Schedule Volatility in Service Work: Implications for Federal Family Income-Support Policies

• In Event: Expanding Access, Easing Burdens: Interactions Across the Nutrition Safety Net

Abstract

Work opportunities for low-income people, particularly parents, in the United States have moved toward the service sector. In our own analysis of the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), 20% of all workers and 40% of parents in low-income households (less than 130% of the Federal Poverty Line, FPL) are in a service occupation. Service jobs are characterized by instability both between and within months. Within-month volatility in hours is heavily involuntary, driven by fluctuating customer demand and pressures on managers to minimize staffing. This paper documents instability among low-income service sector workers and explores implications for proposed safety net program work requirements.

Data for this paper are from two sources: the 2023 SIPP, which reports data for reference year 2022, and daily survey data collected by Ananat and Gassman-Pines (see Gassman-Pines et al., 2020). Among SIPP respondents for whom complete 2022 data is available and live in a household with the same people for all months, we select those age 18-54, working in a service occupation, with a child in the household, and with household income of less than 130% of the FPL. Using reports about work hours each month, we calculate the share of those working an average of 80 hours a month over the year who are unemployed for at least one month and work less than 80 hours per week in at least one month.

The daily survey data was collected during Fall 2019 from a sample of hourly service workers with young children in Philadelphia. Respondents provided daily survey reports for 30 days. From these daily responses, we calculate the number of hours respondents actually work across the month and the number of hours they hold open for work, defined as ever working or being scheduled to work during a particular hour on a particular day of the week.

Results show significant volatility over the course of the year and within the month, with important implications for proposed safety net program work requirements. Among SIPP respondents, over 11% of those who worked on average 80 hours/month – and thus met the spirit of proposed work requirements – had 0 hours of work in at least one month. 20% of those who were continuously employed and worked on average 80 hours/month had at least one month during which they fell below the 80 hour/month threshold. If more stringent work requirements for SNAP or Medicaid are imposed, we estimate that more than 1 in 4 low-income, service-working parents would lose benefits for at least one month during the year, leading to loss of important in-kind supports and program churn.

The daily survey respondents worked, on average, 30 hours/week but held open 59 hours/week – nearly double the number of hours worked. These hours held open place a claim on parents’ time for which they are uncompensated. Given that tax-based work incentives such as the EITC are based on actual earnings, many service working parents are losing out on benefits despite supplying substantial amounts of labor.

Authors

• Anna Gassman-Pines, Duke University
  Presenting Author

• Elizabeth Oltmans Ananat, Barnard College
  Non-Presenting Co-Author

• Olivia K Howard, Brookings Institution
  Non-Presenting Co-Author