Employment Patterns Among Persons with Children During the Recession

ASPE RESEARCH BRIEF

Employment Patterns Among Persons with Children During the Recession^[1]

August 2010

This Research Brief is available on the internet at:http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/10/EmploymentPatterns/rb.shtml

Printer friendly version in PDF format (14 pages)Free PDF reader

Contents

• Summary
• Background
• All Parents
• Mothers
• Fathers
• Couples
• Conclusion

TablesNotes on MethodologyEndnotes

Summary

The employment patterns of persons with children under age 18 have largely mirrored the patterns of the nations labor force during the recession.  Between the fourth quarter of 2007 and the fourth quarter of 2009 the employment rates of parents decreased among most demographic groups.  During the same time period the percent of couples with children with both members employed decreased from 62.1 percent to 56.6 percent, and the percent of couples with children with neither person employed increased from 3.0 percent to 5.5 percent.

[ Go to Contents ]

Background

This Research Brief reports employment information tabulated from the nations primary data collection instrument on labor force activity, the Current Population Survey (CPS).  The primary population of interest is persons living with their own children under age 18.^[2]  This population is important because lower levels of employment among parents generally correlate with increased levels of government transfers, material hardship, and poverty.

The methods used in this Research Brief to calculate unemployment rates are the same as those used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for its official publications. The unemployment rate is the percent of the labor force (those persons working or actively seeking and available for work) that is not employed.  The data in this Research Brief are not seasonally adjusted.  In order to avoid misinterpreting labor market characteristics impacted by seasonal variation, this Brief focuses on comparing the labor force in the fourth quarter of 2007, the beginning of the recession, with the labor force in the fourth quarter of 2009.^[3]

[ Go to Contents ]

All Parents

Parents living with children under age 18 made up 35.9 percent of the civilian, non-institutional labor force in the fourth quarter of 2009.  Figure 1 shows that, in the aggregate, persons with children have lower rates of unemployment than persons without children (8.5 percent compared to 10.0 percent in the fourth quarter of 2009).

Figure 1. Quarterly Unemployment Rates of All Persons By Presence of Own children Percent of Labor Force

See appendix data tables for notes and sources.

Since the start of the recession, the labor force patterns of parents living with children under age 18 largely mirrored the patterns of the rest of the labor force.  Between the fourth quarter of 2007 and the fourth quarter of 2009, the unemployment rate of persons with children increased 4.7 percentage points from 3.8 percent to 8.5 percent, while the unemployment rate of non-parents in the labor force increased from 5.0 percent to 10.0 percent.

The unemployment rates of all of the parent populations shown in Figure 2 increased between the fourth quarter of 2007 and the fourth quarter of 2009, regardless of educational attainment.  Unemployment rates among those with higher levels of education were lower than the rates of parents with less education in 2008 and 2009.  For example, the unemployment rate of parents without a high school diploma or GED increased from 8.6 percent to 16.7 percent during this period.  At the same time, the unemployment rate of parents with a college degree or more increased from 1.7 percent to 4.1 percent.

Figure 2. Quarterly Unemployment Rates of All Parents By Educational AttainmentPercent of Labor Force

See appendix data tables for notes and sources.

Unemployment rates of persons living with children also varied by race and ethnicity.  The unemployment rates of Latinos, non-Latino Blacks, non-Latino Whites, and non-Latino Asians all increased between the last quarter of 2007 and the last quarter of 2009 (Figure 3).  The rates for non-Latino Whites and Non-Latino Asians remained lower than the rates for non-Latino Blacks and Latinos.

Figure 3. Quarterly Unemployment Rates of All Parents By Race & Ethnicity Percent of Labor Force

White, Black, and Asian categories are single race, non-Latino.See appendix data tables for notes and sources.

Figure 4 shows the percent of all parents who are employed, unemployed, or not in the labor force.  Expanding the denominator to include all parents (instead of restricting the denominator to persons in the labor force) provides a different examination of the data because younger parents are much more likely to be out of the labor force than the other age groups.  Between the fourth quarter in 2007 and the fourth quarter in 2009 the percent of parents employed decreased for all age groupings shown in Figure 4 except parents age 55 and older.  Rates of employment among this group of parents remained statistically unchanged.

