While presented as measures to safeguard women's health labor laws banning night work or limiting the amount of weight a woman could lift often restricted women's access to employment
For most of the past 200 years, the campaign for women’s rights and gender equality has been a remarkable success. Legal rights for women have steadily expanded in many countries, and in some places, the ideal of equality before the law is now close to being realized, although important gaps in outcomes still remain. What is less clear, however, is whether this progress reflects a gradual shift in public values or changing political incentives shaped by economic and technological transformation.
To explore this question, our new IZA discussion paper examines a period in US history when the push for legal equality between men and women temporarily reversed. Between the late 19th and mid-20th centuries, many US states enacted “protective” labor laws that applied only to women. These laws banned night work, limited the amount of weight women could lift, mandated seating, and imposed maximum working hours. While they were presented as measures to safeguard women’s health, they often restricted women’s access to employment. Most of these regulations remained in place until the civil rights reforms of the 1960s rendered gender-specific laws unconstitutional.
We find that male concerns about labor market competition from women played a central role in the rise and fall of these protective labor laws. As the US economy shifted from agriculture to industrial production, women increasingly competed with men, especially in low-skilled jobs. For unskilled men, limiting women’s employment opportunities provided an economic advantage.
To understand the incentives behind support for these laws, we develop a model showing that two groups of men stood to benefit the most: single low-skilled men and low-skilled married men whose wives did not work. For both groups, restricting women’s access to jobs increased their own labor income. In contrast, households in which women worked were economically harmed by these laws and therefore tended to oppose them. Crucially, support for protective legislation was not simply a matter of gender, it depended on how the laws affected household income.
We test this explanation using US Census data and newly collected historical records on state-level labor laws. Our analysis shows that states were more likely to pass protective laws when a greater share of households stood to benefit from limiting women’s work. Support for such restrictions declined rapidly as more married women entered the workforce, especially during the 1960s and 1970s. We also investigate other potential explanations, including the influence of labor unions and the impact of women’s suffrage, but find that these factors do not explain the patterns once labor market dynamics are accounted for.
Our findings suggest that the rise in married women’s labor force participation during the 1960s and 1970s helped align the economic interests of men and women, thereby reinforcing support for gender equality. Today, while women’s labor force participation remains high, marriage rates have declined, particularly among less-educated individuals in high-income countries. As a result, our research indicates that the economic interests of men and women may once again be diverging. This divergence could be one reason for the recent decline in support for gender equality observed among young men.
© Matthias Doepke, Hanno Foerster, Anne Hannusch, and Michèle Tertilt
Matthias Doepke is Professor at London School of Economics, UK, and IZA Research Fellow
Hanno Foerster is Assistant Professor at Boston College, US, and IZA Research Fellow
Anne Hannusch is Associate Professor (tenure-track) at the University of Bonn, Germany, and IZA Research Affiliate
Michèle Tertilt is Professor of Economics at the University of Mannheim, Germany, and IZA Research Fellow
Please note:
We recognize that IZA World of Labor articles may prompt discussion and possibly controversy. Opinion pieces, such as the one above, capture ideas and debates concisely, and anchor them with real-world examples. Opinions stated here do not necessarily reflect those of the IZA.
Related IZA World of Labor content:
https://wol.iza.org/articles/policies-to-support-women-paid-work by Gianna Claudia Giannelli
https://wol.iza.org/articles/womens-labor-force-participation by Anne E. Winkler
https://wol.iza.org/articles/determinants-of-housework-time by Leslie S. Stratton
Foto by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash