[Percent distribution of persons 16 to 24 years of age]

Laborers, except farm and mine.

All occupation groups:

Farmers and farm managers..

Sales workers.

Private household workers.

A much smaller proportion of the 1962 dropouts (56 percent) than of the graduates (80 percent) were working or looking for work (table 5). A substantial part of the difference was accounted for by women dropouts who were already married, but men and single women who dropped out of school were also less likely to be in the labor force than those who graduated. Furthermore, the dropouts who were not in the labor force were much less likely than the graduates to be attending special schools for instruction and training which would improve their job opportunities. Only 6 percent of the dropouts not in ework force were in these schools, compared with fully one-half (53 percent) of the 1962 graduates who were not in the labor force."

The rate of unemployment for 1962 school dropouts in October was 29 percent, about twice as high as the rate for the June high school graduates, despite the higher proportion of dropouts in farm areas, where unemployment is less common. (This ratio also held true when the comparison was limited to white dropouts and graduates or to men.) The total number of unemployed dropouts 16 to 24 years old, irrespective of the year they left school, was 430,000, representing about two-fifths of all the unemployed in this age group and one-half of all jobless persons in these ages who were not in school.

As shown in previous surveys, the proportion of employed youths in less desirable jobs was also much higher for dropouts than for graduates, reflecting the large representation of nonwhites and farm residents among the dropouts, as well as their youth and inadequate schooling." Among employed men who last attended school in 1961 or 1962, the proportion of farm laborers was about 22 times as large for young men who dropped out of school (23 percent) as for those who graduated in June 1962 or in 1961 (9 percent) and more of the dropouts were in relatively unskilled service jobs. Only 2 percent of the male dropouts for these years were craftsmen, compared with 11 percent of the graduates, and fewer dropouts than graduates were in white-collar occupations.

Only 16 percent of the female dropouts for these years were in clerical occupations, while 48 percent were in relatively unskilled service occupations, including private household work. For women graduates, the corresponding proportions were 61 percent in clerical occupations and 15 percent in service jobs.

Although a much larger proportion of the out-of-labor-force dropouts than graduates were married women, this factor fails to explain entirely the considerable difference noted in attendance at special schools.

On the other hand, the 1962 school dropouts include those who left school as early as January and had somewhat more time to obtain better jobs than the 1962 graduates who left school in June.

For dropouts, the 1962 base taken alone is too small for reliable comparisons.

Selected Labor Market Indicators for 1962 Male High School Graduates and 1960 Male School Dropouts in October 1962

TABLE 7.—Major occupation group of employed high school graduates not enrolled in college by year of high school graduation and of school dropouts by year last attended school, by color, October 1962

Older school dropouts, who had been in the labor market for longer periods, had lower rates of unemployment and were employed at a somewhat higher occupational level than those who recently left school; however, they continued to be in a worse situation than graduates who had been out of school about the same length of time (tables 3 and 4). The unemployment rate in October 1962 for those who dropped out of school in 1960 was 18 percent-smaller than the 29-percent rate for recent dropouts of 1962 but still considerably above the 10percent rate for graduates of 1960. Similarly, young men who dropped out of school in 1960 were more likely than recent dropouts to be craftsmen and operatives while fewer were relatively unskilled service workers; however, compared with male graduates who also left school in 1960, the dropouts were more concentrated in farm and nonfarm laboring jobs, and fewer were craftsmen or white-collar workers. The proportion of non-farm workers who worked part time because of economic reasons-often a characteristic of their occupationswas 16 percent for 1961 school dropouts but only 4 percent for the 1961 graduates.

8

The limited success which dropouts achieve even after an extended time in the labor market is dramatically illustrated in the chart which shows that in October 1962, young men who had dropped out of school in 1960 fared worse in the labor market than young men who graduated 2 years later-only 4 months before the survey. This conclusion holds in comparisons of unemployment, shortened workweeks, and occupational levels. In addition, a greater proportion of the dropouts were neither in the labor force nor attending special schools. Information obtained for the first time on the years of school completed by dropouts shows that those who left school at a later grade had higher level occupations than those with less education. Of all white 16- to 24-year-old male dropouts employed in October 1962, 17 percent of those who completed only elementary school or less were farm laborers and another 17 percent were nonfarm laborers, compared with only 7 and 12 percent, respectively, for those completing 1 to 3 years of high school (table 6). Moreover, the proportion of craftsmen was noticeably smaller among the dropouts with less education. Among white female dropouts, those who had not finished at least 1 year of high school were more likely to be domestic workers or farm laborers and less likely to be clerical or sales workers.

