Author
Listed:
- Guillaume Morlet
- Katherine Caves
Abstract
Purpose - We investigate whether women are more likely than men to choose to pursue a competency-based labour market integration programme, rather than the time-based labour market integration programme. We further investigate whether women with existing but uncertified skills are even more likely to pursue a competency-based labour market integration programme. Design/methodology/approach - We test our hypotheses using ordinary least squares applied to linear probability models. We discuss the relative advantages of this methodology. We show the robustness of our results through multiple specifications and estimation methods. Finally, we discuss the reasons preventing us from granting our results a causal interpretation and discuss how they are surmountable in future research. Findings - Women are significantly more likely to enrol into competency-based programmes, relative to time-based. Women with existing but uncertified skills are significantly more likely to enrol into competency-based programmes, whereas women without skills or with college degrees are not significantly different from the baseline. Our findings are robust to various specifications, and we include a comprehensive set of fixed-effect vectors, addressing industrial, occupational and time-varying state specificities. Research limitations/implications - First, our empirical test of hypothesis H2 is hindered by the construction of the “some college or associate’s degree” variable in RAPIDS data. “Some college” is very different from an associate’s degree. Second we had to choose between omitted variable bias and selection bias. Because of the demonstrated importance of the occupation and industry variables in existing literature, we included those variables at the risk of selection bias. Occupation and industry fixed effects reduce, but do not eliminate, omitted variable bias. Finally, the third limitation of this paper is external validity. Registered Apprenticeship programmes are quite idiosyncratic to the United States. Social implications - The rollout and expansion of CBRA may thus be an avenue through policymakers may reduce the gender training gap. This may in turn give more women access to the labour market and allow more women to benefit from the “wage premia” of Registered Apprenticeship completion on the labour market (Lou and Hawley, 2019). Originality/value - This article is the first that applies econometric methods to investigate women’s choices of labour market integration programmes, using Registered Apprenticeship as a case study. We discuss the implications of our findings, highlighting how competency-based programmes may be an approach to better serving more diverse populations in Registered Apprenticeship.
Suggested Citation
Guillaume Morlet & Katherine Caves, 2024.
"Gendered choices of labour market integration programmes: evidence from the United States,"
Evidence-based HRM, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 13(2), pages 196-213, May.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:ebhrmp:ebhrm-01-2024-0012
DOI: 10.1108/EBHRM-01-2024-0012
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:ebhrmp:ebhrm-01-2024-0012. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.