U S C E N S U S B U R E A U

Helping You Make Informed Decisions

U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

P70-113

Maternity Leave and Employment

Patterns of First-Time Mothers:

1961–2003

Household Economic Studies

Issued February 2008

Current

Population

Reports

By 

Tallese D. Johnson

INTRODUCTION information from the 1984, 1985, 1996,

and 2001 SIPP panels are also included.5

A little over half of all American women

with a child under 1 year of age were in The report first analyzes trends in

the labor force in 2004.1 A child’s birth women’s work experience prior to their

often requires changes in a mother’s first birth and the factors associated with

work schedule.2 This report examines employment during pregnancy. Changes

trends in maternity leave and the are placed in the historical context of the

employment patterns of women who enactment of family-related legislation

gave birth to their first child between during the last quarter of the twentieth

January 1961 and December 2003.3 century. The next section identifies the

maternity leave arrangements used by The analysis primarily uses retrospective women before and after their first birth

fertility, employment, and maternity and the shifts that have occurred in the

leave data from the 2004 panel of the mix of leave arrangements that are used.

U.S. Census Bureau’s Survey of Income The final section examines how rapidly

and Program Participation (SIPP) con- mothers return to work after their first

ducted in 2004.4 Previously published birth and the factors related to the

results based on similarly collected length of time they are absent from the

labor force.

1 Jane Lawler Dye, Fertility of American Women: In addition to updating childbearing,

June 2004, Current Population Reports, P20-555, employment, and maternity leave trends U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 2005. 2 Mothers with infants consistently have both through the 1990s, the report provides

lower labor force participation rates and lower pro- details on changes many new mothers

portions working full-time than do mothers with experience in the number of hours older children. Jane Lawler Dye, Fertility of American

Women: June 2004, Current Population Reports, P20- worked, pay level, and job skill level after

555, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 2005. 3 the first birth. These changes are exam- The estimates in this report (which may be

shown in text, figures, and tables) are based on ined in relation to whether a woman

responses from a sample of the population and may returned to the same employer she had differ from the actual values because of sampling

variability or other factors. As a result, apparent dif- during pregnancy or changed employer

ferences between the estimates for two or more after the birth of the child.

groups may not be statistically significant. All comparative statements have undergone statistical testing and are significant at the 90-percent confidence 5 For more information on the previously publevel unless otherwise noted. lished reports, see Martin O’Connell, “Maternity 4 The data in this report were collected from June Leave Arrangements: 1961–85,” Work and Family

through September 2004 in the second wave (inter- Patterns of American Women, Current Population

view) of the 2004 SIPP; from June through Reports, Series P-23, No. 165, Bureau of the Census,

September 2001 in the second wave of the 2001 Washington, DC, 1990; Kristin Smith, Barbara

SIPP; from August through November 1996 in the Downs, and Martin O’Connell, Maternity Leave and

second wave of the 1996 SIPP; from January through Employment Patterns: 1961–1995, Current

April 1986 in the fourth wave of the 1985 SIPP; and Population Reports, P70-79, U.S. Census Bureau,

from January through March 1986 in the eighth wave Washington, DC, 2001; Julia Overturf Johnson and

of the 1984 SIPP. The population represented (popu- Barbara Downs, Maternity Leave and Employment

lation universe) is the civilian noninstitutionalized Patterns: 1961–2000, Current Population Reports,

population living in the United States. P70-103, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 2005. 
CHARACTERISTICS OF

MOTHERS AT FIRST BIRTH

Social and economic changes that

have occurred among women since

1961 have been noted to be associated with changes in families, childbearing, and work.6 At the same

time, the demographic picture of

new mothers has also changed.

This section analyzes some of these

events and shows how the characteristics of first-time mothers have

changed over time.

Age and Educational

Attainment of 

First-Time Mothers

Young women giving birth in their

late teens and early twenties are

just beginning to start families at

ages when other women are completing high school and entering

college. Women who have delayed

childbearing until their late twenties and thirties are more likely to

have completed their schooling

and accumulated more years of

work experience than their

younger counterparts. Education

and experience can influence

income levels and job security,

which may in turn influence their

decisions about working during

pregnancy and how soon to return

to work after their first birth. 

Age at first birth and the educational attainment of new mothers

have changed over time. Data from

the National Center for Health

Statistics (NCHS) show that the

mean (average) age at first birth

increased from 21.4 years in 1970

to 24.9 years in 2000.7 The

2 U.S. Census Bureau

6 “Work and Family: A Changing

Dynamic,” BNA Special Report, Bureau of

National Affairs, Washington, DC, 1986. 7 T.J. Matthews and B.E. Hamilton, “Mean

Age of Mother, 1970-2000,” National Vital

Statistics Reports, Vol. 51, No. 1, National

Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD,

2002. 

percentage of first births that were

to women aged 30 and over

increased between 1970 and 2000,

from 4 percent to 24 percent. At

the same time, the percentage of

first births that were to women

under 20 years of age dropped

from 36 percent to 23 percent.

Although not available by birth

order, educational attainment

among all mothers has also

increased since 1970. In 2000, 25

percent of mothers had completed

16 or more years of school, compared with 9 percent in 1970.

Among mothers aged 30 to 34, the

proportion completing 16 or more

years of school increased from 15

percent to 43 percent.8

During this time, an increasing proportion of women 25 to 34 years

old continued their education

beyond high school. The proportion who had completed 4 or more

years of college approximately

doubled from 12 percent in 1970

8 Data for 1970 are from Vital Statistics

of the United States, Vol. 1, National Center

for Health Statistics, Rockville, MD, 1975.

Data for 2000 are from J.A. Martin, et al.,

“Births: Final Data for 2000,” National Vital

Statistics Reports, Vol. 50, No. 5, National

Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD,

2002. 

SIPP FERTILITY, EMPLOYMENT, AND 

MATERNITY LEAVE DATA

The 2004 panel of the nationally representative Survey of Income

and Program Participation (SIPP) included a fertility topical module in

the second wave of interviews conducted in June–September 2004.

Information was collected on the birth dates of the first and last children born to all women 15 to 64 years old at the time of the survey.

Women whose first child was born between 1991 and the survey

date were also asked a series of questions concerning their employment history before and after the birth, as well as their receipt of

maternity-leave benefits. Data from this survey were used in combination with similar information collected in the 1984, 1985, 1996,

and 2001 SIPP panels to provide an extended series of employment

and maternity leave data between 1961 and 2003. 

