Child Care and Workforce Decisions

by Amanda Rohrer
January 2011

This article examines parenting and the workforce, making use of a variety of data sources — American Community Survey, Geographic Profile of Employment and Unemployment (an annual publication by the Bureau of Labor Statistics summarizing Current Population Survey data by state and other geographic areas), and the American Time Use Survey. Child care availability information is based on Minnesota Department of Human Services’ records of licensed care facilities and some local studies of child care costs and usage.

Traditionally mothers are the primary caregivers, particularly for young children. Today, though, Minnesota has the sixth highest female labor force participation rate in the country (67.4 percent compared to 59.5 for the U.S.) [1] as well as being tied for the eighth highest birth rate in the nation (62 per thousand). [2] High rates in fertility and labor force participation have in some ways forced an upset of traditional roles. While continuing to take responsibility for ensuring the care of their children, mothers increasingly do so by arranging for others to provide day-to-day supervision. Child care can come in many forms: some parents alternate work schedules allowing both to be active participants in the labor force; some place children in informal care with a friend or relative; some place children in licensed child care either in a home or a center. The child care options available to parents are limited by their circumstances, finances, and geography but are integral to the choices they have in the workforce.

Women and the Workforce

Mothers are an integral part of the labor force. The mother who stays at home with her child/children is now the exception. Those who spend a few years exclusively caring for their own children often return to the workforce. Allowing motherhood to be a barrier to employment or career advancement would critically wound a workforce that is already struggling to keep up with a demographic shift and a changing economy.

The child-rearing years tend also to be prime working years. In Minnesota women between the ages of 20 and 34 accounted for 74.3 percent of births from 2006 to 2008. [3] About 80 percent of the remaining births were to women between the ages of 35 and 50. Almost all mothers of young children in daily child care are between the ages of 20 and 50. Most of these women have some work history and ties to the labor force. Of women who gave birth, 70 percent were in the labor force and 55 percent had already had at least some higher education.

The overwhelming majority of mothers in Minnesota work at least part time. Of single mothers with children age 18 years and under, 85.3 percent (107,424 women) were in the labor force in 2008. Even in married-couple families, mothers of children under 18 were in the labor force in 78.3 percent of families (368,120 women). While not all have children at home, this still means that about a quarter of women ages 15 to 65 were working mothers of minor children. [4] This doesn’t account for working grandmothers whose grandchildren live with them and for whom they may be partially or solely responsible. In Minnesota there were 40,367 children living with a grandparent, and more than half of them were the primary responsibility of the grandparent, regardless of whether a parent was also present. [5]

Work and Children

Surveys show that women are disproportionately responsible for child care, even when they are active participants in the labor force. Although men are taking on increasingly active roles in day-to-day household chores and child care, in emergencies women are more likely to leave work to care for children or limit their hours to part time as a result of child care. Women are much more likely to work part time because of children. Of all Minnesotans working part time in 2009, 1.9 percent identified child care problems as the primary reason for working less than full time. Only 1,000 men (0.5 percent of Minnesota men working part time) listed child care problems as the primary reason for working part time, compared to 10,000 women (2.7 percent of Minnesota women working part time). [6] When children are sick or child care suddenly becomes unavailable, women are much more likely to be the parent who takes time off work to care for the children. Of people employed, but not at work, in Minnesota in 2009 (a category that includes people on vacation or sick), 11.8 percent cited child care problems as the reason. Among men only 2 percent (1,000) were off for child care reasons, compared to 20 percent of women (12,000). [7]

Some women voluntarily choose lighter work schedules in order to care for their children. While there’s no way to determine how many do so to spend time with their children, on average, women in Minnesota work shorter hours than men, working 34.5 hours a week compared to men’s 39.8 hours, or 86.7 percent of men’s hours in 2009. That gap was somewhat narrower among men and women who normally worked full time, with men working 43.4 hours a week and women 40.5 hours, or 93.3 percent of men’s hours. [8] Women are also more likely to work part time — 30.8 percent of employed Minnesota women work part time, compared to 16.1 percent of employed men. [9]

Women tend to work at times and in places that are more convenient for child care and families. Women are more likely to work at home — 5.1 percent of Minnesota women compared to 4.8 percent of men. Women are more likely to work close to home — 31.3 percent of Minnesota women compared to only 26.1 percent of Minnesota men live and work in the same municipality. Women are also less likely to work hours that conflict with typical school or child care hours. Overall, 42.6 percent of Minnesota women start work between 7a.m. and 8:30 a.m. compared to just 36.2 percent of Minnesota men (see Figure 1). Women’s commutes are shorter, too. On average, Minnesota men spend 23.5 minutes getting to work while women spend only 20.8 minutes. [10]

