological Association
Keyword(s): Motherhood; Wage Levels; Wage Penalty/Career Penalty; Wages, Women

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

Motherhood reduces women's wages. But does the size of this penalty differ between more and less advantaged women? To answer this, we use unconditional quantile regression models with person-fixed effects, and panel data from the 1979 to 2010 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY79). We find that among white women, the most privileged--women with high skills and high wages--experience the highest total penalties, estimated to include effects mediated through lost experience. Although highly skilled, highly paid women have fairly continuous experience, their high returns to experience make even the small amounts of time some of them take out of employment for childrearing costly. By contrast, penalties net of experience, which may represent employer discrimination or effects of motherhood on job performance, are not distinctive for highly skilled women with high wages.
Bibliography Citation
England, Paula A., Jonathan M. Bearak, Michelle Jean Budig and Melissa J. Hodges. "Do Highly Paid, Highly Skilled Women Experience the Largest Motherhood Penalty?" American Sociological Review 81,6 (December 2016): 1161-1189.
18. England, Paula A.
Bearak, Jonathan M.
Budig, Michelle Jean
Hodges, Melissa J.
Is the Motherhood Wage Penalty Worse at the Top or Bottom?
Presented: San Francisco CA, Population Association of America Meetings, May 2012
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: Population Association of America
Keyword(s): Armed Forces Qualifications Test (AFQT); Maternal Employment; Modeling, Fixed Effects; Motherhood; Racial Differences; Wage Differentials; Wage Penalty/Career Penalty; Wages, Women

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

In this paper, we ask whether motherhood wage penalties are higher for women at the top or bottom of skill, wage, and race hierarchies. Two recent papers that address the issue of how the penalties vary by skill and wage present a puzzle. In an unpublished but widely cited NBER paper, Wilde, Batchelder, and Ellwood (2010), using the AFQT cognitive skill test as a measure of skill, find the motherhood penalty to be much higher for higher skilled women before and after controls for experience. This makes sense if we think that the jobs that high-skilled women can get are the hardest to combine with the demands of motherhood without performance being affected. Budig and Hodges (2010), using the same (National Longitudinal Analysis of Youth 1979) dataset, and deploying quantile regression, show that the penalty for motherhood (as a proportion of wage) is much larger for low wage women. Part of this is simply that low wage women drop out the most, and thus, when they re-enter, pay a penalty for their lost experience. But even after adjustments for experience, Budig and Hodges found lower wage women to have them to have higher penalties, possibly reflecting the less family-friendly firms they work for, and/or their low bargaining power on matters of flexibility. Because individuals’ skills and their wages are moderately positively correlated, it is a puzzle that low skill women have lower penalties while low wage women have higher penalties. Research has also examined whether black and white women differ in their motherhood penalties with mixed findings (e.g. Budig and England 2001 find no difference while Waldfogel 1997 finds lower penalties for black women). We examine whether the wage penalty for motherhood is proportionately higher or lower for women at higher points in cognitive skill, wage, and race hierarchies. One animating puzzle is that a paper by Ellwood and colleagues found higher penalties for more cognitively skilled women, while a paper using the same data by Budig and Hodges found higher penalties at lower wage levels; given the correlation between skill and wage, it is surprising if both are true. We use all waves of the NLSY79 with fixed effects models and quantile regression. We assess whether penalties (because of and net of experience) are higher for those scoring higher on the AFQT, for those with lower wages, and for black women. We assess the role of marital status in explaining black/white differences in penalties. We attempt a comprehensive portrait of how motherhood penalties vary by advantage.
Bibliography Citation
England, Paula A., Jonathan M. Bearak, Michelle Jean Budig and Melissa J. Hodges. "Is the Motherhood Wage Penalty Worse at the Top or Bottom?" Presented: San Francisco CA, Population Association of America Meetings, May 2012.
19. England, Paula A.
Budig, Michelle Jean
Folbre, Nancy
Wages Of Virtue: The Relative Pay of Care Work
Social Problems 49,4 (November 2002): 455-474.
Also: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/sp.2002.49.4.455
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: University of California Press
Keyword(s): Modeling, Fixed Effects; Occupational Status; Occupations; Wage Determination; Wage Growth; Wage Rates; Wages

We examine the relative pay of occupations involving care, such as teaching, counseling, providing health services, or supervising children. We use panel data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth covering workers between 17 and 35 years of age. Care work pays less than other occupations after controlling for the education and employment experience of the workers, many occupation and industry characteristics, and (via individual fixed effects) unmeasured, stable characteristics of those who hold the jobs. Both men and women in care work pay this relative wage penalty. However, more women than men pay the penalty, since more women than men do this kind of work.
Bibliography Citation
England, Paula A., Michelle Jean Budig and Nancy Folbre. "Wages Of Virtue: The Relative Pay of Care Work." Social Problems 49,4 (November 2002): 455-474.
20. Hodges, Melissa J.
Budig, Michelle Jean
Who Gets the Daddy Bonus?: Organizational Hegemonic Masculinity and the Impact of Fatherhood on Earnings
Gender and Society 24,6 (December 2010): 717-745.
Also: http://gas.sagepub.com/content/24/6/717.abstract
Cohort(s): NLSY79
Publisher: Sage Publications
Keyword(s): Benefits, Fringe; Earnings, Husbands; Educational Attainment; Ethnic Studies; Fatherhood; Gender Attitudes/Roles; Gender Differences; Marital Status; Maternal Employment; Wage Differentials

Permission to reprint the abstract has not been received from the publisher.

Using the 1979-2006 waves of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, we investigate how the earnings bonus for fatherhood varies by characteristics associated with hegemonic masculinity in the American workplace: heterosexual marital status, professional/managerial status, educational attainment, skill demands of jobs, and race/ethnicity. We find the earnings bonus for fatherhood persists after controlling for an array of differences, including human capital, labor supply, family structure, and wives' employment status. Moreover, consistent with predictions from the theory of hegemonic masculinity within bureaucratic organizations, the fatherhood bonus is significantly larger for men with other markers of workplace hegemonic masculinity. Men who are white, married, in households with a traditional gender division of labor, college graduates, professional/managerial workers and whose jobs emphasize cognitive skills and deemphasize physical strength receive the largest fatherhood earnings bonuses. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Copyright of Gender & Society is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Bibliography Citation
Hodges, Melissa J. and Michelle Jean Budig. "Who Gets the Daddy Bonus?: Organizational Hegemonic Masculinity and the Impact of Fatherhood on Earnings." Gender and Society 24,6 (December 2010): 717-745.