Occupational sociology monograph on research on entry into the labour market in the USA - analyses data resulting from an interview survey of a sample of men (incl. Blacks) in the 30 to 39 age group in 1968 and covering family background, educational level, occupational prestige, social mobility, wages, employment and unemployment, etc. Flow charts, references and statistical tables.

The promise of upward mobility—the notion that everyone has the chance to get ahead—is one of this country's most cherished ideals, a hallmark of the American Dream. But in today's volatile labor market, the tradition of upward mobility for all may be a thing of the past. In a competitive world of deregulated markets and demanding shareholders, many firms that once offered the opportunity for advancement to workers have remade themselves as leaner enterprises with more flexible work forces. Divergent Paths examines the prospects for upward mobility of workers in this changed economic landscape. Based on an innovative comparison of the fortunes of two generations of young, white men over the course of their careers, Divergent Paths documents the divide between the upwardly mobile and the growing numbers of workers caught in the low-wage trap. The first generation entered the labor market in the late 1960s, a time of prosperity and stability in the U.S. labor market, while the second generation started work in the early 1980s, just as the new labor market was being born amid recession, deregulation, and the weakening of organized labor. Tracking both sets of workers over time, the authors show that the new labor market is more volatile and less forgiving than the labor market of the 1960s and 1970s. Jobs are less stable, and the penalties for failing to find a steady employer are more severe for most workers. At the top of the job pyramid, the new nomads—highly credentialed, well-connected workers—regard each short-term project as a springboard to a better-paying position, while at the bottom, a growing number of retail workers, data entry clerks, and telemarketers, are consigned to a succession of low-paying, dead-end jobs. While many commentators dismiss public anxieties about job insecurity as overblown, Divergent Paths carefully documents hidden trends in today's job market which confirm many of the public's fears. Despite the celebrated job market of recent years, the authors show that the old labor market of the 1960s and 1970s propelled more workers up the earnings ladder than does today's labor market. Divergent Paths concludes with a discussion of policy strategies, such as regional partnerships linking corporate, union, government, and community resources, which may help repair the career paths that once made upward mobility a realistic ambition for all American workers.

This volume honours the contributions Claudia Goldin has made to scholarship and teaching in economic history and labour economics. The chapters address some closely integrated issues: the role of human capital in the long-term development of the American economy, trends in fertility and marriage, and women's participation in economic change.

This book, designed to give a survey history of American labor from colonial times to the present, is uniquely well suited to speak to the concerns of today’s teachers and students. As issues of growing inequality, stagnating incomes, declining unionization, and exacerbated job insecurity have increasingly come to define working life over the last 20 years, a new generation of students and teachers is beginning to seek to understand labor and its place and ponder seriously its future in American life. Like its predecessors, this ninth edition of our classic survey of American labor is designed to introduce readers to the subject in an engaging, accessible way.

This book analyzes the labor market adjustment processes of immigrants in the United States. Newly-arrived immigrants earn less, work fewer weeks, and have higher rates of unemployment than native-born workers. After a period of assimilation, these conditions later converge to, and often surpass, those of native-born workers. The adjustment process traditionally implies greater employment turnover. Newly-arrived immigrant men have lower employment and labor force participation rates than similar native-born American men. Yet differences in unemployment rates are less consistent, and are complicated by shorter periods of unemployment duration for immigrants. Contrary to expectations, recent immigrants are less likely to be unemployed, even after adjusting for a lower duration of unemployment. This is partly because movements in and out of the labor force are high. Lower employment for recent immigrants is best explained by lower labor force participation, while higher unemployment rates are best explained by high rates of labor force entry. All labor force outcomes for immigrants, whether higher or lower upon arrival, converge to native-born norms after a few years of residence.