operations, Deering must offer employment to Darlington's former workers.

At the end of 1961, the NLRB announced a policy of more active use of its discretionary authority to petition for injunctions to restrain alleged unfair practices in certain employer and union unfair labor practice cases pending decision on the case.25 Although there had been sporadic earlier instances of the Board's using section 10(j) of the Taft-Hartley Act in order to prevent "persons violating the act [from accomplishing] the unlawful objective before being placed under any legal restraining," there have been 15 injunctions sought since the new policy was issued.

On November 21, 1962, the Board revised its rule barring election petition for the first 2 years of an incumbent union's contract term by extending this protection, effective immediately, to 3 years. Petitions for such a change reflecting the current trend toward longer contracts had been filed by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and the International Union of Electrical Workers, and were supported by a number of unions.26

25 NLRB v. DuBois Chemical Co. (U.8. Dist. Ct., N. Dist. of Tex., Dallas Div., Civ. 8978).

26 General Coble Corp. and International Union of Electrical Workers (139 NLRB No. 111).

Marital and Family Characteristics of Workers, March 1962

JACOB SCHIFFMAN*

A TOTAL of 1.5 million married heads of families were unemployed in March 1962, representing 4.3 percent of the married family heads in the labor force and 35 percent of all unemployed persons.1 Over one-half million of the unemployed family heads had been jobless for 15 weeks or more. Among the employed heads, about one-half million who usually worked 35 hours or more were employed only part time on nonfarm jobs because of slack work and other economic reasons. (See table 1.) The rates of unemployment and proportions on shortened workweeks for these family heads had noticeably declined from March 1961 and were very similar to what they had been in March 1960, prior to the latest economic downturn. Furthermore, a greater proportion of these men in nonagricultural industries worked overtime than in March 1961, or even in March 1960. On the other hand, the number jobless 15 weeks or more, which declined from 1961, was still significantly higher than in 1960.

About one-half of all unemployed married family heads in March 1962 had a wife or other family member in the labor force (a proportion which has been moving up along with the growing propensity of married women to work). However, as also shown by previous surveys, the proportion with a family member employed was considerably lower slightly more than two-fifths (table 2).

Compared with employed heads, unemployed heads were more likely to have a family member in the labor force, but no more likely to have one of them employed. In other words, family members were much more prone to be unemployed where the family head himself was jobless. Presumably, they, like the unemployed heads, are more apt to have those characteristics associated with higher unemployment, such as lower education, less job skill, and greater concentration in areas of higher unemployment. Also, some of the members probably became unemployed upon entering the labor force in search of work when the family head became unemployed.

Most often it was the wife, rather than another family member, who assisted the head of the family, since about two-thirds of all husband-wife

Of the Division of Manpower and Employment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

1 Unless otherwise stated, references to married persons relate to those living in the same household as the spouse and the discussion on families and their heads refers only to husband-wife families. By definition, the husband in these families is considered the head. A married couple or a parent-child group related to the head of the family and sharing his living quarters is treated as part of the head's family.

The analysis is based primarily on information from supplementary questions in the March 1962 monthly survey of the labor force, conducted for the Bureau of Labor Statistics by the Bureau of the Census through its Current Population Survey.

An article based on the 1961 survey appeared in the January 1962 issue of the Monthly Labor Review (issued as Special Labor Force Report No. 20) and another, based on the 1960 survey, was published in the Review of April 1961 (reprinted as Special Labor Force Report No. 13). Earlier surveys on the marital and family characteristics of workers were summarized in the March and August 1960 issues of the Review (Special Labor Force Reports Nos. 2 and 7, respectively), the Bureau of the Census Current Population Reports, Series P-50, Nos. 5, 11, 22, 29, 39, 44, 50, 62, 73, 76, 81, and 87, and the Bureau of the Census Special Reports, Series P-S, No. 20. Additional related information can be found in Current Population Reports, Series P-20.

Most of the monthly data presented here relate to the population 14 years of age and over, including inmates of institutions and those members of the Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post (978,000 in March 1962). Annual average data in this report refer to the civilian noninstitutional population.

families included no one of working age other than themselves. In families where the husband was employed and someone else was in the work force it was most often the wife (table 2); the number of such families with wives working or seeking work outnumbered those with other secondary earners about 2 to 1; the ratio was 2% to 1 in families where the head was unemployed. The higher proportion of working wives than of other members in these families reflected the much higher rate of labor force participation of wives of the unemployed than of the employed and also the absence of other members of working age in many of these families. Typically, unemployed heads are relatively young, with children not yet of working age, or at the other extreme, are old enough to have children who have established their own households.

