Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 19:30:37 -0500 From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood-AT-panix.com> Subject: Re: M-FEM: RE: Midlife downsizing, the age-wage curve, Margaret Morganroth Gullette wrote: >For an essay I am writing on "The High Costs of Middle Ageism" I am looking >for research on what happens to those who are displaced at midlife. (Since >unemployment insurance runs out and age discrimination turns on, this would >seem to be a real problem.) Also, data on how many of the unemployed are, >say, >between 45 and 65? Theories about why the left hasn't paid more attention? >Midlife women living alone have a significantly higher poverty rate than >other >women and aren't eligible for any of the categorical programs. There's a lot of anecdotal evidence that the "downsizing" of the last few years has really been a matter of bouncing older, more highly paid workers in favor of younger, low-paid ones. In other words, the net employment effects are zero; it's just the age mix that's changing. As I say, this is largely anecdotal. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has reams of data on the demographics of unemployment and job displacement. You can start at their web site (www.bls.gov), and then call or email the listed contacts to get hold of unpublished or obscure data. They do a displaced worker survey every few years, results of which are reported in releases on the web site and in articles in their Monthly Labor Review. I can't tell if you're implying that women are more the victims of this than men, but if you are, then that may well be wrong. Average job tenure for women has been rising while that for men has been falling. Doug
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005