Figure 4. Distribution of Parents by Age and Employment Status Employed

Unemployed*

Not in the Labor Force

* Unlike the other figures in this research brief, these numbers are the percent of all parents that are unemployed, and include not only those parents in the labor force (i.e., those working or looking for work) but also those parents that are not currently looking for work.See appendix data tables for notes and sources.

[ Go to Contents ]

Mothers

Between the fourth quarter in 2007 and the fourth quarter in 2009 the unemployment rates among non-married mothers were higher than those of married mothers, as shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Quarterly Unemployment Rates of Mothers By Living Arrangement Percent of Labor Force

See appendix data tables for notes and sources.

Throughout this time period, the unemployment rates of mothers living with cohabiting partners were closer to the rates of non-cohabiting, non-married mothers than to those of married mothers.  In the fourth quarter of 2009 the unemployment rate of single mothers living with cohabiting partners was more than double that of married mothers living with their spouses.

Figure 6 below shows the percent of all mothers who are employed, and for those mothers who are not employed, whether they live with a spouse or cohabiting partner who is employed.^[4]

Between the fourth quarter of 2007 and the fourth quarter of 2009, the percent of mothers who were not employed and did not live with an employed spouse or cohabiting partner increased from 9.7 percent to 12.8 percent.  Thus, in the fourth quarter of 2009 about 87 percent (the sum of 65.2 and 22.0) of mothers either were employed themselves or lived with a spouse or cohabiting partner who was employed.

Figure 6. Percent Distribution of Mothers by Employment Status and Living Arrangement

See appendix data tables for notes and sources.

Single mothers are a population of interest among social scientists because previous research has confirmed that children living with unmarried mothers are more likely to experience material hardship than children living with married parents.  Figure 7 focuses only on single mothers who are not living with spouses.^[5]  For those single mothers, it shows the percent who are employed and, for those single mothers who are not employed, whether they live with a cohabiting partner who is employed.  Between the fourth quarter of 2007 and the fourth quarter of 2009, the percent of single mothers who were neither employed nor living with an employed cohabiting partner increased from 24.6 percent to 30.2 percent.  Between the fourth quarter of 2007 and the fourth quarter of 2009 the percent of single mothers who were not employed but living with an employed cohabiting partner did not change statistically.

Figure 7.

* Single mothers in this figure refer to all mothers who do not have a spouse present.See appendix data tables for notes and sources.

[ Go to Contents ]

Fathers

The employment patterns of fathers generally mirror those of the rest of the labor force.  Between the fourth quarter in 2007 and the fourth quarter in 2009, the unemployment rate among non-married resident fathers^[6] was higher than the rate of married fathers, as shown in Figure 8.  The average unemployment rate of non-married fathers living with cohabiting partners during this time period was higher than for non-married fathers not living with cohabiting partners.  Although the unemployment rate of all fathers was lower than the category of all mothers combined in the fourth quarter of 2009 (see Figure 5), the unemployment rate of married fathers was higher than the rate of married mothers (7.1 percent for fathers versus 6.1 percent for mothers).

Figure 8. Quarterly Unemployment Rates of Fathers By Living ArrangementsPercent of Labor Force

See appendix data tables for notes and sources.

Figure 9 shows the percent of all fathers who are employed, and for those fathers who are not employed, whether they live with a spouse or cohabiting partner who is employed.  In the aggregate, over 9 in 10 fathers were either employed or living with a spouse or cohabiting partner that was employed in the fourth quarter of 2009.  However, the percent of fathers that were not employed and were not living with a spouse or cohabiting partner that was employed increased from 3.6 percent to 6.5 percent between the fourth quarter in 2007 and the fourth quarter in 2009.

Figure 9. Percent Distribution of Fathers by Employment Status and Living Arrangement

See appendix data tables for notes and sources.

[ Go to Contents ]

Couples

Since mothers and fathers living together typically work collectively to provide for their children, it also is important to analyze their rates of employment as couples and not just as individuals. Figures 10 through 12 display the rates of employment of couples.^[7]

Between the fourth quarter of 2007 and the fourth quarter of 2009, the percent of couples with children in which both parents were employed decreased from 62.1 percent to 56.6 percent.  During this same time period, the percent of couples with neither parent employed increased from 3.0 percent to 5.5 percent.  While the percent of couples with only the father employed stayed statistically unchanged during this time period, the percent of couples with only the mother employed increased from 5.2 percent to 8.1 percent.

