In many – if not most – communities across the United States, large health systems have increasingly become centers of job growth and economic development. Many cities and towns have watched manufacturers leave their communities, often taking with them “good jobs” that used to be available to their working-class residents.

Health systems have now replaced manufacturers as leading employers in town, but what kinds of jobs does the health sector provide for the working-class? We know that the health sector provides high quality jobs for workers with advanced degrees, such as physicians, pharmacists, and administrators. But does the health care sector provide “good jobs” for men and women without a college degree?

Flexible work arrangements, which enable people to voluntarily change when and where they work, are stigmatized in American workplaces due to a belief that flexible work patterns reflect an insufficient commitment to work. Yet, I find that the use of these arrangements is associated with heightened, not diminished, levels of work devotion among working mothers.

This finding contradicts the commonly held view that to effectively manage job and family responsibilities, one must make sacrifices or trade-offs between ambitions at work and at home. As “trade-offs,” strategies are portrayed within the context of a zero-sum relationship between work and family—a view which upholds the “sperate spheres ideology” that has long legitimized traditional breadwinning men and homemaking women arrangements.

In a recently published article, I suggest that work-family strategies exist as a “buffet” of options, characterized not just by the institution (work or family) that is adjusted when adopted but also by their associated moral weight. Said differently, strategies are embedded within symbolic landscapes that render certain options more accessible, appropriate or desirable than others.

Work organizations are often seen as the engines of inequality: they sort people into jobs with different opportunities, they pay people differently, and they reserve power for a select few.  But we know far less about how organizations foster equality in the workplace by allowing occupational mobility, reducing wage disparities, and distributing power among many.

In a recent article, I examine one workplace that adopted such equality-producing practices. Over nearly a decade, I conducted research on worker-recuperated businesses in Argentina, which are companies that have converted from privately-owned enterprises into worker-controlled cooperatives. Today, there are nearly 400 worker-recuperated businesses operating in Argentina. And most of these are organized as worker cooperatives that are owned and operated by their members.

Contemporary professionals face increased precarity in all aspects of their work. They have less control over their schedules, less autonomy from clients and organizations, and weaker professional identities than in the past. Sociologists refer to these broad changes as deprofessionalization.

Deprofessionalization is particularly pronounced in the field of journalism. In recent decades, corporate consolidation, the internet, and the rise of powerful technology platform companies have profoundly altered the journalism landscape and the journalism labor market.

Suppliers to global value chains face formidable efficiency demands to produce ever more cheaply and rapidly. Suppliers in the Global South often compete on labor costs and operate with very low margins, and multinational companies’ (MNCs) demanding sourcing practices magnify these efficiency pressures. This can lead to a “race to the bottom” in labor practices, resulting in sweatshop conditions.

Suppliers to global value chains face formidable efficiency demands to produce ever more cheaply and rapidly. Suppliers in the Global South often compete on labor costs and operate with very low margins, and multinational companies’ (MNCs) demanding sourcing practices magnify these efficiency pressures. This can lead to a “race to the bottom” in labor practices, resulting in sweatshop conditions.

Today, employers’ discrimination against black men applying for jobs is notoriously prevalent in the United States. It is commonly accepted that employers’ racial bias explains disparities in how often black versus white men receive job offers. Seeing a black name on a résumé, for example, could activate a range of stereotypes that depict young black men as aggressive, criminal, and violent, which are widely-known in society and deeply rooted in our collective consciousness.

Not only can names on a résumé activate stereotypes – but events that transpire in a neighborhood can also influence people’s reliance on stereotypes, especially right after they happen. For example, after a police officer is shot by a black suspect, other police officers increase their use of force in routine stops with black people.

There has been sizable growth in the population of mixed-race couples and their multiracial children in recent decades. Research indicates that these families tend to prefer living in racially and ethnically diverse neighborhoods that are relatively affluent. The neighborhood preferences of mixed-race couples with children appear to be largely driven by a desire for their children to live in an area that accepts their children’s multiracial identity while providing them safety and amenities.

However, there is a problem that these families face in finding diverse, higher income neighborhoods –there are not many of them. Indeed, scholars highlight that diverse neighborhoods tend to be lower income. This implies that some mixed-race couples with children encounter trade-offs between diversity and affluence when they are searching for a home in a new neighborhood.

Where these diverse families ultimately choose to live has a number of important consequences. If mixed-race couples with children lean more toward moving to diverse neighborhoods, they can bolster already increasing levels of neighborhood diversity.

Like many other Western countries, the US has a substantial gender wage gap, much of which can potentially be attributed to a lack of affordable childcare options which tend to restrict mothers’ work opportunities far more than fathers’. Bethany A. Carter argues that policymakers should look to the former East Germany for potential solutions to this gap. There, she writes, the much smaller gender pay gap can be attributed to the area’s extensive, professional daycare system which has persisted because citizens value it.

During the fourth Democratic debate on October 16th, then presidential candidate and former Texas Congressman Beto O’Rourke confronted Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren on one of her key policy proposals: universal childcare. O’Rourke demanded to know whether American families would see a tax increase. Most of the discussion around this issue has centered on the cost of such a plan. And research has mainly focused on the short- and long-term benefits of childcare spending on children (i.e. a “child safety net”). But parents may benefit as much or more as their children.

Women face a double bind when they are in leadership positions. They are expected to be competent and authoritative, but others often see their authoritative behavior as overly dominant, and a violation of gender stereotypes. In other words, women face a “dominance penalty” when they act authoritatively, but they face questions about their competence when they do not act authoritatively. Research has documented this double bind in a number of settings, but these studies have by and large focused on white women. 

Recent research challenges the universality of the dominance penalty, and suggests that race and gender intersect to shape reactions to authoritative behavior. For example, recent studies have shown that in a professional workplace context, black women who demonstrate high levels of competence face less backlash when they behave authoritatively than do comparable white women or black men. 

Access to stable housing is critical to the wellbeing of individuals and families. As rents have risen and wages have not kept pace, finding affordable housing in the U.S. has gotten harder. This is especially true for low-income families, who often spend more than half their income on rent.

The U.S. has a number of housing policies, like Housing Choice Vouchers, to help low-income families find and afford housing, but only about 25% of eligible households get assistance. Housing vouchers can also be challenging to use when landlords refuse to accept them. This led us to consider whether a different policy – the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) – might help improve families’ housing situations. We wanted to know whether making the EITC more generous for low-income families might be another way to address the housing affordability crisis.