Work shifts and disability: A national view

Monthly Labor Review

Volumn 125, Issue 9, 2002, Pages 11-24

  Presser, Harriet B ^a   Altman, Barbara ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b NATIONAL CENTER FOR HEALTH STATISTICS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0242361499     PISSN: 00981818     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Harriet B. Presser, "Toward a 24-Hour Economy," Science, June 11, 1999, pp. 1778-79.
2. Harriet B. Presser, "Job, Family, and Gender: Determinants of Nonstandard Work Schedules among Employed Americans in 1991," Demography, November 1995, pp. 577-98.
3. See, for example, Biological Rhythms: Implications for the Worker, OTA-BA-463 (Office of Technology Assessment, 1991); and Harriet B. Presser, "Nonstandard Work Schedules and Marital Instability," Journal of Marriage and the Family, February 2000, pp. 93-110.
4. See, for example, Biological Rhythms: Implications for the Worker, OTA-BA-463 (Office of Technology Assessment, 1991); and Harriet B. Presser, "Nonstandard Work Schedules and Marital Instability," Journal of Marriage and the Family, February 2000, pp. 93-110.
5. Peter Kostiuk, "Compensating Differentials for Shift Work." Journal of Political Economy, October 1990, pp. 1054-75.
6. David Braddock and Lynn Bachelder, The Glass Ceiling and Persons with Disabilities, Public Policy Monograph Series No. 56 (Chicago: Institute on Disability and Human Development, 1994); and William G. Johnson and James Lambrinos, "Wage Discrimination against Handicapped Men and Women," Journal of Human Resources, spring 1985, pp. 264-77.
7. David Braddock and Lynn Bachelder, The Glass Ceiling and Persons with Disabilities, Public Policy Monograph Series No. 56 (Chicago: Institute on Disability and Human Development, 1994); and William G. Johnson and James Lambrinos, "Wage Discrimination against Handicapped Men and Women," Journal of Human Resources, spring 1985, pp. 264-77.
8. Further details on the sample design of the 1996 MEPS Household Component are available in J. Cohen, "Design and Methods of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Household Component," MEPS Monthly Report No. I, AHCPR Pub. No. 97-0026 (Rockville, MD, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1997), and "Sample Design of the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Household Component," MEPS Monthly Report No. 2, AHCPR Pub. No. 97-0027 (Rockville, MD, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1997).
9. Further details on the sample design of the 1996 MEPS Household Component are available in J. Cohen, "Design and Methods of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Household Component," MEPS Monthly Report No. I, AHCPR Pub. No. 97-0026 (Rockville, MD, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1997), and "Sample Design of the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Household Component," MEPS Monthly Report No. 2, AHCPR Pub. No. 97-0027 (Rockville, MD, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1997).
10. This is the sample size for the regressions on nonday workers, including the self-employed. The sample is further reduced to 4,012 men and 3,969 women for the regression analyses of hourly wages of wage and salary workers only (and is limited to those with data on wages).
11. Barbara Reskin and Patricia A. Roos, Job Queues, Gender Queues (Philadelphia, Temple University Press, 1990).
12. Presser, "Toward a 24-Hour Economy." See also Thomas M. Beers, "Flexible schedules and shift work: replacing the '9 to 5' workday?" Monthly Labor Review, June 2000, pp. 33-40.
13. Presser, "Toward a 24-Hour Economy." See also Thomas M. Beers, "Flexible schedules and shift work: replacing the '9 to 5' workday?" Monthly Labor Review, June 2000, pp. 33-40.
14. S. Z. Nagi, "Some Conceptual Issues in Disability and Rehabilitation," in M. B. Sussman (ed.), Sociology and Rehabilitation (Washington, DC, American Sociological Association, 1965).
15. E. N. Brandt and A. M. Pope, Enabling America: Assessing the Role of Rehabilitation Science and Engineering (Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 1997).
16. Activities of daily living were identified by a question asking, "Does [person] receive help or supervision with personal care such as bathing, dressing, or getting around the house because of an impairment or a physical or mental health problem?" Instrumental activities of daily living were identified by a question asking, "Does [person] receive help or supervision using the telephone, paying bills, taking medications, preparing light meals, doing laundry, or going shopping because of an impairment or a physical or mental health problem?"
17. Note that, because the sample is limited to those who are employed, questions about work limitations or housework serve to identify only employed persons who experience limitations in those roles. The question does not identify those who cannot work and who have the stated limitations.
18. One question in the MEPS data asks specifically about social roles: "Is anyone in the family limited in participating in social, recreational, or family activities because of an impairment or a physical or mental health problem?"
19. All large national surveys used in this article are limited by whether the respondent him- or herself answers the questions or whether a family member does so. The surveys also are limited by whether the respondent understands the questions posed and is truthful in responding to them. These limitations account for some of the differences that arise in various surveys' estimates of the size of the disabled population in the United States.