The most recent data shown in this report, for the time period

2001–2003, are from Wave 2 of the 2004 SIPP. In previous reports,

data for prior decades were often generated retrospectively from the

most recent survey. For this report, data presented from 1961–2000

were obtained from earlier maternity leave reports produced by the

Census Bureau or were retabulated and the most recent time period

was generated by the survey year closest to that period. Generally,

data from 1961–1965 to 1981–1985 are from the Bureau of the

Census, Current Population Reports, Series P23-165 (Work and

Family Patterns of American Women), except as noted in individual

tables and figures; data from 1986–1990 to 1991–1995 are from

P70-79 (Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961–1995); and

data from 1996–2000 are from P70-103 (Maternity Leave and

Employment Patterns: 1961–2000). For this reason, some of the data

for prior survey years shown in this report may not be identical to

those published in previous reports for similar time periods.
to 23 percent by 1990. By 2006,

the proportion with a bachelor’s

degree or more education had

reached 33 percent.9 The age and

educational attainment of first-time

mothers as related to their work

history around the time of their

child’s birth are examined in ensuing sections of this report.

Factors Related to Employment

and Maternity Leave

In the 1970s, the common expectation that women would leave work

upon becoming pregnant began to

change.10 Another change during

the 1970s was an increase in the

proportion of families with a second

income. More mothers, to maintain

economic well-being and for other

reasons, began to enter and stay in

the workforce, resulting in an

increase in homes where both

spouses worked.11

Legislative, judicial, and regulatory

changes related to maternal

employment were enacted in the

1970s and 1980s that affected

employer practices during an

employee’s pregnancy and after

giving birth and revised policies on

child care support. For example, in

1976 the federal tax code was

changed to permit working families with a dependent child to take

a tax credit for child care costs.

The affordability of child care services may be an issue for many

women in deciding whether and

-

n

U.S. Census Bureau 3

9 Educational Attainment Historical

Tables: Table A-1, Current Population Survey,

U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 2007,

<www.census.gov/population/socdemo

/education/cps2006/tabA-1.xls>. Prior to

1992, educational attainment was measured

by years of schooling completed. Four or

more years of college is equivalent to a

bachelor’s degree or more education. 10 Andrew Cherlin, Marriage, Divorce,

Remarriage, Harvard University Press,

Massachusetts, 1992. 11 Frank Levy, The New Dollars and

Dreams, American Incomes and Economic

Change, Russell Sage Foundation, New York,

1998.

when to return to work.12 In 1978,

the Pregnancy Discrimination Act

was passed, which prohibited

employment discrimination on the

basis of pregnancy or childbirth.

This act covered hiring and firing

policies as well as promotions and

pay levels. 

Flexible work schedules,

employment-based child care bene

fits, and maternity leave emerged

as issues during the 1980s at

about the same time that birth

rates among women 30 and older

began to increase steadily in the

United States.13 A U.S. Supreme

Court decision in 1987, California

Federal Savings and Loan

Association v. Guerra, upheld a

California law requiring most

employers to grant pregnant

women 4 months of unpaid disability leave and the right to retur

to their same job. At the federal

level, The Family and Medical

Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA) mandates up to 12 weeks of unpaid

leave for childbearing or family

care over a 12-month period for

eligible employees. Studies so far

have found little evidence that

such laws have increased the

amount of leave women take by

any considerable amount.14

EMPLOYMENT HISTORY

BEFORE THE FIRST BIRTH

This section describes overall

trends in women’s employment

12 Daphne Spain and Suzanne Bianchi,

Balancing Act: Motherhood, Marriage, and

Employment Among American Women,

Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1996. 13 Harriet B. Presser, “Can We Make Time

for Children? The Economy, Work Schedules,

and Child Care,” Demography, Vol. 26, 1989,

pp. 523–543. See Historical Fertility Tables,

U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 2005,

Table H3, <www.census.gov/population

/socdemo/fertility/tabH3.xls>. 14 Wen-Jui Hen and Jane Waldfogel,

“Parental Leave: The Impact of Recent Legislation on Parent’s Leave Taking,” Demography,

Vol. 40, No. 2, 2003, pp. 191–200. Jacob

Klerman and Arleen Leibowitz, “Job Continuity

Among New Mothers,” Demography, Vol. 36,

No. 2, 1999, pp. 145–155.

history from 1961–1965 to

2001–2003 and the characteristics

of women who worked during

their first pregnancy.

Overall Trends: 

1961–1965 to 2001–2003

In the Fertility History portion of the

SIPP, all mothers are asked if they

ever worked for pay for at least 6

consecutive months before their

first birth and if they worked for

pay at a job at any time during the

pregnancy leading to their first

birth.15 The categories do not necessarily overlap, as new mothers may

have worked for a few months during their pregnancy while never

having worked for 6 months in a

row.16 Other mothers may have

worked for 6 months but quit working before they got pregnant. 

Table 1 shows that for mothers who

had their first child between 2001

and 2003, 74 percent had worked

for at least a 6-month period in

their lives. This percentage had

increased since the early 1960s,

when it was 60 percent of new

mothers. Most of the increase since

1961–1965 occurred by the time of

the 1986–1990 first-birth cohort,

when the percentage reached 76

percent. Since then, no major

changes have occurred. Age is

related to whether women have

worked before having their first

child. For women 30 years and

older, 9 out of 10 women who had

a first birth in 2001–2003 had

worked for at least 6 consecutive

months, compared with 55 percent

of women under 22 years of age.17

15 For the remainder of this report, the

term “pregnancy” is used to refer to the

pregnancy preceding the first birth. 16 Working for 6 consecutive months is a

standard labor force indicator that measures

the likelihood of a serious commitment to

the labor force. 17 Separate analysis, not shown in tables.
The percentage of new mothers

who worked at all during their pregnancy increased by 23 percentage

points since 1961–1965. Forty-four

percent of women who had their

first birth between 1961 and 1965

worked while pregnant. For the

2001–2003 first-birth cohort, 67

percent of new mothers worked

while pregnant, not different from

the proportions working while pregnant since 1986–1990.18

Fifty-seven percent of first-time

mothers in 2001–2003 worked at

full-time jobs during their pregnancy (35 hours or more per week,

Table 1). The proportion of firsttime mothers working full-time during pregnancy was 40 percent in

1961–1965, increased to over 50

percent by the late 1970s, and

stayed above 50 percent through

2003. The proportion of first-time

4 U.S. Census Bureau

18 Overall labor force participation rates

for women, regardless of pregnancy status,

were as follows: 32 percent in 1960, 43 percent in 1970, 52 percent in 1980, 58 percent

in 1990, and 60 percent in 2000. See the

Bureau of Labor Statistics Web site at

<www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat2.pdf>.

mothers working part-time during

pregnancy in 1961–1965 was 5 percent. The percentage doubled to 11

percent in 1981–1985 and has

remained between 9 percent and 12

percent since then. Subsequent sections of this report will show the

extent to which weekly hours

worked while pregnant and the

amount of leave taken from the

workforce around the time of a first

birth are related to the type of

maternity benefits received. 

