Military service and economic mobility: Evidence from the American civil war

Abstract

How did geographic and occupational mobility after the Civil War differ between Union Army veterans and nonveterans? By 1880, Union veterans were more likely to migrate to a different state or region than nonveterans. The higher geographic mobility of veterans is likely attributable to their experience of traveling away from their hometowns while in service. Union veterans who held unskilled jobs prior to enlistment were more likely to move up to white-collar or farming jobs by 1880 than unskilled nonveterans. In contrast, unskilled veterans were less likely to become artisans than nonveterans. The differences in occupational mobility by veteran status might be explained by the effects of military experiences such as learning from comrades in the company.

An Empirical Examination of the Occupational Attainment of American Veterans of World War I

“…In general, our results are consistent with Fredland and Little's () “Bridging Hypothesis” whereby certain experiences associated with military service (wider geographic perspective, social/professional networks, experience with large organizations) can lead to greater postservice labor market success. Our findings are also consistent with Lee's studies (, ) of American Civil War Union veterans, which find higher levels of upward occupational mobility than comparable nonveterans, and with Laschever's () conclusion that social networks formed in the military subsequently improved the employment prospects of WWI veterans. In the context of other research, our results are complementary to studies that find wage premiums for military service.…”

“…For example, Fredland and Little's () study of WWII veterans suggests that military service augments a veterans' human capital by providing them with geographic mobility and knowledge, personal independence, education, training, and experience in dealing with large bureaucratic structures. This additional human capital enhances their postservice job prospects, a process Fredland and Little refer to as the “Bridging Hypothesis.” Using similar reasoning to Fredland and Little, Lee's (, ) studies of Union veterans of the American Civil War found that they benefited from wider social and professional networks than nonveterans because they served with men from across the country. Lee's empirical results suggest that a broader geographical perspective of the United States, along with skills acquired during military service, made it more likely for Union veterans to experience postwar upward occupational mobility into higher paying jobs.…”

Evaluating the Internal Labor Migration Effects of Compulsory Peacetime Conscription

“…Inspired by Lee's (2012) strategy for disentangling treatment and selection effects, I utilize the timing of service among those who served to tackle the selectivity issue. For conscripts who worked before doing their service, entry moves as represented by 2 M cannot be influenced by the service itself.…”

“…Using U.S. census data, Cowper et al (2000) and Bailey (2011) find higher rates of migration among veterans that persist over both the course of life and military staffing policies. Using longitudinal microdata, Lee (2012) and Doetsch (2012) contrast the geographical mobility of U.S. veterans and nonveterans in the aftermath of the American Civil War and World War I, respectively. They find that wartime military service has positive, or at least nonnegative, effects on post-war geographical mobility.…”

“…Lee (2012) highlights the importance of distance traveled while in service as a predictor of geographical mobility, so without the opportunity for traveling to distant places, military service during the American Civil War would indeed have decreased veterans' geographical mobility.…”