Separate income data for wives of unemployed family heads and employed heads in the labor force are not available. However, information on TABLE 1. SELECTED ECONOMIC DATA ON HEADS OF HUSBAND-WIFE FAMILIES, March 1957-62

[Numbers in thousands] Unemployed

the occupations of married women shows that a much higher proportion of wives of unemployed men than of employed men had unskilled and semiskilled jobs which tend to pay relatively low wages (table 3). One-third of the wives of the unemployed were in one of the service occupations, as against only one-fifth of the women with employed husbands. Relatively three times as many wives of the unemployed were in private household work (reflecting in part the disproportionately large number of nonwhite women among wives of the unemployed.)

Unemployment Patterns of Marital Groups

Because married men have more dependents, unemployment among them is usually more serious than among other persons; fortunately, their unemployment rate is lower than for other groups of workers, as shown in the following tabulation:

Date 1

Num- Percent of heads in labor Percent of all unemployed ber force 2 persons

Single...

Widowed, divorced, and married, husband absent...

8.7

6.4

7.4

The low rate of unemployment of married men is not surprising since they are more concentrated than other groups in the prime working years, when workers are more likely to have valuable skills, experience, and seniority. Furthermore, relatively few married men are entering the labor force in search of their first job, unlike young single people who are starting their careers, and few are reentering the labor force looking for work, unlike many married women. These factors tend to keep their rate of unemployment below that of other persons even though, once they lose a job, they usually must persist in their job hunting because of family responsibilities.

Another characteristic of unemployment among married men is its greater responsiveness to changing economic conditions. For example, the unemployment rate for married men rose more sharply than for all other workers between. March 1957 and March 1958, one of the worst recession months of that period, and dropped more

1,528

2,025

1,462

1,477

2, 114

4.3

5.7

4.2

4.3

6.1

1, 171 3.4

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100. O

50.9

51.4

in manufacturing and related industries, which have experienced dramatic changes in employment and unemployment during recent business cycles. Moreover, as mentioned above, when layoffs occur, married men seldom leave the labor force, as many others do, but as a rule continue to look for work until they are rehired or obtain another job.

Irrespective of economic conditions, however, unemployment among married men follows a similar pattern during the course of each year. It is highest during the winter months following curtailments in construction and other outdoor activities, drops off sharply with improving weather in the spring months, reaches its low point in September and October, and rises again with the onset of winter. This pattern of relatively high unemployment during the colder months also holds true for other men. Single

1 Unemployed as percent of civilian labor force. Includes members of the Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post. NOTE: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

men, in addition, experience a period of high unemployment during the summer months when schools are closed. Among married women, unemployment is usually highest in January and February following layoffs of employees hired for the holiday season. In keeping with the seasonal movements in unemployment, the marital and age composition and the total number of unemployed vary considerably during the year (table 4). Thus, in February 1961, married men accounted for about 40 percent and single persons for about 30 percent of the unemployed, but 4 months later, in June, married men comprised only about 25 percent and single persons about 45 percent of unemployed. The numerical changes over this same short period were equally dramatic, as unemployment dropped by 900,000 among married men and rose by the same amount among single persons.

The nature of unemployment among the different marital groups is well illustrated by data showing the employment status of identical persons in adjacent months. For example, about 35 percent of the married men unemployed in an average month of 1961 had been employed 1 month earlier, in contrast with only 20 percent of the single and married women (table 5). On the other hand, about 1 out of 3 of the married women and of the single women had not been in the labor force the month before, as against only 1 out of 20 of the married men. Thus, among married

men, job layoffs caused more unemployment than labor force entry or reentry, and the opposite was true among single and married women. About the same proportions of unemployed single men had been employed in the previous month as had been out of the labor force. In all marital and sex groups, unemployed persons jobless the previous month greatly exceeded those who had been employed and those not in the labor force. About one-half of the jobless women in each marital group had been unemployed a month earlier, and the proportions were even higher for the different groups of men-about three-fifths for married

men.

As would be expected, the distribution of the unemployed by their employment status 1 month earlier changes significantly during the course of each year. In 1961, the proportion of jobless single men not in the labor force in the prior month was about three times as great in June, when many students and graduates were looking for jobs, as in February. The proportion of unemployed married men not in the labor force 1 month earlier was never very large-seldom more than about 1 out of 20; however, the proportions employed or unemployed in the prior month did vary considerably during the year. The jobless married men who had been unemployed in the previous month persistently exceeded those who had been employed, but, as in previous years, the difference was considerably less in the fall of the year than in the spring. The fall marks the beginning of layoffs resulting from colder weather and follows a period when relatively few men are unemployed. The spring, on the other hand, follows a period of heavy winter layoffs and many of the unemployed have been in this situation for several months.

It is these persons already unemployed, rather than those previously employed or not in the labor force, who constitute a more serious economic problem. In 1961, about 35 percent of the jobless married men were classified as "long-term unemployed," i.e., had been jobless for 15 weeks or more. The tabulation on page 28 shows that comparable percentages were smaller for single men and for women, who were more likely to cease job hunting and leave the labor force when work was not easily found or who were possibly more willing to take available lower paying jobs.