The Prevalence of Precarious Work Schedules Among Early-Career Adults in the US

Purpose. This paper presents findings from national data on precarious scheduling practices in the US labor market. Studies in different nations and industries reveal how the scheduling practices today’s employers use to contain outlays for labor often result in unstable and unpredictable work hours that undermine worker well-being and family economic security. Yet, national surveys in the US have not included items to gauge the prevalence of precarious scheduling practices, e.g., most surveys intentionally smooth variation by asking about “usual” hours. The papers’ authors worked with the Bureau of Labor Statistics to develop measures of hour fluctuations and advance schedule notice that were included in the most recent round of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY97).  Combined with existing items on schedule input and nonstandard timing, the NLSY now offers a uniquely comprehensive picture of precarious scheduling practices among a nationally representative sample of early-career adults.  This paper:

 (1) Provides descriptive data on the distribution of advance schedule notice, schedule input, fluctuating hours, and nonstandard timing by race, gender, parental status, poverty status, and a set of occupational characteristics.

(2) Identifies characteristics of workers at risk of experiencing different combinations of precarious scheduling practices.

Methods. The NLSY97 is a panel study that has followed a probability sample of youth since 1997; respondents were 27-33 years old in the current round. For this paper, the sample is limited to respondents currently working and not in the military or self-employed (N=3,741); weights adjust for oversampling of youth of color. Fully 72% of the sample are paid by the hour, 24% work part-time, and 56% have a child 12 or younger. The sample is equally split on gender, and 72% are white, 14% black/mixed race and 13% Hispanic.

Results. Precarious scheduling practices are widespread in the labor market, though hourly workers are most at risk. For example, 41% of hourly workers (34% women; 48% men) and 29% of non-hourly workers (20% women; 38% men) said they “know when they will need to work” one week or less in advance. Fully 49% of hourly workers (46% women; 55% men) and 31% of non-hourly workers (36% women; 29% men) said their employer decides start and end times without their input. The majority of workers (74%) reported variation in their weekly work hours in the month prior to the survey and these workers’ hours varied on average by 47%. Among workers with children, 40% reported one week or less advance notice and 50% said they had no input into their schedule. Workers of color, low-income workers, men in hourly full-time jobs, and women in hourly part-time jobs were at highest risk of short notice, extreme hour fluctuations, and employer-controlled scheduling.

Implications. A substantial proportion of workers who are in the midst of forging careers and families experiences scheduling practices that can make it difficult to meet personal responsibilities and earn an adequate living. The authors discuss how these new data can help inform policy initiatives underway to develop legislation targeted at improving employers’ scheduling practices.