While Minnesota-specific data on why women work closer to home and work the hours they do are unavailable, National Time Use Survey data suggest that child care duties play a role. [11] Nationwide, married mothers are more likely to be taking their children to school, day care, or other activities than are married fathers. Of married mothers who are employed full time, 39.6 percent transported children on an average day, and of those employed part time, 44.6 percent transport children. In contrast, only 22.8 percent of married employed men took their children to activities on an average day. Mothers also spent more time traveling with children — 0.23 hours a day on average for mothers employed full time and 0.28 hours per day for those employed part time compared to only 0.12 hours a day for employed fathers. [12]

Finances

For families with young children, child care is often one of the most significant expenses in the household budget. The cost of child care affects the choices parents make regarding employment. Families with limited resources may be unable to cover the cost of licensed care, while those with more options may leave the workforce or otherwise change their workforce participation as a result of costs.

The average annual earnings of working women in the metro were $38,844 in the third quarter of 2009. The cost of care at a metro child care center for a single infant is nearly $15,000, on average, or 38.6 percent of a woman’s average pay. While the definitions of “infant” can vary, it often includes children up to 18 months in age. A family with twins or children close in age may be paying the most expensive infant rates for two children at a time. In that case, a woman earning the average salary in the metro and paying the average rate at a child care center for both children would be paying 77.1 percent of her gross income to the center. Even the more affordable family child care providers would cost $16,744 annually to care for an infant and a toddler, 43.1 percent of a woman’s pay. Outside the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area, the average woman earns $27,780. Compared to the metro area, child care centers in Greater Minnesota are proportionately more affordable, while family child care is less so. Two infants in a child care center in Greater Minnesota would cost $19,448 in tuition, or 70 percent of the average woman’s gross pay, while family child care for an infant and toddler would cost $13,000 annually or 46.8 percent of her before-tax pay [13] (see Table 1).

When the overall value of women’s earnings to the family budget is eclipsed by the cost of not being available to care for children, participating in the workforce may be primarily based on personal preference.

For many women in Minnesota the cost of licensed child care is more than their income. The state has programs to assist families at and below the poverty level to pay for child care while they work, but in many counties there are long waiting lists. [14]  Additionally, since the maximum income of families served by the program is 250 percent of the federal poverty level (90 percent of families served make less than 200 percent of the federal poverty level) [15], a four-person family earning $44,100 would very likely be unable to qualify for assistance. [16]  If there were two parents, each earning half that, in the metro the cost of sending a toddler and infant to home-based care would eat up more than three-quarters of one parent’s gross pay. While a variety of tax benefits are intended to help families with children, a refund that comes a year after the bills have to be paid is unlikely to figure in most families’ calculations of the costs and benefits of working.

When a mother has substantially less income than her spouse, the decision to work or not work may be fairly straightforward. In single-parent households, or when both parents have similar incomes or the mother earns more, child care options may be more critical, because the mother’s ties to the labor force may be more essential for the family’s well-being. The number of single-parent households is increasing [17] as is the average proportion of women contributing to household income in two-parent families. [18]

Geography

Given their greater role in children’s care, women may find employment more limited by the availability of convenient child care options than their male counterparts. The greatest number of licensed child care providers is in inner-ring suburbs and around high-employment areas like city centers. Women living far from these areas may find that child care puts more restrictions on their working lives. Even where there is ample child care, but the market is dominated by only a few providers, there may not be enough options to meet demand. Women with fewer resources may not have paid leave time available to care for a sick child, or they may rely on public transportation. Access to a variety of different providers with different policies is critical to balancing work and child-rearing obligations.

Because of reduced population densities, people in rural areas have fewer child care options than those in urban areas. However, except for the Boundary Waters and less populated northern parts of the state, there are licensed caregivers in every county of the state and within five miles of nearly any community. The various metro areas in the state have much more than that — up to 400 providers per community or more than 4.8 per square mile (see Maps 1 and 2). Despite the broad availability of licensed care, the number of children that caregivers are licensed to serve is less than the number of children needing care. Affluent city neighborhoods and the suburbs nearest the urban core have the greatest number of child care providers and are licensed to serve the greatest number of children. Less affluent city neighborhoods have several providers but serve fewer children. Rural communities have few locations licensed for few children, which suggests that parents in these areas rely more on informal care — grandmothers, nannies, trading care with friends, or allowing older children to be unsupervised.

Child care patterns differ in other ways between Greater Minnesota and the metro areas. In the metro areas more people choose child care facilities that are located closer to home than to work. Residential areas of suburbs have a higher ratio of child care spots to workers than do any employment centers. In part this is because of the availability of licensed “after school” programs and Head Start locations. Children are more likely to be in a school near home than parents are to work near home. In Greater Minnesota, child care availability is less consistent. This is likely because of the relatively small labor force. Small groups of people commuting to a single large employer could change the ratios of child care providers to workers without the reason's being obvious in this analysis. Also, licensed care providers include day camp programs and other such places that may only be in operation occasionally. Where there aren’t many child care facilities, such programs would be more likely to disrupt the data patterns (see Map 3).

