Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management

In recent decades women have made considerable gains in educational and occupational attainment, surpassing men not only in attaining college degrees but also in completion of graduate degrees. Yet differences in men and women's employment patterns and earnings persist. These differences are particularly pronounced for women with less education who are among the most economically vulnerable groups of workers in the American economy. In acknowledgement of the particular employment challenges faced by more economically vulnerable groups of workers, recent changes to the unemployment insurance program under the Unemployment Insurance Modernization Act (UIMA) of 2009, provided financial incentives for states to adopt programmatic changes intended to help more unemployed workers qualify for benefits.

This paper examines the effectiveness of these policies for increasing access to UI among female workers, particularly among those with a high school diploma or less education. I focus on three questions: (1) Do male and female workers differ in their rates of UI eligibility and are these differences more pronounced for less-educated workers? (2) What are the factors associated with these differences? Here I pay particular attention to differences in employment characteristics such as occupation and industry and rates of part-time work. (3) To what extent did UI modernizations, particularly state adoptions of alternative base periods for determining monetary eligibility and state adoptions of provisions for part-time workers, attenuate gender differences in UI eligibility?

This paper uses nationally representative data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (2004 and 2008 panels). Probit regression is used to examine gender gaps in UI eligibility and decomposition analysis is used to examine the factors, including state policy variation, that contribute to these gaps.

Preliminary results from probit regression analysis suggest that female workers are less likely to be eligible for UI than male workers and that this gap in coverage is larger among workers with a high school diploma or less. Preliminary results from decomposition analysis indicate the occupational differences between male and female workers, differences in rates of part-time work, and state differences in alternative base periods for determining benefit eligibility and part-time work provisions all contribute to these gaps.

These results have important policy implications for the role of the UI program in meeting the needs of female workers in U.S. economy. For those concerned that UI should be available only to workers with strong recent labor force attachments who have become involuntarily unemployed, gender differences in rates of UI eligibility may indicate that the program is working as intended. For those concerned that UI should have a broad reach across the labor force, especially during times of economic crisis and in the absence of other social welfare programs to support working-age adults, this paper identifies alternative base periods and part-time work provisions as important policy levers that can broaden UI coverage.