Economic Characteristics across 20 Welfare States BSA Annual - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Helen Kowalewska & Agnese Vitali

Breadwinning or On the Breadline? Female Breadwinners’ Economic Characteristics across 20 Welfare States

BSA Annual Conference 2019

@helenkowalewska H.R.Kowalewska@soton.ac.uk @agnevitali Agnese.Vitali@unitn.it

From male breadwinners to dual breadwinners…

Policymakers and academics promote a ‘dual-breadwinner’ (DBW) family model (e.g. Esping-Andersen et al., 2002; European Commission, 2013;

Hemerijck, 2013).

FT empl. male + h/wife (lower- educated in S. Europe) FT empl. male + PT

• empl. woman (Anglo-

Saxon and Continental countries) Man and woman share breadwinning (Scandinavia and highly-educated in S. Europe and US)

‘Pure’ MBW 1.5 MBW DBW In reality, the male-breadwinner (MBW) and ‘one-and-a-half’ male- breadwinner (1.5 MBW) models persist (e.g. Lewis et al., 2008; Hook, 2015).

Not considered in social-policy research, which assumes men in couple-households are full-time employed (Hook, 2015). Our research contributes to addressing this gap by examining the economic characteristics of female breadwinners.

…To female breadwinners?

Data: LIS Wave 10 (~2016) or 9 (~2013). Sample: Heterosexual co-residing couples with/without children; 18- 65 years; neither partner retired, in education, or disabled. Monetary amounts expressed in US$ 2016, transformed using the Purchasing Power Parity and a deflator. To assess whether observed income differences between FBWs and MBWs are statistically significant, we use two-sample t-tests on the difference between two population proportions/means and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for the difference between two population medians.

We identify two ‘types’ of female breadwinner, stratified by class

0% 25% 50% 75% 100% % of FBWs who are highly educated $0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 Median disposable HH income, 2016 US$

Pure FBWs:

• nly the

woman works 1.5 FBWs: woman works FT, man works PT

‘Pure’ female breadwinners: ‘on the breadline’

$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000

Median disposable household incomes, 2016 US$ DBW (m+f work) Pure MBW (only m works) Pure FBW (only f works)

N.B. Solid colour indicates income differences between male and female BWs are statistically significant

But ‘pure’ female breadwinners earn significantly less as individuals than MBWs

$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000

Median labour income of breadwinner, 2016 US$ Pure MBW Pure FBW

N.B. Solid colour indicates income differences between male and female BWs are statistically significant

Pure FBWs are more likely to be ‘emergency’ breadwinners

Compared with pure MBWs, pure FBWs:

• Work fewer hours
• Are less likely to be in

managerial positions

• Are more likely to be in

elementary occupations Previous research suggests male job-loss is associated with a rise in female breadwinning - especially among lower-educated couples (e.g. Dotti Sani, 2018). UK data

34 29.1% 13.8% 43 35.8% 8.2%

Mean hours worked/week % in managerial/ Professional occs % in labourer/ Elementary occs

One-and-a-half female breadwinners are doing better…

N.B. Solid colour indicates income differences between male and female BWs are statistically significant

$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000

Median disposable household incomes, 2016 US$ 1.5 MBW (m works FT, f works PT) 1.5 FBW (m works PT, f works FT)

But, as individuals, 1.5 female breadwinners earn less than 1.5 MBWs

N.B. Solid colour indicates income differences between male and female BWs are statistically significant

$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000

Median labour income of breadwinner, 2016 US$ 1.5 MBW 1.5 FBW

Gender inequalities in secondary earners’ labour incomes

N.B. Solid colour indicates income differences between male and female BWs are statistically significant

$0 $4,000 $8,000 $12,000 $16,000 $20,000

Median labour income of secondary earner (i.e. non- breadwinner), 2016 US$ Woman in 1.5 MBW Man in 1.5 FBW

Implications

‘Pure’ MBW 1.5 MBW DBW 1.5 FBW ‘Pure’ FBW

• Rather than reflecting women’s empowerment, ‘pure’ FBWs are

poorer and potentially breadwinners by default.

• Breadwinning will remain a gendered opportunity without broader

policies to address gender inequalities beyond employment rates (e.g. combatting discrimination in workplaces).

• Differences between pure and 1.5 FBWs suggest integrating the

female-breadwinner category into comparative social policy literature can illuminate how welfare state reduce or potentially reproduce stratification along gender and class lines.

Centre for Population Change

Find our more and contact us

Web: www.cpc.ac.uk Email: cpc@soton.ac.uk Tel: +44 (0)23 80 592 579 Twitter: @CPCpopulation Facebook: CPCpopulation Mendeley: CPC Population