In egalitarian families, we might expect that men and women similarly prioritize work and family obligations. Yet, prior research examining gender differences in work‐family priorities often use measures that imperfectly reflect those priorities. Drawing two samples of full‐time married workers from the 1992 National Study of the Changing Workforce, this article analyzed the determinants of placing restrictions on work efforts (reducing work hours, refusing to travel, etc.) for the sake of family life. Results showed that women imposed more job trade‐offs in response to husband’s work efforts, whereas men’s work restrictions were largely unresponsive to familial characteristics. In conclusion, prioritizing work and family obligations is governed more by gender traditionalism than by egalitarianism.
This article contends that the use of vacation time reveals one's relative weighting of work and family obligations and examines gender differences in taking vacation time. Using data from the National Study of the Changing Workforce, this study finds that in the presence of familial and work-related controls, women are less likely than men to have unused vacation time. In gender-specific analyses, men's work schedules, supervisory duties, and concerns about job security significantly reduce the duration of their vacations. Even though familial factors have no impact on women's vacation use, women's concerns about the success of their family lives increase with the number of unused vacation days. These findings suggest the endurance of traditional expressions of work-family priorities. The research and policy implications of these findings are briefly discussed.
This study adds to a small but growing literature that situates sleep within gendered work— family responsibilities. We conducted interviews with 25 heterosexual dual-earner working-class couples with children, most of whom had one partner (usually the mother) who worked at night. A few men suffered disrupted sleep because of their commitment to being a coparent to their children, but for most their provider status gave them rights to longer and more continuous sleep. By contrast, as they were the primary caregiver during sentient hours, women’s sleep was curtailed and interrupted by responding to the needs of family members at night and at the beginning of each day, and this was true for women who worked nights as well as days. Furthermore, in struggling to meet their daily employment and familial obligations while tired and sleepy, women further stressed their bodies in ways that can cause cumulative sleep debt. This article demonstrates that sleep deficits are another manifestation of gender inequality, with important implications for long-term health and well-being.
Many have researched the effect of occupational segregation on race and gender gaps in pay, but few have examined segregation's impact on promotions. This article uses the Panel Study of Income Dynamics to examine the effect of race and gender composition in the origin occupation on movement to a managerial position. Findings show that for men, percentage of women in the origin occupation positively affected the chances of men moving to a supervisory position and that Blacks were less likely than Whites to be promoted. For women, percentage of women and percentage of Blacks in the origin occupation significantly decreased chances of women attaining a management position. Subsequent analyses showed that Black men, Black women, and White women waited longer than did White men for the managerial promotions they received. The findings suggest the impact of a “glass escalator” for White men, a “glass ceiling” for others, and contradict the notion of a “declining significance of race.”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.