Women Who Worked 

During Pregnancy

Table 2 summarizes differences in

women’s work experience during

pregnancy in 2001–2003. Overall,

67 percent of mothers who had

their first births in 2001–2003

worked during pregnancy. First-time

mothers under age 22 had lower

rates of employment during pregnancy than older first-time mothers.

Among women at the ends of the

age spectrum, 30 percent of new

mothers under age 18 worked

while pregnant, compared with 85

percent of mothers 30 and older.

Among the racial groups shown,

non-Hispanic White women had the

highest percentage (77 percent)

that worked during their first pregnancy.19 Fifty-eight percent of Asian

women worked during pregnancy,

followed by 56 percent of Black

19 Federal surveys now give respondents

the option of reporting more than one race.

Therefore, two basic ways of defining a race

group are possible. A group such as Asian

may be defined as those who reported Asian

and no other race (the race-alone or singlerace concept) or as those who reported

Asian regardless of whether they also

reported another race (the race-alone-or-incombination concept). The body of this

report (text, figures, and tables) shows data

for women who reported they were the single race White and not Hispanic, women who

reported the single race Black, and women

who reported the single race Asian. Use of

the single-race populations does not imply

that it is the preferred method of presenting

or analyzing data. The Census Bureau uses a

variety of approaches.

For further information, see the Census

2000 Brief, Overview of Race and Hispanic

Origin: 2000, (C2KBR/01-1) <www.census.gov

/population/www/cen2000/briefs.html>.

Hispanics may be any race. Data for the

American Indian and Alaska Native population

are not shown in this report because of their

small sample size in the SIPP. Based on the

population of women who had a first birth

between 2001–2003 surveyed in the 2004

SIPP, 3.2 percent of the single-race Black population and .54 percent of the single-race

Asian population were also Hispanic.

Table 1.

Employment History of Women Before First Birth: 1961–1965 to 2001–2003

Year of first birth Number of

women with a

first birth

(thousands)

Women with a first birth who—

Ever worked for 6 or

more months

continuously1

Worked during

pregnancy

Worked full-time2 during pregnancyWorked part-time2 during pregnancy

Percent

Margin of3 error Percent

Margin of3 error PercentMargin of3 error PercentMargin of3 error

1961–1965 . . . . . . . 6,306 60.0 2.0 44.4 2.0 39.7 2.0 4.7 0.9

1966–1970 . . . . . . . 6,956 66.4 1.8 49.4 1.9 44.2 1.9 5.2 0.9

1971–1975 . . . . . . . 6,920 68.9 1.8 53.5 1.9 47.6 2.0 5.9 0.9

1976–1980 . . . . . . . 7,192 73.1 1.7 61.4 1.9 53.1 1.9 8.3 1.1

1981–1985 . . . . . . . 8,129 75.2 1.4 64.5 1.5 54.0 1.5 10.5 0.8

1986–1990 . . . . . . . 8,568 75.5 1.3 67.2 1.4 58.3 1.5 8.9 0.9

1991–1995 . . . . . . . 8,599 73.8 1.6 66.8 1.8 54.5 1.8 12.2 1.0

1996–2000 . . . . . . . 8,558 74.0 1.6 67.2 1.7 56.6 1.8 10.6 1.1

2001–2003 . . . . . . . 4,905 74.0 2.0 67.0 2.1 57.1 2.2 9.9 1.3

1 At any time before first birth. 2 Full-time/part-time status refers to last job held before first child’s birth. 3 The margin of error, when added to or subtracted from the estimate, provides the 90-percent confidence interval around the estimate.

Source: 1961–1965 to 1981–1985: Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-23, No. 165 (Work and Family Patterns of American

Women), Tables C, B-2, and B-3; 1986–1990 to 1991–1995: P70-79 (Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961–1995), Table A; 1996–2001: P70-103

(Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961–2000), Table 1; and 2001–2003: Survey of Income and Program Participation, 2004 Panel, Wave 2.
women and 47 percent of Hispanic

women.20

A mother’s educational level is also

associated with the probability that

she worked during her first pregnancy. Table 2 shows that for new

mothers in 2001–2003, those with

a bachelor’s degree or higher were

more likely to have worked during

pregnancy (82 percent) than

women with less education (30

U.S. Census Bureau 5

20 The proportion of women who worked

during pregnancy is not statistically different

between Asian women, Black women, and

Hispanic women.

percent to 75 percent of women in working life before their first birth

other educational categories). than mothers who had their first

birth at younger ages. This finding Figure 1 shows how educational may reflect a decision to postpone attainment and age at first birth pregnancy in order to gain more are related to the likelihood of work experience, regardless of working during pregnancy. At their level of education. every level of educational attainment, women 25 or older at the Women who had their first child

time of their first birth had higher before their first marriage rather

rates of working during pregnancy than within or after their first marthan younger first-time mothers. riage were less likely to have

Women who became mothers later worked during pregnancy (53 perin life were more likely to have cent, 75 percent, and 84 percent,

worked at some time prior to their respectively). This difference by

first birth, probably because they marital status in terms of employhad more years of potential ment during pregnancy has been

Table 2.

Work History of Women During Pregnancy Preceding First Birth by Selected

Characteristics: 2001–2003

Characteristic Number of women

with a first birth

(thousands)

Percent who worked

during pregnancy

Among women who worked while pregnant,

percent who were working—

Less than 3 months

before child’s birth

Less than 1 month

before child’s birth1

Total . . . . . . . . . ....... 4,905 67.0 87.1 64.0

Age at First Birth

Less than 18 years . . . . . . . . . 361 29.6 82.2 56.1

18 and 19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . 663 42.2 77.9 63.2

20 and 21 years . . . . . . . . . . . . 619 61.4 85.0 68.2

22 to 24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 743 66.8 82.5 51.0

25 to 29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,259 75.9 87.9 66.0

30 years and over . . . . . . . . . . 1,260 84.8 92.2 67.7

Race and Hispanic Origin

White alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,818 69.6 88.2 64.6

Non-Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,924 76.7 88.4 65.5

Black alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 625 55.5 77.2 63.4

Asian alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 57.9 91.4 60.5

Hispanic (any race) . . . . . . . . . 942 47.0 86.5 60.7

Timing of First Birth2

Before first marriage . . . . . . . . 1,896 53.3 82.8 59.6

Within first marriage . . . . . . . . . 2,766 74.9 89.2 65.5

After first marriage . . . . . . . . . . 243 84.4 87.3 69.8

Educational Attainment

Less than high school . . . . . . . 692 29.9 81.6 57.5

High school graduate . . . . . . . 1,194 59.1 82.4 61.3

Some college . . . . . . . . ...... 1,534 75.1 86.8 63.5

Bachelor’s degree or higher . . 1,485 82.2 91.1 67.1

1 Includes women who responded that they never stopped working during their pregnancy. 2 Refers to marital status at time of first birth. Before first marriage includes never-married women. After first marriage includes first births outside marriage

or within second or subsequent marriages.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation, 2004 Panel, Wave 2.
consistently noted since

1966–1970.21 Women who have

their first child prior to marriage

are generally younger, more likely

to be a minority race or Hispanic,

and to have lower levels of education. All of these factors are related

to lower levels of employment during pregnancy.22 Women who have

their first birth during or after their

first marriage are more likely to be

older and already in the labor force

at the time they become pregnant. 

