IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oxf/wpaper/331.html

Does Housework Lower Wages and Why? Evidence for Britain

Author

Listed:
  • Almudena Sevilla-Sanz
  • Mark L. Bryan

Abstract

Women working full-time in the UK earn on average about 18% per hour less than men (EOC, 2005). Traditional labour economics has focussed on gender differences in human capital to explain the gender wage gap. Although differences in male and female human capital are recognized to derive from different household responsibilities over the life cycle, there is also a lesser-studied and more direct effect of household activities on wages. In a broad economic sense, household activities require effort, which decreases labour market productivity and thus wages. This paper first documents the relationship between housework and wages in Britain and applies a variety of econometric techniques to pin down the effect of housework on wages. It further explores what dimensions of housework are at the root of the relationship between housework and wages. After controlling for unobserved heterogeneity, we find a negative effect of housework on wages for married female workers, but not for single workers or married male workers. This differential effect across marital status suggests that the factors behind the relationship between housework and wages are the type and timing of housework activities as much as the actual time devoted to housework.

Suggested Citation

  • Almudena Sevilla-Sanz & Mark L. Bryan, 2007. "Does Housework Lower Wages and Why? Evidence for Britain," Economics Series Working Papers 331, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:oxf:wpaper:331
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:84d0ce4b-2b44-4189-9799-4947d570a82d
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Housework and wages
      by chris dillow in Stumbling and Mumbling on 2007-06-26 20:27:09

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. F. Brune, Lasse, 2007. "The smoker’s wage penalty puzzle: evidence from Britain," ISER Working Paper Series 2007-31, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    2. Ponczek, Vladimir & Grezzana, Stefânia, 2012. "Gender Bias at the Brazilian Superior Labor Court," Brazilian Review of Econometrics, Sociedade Brasileira de Econometria - SBE, vol. 32(1), March.
    3. Alwago Wycliffe Obwori, 2024. "Decomposing the Gender Wage Gap in the Urban Labor Market in Kenya," Studia Universitatis „Vasile Goldis” Arad – Economics Series, Sciendo, vol. 34(4), pages 1-33.
    4. Dante Contreras & Paulina Sepúlveda, 2017. "Effect of Lengthening the School Day on Mother's Labor Supply," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 31(3), pages 747-766.
    5. Joni Hersch, 2009. "Home production and wages: evidence from the American Time Use Survey," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 159-178, June.
    6. Sholeh A. Maani & Amy A. Cruickshank, 2010. "What Is The Effect Of Housework On The Market Wage, And Can It Explain The Gender Wage Gap?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(3), pages 402-427, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J31 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:oxf:wpaper:331. 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: Anne Pouliquen The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Anne Pouliquen to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sfeixuk.html .

    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.