Geographic Labor Mobility in the United States: Recent Findings*
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Geographic Labor Mobility in the United States: Recent Findings* THIS ARTICLE presents the major conclusions Three waves of interviews wit,h cross-sections of a study recently completed by t,he University of the United States population, conducted in of Michigan Survey Research Center and re- August-September 1962, November-December ported in The Geographic Mobility of La.bor,1 as 1962, and November 1963, yielded information yet unpublished. The st,udy, supported in part by from nearly 4,000 respondents. Of these, about a research grant from the Social Security Admin- 3,570 were white, 350 were Negro, and 50 were istration, makes a significant contribution toward other nonwhite. There were also three special understanding the relationship between geo- samples involving: (1) interviews with 433 fam- graphic mobility and the economic well-being of ilies living in redevelopment areas in September- American workers, a matter of long-standing October 1962; (2) reinterviews, in September- interest to the Social Security Administration. October 1962 and February 1963, with a total of A comparison of Negro-white differences in 189 individuals who reported in the 1962 or 1963 geographic mobilit,y, also drawn from the Survey Survey of Consumer Finance that they had Research Center study, will appear. in a future moved in the year before they were questioned ; and issue of the BULLETIN. (3) reinterviews in August 1963 with 1,750 per- sons who had been interviewed in the first cross- section or the first special sample. This final sam- SCOPE OF THE STUDY ple was designed to determine the accuracy of For the purposes of this investigation a move predictions of annual mobilty made on the basis was defined as a change of residence between of variables measured in the first interview. labor-market areas. As is the practice of t,he The use of such a small sample2 ordinarily Depart,ment of Labor, the labor-market areas is might preclude a close reading of the resulting considered to be the metropolitan area ; out- data, especially those figures developed for sub- side metropolitan areas, it is the county. The groups within the population. Recognizing this, definition of a move used by the Survey Research the Survey Research Center compared many of Center is similar to, but not ident,ical with, that its statistical findings with those available from used by the Bureau of the Census, which also other sources and, after adjusting for differences considers interc0unt.y movement within metro- in methodology and definition, found very close politan areas as migration. similarities. Furthermore, whatever degree of To obtain the data on which its study is based, precision was lost by limiting the analysis to an the Survey Research Center conducted six sample in-depth study of a small number of respondents surveys of adults living in private households in was more than compensat,ed for by the fact that 1962-63. In families selected for interview, the it made possible the measurement of a far greater respondent was eit,her the household head or his number of variables---including social, psycho- wife, on a random basis. logical, and demographic factors-than a larger sample would have permitted. *Prepared by Robert E. Marsh, Publications Staff, Otllce of Research and Statistics, from abstracts provided by the Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Re- 2 By contrast, a recent study of labor mobility by search, University of Michigan. Lowell E. Gallaway is based on a statistical evaluation 1 This research project was conducted under the direc- of the l-percent continuous work-history sample from the tion of John B. Lansing and Eva Mueller. They were earnings records of the Social Security Administration, assisted by Nancy Barth, William Ladd, and Jane Lean. which, in 195740, included more than 300,000 individ- Appreciation is extended to the authors for their help uals. This monograph, entitled Intfrindustry Labor in readying this article for publication. The full report Mobility in the United States, 1957 to 1960, will be re- has been scheduled for publication by the University of leased shortly by the Office of Research and Statistics as Michigan’s Institute for Social Research at Ann Arbor. Research Report No. 18. An abstract of the larger study, Copies will soon be available from the Institute’s publi- “Interindustry Labor Mobility Among Men, 195’7-60,” cations division. appeared in ‘the social 8ecurity Bulletin, September 1966. 