Duration of Work During

Pregnancy

Among all first-time mothers who

worked while pregnant, 87 percent

worked into their last trimester (less

than 3 months before their child’s

birth, Table 2) while 64 percent

worked into their last month of

pregnancy. Older mothers were

more likely than younger mothers

to work closer to the end of their

pregnancies. Eighty-nine percent of

mothers 22 and older worked into

the last 3 months of their pregnancy, compared with 82 percent of

mothers less than 22 years of age. 

In the early 1960s, high school

dropouts worked longer into their

pregnancy.23 During the 1980s, a

larger proportion of collegeeducated women began to work

into the last trimester of their pregnancy than women with less than a

high school education.24

6 U.S. Census Bureau

21 Kristin Smith, Barbara Downs, and

Martin O’Connell. “Maternity Leave and

Employment Patterns: 1961–1995,” Current

Population Reports, P70-79, U.S. Census

Bureau, Washington, DC, 2001. O’Connell,

op. cit., pp. 14–15. 22 Smith, Downs, and O’Connell, op cit.,

Tables C and E. These differences by marital

status were also found to persist in being

related to employment levels in a multivariate analysis controlling for many socioeconomic factors. 23 O’Connell, op. cit., pp. 16–17. 24 Smith, Downs, and O’Connell, op cit.,

pp. 7–9.

By 2001–2003, 91 percent of 13 percent of those who worked

college graduates who worked dur- during pregnancy reported they

ing their pregnancy were employed stopped working during their first

into their last trimester, compared trimester (6 or more months

with 82 percent of women who had before the birth), while 35 percent

not graduated from high school. worked one month or less before

their child’s birth. By 1986–1990, Black women were less likely than the percentage of women who left other women to work during their work in their first trimester had last trimester of pregnancy. declined to 5 percent, while the Seventy-seven percent of Black proportion working 1 month or mothers-to-be worked during their less before their child’s birth more last trimester of pregnancy, not than doubled to 76 percent. During statistically significant different 1991–1995, 7 percent of women from Hispanics (87 percent) but left work in their first trimester, statistically less than that of non- compared with 4 percent by the Hispanic Whites (88 percent) and 2001–2003 birth cohort. However, Asians (91 percent). the proportion working 1 month or

Table 3 shows how late into preg- less before their child’s birth

nancy first-time mothers have increased from 73 percent in

worked since 1961. For the 1991–1995 to 80 percent in

1961–1965 first-birth cohort, 2001–2003. 

Figure 1.

Percent of Women Who Worked During Pregnancy 

Preceding First Birth by Age at First Birth and 

Educational Attainment: 2001–2003

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation, 2004 Panel, 

Wave 2.

Bachelor's 

degree or higher 

All ages Under 25 25 and over

Less than 

high school 

High school 

graduate 

Some 

college 

Age at first birth

84

30

59

75

82

27

55

68

65

47

70

83
The proportion of women who

worked full-time during their pregnancy, according to when they

stopped working, is highlighted in

Table 4. In the 1960s, 90 percent

of women who worked during

pregnancy worked full-time. By the

2001–2003 first-birth cohort, the

percentage of working women who

worked full-time during pregnancy

declined to 85 percent.25 By

2001–2003, 70 percent of women

who worked only in their first

U.S. Census Bureau 7

25 Bureau of Labor Statistics’ data show

that the percentage of employed workers

working full-time decreased from the 1970s

to the mid-1980s and then began to rise. See

trimester had full-time jobs, compared with 88 percent of women

who were still working 1 month or

less before their child’s birth. 

Women in the Labor Force: A Data Book,

Report 985, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,

2005, Table 20, <www.bls.gov/cps

/wlf-databook-2005.pdf>.

Table 3.

Women Who Worked During Pregnancy Preceding First Birth by When They Stopped

Working: 1961–1965 to 2001–2003

(Numbers in thousands)

Characteristic 1961–

1965

1966–

1970

1971–

1975

1976–

1980

1981–

1985

1986–

1990

1991–

1995

1996–

2000

2001–

2003

Number of women with a first birth . . . . . . .

Number of women who worked during

6,306 6,956 6,920 7,192 8,129 8,568 8,599 8,558 4,905

pregnancy . . . ........................

Percent Distribution of Women by

Number of Months Before First

Birth They Stopped Working1

2,797 3,435 3,700 4,414 5,239 5,758 5,740 5,749 3,287

Total . . . . . . . . . ................ 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

1 month or less2 ...................... 34.6 39.1 43.1 58.9 64.7 75.7 72.9 76.6 79.7

2 months . . . . ........................ 17.1 18.3 20.9 14.7 13.0 9.1 9.0 8.1 7.4

3 to 5 months . . . . . . . ................. 35.4 28.4 22.9 18.6 13.5 10.0 11.0 7.9 8.6

6 or more months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.9 13.9 13.1 7.7 8.7 5.2 7.1 7.3 4.3

1 Among women who worked during pregnancy. 2 Includes women who responded that they never stopped working during their pregnancy.

Source: 1961–1965 to 1981–1985: Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-23, No. 165 (Work and Family Patterns of American

Women) Tables B-3 and B-6; 1986–1990 to 1991–1995: P70-79 (Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961–1995), Table D; 1996–2000: P70-103 (Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961–2000), Table 3; and 2001–2003: Survey of Income and Program Participation, 2004 Panel, Wave 2.

Table 4.

Women Who Worked Full-Time During Pregnancy Preceding First Birth by When They

Stopped Working: 1961–1965 to 2001–2003

(Numbers in thousands)

Characteristic 1961–

1965

1966–

1970

1971–

1975

1976–

1980

1981–

1985

1986–

1990

1991–

1995

1996–

2000

2001–

2003

Number of women with a first birth . . . . . . .

Number of women who worked during

6,306 6,956 6,920 7,192 8,129 8,568 8,599 8,558 4,905

pregnancy . . . ........................ 2,797 3,435 3,700 4,414 5,239 5,758 5,740 5,749 3,287

Worked full-time (number)1 . . . . . . . . . . . 2,502 3,074 3,291 3,821 4,387 4,992 4,690 4,846 2,802

Worked full-time (percent)2 . . . . . . . . . . . .