NONWHITE GRADUATES AND DROPOUTS

Results of this survey give further evidence of the unfavorable position of young nonwhites with respect to educational and economic attainment-despite their advances in these areas in recent years.' As mentioned previously, nonwhites comprised 1 out of 4 of the 1962 school dropouts, about twice their proportion of the June 1962 graduates. Among both high school graduates and dropouts in the labor force in October 1962, nonwhites were much more likely to be in less skilled and less desirable occupations and more of them, partly as a result of their occupations, were unemployed. Of those persons who graduated between 1960 and 1962, about one-half of the nonwhite graduates, but only onefifth of the white graduates, were in a service occupation (including private household) or were farm or nonfarm laborers (table 7). Among dropouts, fully three-fourths of the nonwhite youths, compared with two-fifths of the white youths, were in these occupational groups. The unemployment rate for nonwhite graduates was noticeably higher than for white graduates, but among dropouts, rates were about equally high for both white and nonwhite youths,' as shown in the following tabulation:

Data not available for 1960.

10

See "Economic Status of Nonwhite Workers, 1955-62," which will appear in the July issue of the Review.

19 Nonwhite dropouts include a larger proportion in farm areas, where unemployment is comparatively low. These rates are based on relatively small numbers; however, data

Unemployed as percent of civilian labor force in each group

Furthermore, nonwhites failed to improve their economic position over time as much as white youth. Comparing the October 1962 jobs of young people who last attended school before 1960 and of those who left school between 1960 and 1962, the proportion of graduates and dropouts in service and laboring jobs dropped off noticeably for the older white youth but remained approximately the same for the older as for the younger nonwhites. Fewer of the earlier than the recent nonwhite graduates were farm laborers, but more were in service occupations. There was also some increase in the proportion employed as crafts men and as professional and technical workers among the earlier graduates." Rates of unemployment for nonwhite graduates and dropouts remained relatively high even after they had been out of school several years, while the rates for the older white graduates and dropouts declined sharply.

This preprint contains, in addition to the article which will be published in the July 1963 issue of the Review, the following material: Explanatory note.

Detalled tables:

A. Employment status of high school graduates 16 to 24 years of age not enrolled in college, by year of graduation, sex, color, and marital status of women, October 1962.

B. Employment status of persons 16 to 24 years of age who were not high school graduates and not enrolled in school, by year last attended school, sex, color, and marital status of women, October

1962.

C. Major occupation group of employed high school graduates 16 to 24 years of age not enrolled in college, by year of high school graduation, sex, and color, October 1962.

D. Major occupation group of employed persons 16 to 24 years of age who were not high school graduates and not enrolled in school, by year last attended school, sex, and color, October 1962.

E. Industry and class of worker of employed high school graduates not enrolled in college and of school dropouts by years of school completed, by sex, October 1962.

F. Industry and class of worker of employed high school graduates and school dropouts who last attended school in 1962 or 1961, by sex, October 1962.

G. Hours worked in nonagricultural industries by employed high school graduates and school dropouts who last attended school in 1962 or 1961, by sex, October 1962.

EXPLANATORY NOTE

The estimates in this report are based on supplementary questions in the Oc tober 1962 monthly survey of the labor force conducted and tabulated for the Bureau of Labor Statistics by the Bureau of the Census. The basic labor force concepts, sample design, estimating methods, and reliability of the data are described briefly in the material which follows."

12

DEFINITIONS AND EXPLANATIONS

Population coverage. In the monthly survey, information is collected by trained interviewers from a sample of about 35,000 households in 333 areas throughout the country. Beginning with figures for April 1962 (March 1962 for reports on marital and family characteristics and on educational attain ment) information from the 1960 Census of Population replaces that from the 1950 census in the estimation procedures for the monthly survey. Beginning in January 1960, the coverage of the monthly survey was extended to include

u Pre-1960 graduates may include persons who have also graduated from college. Since the white group presumably includes a larger proportion of college graduates than does the nonwhite group, this difference may partially account for the greater job progress shown by

whites.

12 A more complete account of the methodology is published in the explanatory notes of