14 SOCIAL SECURITY EXTENT OF GEOGRAPHIC MOBILITY where but had returned. Twenty-one percent were living 1,000 miles or farther from their place of birth. Survey questionnaires were designed to provide Other measures of lifetime mobility show estimates of intercount,y mobility for periods of smaller but nonetheless significant rates of move- 1 year, 5 years, 12-13 years (from 1050 to the ment. Another Survey Research Center question date of interview, either 1962 or 1963), and over revealed that 57 percent of all family heads were the lifetime of those interviewed. Other questions in a different labor-market area than the one in asked by the interviewers made possible estimates which they were living when they graduated from of the ratio of moves that were returns to a high school or terminated their formal education. former place of residence, repet,itive movements Data from the 1960 Census cited in the report on the part of those family heads who had moved show that, proportion of the native poulation at least once in a given period, intracount,y or born in one State and living in another in 1960 “residential” moves, temporary moves, commut- was only 25.5 percent, but this measure of lifetime ing over long distances, and desires and plans to mobility includes children, who often are too move. young to have moved, and does not reflect moves between labor-market areas within States. The data also indicate that there has been remarkably Rate of Intercounty Movement little change in this kind of lifetime mobility over a long period: in 1850, 24 percent of native-born The proportion of the population that moves Americans were living in States other than those from one labor-market area to another naturally in which they were born; 110 years later the varies widely according to the period under study. figure had risen by only 1.5 percentage points. It was found to be considerable even during a l- year period and, over the lifetime of adults, to affect a majority of t,he population. The specific Other Indicators of Mobility rates of intercounty mobility in the various pe- riods are described below. Statistical analysis of other mobility indicators -residential, return, and temporary moves, repe- One year.-From 5 to 6.8 percent of the population tit ive movement, commuting over long distances, moves from one labor-market area to another in a typical l-year period. The lower estimate was made and desires and plans to move-revealed the fol- by the Survey Research Center on the basis of inter- lowing rates : views in 1962 and reinterviews in 1963 with a cross- section of the United States population. The higher Residential mobility.-The 1960 Census (which in- figure comes from the Bureau of the Census and indi- cluded data on place of residence in 1955) found cates the proportion of migrants (including those that 43 percent of the population had moved to a who moved from one county to another within a new address within the previous 5 years. As noted metropolitan area) for roughly the same period. earlier, the proportion of intercounty migrants in the same period was 17.5 percent. Five year&--In recent 5-year periods (1957-62 or 1958-63, depending on when the interviews took Return moves.-The Survey Research Center found place) the proportion of family heads who moved be- that 20 percent of all moves were returns to a place tween labor-market areas was 15 percent, or three where the head of the family had lived at some time ; times the proportion who reported having moved in 15 percent were to a place where he had lived since 1 year’s time. Close to a 3-to-1 ratio was also found 1950; 12 percent were to the particular labor-market by the 1960 Census, which collected data on place of area where he resided in January 1950; and 9 per- residence in 1955 and was therefore able to make a cent were to his birthplace. 5-year comparison. In the latter case, the 5-year mobility rate was 17.5 percent. Repetitive movement.-In the 12- or 13-year period from 1950 to the time of interview, the mean num- Twelve-thirteen years.-In the period of 12-13 years ber of moves made by family heads who moved at from early 1950 to the date of interview, 29 percent all was 2.1. This Agure, however, is strongly in- of family heads moved from one labor-market area fluenced by a small number of people who shift from to another. place to place in quick succession. Lifetime mobility.-Sixty-eight percent of family Temporary moves and commuting.-In the 12- or heads, or more than 2 out of every 3, were at the l&year period cited above, 13 percent of family heads time of the Survey Research Center study found to either commuted long distances (50 miles or more) be living in a labor-market area other than the one or left home to work elsewhere temporarily. This in which they were born. Of the remainder, 5 per- category was composed of 6 percent who reported cent reported that at one time they had lived else- that they had commuted long distances in the period BULLETIN, MARCH 1967 15 but had not gone away temporarily to work, 5 per- Personal Economic Incentives cent who had worked away from home but had not commuted, and 2 percent who had done both.