Figure 10. Distribution of All Couples with Children By Spouse's Employment StatusPercent of Couples

See appendix data tables for notes and sources.

Figures 11 and 12 duplicate Figure 10 for married and cohabiting couples.  As shown in Figure 12, the percent of cohabiting couples with both parents employed decreased from 54.4 percent to 44.2 percent, while the percent with neither parent working increased from 5.7 percent to 14.0 percent of the population, between the fourth quarter in 2007 and the fourth quarter in 2009.

Figure 11. Distribution of Married Couples with Children By Spouse's Employment Status, Percent of Couples

See appendix data tables for notes and sources.

Figure 12. Distribution of Cohabitating Couples with Children By Partners's Employment StatusPercent of Couples

See appendix data tables for notes and sources.

[ Go to Contents ]

Conclusion

Between the fourth quarter of 2007 and the fourth quarter of 2009, the percent of couples with both members employed decreased from 62.1 percent to 56.6 percent.  During this same time period, the percent of couples with neither parent employed increased from 3.0 to 5.5 percent.  The percent of couples with only the mother employed increased for both married and cohabiting couples with children.

Since the start of the recession, the labor force patterns of parents living with children under age 18 largely mirrored the patterns of the rest of the labor force.  Between the fourth quarter of 2007 and the fourth quarter of 2009, the unemployment rate of persons with children increased from 3.8 to 8.5 percent, while the unemployment rate of non-parents increased from 5.0 percent to 10.0 percent.

Between the fourth quarter of 2007 and the fourth quarter of 2009, the percent of single mothers that were neither employed nor living with an employed cohabiting partner increased from 24.6 percent to 30.2 percent.  Therefore, in the fourth quarter of 2009, about 3 in 10 single mothers were not employed and did not live with employed cohabiting partners.

[ Go to Contents ]

Tables

[ Go to Contents ]

Notes on Methodology

This Research Brief report is based on ASPE tabulations of public use data from the Current Population Survey (CPS), which is the nations primary data collection instrument for measurements of employment and unemployment rates in the United States.^[8]  The CPS is administered by the U.S. Census Bureau for the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), U.S. Department of Labor, and collects data from about 60,000 occupied households each month using a nationally representative probability design.  Many of the questions on the survey refer to labor force participation during the week that includes the 12^th day of each month.  Persons included in the survey do not have to be citizens of the United States, but must reside in the country.

Once a year, the CPS expands the list of income and demographic questions that it asks its respondents and creates a supplemental dataset called the CPS-Annual Social and Economic Supplement (CPS-ASEC).  The ASEC was formerly called the March Supplement.  This supplement is used by various organizations to report rates of poverty and health insurance coverage, and data about household incomes.  Historically, it also was the primary CPS-based data source to compare employment and labor force participation between persons with children and those without children. However, since 2004 the publicly available data from the Basic Monthly CPS has been expanded to allow the identification of parents who live with their own children under age 18.  Tabulations of employment and unemployment rates isolating parents are available on a monthly basis from 2004 to the present using the public CPS Basic Monthly files, and also are available on an annual basis through the use of the CPS-ASEC once-a-year supplement.  This Research Brief exclusively uses the Basic-Monthly CPS because its information reflects a more current reporting period.

This Research Brief includes the same universe analyzed by the BLS for its calculations of unemployment statistics.  Using this methodology, the following populations are excluded from all of the tabulations:

• Institutionalized persons (e.g., persons in prisons, long-term care hospitals, and nursing homes)
• Persons living outside of the United States or living in military housing
• Persons age 15 and younger

The methods used in this Research Brief to calculate unemployment rates are the same as those used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for its official publications.  The unemployment rate is the percent of the labor force (those persons working or actively seeking and available for work) that is employed.  In general, the labor force includes persons who are either working or looking for work.  However, persons on layoff from a job and expecting recall also are included in the labor force even when they are not seeking other employment.  Examples of persons excluded from the labor force for unemployment rate calculations include persons who cannot work, do not want to work, or are not actively looking for employment because they are discouraged about their job prospects.  Therefore, unemployed persons are a subset of a larger population that is not employed.

