Search Results

Methods: We used data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (1988-2016) and the Occupational Information Network database to create a longitudinal precarious employment score (PES) among 7568 employed individuals over 18 waves (N=101 290 observations). We identified 13 survey indicators to operationalize 7 dimensions of precarious employment, which we included in our PES (range: 0-7, with 7 indicating the most precarious): material rewards, working-time arrangements, stability, workers' rights, collective organization, interpersonal relations, and training. Using generalized estimating equations, we estimated the mean PES and change over time in the PES overall and by race/ethnicity, gender, education, income, and region.

Results: On average, the PES was 3.17 [standard deviation (SD) 1.19], and was higher among women (3.34, SD 1.20), people of color (Hispanics: 3.24, SD 1.23; non-Hispanic Blacks: 3.31, SD 1.23), those with less education (primary: 3.99, SD 1.07; high school: 3.43, SD 1.19), and with lower-incomes (3.84, SD 1.08), and those residing in the South (3.23, SD 1.17). From 1988 to 2016, the PES increased by 9% on average [0.29 points; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26-0.31]. While precarious employment increased over time across all subgroups, the increase was largest among males (0.35 points; 95% CI 0.33–0.39), higher-income (0.39 points; 95% CI 0.36-0.42) and college-educated (0.37 points; 95% CI 0.33-0.41) individuals.

Methods: Data were from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth adult cohort (1996-2016) (N = 7280). Thirteen indicators were identified to operationalize seven dimensions of precarious employment (range: 0-7, 7 indicating most precarious): material rewards, working-time arrangements, stability, workers' rights, collective organization, interpersonal relationships, and training. The precarious employment-BMI association was estimated using linear regression models and an instrumental variables approach; state- and individual-level firm sizes were the instruments for precarious employment. Models also included individual and year fixed effects and controlled for age, marital status, education, region, and industry.

Results: The average precarious employment score (PES) was 3.49 (95% CI: 3.46–3.52). The PES was the highest among Hispanic (4.04; 95% CI: 3.92-4.15) and non-Hispanic Black (4.02; 95% CI: 3.92-4.12) women with lower education. A 1-point increase in the PES was associated with a 2.18-point increase in BMI (95% CI: 0.30-4.01).

Methods: Data were collected from 2871 women enrolled in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 and the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 Children and Young Adult Cohort. Employment precarity was evaluated using a summary variable that combined several employment attributes: availability of employer-sponsored insurance, income, long shifts, non-daytime shifts, availability of employer sponsored training or educational benefits and membership in a union or collective bargaining unit. Employment precarity scores (a sum of the number of negative employment attributes) were categorised into low (0–2), medium (3) and high (4-6). LBW was defined as weight less than 2500 g at birth. Modified Poisson models were fit to calculate risk ratios and 95% CIs and adjusted for maternal age, race/ethnicity, educational attainment, nativity, prepregnancy body mass index, alcohol consumption, smoking during pregnancy and infant year of birth. We assessed effect modification by maternal race/ethnicity using a composite exposure-race variable.

Results: Women with high employment precarity had higher risk of a LBW delivery compared with women with low employment precarity (RR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.11 to 1.98). Compared to non-Hispanic/non-black women with low employment precarity, non-Hispanic black women (RR: 2.68; 95% CI: 1.72 to 4.15), Hispanic women (RR: 2.53; 95% CI: 1.54 to 4.16) and non-Hispanic/non-black women (RR: 1.46; 95% CI: 0.98 to 2.16) with high employment precarity had higher risk of LBW.