20. See note 12.
21. A survey question about work and housework limitations asked, "Is anyone in the family limited in any way in the ability to work at a job, do housework, or go to school because of an impairment [or a] physical or mental health problem?" Another question, which identified other social role limitations, asked, "Is anyone in the family limited in participation in social, recreational, or family activities because of an impairment or a physical or mental health problem?"
22. John N. McNeil, Americans with Disabilities: 1991-92, Data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation, Current Population Reports, P70-33 (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1993).
23. Two other measures were developed to differentiate limitations that were caused by physical, as opposed to cognitive, impairments and to differentiate limitations in major activities such as work and housework from those in social activities other than work. In the first instance, a variable was created to identify persons with limitations in physical functioning, such as walking, standing, climbing steps, bending or stooping, and using one's arms and hands, or cognitive functioning, such as experiencing memory loss or confusion, being unable to make decisions, and needing supervision in order to ensure one's safety. The variable consists of four categories: persons with physical limitations only, persons with cognitive limitations only, persons with both cognitive and physical limitations, and persons with neither cognitive nor physical limitations. The second variable was created to measure limitations in role functioning and also consists of four categories, this time identifying persons who are limited in their work or housework role only, those who are limited only in their social roles in the family and community, persons who are limited in both roles, and persons with no limitations in their work or social roles. Both measures showed no significant relationship to a worker's shift, and thus these findings are not presented in this article. None of the measures specifically included persons with mental illness, unless they were captured by one or more of the physical, cognitive, social, or work limitation measures.
24. Estimates of the percentage of all Americans with a disability in 1997 range from 13 percent to 20 percent, depending on the definition of disability. (See Glenn T. Fujiura, "Emerging Trends in Disability," Population Today, August-September 2001, pp. 9-10.
25. Edward Yelin, Disability and the Displaced Worker (New Brunswick, NJ, Rutgers University Press, 1992).
26. Industry codes are based on the six major categories derived by J. Singlemann and M. Tienda, "The Process of Occupational Change in a Service Society: The Case of the United States, 1960-1980," in B. Roberts, R. Finnegan, and D. Gallie (eds.), New Approaches to Economic Life (Manchester, U.K., Manchester University Press, 1985). Note that, in the analysis that follows, because the extractive industry is small, it is combined with the transformative industry.
27. Presser, "Job, Family, and Gender."
28. See Marjorie L. Baldwin and William G. Johnson, "Labor Market Discrimination against Men with Disabilities in the Year of the ADA," Southern Economic Journal, January 2000, pp. 548-66; and Thomas DeLeire, "Changes in Wage Discrimination against People with Disabilities," Journal of Human Resources, winter 2001, pp. 144-58.
29. See Marjorie L. Baldwin and William G. Johnson, "Labor Market Discrimination against Men with Disabilities in the Year of the ADA," Southern Economic Journal, January 2000, pp. 548-66; and Thomas DeLeire, "Changes in Wage Discrimination against People with Disabilities," Journal of Human Resources, winter 2001, pp. 144-58.
30. Marjorie L. Baldwin and William G. Johnson, "Labor Market Discrimination against Women with Disabilities," Industrial Relations, October 1995, pp. 555-77. The body of research arguing for this view also has shown that functional limitations affect the employment of disabled persons more than their wages do. See Richard V. Burkhauser and Mary C. Daly, "Employment and Economic Well-Being Following the Onset of Disability," in J. L. Mashaw, V. Reno, R. V. Burkhauser, and M. Berkowitz (eds.), Disability. Work and Cash Benefits (Kalamazoo, MI, W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 1996), for a longitudinal perspective on the onset of disability in relation to employment.
31. Marjorie L. Baldwin and William G. Johnson, "Labor Market Discrimination against Women with Disabilities," Industrial Relations, October 1995, pp. 555-77. The body of research arguing for this view also has shown that functional limitations affect the employment of disabled persons more than their wages do. See Richard V. Burkhauser and Mary C. Daly, "Employment and Economic Well-Being Following the Onset of Disability," in J. L. Mashaw, V. Reno, R. V. Burkhauser, and M. Berkowitz (eds.), Disability. Work and Cash Benefits (Kalamazoo, MI, W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 1996), for a longitudinal perspective on the onset of disability in relation to employment.
32. The regressions on hourly wages also were computed excluding Social Security or Supplemental Social Insurance income and hours of work, given the debate in the economics literature as to whether these are appropriate control variables in assessing wages. The significant relationships between disability status and hourly wages obtained for both men and women.
33. Presser, "Nonstandard Work Schedules."