Some of the subpopulations examined in this Research Brief consist of relatively small monthly sample sizes in the CPS.  Therefore, the Research Brief averages three months of data together for all estimates to reduce sampling error across time. Each calculation is performed independently for each month, and the statistic reported (for example, unemployment rates) is computed by averaging three months of data to present 3-month quarterly averages.  No estimate presented in this Research Brief is adjusted for seasonality, and care should be exercised when comparing different quarters of data throughout the year.  Quarters refer to calendar year quarters, not fiscal year quarters.

Although a majority of the couples presented in the figures are opposite-sex couples the data are able to distinguish them from couples who are same-sex couples. Overall, same-sex couples comprise less than 0.1 percent of the couples with children in the CPS; this produces a sample size too small for separate tabulations of this group. Same-sex couples are excluded from Figures 10-12 in order to highlight differences by gender, but are included in Figures 1-9.

Some persons are included in BLSs labor force tabulations but live with spouses or partners who are excluded.  These persons are included in figures 1-5 and 8 but are excluded in figures 6, 7, and 9.  Couples containing one or more persons who are excluded from BLS labor force tabulations are excluded in figures 10-12.  For example, a person age 17 who is living with a cohabiting partner that is age 15 would be included in the population examined for Figures 1-5 and 8, but would be excluded in Figures 6, 7, 9, and 10-12.  In this case, the person age 15 would be excluded from the labor force universe because the minimum age for inclusion in the labor force is 16.  Another example is a couple that consists of one civilian adult and one adult in the Armed Services.  Like the previous example, this couple would be included in the population examined for Figures 1-5 and 8, but is excluded in Figures 6, 7, 9, and 10-12.  The exclusion of mixed couples with only one person included in the labor force universe means that the populations will not sum perfectly across some of the data tables.  For example, the number of married couples with children in Figure 11 is slightly lower than the number of married fathers in Figure 8.^[9]

The definition of parent used for the estimates presented here includes only those parents who are living with their own children under age 18, or those living with a cohabiting partner with his or her own children under age 18.  This includes parents of biological and adopted children, but excludes parents of foster children and other relatives of children taking on informal parenting responsibilities.  Thus, a person living with her granddaughter would not be identified as a parent, even though she may be providing parental care for the child.  In addition, parents of children age 18 and older also are excluded, even when they are providing significant financial support to these adult children.  Finally, non-resident parents, even those supporting dependents with child support payments or claiming the children for tax reporting purposes, are excluded from the parental universe in this Research Brief if they are not living with at least one of their own children.

The Research Brief identifies couples with children under age 18 for Figures 10-12 if either person in the couple is living with his or her own child, including adopted children.  The numbers may not add to 100 percent because of rounding.  All comparisons made in the text of this Research Brief are statistically significant at p  .05.  Standard errors can be approximated for all numbers shown.  For more information on how standard errors can be approximated for comparisons not mentioned in the text, visit the BLS Technical Documentation Internet pages at http://www.bls.gov/cps/documentation.htm.

[ Go to Contents ]

Endnotes

[1] The authors would like to thank Mary Bowler, Gene Falk, Peter Horner, and Rose Kreider for providing thoughtful comments on an earlier draft of this Research Brief.

[2] Unless noted otherwise, the term parents refers to persons living with their own children under age 18, including biological, adopted, and step children.

[3] All comparisons cited in the text of this Research Brief are statistically significant at a 95% confidence level.

[4] Unlike the figures showing unemployment rates, the employment percentages shown in Figures 5 and 6 compare employment levels to the entire civilian, non-institutional population, not just the labor force.

[5] Some of these women are separated or married, but not living with their spouses.

[6] The data exclude fathers that are not living with their children.

[7] Unlike the figures showing unemployment rates, the employment percentages shown in these figures compare employment levels to the entire civilian, non-institutional population, not just the labor force.

[8] http://www.bls.gov/cps

[9] Another reason why the number of married couples will not be exactly equal to the number of married individuals is that, unlike the annual CPS-ASEC supplement (i.e., the March Supplement), the Basic Monthly CPS does not post-stratify in a manner that gives two persons in a married couple the exact same population weight.  For this analysis, couples are assigned the weight of the household or family reference person.

[ Go to Contents ]