Percent Working Full-Time Among

Women Who Stopped Working at

Each Time Interval

89.5 89.5 88.9 86.6 83.7 86.7 81.7 84.3 85.2

1 month or less3 .................... 89.5 91.7 90.5 89.7 87.1 90.0 86.1 86.8 87.5

2 months . . . ....................... 86.2 90.0 93.7 84.5 76.7 82.1 71.2 84.4 78.6

3 to 5 months . . . . . . . . . ............. 91.8 88.5 86.9 79.8 76.6 73.4 66.2 74.0 77.8

6 or more months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87.5 85.1 80.0 83.2 80.7 72.0 72.4 68.3 69.7

1 Full-time employment status refers to last job held before birth of first child. 2 Among women who worked during pregnancy. 3 Includes women who responded that they never stopped working during their pregnancy.

Source: 1961–1965 to 1981–1985: Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-23, No. 165 (Work and Family Patterns of American

Women), Tables B-3 and B-6; 1986–1990 to 1991–1995: P70-79 (Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961–1995), Table D; 1996–2000: P70-103

(Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961–2000), Table 4; and 2001–2003: Survey of Income and Program Participation, 2004 Panel, Wave 2.
MATERNITY LEAVE

ARRANGEMENTS

This section first provides an

overview of the changes in maternity leave arrangements since

1980, when comparable questions

on types of leave arrangements

were first asked on SIPP panels.

The report highlights differences in

leave arrangements women use

before and after the birth of their

first child. It concludes with a look

at how the use of various categories of leave differs according to

selected characteristics of women.

Changes in Leave

Arrangements Since the 1980s 

Types of leave used by first-time

mothers include paid leave,

unpaid leave, and disability. Other

circumstances that lead to time

away from a job include quitting a

job, being let go from a job, and

having an employer go out of

business. They are included as

types of leave arrangements in

this report. Some women use only

one type of leave while others

may combine several types. 

Table 5 shows the changes over

the past 20 years in the type of

leave arrangements used by

women who worked during their

pregnancy. A drop in the proportion quitting their jobs was noted

between the 1981–1985 first-birth

cohort and the subsequent

1986–1990 first-birth cohort from

36 percent to 27 percent. No statistically significant change in the

proportion quitting their job

occurred in the following periods.

Conversely, the percentage of

mothers who took paid leave

(including paid maternity, sick,

vacation leave, and all other paid

leave) increased from 37 percent in

1981–1985 to 43 percent in

1986–1990, remaining at that level

until 2001–2003, when 49 percent

received paid leave. Employers

may offer paid maternity leave as a

job benefit when they weigh the

costs of finding and training a new

employee against a short leave of

absence.26

For all of the first-birth cohorts,

less than 5 percent of women

reported being let go from their

job while pregnant or within 12

weeks after giving birth. Disability

leave usage over the past two

decades appears to have reached a

high point in 1991–1995 at 11

percent. Unpaid maternity leave

usage increased from 34 percent

to 41 percent during the 1980s,

and further increased to 45 percent by 1996–2000. An apparent 

8 U.S. Census Bureau

26 A Workable Balance: Report to

Congress on Family and Medical Leave

Policies, U.S. Department of Labor,

Commission on Family and Medical Leave,

Washington, DC, 1996.

6 percentage-point decline in

unpaid maternity leave usage

occurred by 2001–2003, coincidental with the increase in the percentage of women receiving some

type of paid maternity leave.

Leave Arrangements Before

and After the First Birth

Table 6 provides a detailed picture

of leave arrangements—both

before and after their child’s

birth—used by employed women

who had their first birth between

2001 and 2003. Women were

allowed to identify more than one

type of leave arrangement. One in

four women quit their job around

the time of the birth of their child

(25 percent). Seventeen percent of

women quit their job before the

birth of their child, compared with

8 percent who quit after the birth

of their child. 

MATERNITY LEAVE ARRANGEMENTS

In the 1996, 2001, and 2004 Survey of Income and Program

Participation panels, two separate questions on leave arrangements

were asked of every woman who worked during pregnancy. The first

question concerned arrangements used between the time she

stopped working and when the child was born, while the second

question asked about the arrangements used between the child’s

birth and up to 12 weeks after the child was born. The 1984 and

1985 SIPP panels asked only one question about arrangements used

at any time during pregnancy or up to 6 weeks after the child was

born. If a woman said she had never stopped working during pregnancy, no other leave arrangements were tabulated.

In the 1996, 2001, and 2004 panels, questions about leave arrangements used after the child was born were asked of all women,

including those who reported that they had never stopped working

before the child’s birth. This change from the earlier SIPP panels complicates any comparisons with leave arrangements used by women

prior to 1980. Maternity leave arrangement data for the 1980s were

obtained from the 1996 panel that asked these questions of women

who had a first birth since 1980. Beginning in the 1996 panel, “disability leave” was included as a separate response. Women may have

conceptually included it in either the paid or the unpaid leave categories in the prior SIPP panels.
Both paid and unpaid leave (all return to work after having their unpaid maternity leave. Both of

types combined) were more likely child, many may work as long as these types of leave were more

to be used after the child’s birth possible into their pregnancy in likely to be used after birth than

(43 percent and 34 percent, order to have more leave available before. Whether it was used during

respectively) than during preg- to use once their child is born. pregnancy or after giving birth,

nancy (22 percent and 16 percent, sick leave and vacation leave were Overall, 39 percent of women respectively). These findings sug- more likely to be paid than unpaid. received paid maternity leave and gest that for women who plan to 29 percent of women received

U.S. Census Bureau 9

Table 5.

Leave Arrangements Used by Women Who Worked During Pregnancy Preceding First

Birth: 1981–1985 to 2001–2003

Year of first birth

Number of

women who

worked during

pregnancy

(thousands)

Percent of women using type of specified leave arrangement1

Quit job 2 Paid leave 3 Unpaid leave Disability leave Let go from job

1981–1985 . . . . . . . . . . . . .......

1986–1990 . . . . . . . . . . . . .......

1991–1995 . . . . . . . . . . . . .......

1996–2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . .......

2001–2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . .......

5,147

5,758

5,740

5,749

3,287

35.7

26.5

26.9

25.6

25.3

37.3

43.3

42.7

42.0

49.1

33.7

41.0

40.3

45.0

39.1

6.3

7.5

11.2

6.9

8.5

3.5

2.3

4.2

2.2

3.8

1 The total in individual leave arrangements exceeds 100 percent because of multiple answers. Leave arrangements may have been used before, or up to,

12 weeks after the birth. 2 Paid leave includes all paid maternity, sick, and vacation leave and other paid leave. 3 Unpaid leave includes all unpaid maternity, sick, and vacation leave and other unpaid leave.

