Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Changing Nature of Work
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Changing Nature of Work
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Part I Introduction to the Changing Nature of Work
- Part II What Has Changed?
- 4 Changes in Technology
- 5 The Changing Nature of Work
- 6 Changes in Occupations, Jobs, and Skill Polarization
- 7 Changes in the Legal Landscape
- 8 The Rise and Decline of Organized Labor in the United States
- 9 Changes in Organizational Income Inequality
- 10 Work and Employment in Fluid Organizational Forms
- 11 Changes in Worker Demographics
- 12 Generational Changes in Personality, Values, and Abilities
- 13 Changes in Work Behavior Patterns
- Part III Implications for Talent Management and Impact on Employees
- Index
- References
6 - Changes in Occupations, Jobs, and Skill Polarization
from Part II - What Has Changed?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 April 2020
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Changing Nature of Work
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Changing Nature of Work
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Part I Introduction to the Changing Nature of Work
- Part II What Has Changed?
- 4 Changes in Technology
- 5 The Changing Nature of Work
- 6 Changes in Occupations, Jobs, and Skill Polarization
- 7 Changes in the Legal Landscape
- 8 The Rise and Decline of Organized Labor in the United States
- 9 Changes in Organizational Income Inequality
- 10 Work and Employment in Fluid Organizational Forms
- 11 Changes in Worker Demographics
- 12 Generational Changes in Personality, Values, and Abilities
- 13 Changes in Work Behavior Patterns
- Part III Implications for Talent Management and Impact on Employees
- Index
- References
Summary
The job structure has become more polarized in recent decades in the United States. Automation and related computerized technologies replaced many jobs which are characterized by well-defined, routine activities that do not require complex analytical skills. Using recent data for the labor force, we find that job polarization increased through about 2011. This overall trend was the outcome of two contrary patterns including occupational downgrading among men and occupational upgrading among women. However, the perception of job polarization may be greater than its actuality because the distribution of household income has become more unequal than the occupational structure due to rising assortative mating. Job polarization seems to have tapered off since 2011 whereas household income inequality has continued to increase. The trend towards job polarization ironically occurred while the educational distribution of workers was becoming less polarized.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Changing Nature of Work , pp. 133 - 153Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Acemoglu, D., & Autor, D. (2011). Skills, tasks and technologies: implications for employment and earnings. In Ashenfelter, O. & Card, D. (Eds.), Handbook of labor economics (pp. 1043–1171). North Holland: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Autor, D. H. (2014). Skills, education, and the rise of earnings inequality among the other 99 percent. Science, 344(6186), 843–851.Google Scholar
Autor, D. H., Katz, L. F., & Kearney, M. S. (2006). The polarization of the US labor market. American Economic Review, 96(2), 189–194.Google Scholar
Autor, D. H., Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2003). The skill content of recent technological change: an empirical exploration. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4), 1279–1333.Google Scholar
Bills, D. B. (2016). Congested credentials: the material and positional economies of schooling. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 43, 65–70.Google Scholar
Brandolini, A., & Smeeding, T. M. (2009). Income inequality in richer and OECD countries. In Salverda, W., Noland, B., & Smeeding, T. M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of economic inequality (pp.71–100). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cappelli, P. (2001). Assessing the decline of internal labor markets. In Berg, I. & Kalleberg, A. (Eds.), Sourcebook on labor markets: Evolving structures and processes (pp. 207–245). New York, NY: Kluwer Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
Di Stasio, V., Bol, T., & Van de Werfhorst, H. G., (2016). What makes education positional? Institutions, over-education and the competition for jobs. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 43, 53–63.Google Scholar
Fischer, C. S., & Hout, M. (2006). Century of difference: How America changed in the last one hundred years. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Flores, A. (2017). How the US Hispanic population is changing. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved from www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/18/how-the-u-s-hispanic-population-is-changing/Google Scholar
Kim, C. H., & Sakamoto, A. (2008). The rise of intra-occupational wage inequality in the United States, 1983 to 2002. American Sociological Review, 73, 129–157.Google Scholar
Kim, C. H., & Sakamoto, A. (2017). Women’s progress for men’s gain? Gender-specific changes in the return to education as measured by family standard of living, 1990 to 2009–2011. Demography, 54(5), 1743–1772.Google Scholar
Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. American Economic Review, 45(1), 1–28.Google Scholar
Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Reich, M., Gordon, D. M., & Edwards, R. C. (1973). A theory of labor market segmentation. American Economic Review, 63(2), 359–365.Google Scholar
Sakamoto, A., Goyette, K. A., & Kim, C. H. (2009). The socioeconomic attainments of Asian Americans. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 255–276.Google Scholar
Sakamoto, A., Kim, C. H., & Woo, H. (2012). An empirical test of alternative theories of educational stratification. Education Research International, 2012, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sakamoto, A., & Wang, S. X. (2017). Occupational and organizational effects on wages among college-educated workers in 2003 and 2010. Social Currents, 4(2), 175–195.Google Scholar
Semega, J. L., Fontenot, K. R., & Kollar, M. A. (2017). Income and poverty in the United States: 2016. Current Population Report no. P60–259. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Stiglitz, J. E. (2015). Inequality in America: A policy agenda for a stronger future. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 657, 8–20.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K. E. (2009). Income inequality and social dysfunction. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 493–511.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by