Excluding family child care, which is typically licensed for a broader range of ages for the sake of flexibility, more licensed care is available for young children than school-age children. Particularly in Greater Minnesota, more communities have a child care center than a school-age program. School-age programs serve fewer children in urban areas, as well, perhaps because there are more options. Older children may be involved in after-school activities until parents get off work or may be able to go to community centers or the homes of neighbors (see Maps 4 and 5).

While child care for rural Minnesotans exists, it’s more likely to be in homes (see Map 6). The occasional child care center is available, but the overall trend is that the further you are from a population center, the rarer child care centers are. This is most likely a result of lower populations — where there aren’t enough children to fill it, a child care center isn’t economically feasible.

The type of care available affects the type of work sought by women with young children. Family child care may be more accommodating of special circumstances than a child care center. However, with family child care, illness or vacation of the provider increases the incidents of needing to find alternate care. Some parents have more confidence in commercial child care centers, so where centers are unavailable, parents may find a way to allow one parent (most often the mother) to stay at home.

While child care options are available in most areas, women with lower incomes living in rural areas may have to take their children further for care or restrict their work hours based on what’s offered by the one or two licensed locations in their area. Women of limited means living in urban areas have similar problems — price narrows their choices as does distance. Since many low-wage earners also lack benefits like paid leave, a sick child may be a major hardship rather than a minor inconvenience for affluent working women.

Conclusion

By choice or necessity many women gravitate toward careers that allow them to care for their children. The balance of child care availability — locations, hours of operation, part-time and flexible-care options, and affordability — and workplace accommodations for family life are inextricably linked to the role women play in the workforce.

Access to affordable quality child care has a significant effect on the ability of women with small children to participate fully in the workforce. While all parents make trade-offs bringing up their children, women as workers are disproportionately affected because women tend to be the primary caregivers.

[1]U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Geographic Profile of Employment and Unemployment, 2009. Table 14 
[2] U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2006-2008, Table S1301. Fertility, Minnesota 
[3] U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2006-2008, Table S1301. Fertility, Minnesota 
[4] U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2006-2008, Table S2302. Employment Characteristics of Families, Minnesota
Note: the percentage of women age 15-65 that are working mothers is calculated using two different sets of data. “Working mothers” data are from the subset of “women in families,” which includes all people living with a spouse or children. “Working-age women” is a total-population estimate. There are two potential problems with this statistic – 1) A woman who had a child at age 49 and now is 66 with a 17-year-old would be counted in the families but not in the working-age women category. 2) Women not in families but with children for whom they are responsible are not counted in the total of working moms – this would include one member of lesbian couples, girlfriends of single dads, and live-in grandmothers. These circumstances aren’t particularly common and the percentage should be roughly accurate.
[5] U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2006-2008, Table S1001. Grandchildren Characteristics, Minnesota
[6] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Geographic Profile of Employment and Unemployment, 2009.  Table 23 
[7] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Geographic Profile of Employment and Unemployment, 2009.  Table 24 
[8] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Geographic Profile of Employment and Unemployment, 2009.  Table 22 
[9] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Geographic Profile of Employment and Unemployment, 2009.  Table 16 
[10] U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2006-2008, Table S0801. Commuting Characteristics by Sex 
[11] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, American Time Use Survey, 2003-06, Married Parents’ Use of Time Summary 5/8/08. Online at www.bls.gov/news.release/atus2.nr0.htm
[12] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, American Time Use Survey, 2003-06, “Table 1. Time spent in primary activities (1) and the percent of married mothers and fathers who did the activities on an average day by employment status and age of youngest own household child, average for the combined years 2003-06”  5/8/08.  Online at www.bls.gov/news.release/atus2.t01.htm
[13] DEED, Labor Market Information Office, LEHD State of Minnesota Metro Reports, Quarterly Workforce Indicators, Third
Quarter 2009.
[14] Minnesota Department of Human Services, Child Care Assistance Program.
www.dhs.state.mn.us/main/idcplg?IdcService=GET_DYNAMIC_CONVERSION&RevisionSelectionMethod=
LatestReleased&dDocName=id_008688
[15] Minnesota Department of Human Services, Child Care Assistance Program Family Profile 2008.  www.dhs.state.mn.us/main/groups/economic_support/documents/pub/dhs_id_057781.pdf
[16] U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, The 2009 HHS Poverty Guidelines. http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/09poverty.shtml
[17] U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey
[18] Folbre, Nancy (10/12/10), The New York Times, “The Spousal Safety Net”.  http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/12/the-spousal-safety-net/?ref=business

Tops