Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T04:30:03.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - Changes in Occupations, Jobs, and Skill Polarization

from Part II - What Has Changed?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2020

By
Arthur Sakamoto ,
ChangHwan Kim  and
Christopher R. Tamborini
Edited by
Brian J. Hoffman ,
Mindy K. Shoss  and
Lauren A. Wegman
Brian J. Hoffman
Affiliation:
University of Georgia
Mindy K. Shoss
Affiliation:
University of Central Florida
Lauren A. Wegman
Affiliation:
University of Georgia
Get access

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

occupationsjob polarizationoccupational downgradingincome inequalityeducational attainmentassortative mating
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of the Changing Nature of Work , pp. 133 - 153
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

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
Thurow, L. C. (1975). Generating inequality. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K. E. (2009). Income inequality and social dysfunction. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 493–511.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×