International and national crises often highlight inequalities in the labor market that disproportionately affect individuals from marginalized backgrounds. The COVID-19 pandemic, and the resulting changes in society due to social distancing measures, has showcased inequities in access to decent work and experiences of discrimination resulting in many of the vulnerable populations in the United States experiencing a much harsher impact on economic and work-related factors. The purpose of this essay is to describe how the COVID-19 pandemic may differentially affect workers of color, individuals from low-income backgrounds, and women in complex ways. First, this essay will discuss disproportionate representation of workers from low-income and racial/ethnic minority backgrounds in sectors most affected by COVID-19. Second, it will discuss the lack of decent work for low-income workers who perform "essential" tasks. Third, this essay will highlight economic and work-related implications of increased discrimination Asian Americans are experiencing in society. Finally, role conflict and stress for women who are managing additional unpaid work, including caretaking responsibilities, while needing to continue to engage in paid work will be examined. A research agenda will be set forth throughout the essay, calling for vocational psychologists to engage in research that fully examines how the COVID-19 pandemic is affecting vulnerable communities.On March 31, 2020, during the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, Andrew Cuomo, the governor of one of the hardest hit states, New York, wrote on Twitter that the coronavirus is the "great equalizer" (Cuomo, 2020), reflecting the sentiment that the virus was capable of sickening anyone regardless of age, social status, race/ethnicity, or gender. Governor Cuomo's tweet was well meaning in nature but did not accurately reflect the differential impact of the virus on historically marginalized groups in the United States. International and national crises, including pandemics, often highlight inequalities that may have been unseen or hidden prior to the crisis. COVID-19, and the resulting changes in society due to social distancing measures, have showcased inequities in access to decent work and in experiencing discrimination resulting in many of our most vulnerable populations in the United States (e.g., racial/ethnic minorities, individuals from low socioeconomic backgrounds, and women) experiencing a much harsher impact on work-related and economic factors.Racial, gender, and social class disparities have been well documented in educational and work opportunities for decades (Flores, Martinez, McGillen, & Milord, 2019). For individuals from vulnerable or marginalized backgrounds, educational systems, labor markets, and workplace environments often perpetuate systems of oppression, power, and privilege, resulting in them experiencing marginalization and discrimination within these systems and obtaining poorer educational and vocational outcomes (Flores et al., 2019)....

No abstract

No abstract

This article describes the development and validation of the Family Influence Scale (FIS). The FIS is designed to assess perceptions of how one’s family of origin influences career and work choices. The purpose of Study 1 was to identify the domains of family influence. A 57-item scale was completed by a sample of 205 college students. Results supported a 32-item four-factor measure. The purpose of Study 2 was to refine the initial scale’s items and examine construct validity using a larger and more diverse sample (n = 537). Results supported a four-factor solution composed of the following sub-scales: Informational Support, Financial Support, Family Expectations, and Values/Beliefs. Findings also provided support for the internal consistency and construct validity of the scale.

This study examined whether university students were psychologically distressed or had difficulties with career decisions to indicate whether they needed career services, whether they were aware of the services offered by the campus counseling and career services, and finally, whether they had used the services. Findings indicated that students indicated difficulties with career decisions, high levels of psychological distress, and low levels of psychological well-being and that about half of students were aware of career services but much fewer had used those services. There were relationships among psychological distress and career-related variables for undecided students. Results are discussed with implications for career services on university campuses.