IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0339160.html

Work participation disparities among LGBTQ+ Australians: Insights from a nationally representative cohort study

Author

Listed:
  • Dunya Tomic
  • Tessa Keegel
  • Monica O’Dwyer
  • Karen Walker-Bone

Abstract

This study examined work participation disparities among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other sexually and/or gender diverse (LGBTQ+) adults using nationally representative data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey. Sexual identity data were collected in wave 20 (2020) from 14,302 participants and gender identity data in wave 23 (2023) from 13,981 participants. Multivariable regression models examined associations between sexual or gender identity and work participation measures. Sexual identity was analysed cross-sectionally (wave 20) and longitudinally (waves 20–23), while gender identity was analysed cross-sectionally (wave 23). Compared to heterosexual participants, those identifying as gay or lesbian were more likely to be unemployed (prevalence ratio [PR] 2.05, 95% CI 1.01–4.14) and less likely to work in trades or manual occupations (PR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36–0.85) or in manufacturing and construction (PR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23–0.72). Bisexual participants had higher prevalence of labour force non-participation (PR 1.91, 95% CI 1.49–2.47) and unemployment (PR 2.05, 95% CI 1.24–3.38), and were less likely to work in agriculture, forestry or mining (PR 0.24, 95% CI 0.08–0.79). Participants of other sexual identities also had higher unemployment (PR 2.78, 95% CI 1.41–5.45). Longitudinally, bisexual participants were more likely to transition out of employment (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 2.08, 95% CI 1.35–3.21) and initiate paid sick leave (IRR 1.42, 95% CI 1.17–1.71), while gay or lesbian participants were more likely to commence working from home (IRR 1.72, 95% CI 1.21–2.44). Transgender and gender diverse participants were less likely to work in manufacturing and construction (PR 0.35, 95% CI 0.17–0.75) and worked fewer hours (PR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79–0.97) than cisgender peers. These findings highlight inequalities in work participation among LGBTQ+ adults, underscoring the need for dedicated research and inclusive workplace policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Dunya Tomic & Tessa Keegel & Monica O’Dwyer & Karen Walker-Bone, 2026. "Work participation disparities among LGBTQ+ Australians: Insights from a nationally representative cohort study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(1), pages 1-15, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0339160
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0339160
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0339160
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0339160&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0339160?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0339160. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.