Snakes and Ladders report finds working part-time and residency outside London also key factors
Gender and lack of higher education are the key brakes on people moving up the earnings ladder, with occupation, part-time work and residency outside London also proving a hurdle towards a better standard of living.
Social mobility ? the chance of moving on in one's life through work ? is a rarely used measure of how able individuals can improve their lot in life. But a report by Lee Savage, of Resolution Foundation, finds upwards mobility is largely restricted to those in the middle and upper part of the earnings distribution range. A comparison of the earnings mobility of every person born in the UK in one week in 1958, and in 1970, showed that 40% of those people did not alter their income over the "peak earning" phase while they were in their 30s.
This, says Savage, matters because median wages have been stagnating since 2003. The share of national income going to low-to-middle earners has fallen from �16 in every �100 in 1977, to �12 in 2010.
"Gender, education, occupation, working part-time, experience of unemployment and region, independently all play highly significant roles in determining individuals' prospects of upwards and downwards mobility," Savage said. "These factors are not just important in shaping the first phase of an individual's working life. They continue to be important as people move on in their careers towards their period of peak earnings."
The study, Snakes and Ladders: Who climbs the rungs of the earnings ladder, published on Friday, compared research from the National Child Development Study and the British Cohort Study .
It found men were 40% more likely to climb the ladder than women in the 2000s. "A high figure," said Savage, "but lower than the 51% likelihood of upwards mobility enjoyed by men in the 1990s." He said women had been more likely to slip down the ladder in each decade.
Regional differences in mobility became more apparent in the 2000s, with people in London significantly more likely to rise up the earnings ladder than people in other areas. Those in the south-west were 83% more likely to slide than those in London; those in the north-east had a 73% greater risk of downward mobility, the report said. This held true even when accounting for individual skill levels within each decade.
"This change in the significance of regional background between the two decades largely reflects changes between the two decades," explained Savage. "Between the 1990s and 2000s London [became] a focus for job growth in the types of industries that offer the greatest opportunities for earnings progression."
Education was also key. Those without a degree were at least 37% less likely to "move up" in the 1990s and 2000s. As the proportion of workers with a degree increased, the risk of downward mobility for those without a degree increased substantially in the 2000s.
Occupation is associated with a greater chance of upwards mobility. Those in professional occupations, such as teachers and lawyers, had a 55% increased chance of upwards mobility in the 2000s compared with managers.
Other workers, such as glaziers, electricians and builders, were strongly associated with an increased risk of moving downwards.
Unemployment at any time while a person was in their 30s made it much less likely they would move up the earnings ladder even if they subsequently returned to work. The "penalty" for being jobless was greater in the 2000s than in the 1990s, with this group at least 79% more likely to slide. Part-time work also incurred a penalty, with those who worked part-time for the entire decade being 87% more likely to slip down the earnings ladder in the 2000s. The negative impact was greater in the 2000s than in the 1990s.
But Savage added: "The penalty for people who shifted from full-time to part-time work during the decade was less severe in the 2000s than in the 1990s."
Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/sep/23/upward-mobility-women-low-earners
No comments:
Post a Comment