Female Labor Supply Differences by Sexual Orientation: A Semi-Parametric Decomposition Approach

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in Female Labor Supply Differences by Sexual Orientation: A Semi-Parametric Decomposition ApproachHeather Antecol Michael D. Steinberger The Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) in Bonn is a local and virtual international research center and a place of communication between science, politics and business. IZA is an independent nonprofit organization supported by Deutsche Post Foundation. The center is associated with the University of Bonn and offers a stimulating research environment through its international network, workshops and conferences, data service, project support, research visits and doctoral program. IZA engages in (i) original and internationally competitive research in all fields of labor economics, (ii) development of policy concepts, and (iii) dissemination of research results and concepts to the interested public. D I S C U S S I O N P A P E R S E R I E SIZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be available directly from the author. Census data we illustrate the importance of accounting for household specialization in lesbian couples when examining the sexual orientation gap in female labor supply. Specifically, we find the labor supply gap is substantially larger between married women and partnered lesbian women who specialize in market production (primary earners) than between married women and partnered lesbian women who specialize in household production (secondary earners). Using a semi-parametric decomposition approach, we further show that the role of children in explaining the mean labor supply gap by sexual orientation is greatly understated if the household division of labor between household and market production is not taken into account. Finally, we illustrate that controlling for children significantly reduces differences between married women and secondary lesbian earners both in terms of the decision to remain attached to the labor market (the extensive margin), as well as in terms of annual hours of work conditional on working (the intensive margin). Further, the effect of controlling for children is not uniform across the distribution of conditional annual hours; instead it primarily reduces the percentage of secondary lesbian earners working extremely high annual hours.JEL Classification: J22, J24

Multilevel analysis of the effects of antidiscrimination policies on earnings by sexual orientation

“…36 Jepsen (2008) does not find that hours of work by women's partners affect their own earnings, but levels of actual or potential earnings might be more important than hours here. Both and Antecol and Steinberger (2009) find the lower market specialization among same-sex couples might be at least partly explained by differential rates of child rearing. 37 It is possible that combined effects of state and local policies push household earnings enough to offset possible decreases in labor supply due to an income effect.…”

“…Thus, policies could decrease wage penalties due to discrimination at the same time they encourage fewer hours or weeks of work in response to more stable earnings for at least one partner. There is some evidence that labor market outcomes and differences by demographic characteristics may differ for those designated as "householder" and "partner" in same-sex couples, and the differences may be related to household decisions regarding labor market specialization (Antecol & Steinberger, 2009). To explore possible differences in the policy effects, I estimate separate models by householder status.…”

“…More secure or lucrative employment could allow more specialization within same-sex couples, more leisure time for one or both members (through an income effect), or more intensive work opportunities (a substitution effect). 35 There is less household specialization in same-sex couples than in heterosexual couples Antecol & Steinberger, 2009); however, labor market discrimination might partly explain those differences. 36 To further assess the potential effects of antidiscrimination policies on couples, Table 5 shows models of logged household income and its association with the type of couple (male same-sex, female same-sex, and unmarried different-sex, with married as the reference group), local and state antidiscrimination policies, local area characteristics, and the characteristics for both partners.…”

Sexual Orientation and Household Savings: Do Homosexual Couples Save More?

“…In the first period, the household joint expenditure is X 1 . How this expenditure is transformed into consumption and how this consumption is shared between the two people are decisions that we side 3 We abstract from analyzing how differences in income across individuals and types of couples may affect savings behavior, as our focus is on more "primitive" characteristics of homosexual and heterosexual couples.…”

Sexual orientation and household decision making.

“…The latter analyzes the determinants of individual labor supply of same-sex partners, but each partner's labor supply decision is assumed to depend entirely on his/her own characteristics, without regard for the influence of the other partner. A recent work by Antecol and Steinberger (2010) analyzes partnered lesbians' and married women's labor supplies, emphasizing the role of primary versus secondary earners. Finally, there is evidence in the literature of persistent wage disparities among gay, lesbian, and heterosexual workers, with lesbians earning significantly more than heterosexual women, and gay men earning significantly less than heterosexual men (e.g.…”