Sex Differences in Early Labor Force Experience: Harbinger of Things to Come

Abstract

The increased participation of youngsters in the formal labor force raises questions about how early in individuals' occupational histories sex differences in labor force participation, and the rewards thereof, begin. Analysis of current and retrospective data obtainedfrom 3,101 suburban 10th and 11th graders about theirfirst and subsequent jobs shows that (a) adolescents' first jobs are significantly segregated by sex; (b) girls work fewer hours per week than boys; (c) girls typically earn lower hourly wages than boys; and (d) hourly wages are higher in job types that are dominated by males. In general, differences are maintained over youngsters' early job histories. These findings mirror well-known facts about sex differences in the adult occupational structure and are interpreted in terms of differential opportunity and differential socialization. It is well-known and well-documented that fewer adult women than men are employed; that employed women work fewer hours than men, even if both hold full-time jobs; that adult working women are clustered, in higher proportion than men, in lower paying occupational categories; and that even within the same broad occupational category (e.g., the professions, sales jobs) women earn less than men (U.S. Bureau of the Census). These striking social and economic realities raise questions that have not received adequate attention to date. When does the pattern of lower female partici*This study is part of a larger program of research on the costs and benefits of early work experience to adolescent development. The research was funded by the National Institute of Education; dissemination of policy-relevant papers is supported by the Ford Foundation. The authors, who are Co-Principal Investigators of the research program, share equal responsibility for preparation of this report. We thank staff members of the Adolescent Work Project for their assistance in the cleaning, coding, and analysis of data. We owe a special debt to Margaret M. Marini for her extensive review of an earlier version of this paper and the revision to which it led. Linda S. Gottfredson and Aage B. Sorensen also made helpful suggestions on the initial draft. Address correspondence to the authors, Program in Social