IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Part-Week Work and Human Capital Investment by Married Women


  • Ethel B. Jones
  • James E. Long


This paper uses National Longitudinal Surveys data to examine the relationship between part-week work and the wages and postschool human capital investment of married women. The empirical evidence presented is consistent with the hypothesis that part-week workers and their employers will have relatively lower incentive to invest in on-the-job training since part-week work means fewer hours in the labor market than full-week employment. The effect of part-week work by women on the male-female wage differential is ambiguous because the labor force participation of married women is discontinuous over the life cycle.

Suggested Citation

  • Ethel B. Jones & James E. Long, 1979. "Part-Week Work and Human Capital Investment by Married Women," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 14(4), pages 579-594.
  • Handle: RePEc:uwp:jhriss:v:14:y:1979:i:4:p:579-594

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: A subscripton is required to access pdf files. Pay per article is available.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Richard V. Burkhauser, 1979. "The Pension Acceptance Decision of Older Workers," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 14(1), pages 63-75.
    2. repec:hoo:wpaper:e-88-28 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Steven G. Allen & Robert L. Clark & Daniel A. Sumner, 1986. "Postretirement Adjustments of Pension Benefits," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 21(1), pages 118-137.
    4. Phillip B. Levine & Olivia S. Mitchell, 1988. "The Baby Boom's Legacy: Relative Wages in the 21st Century," NBER Working Papers 2501, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Zvi Bodie & John B. Shoven, 1983. "Financial Aspects of the United States Pension System," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number bodi83-1, January.
    6. Lazear, Edward P, 1979. "Why Is There Mandatory Retirement?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(6), pages 1261-1284, December.
    7. Stock, James H & Wise, David A, 1990. "Pensions, the Option Value of Work, and Retirement," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(5), pages 1151-1180, September.
    8. Hutchens, Robert, 1986. "Delayed Payment Contracts and a Firm's Propensity to Hire Older Workers," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(4), pages 439-457, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Tom Krebs & Martin Scheffel, 2016. "Structural Reform in Germany," IMF Working Papers 16/96, International Monetary Fund.
    2. Anh T. Le & Paul W. Miller, 2001. "The Persistence of the Female Wage Disadvantage," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 34(1), pages 33-52.
    3. Fernández-Kranz, Daniel & Rodríguez-Planas, Núria, 2011. "The part-time pay penalty in a segmented labor market," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 591-606, October.
    4. Alan Manning & Barbara Petrongolo, 2005. "The Part-Time Pay Penalty," CEP Discussion Papers dp0679, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    5. Colella, Fabrizio, 2014. "Women's Part-Time - Full-Time Wage Differentials in Europe: an Endogenous Switching Model," MPRA Paper 55287, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Rebecca M. Blank, 1994. "The Dynamics of Part-Time Work," NBER Working Papers 4911, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Alan Manning & Barbara Petrongolo, 2008. "The Part-Time Pay Penalty for Women in Britain," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(526), pages 28-51, February.
    8. Krebs, Tom & Scheffel, Martin, 2016. "Quantifizierung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Effekte ausgewählter Reformvorschläge der Studie "Reforms, Investment and Growth: An Agenda for France, Germany and Europe"," Working Papers 16-04, University of Mannheim, Department of Economics.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:uwp:jhriss:v:14:y:1979:i:4:p:579-594. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.