Source: 1981–1985 to 1991–1995: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports, P70-79 (Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961-1995), Table

F; 1996–2000: P70-103 (Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961–2000), Table 5; and 2001–2003: Survey of Income and Program Participation, 2004

Panel, Wave 2.

Table 6.

Detailed Leave Arrangements Used by Women Who Worked During Pregnancy Preceding

First Birth: 2001–2003

Type of leave 1 Before or after birth Before birth After birth

Number of women who worked during

pregnancy (thousands) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,287 3,287 3,287

Percent Using Leave Arrangement2

Quit job . . . .................................. 25.3 16.9 8.4

Paid leave3 ................................. 49.1 22.0 43.4

Maternity leave . . . . . . ...................... 38.6 17.6 32.3

Sick leave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.7 3.4 6.7

Vacation leave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1 2.3 7.4

Other paid leave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.8 0.5 2.4

Unpaid leave4 ............................... 39.1 15.5 34.2

Maternity leave . . . . . . ...................... 28.5 10.6 24.8

Sick leave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4 1.2 3.7

Vacation leave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4 1.8 2.5

Other unpaid leave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 2.0 4.2

Disability leave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.5 3.6 6.2

Other leave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.5 4.2 5.6

Self-employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 0.5 1.0

Employer went out of business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.4 0.4 0.1

Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.0 3.3 4.6

Let go from job . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.8 2.9 3.0

1 Leave arrangements are only counted once if used before and after birth. 2 Total in individual leave arrangements exceeds the percent who took leave because of multiple answers. 3 Paid leave includes all paid maternity, sick, and vacation leave and other paid leave. 4 Unpaid leave includes all unpaid maternity, sick, and vacation leave and other unpaid leave.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation, 2004 Panel, Wave 2.
Another leave-taking strategy that

women use is to combine different

types of leave. Figure 2 shows the

percentage of women who worked

during pregnancy who used paid

leave only, used unpaid leave only,

quit their job only, and used multiple types of leave. These data are

shown separately for the time during pregnancy, up to 12 weeks

after giving birth, and the combined periods. While 5 percent

used more than one leave arrangement before birth and 12 percent

used more than one type after

birth, 32 percent of women used

multiple leave arrangements in the

combined periods of pregnancy

and up to 12 weeks after giving

birth (different arrangements

before and after their child’s birth). 

Using only paid leave was more

common for women after giving

birth than before (33 percent and

18 percent, respectively). The proportion of women who used only

unpaid leave after the birth was

almost twice as high as the proportion who used only unpaid leave

before birth (24 percent and 13 percent, respectively). Among women

who identified quitting their job as

their only leave arrangement, 16

percent quit their job while they

were pregnant while 7 percent quit

their job after giving birth. 

Use of Different 

Leave Arrangements

This section examines the types of

leave arrangements used by

women—either before or after their

child’s birth—by various social and

demographic characteristics.

Among first-time mothers in

2001–2003, younger women were

more likely than women who had

their first child at a later age to

quit their jobs (Table 7). Forty-one

percent of women who had their

first birth as a teenager quit their

jobs, compared with 20 percent of

women who had their first child at were more likely to receive paidage 25 or older. The proportion of leave benefits (54 percent) than

women using paid leave for their those who left work 6 months or

first birth generally increased with more prior to their first birth (23

age, from 27 percent of women percent). A small proportion of

under age 22 at their first birth to women who worked until their last

59 percent of those 25 and older. month of pregnancy were let go

Older women, who have more from their job (2 percent). 

years of labor force experience

Increasing levels of education go than younger women, may benefit

hand-in-hand with increases in the from this experience by receiving

more paid benefits. use of paid-leave benefits. Sixty

percent of women with a bacheEmployment characteristics of last lor’s degree or more used paid

job held during pregnancy are also leave, compared with 22 percent

associated with the type of leave of women who had less than a

arrangements women use for the high school education. The use of

birth of their first child. Full-time unpaid maternity leave did not difworkers were more likely to use fer statistically between women

paid-leave benefits than part-time who had less than a high school

workers (55 percent and 17 per- education and those with a bachecent, respectively), while part-time lor’s degree or more. Almost twice

workers were more likely to quit as many women who had less than

their jobs than were full-time work- a high school education quit their

ers (43 percent and 22 percent, jobs as did women who had a

respectively). Women who worked bachelor’s degree or more (37 perinto the last month of pregnancy cent and 19 percent, respectively). 

10 U.S. Census Bureau

Figure 2.

Percent of Women Using Selected Leave Arrangements

and Multiple Arrangements Before or After 

Their First Birth: 2001–2003 

Note: Multiple types of leave used “Before or after birth” include using more than one type 

before birth only, after birth only, and using a different type before birth than after birth. 

Paid leave includes all paid maternity, sick, and vacation leave and other paid leave. 

Unpaid leave includes all unpaid maternity, sick, and vacation leave and other unpaid leave.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation, 2004 Panel Wave 2.

Quit only 

Before birth After birth Before or after birth

Multiple types Paid only Unpaid only 

(Among women who worked during pregnancy)

5

18

13

16

12

33

24

7

32

27

19

14
In the early 1960s, the use of paid 1980s (Figure 3). The percentage between 2001 and 2003. The use

maternity leave for a first birth did of women with a bachelor’s degree of paid leave by mothers with less

not differ statistically by educa- or more who received paid leave than a high school degree was 22

tional level. The relationship increased from 27 percent for the percent in 2001–2003, not statistibetween educational attainment 1971–1975 first-birth cohort to 59 cally different from the levels in

and use of paid leave began to percent for those with a first birth prior first-birth cohorts shown in

appear in the early 1970s and between 1981–1985 and remained Figure 3. 

became pronounced by the early at 60 percent of new mothers

U.S. Census Bureau 11

Table 7.

Type of Leave Arrangements Used Before or After Birth by Women Who Worked During

Pregnancy Preceding Their First Birth by Selected Characteristics: 2001–2003

Characteristic

Number of

women who

worked during

pregnancy

(thousands)

Percent of women using specified leave arrangement

Quit job 1 Paid leave

Unpaid

leave2

Disability

leave

Let go

from job

Total . . . . . . . . . .................

Employment Status at Last Job

3,287 25.3 49.1 39.1 8.5 3.8

Full-time . . . .......................... 2,802 22.2 54.7 37.8 9.0 3.5

Part-time . . . ..........................

Month Stopped Working Before Birth

486 42.6 16.7 46.1 5.3 6.0

1 month or less3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,620 18.5 53.7 41.3 9.1 1.6

2 months . . . . ......................... 243 39.1 43.2 42.8 8.2 2.9

3 to 5 months . . . ...................... 284 56.0 24.6 19.7 5.6 22.5

6 or more months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Age at First Birth

140 65.0 22.9 29.3 2.1 8.6

Less than 18 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 49.5 9.3 51.4 5.6 4.7

18 and 19 years . . . . . . . . .............. 280 37.9 26.4 46.1 2.5 5.7

20 and 21 years . . . . . . . . .............. 380 29.5 33.2 41.8 6.8 3.7

22 to 24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496 31.7 40.7 38.9 7.9 5.6

25 to 29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 19.0 56.0 38.4 7.1 4.4

30 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Race and Hispanic Origin

1,069 20.8 62.3 35.6 12.4 2.0

White alone . . . ....................... 2,658 25.4 48.9 39.2 8.2 4.4

Non-Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . ............. 2,244 24.7 50.1 39.5 8.5 4.1

Black alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347 23.6 49.6 40.6 5.5 2.6

Asian alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 21.0 56.8 35.8 17.9 –

Hispanic (any race) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Timing of First Birth4

443 27.5 42.4 38.1 7.0 5.9

Before first marriage . . . . . . . . ........... 1,011 30.8 35.9 43.2 5.8 6.5

Within first marriage . . . . . . . . ........... 2,071 23.3 54.5 37.7 10.2 2.2

After first marriage . . . . . . . . ............

Educational Attainment

205 18.0 59.0 32.7 4.4 6.8

Less than high school . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 37.2 21.7 45.9 1.4 8.2

High school graduate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 706 31.4 39.1 38.2 7.6 4.4

Some college . . ....................... 1,152 26.3 48.5 41.3 7.6 4.0

Bachelor’s degree or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,221 18.8 60.0 36.4 10.9 2.6

– Represents zero or rounds to zero.

1 Paid leave includes all paid maternity, sick, and vacation leave and other paid leave. 2 Unpaid leave includes all unpaid maternity, sick, and vacation leave and other unpaid leave. 3 Includes women who responded that they never stopped working during their pregnancy. 4 Refers to marital status at time of first birth. Before first marriage includes never-married women. After first marriage includes first births outside or within

second or subsequent marriages.

Note: The total in individual leave arrangements exceeds 100 percent because of multiple answers. Leave arrangements may have been used before or up

to 12 weeks after the birth.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation, 2004 Panel, Wave 2.
In summary, many changes have employer after birth is related to

occurred in mothers’ employment changes in job characteristics.

during and after pregnancy since

the 1960s. Women are now work- Trends Since the 1960s

ing longer into their pregnancy. Figure 4 shows the monthly Paid benefits are more likely to be employment paths of women dur- received by more educated ing their first pregnancy and for the women, those who work at full- first 12 months after their child’s time jobs, and those who work birth. Clearly, women in the most very close to their child’s birth. recent first-birth cohort of 2000–

WORKING AFTER THE 2002 worked longer into their pregFIRST BIRTH nancy and started working after

childbirth sooner than their counterThis section looks at how rapidly parts in the early 1960s. As shown women begin working after the in Figure 4, most of the increases in birth of their first child. Overall the percentage of women working trends since the 1960s will be later into their pregnancy and work- examined. Also, recent data from ing after their first birth came about the 2004 SIPP panel are analyzed by the early 1980s. to determine the characteristics of

women who start working most This trend is also evident in 

rapidly and whether changing Table 8, which shows the monthly

cumulative percentage of women

working after the birth of their first

child. In the early 1960s, 14 percent of all mothers with newborns

were working by the sixth month,

increasing to 17 percent by the

twelfth month. These percentages

more than doubled by 1976–1980,

with further increases occurring by

1986–1990. By 2000–2002, 55

percent of mothers were working

by the sixth month after their

child’s birth and 64 percent by the

twelfth month, not statistically different from the proportions

recorded for 1986–1990.27

12 U.S. Census Bureau

27 The time period of analysis for working

after a first birth is restricted to those who

gave birth by 2002 because some who gave

birth in 2003 did not have one full year of

employment data by the time of the interview in 2004.

Figure 3.

Percent of Women Who Received Paid Leave Before or After Their First Birth by 

Educational Attainment: Selected Years, 1961–1965 to 2001–2003

Note: Paid leave includes all paid maternity, sick, and vacation leave and other paid leave used before the birth and up to 12 weeks after the birth. 

Source: 1961–1965 to 1971–1975: Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P23-165 (Work and Family Patterns of American 

Women), Table B-9; 1981–1985 to1991–1995: P70-79 (Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961-1995), Figure 4; and 2001–2003: 

Survey of Income and Program Participation, 2004 Panel, Wave 2.

1961-1965 1971-1975 1981-1985 1991-1995 2001-2003

Less than high school High school graduate Some college Bachelor's degree or higher

60

19 18 20 18

22

16 16

14

22

26 27

43

49

59

29

40

63

39

49
Not all women begin working at

the same interval after their child’s

birth. Table 8 shows the relationship between work experience during pregnancy and the rate at

which women work in the first

year after giving birth for the periods 1961–1965 to 2000–2002.

Among women who worked during

their pregnancy, 17 percent of

women in the 1961–1965 firstbirth cohort returned to work 3

months after their child’s birth.

Twenty years later, this percentage

increased to 46 percent for the

1981–1984 first-birth cohort and

to 58 percent for the 2000–2002

first-birth cohort. Women who did

not work during their first pregnancy have considerably lower percentages working at this 3-month

interval: 5 percent (1961–1965),

10 percent (1981–1984), and 12

percent (2000–2002) for these

three first-birth cohorts.28 This suggests that a prior employeremployee relation is likely to be an

important determinant in employment after a woman’s first birth.

Characteristics of Mothers 

To examine the characteristics of

women by when they returned to

work, data are shown in Table 9 in

two ways: for all mothers and for

mothers who worked during pregnancy. This latter group, women

who worked during pregnancy, is

used to control for the negative

effect of job-search costs on the

U.S. Census Bureau 13

28 There is no statistical difference among

women who did not work during their first

pregnancy between the 1981–1984 and

2000–2002 birth cohorts.

likelihood of securing work for

those not being employed during

pregnancy. Characteristics are

shown by time intervals of when

mothers started working after the

child’s birth—less than 3 months, 3

to 5 months, or 6 to 11 months

after the child’s birth. To complete

the distribution, proportions are

also shown for women who were

not working within the first year

after their child’s birth.29

29 The June 2002 Current Population

Survey found that 59.8 percent of women

who had their first birth in the year prior to

the survey were in the labor force at the time

of the interview. (See Jane Lawler Dye,

Fertility of American Women: June 2004,

Current Population Reports, P20-555, U.S.

Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 2005, 

Table 4.) The SIPP for the period 2000–2002

shows that 62.6 percent of women who had a

birth in this period had ever worked within 12

months of their child’s birth (Table 9).

Figure 4.

Percent of Women Working During Pregnancy and Percent Working 

After Their First Birth by Month Before or After Birth: Selected Years,

1961–1965 to 2000–2002

Source: 1961–1965 to 1981–1984: Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-23, No. 165 (Work and Family Patterns of 

American Women), Table B-5; 1991–1994: P70-79 (Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961–1995), Figure 7; and 2000–2002: Survey 

of Income and Program Participation, 2004 Panel, Wave 2.

Cumulative percent

Months before birth Months after birth

Working during pregnancy Working after birth

2000–2002

1961–1965

1971–1975

1981–1984

1991–1994 1991–1994

2000–2002

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1 month

or less

6789 5 234 1 month 432 5 9876 121110

or less

1961–1965

1971–1975

1981–1984
Some women may be motivated to

maintain ties to the labor force

because of career goals or because

their jobs offer attractive leave

benefits and do not penalize them

for choosing to become mothers.

They may also feel they have too

much invested in their careers in

terms of education, training, and

wages to leave the labor force.30

Previous research has shown that

in the 1960s and 1970s, those

who were most economically in

need of and dependent on their

own earnings (teenagers, Black

14 U.S. Census Bureau

30 Sonalde Desai and Linda Waite,

“Women’s Employment During Pregnancy and

After the First Birth: Occupational

Characteristics and Work Commitment,”

American Sociological Review, Vol. 56, 1991,

pp. 551–556.

women, and women with premarital first births) returned to work

the most rapidly.31

Table 9 shows that for 2000–2002,

older first-time mothers were more

likely to work in the first few

months after giving birth than

younger first-time mothers.

Twenty-eight percent of mothers

30 or older were working within 3

months, compared with 15 percent

of mothers less than 18 years old.

Most of these women were old

enough to have completed high

school or college and were potentially old enough to have had some

work experience prior to the 

child’s birth. 

31 O’Connell, op. cit., pp. 23–25.

In terms of education, women with

a high school degree, some college, or a bachelor’s degree or

more were more likely to work in

the first 3 months after their child’s

birth (30 percent or more) than

women with less than a high

school degree (14 percent). Women

with less than a high school

degree were most likely not to

work at all in the year after their

first child’s birth (62 percent). A

larger percentage of non-Hispanic

White women than Hispanic

women were working within 3

months after childbirth (34 percent

compared with 25 percent) and a

smaller percentage did not work in

the first year (33 percent and 52

percent, respectively). 

Table 8.

Women Working at Monthly Intervals After First Birth by Year of First Birth: 1961–1965 to

2000–2002

Characteristic 1961–

1965

1966–

1970

1971–

1975

1976–

1980

1981–

1984

1986–

1990

1991–

1994

1996–

1999

2000–

2002

Women With a First Birth

Number of women (thousands) . . 6,306 6,956 6,920 7,192 6,671 8,568 6,995 6,918 5,077

Percent . . . . ...................

Cumulative percent working after:

100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

3 months . . . . ................ 9.9 12.7 15.6 22.4 32.9 41.6 40.8 44.7 42.4

6 months . . . . ................ 13.7 18.3 21.9 32.2 43.5 52.9 52.3 57.2 55.0

12 months . . . ................

Women Who Worked During

Pregnancy

16.8 23.9 27.9 38.8 52.5 60.8 60.1 64.6 63.7

Number of women (thousands) . . 2,797 3,435 3,700 4,414 4,237 5,758 4,621 4,592 3,386

Percent . . . . ...................

Cumulative percent working after:

100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

3 months . . . . ................ 16.5 19.6 24.1 32.6 46.0 57.3 57.3 59.7 57.7

6 months . . . . ................ 21.4 26.7 32.1 45.4 59.3 70.6 70.4 74.8 72.4

12 months . . . ................

Women Who Did Not Work

During Pregnancy

25.8 32.7 38.8 52.6 69.7 78.6 77.7 81.5 79.4

Number of women (thousands) . . 3,509 3,522 3,221 2,778 2,434 2,810 2,374 2,327 1,691

Percent . . . . ...................

Cumulative percent working after:

100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

3 months . . . . ................ 4.6 6.0 5.9 6.3 9.9 9.4 8.7 15.1 11.8

6 months . . . . ................ 7.5 10.2 10.1 11.1 16.2 16.6 17.3 22.5 20.1

12 months . . . ................ 9.6 15.3 15.3 16.8 22.5 24.3 25.8 31.2 32.2

Note: 2000–2002 estimates are used for the most recent birth cohort to allow for at least 1 year of post-birth employment data. No data are available for

either the 1985 or 1995 birth cohort for the full calendar year to derive the work after birth proportion.

Source: 1961–1965 to 1981–1984: Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-23, No.165 (Work and Family Patterns of American

Women), Table B-5; 1986–1990 to 1991–1994: P70-79 (Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961–1995), Table I; 1996–1999: P70-103 (Maternity Leave

and Employment Patterns: 1961–2000), Table 8; and 2000–2002: Survey of Income and Program Participation, 2004 Panel, Wave 2.
U.S. Census Bureau 15

Table 9.

Women Working at Stated Time Intervals After First Birth by Selected Characteristics:

2000–2002

Women with a first birth who worked All women with a first birth during pregnancy

Started working after first birth Started working after first birth

Characteristic Did not Did not

work work

Total Less during Total Less during

(thou- than 3 3 to 5 6 to 11 first (thou- than 3 3 to 5 6 to 11 first 2 2 sands) months1 months months year sands) months1 months months year

Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,077 1,553 1,096 528 1,899 3,386 1,404 954 296 732

PERCENT DISTRIBUTION

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 30.6 21.6 10.4 37.4 100.0 41.5 28.2 8.7 21.6

Employment Status During

Pregnancy

Not employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,691 8.9 8.5 13.7 69.0 (X) (X) (X) (X) (X)

Full-time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,928 42.1 29.1 8.3 20.5 2,928 42.1 29.1 8.3 20.5

Part-time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458 37.1 22.3 11.8 29.0 458 37.1 22.3 11.8 29.0

Age at First Birth

Less than 18 years . . . . . . . . . . . 405 15.3 12.1 9.1 63.5 118 37.3 11.0 16.1 35.6

18 and 19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . 723 24.6 15.1 18.4 41.8 326 49.4 21.5 15.0 14.4

20 and 21 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . 699 36.9 19.0 13.3 30.6 441 53.1 22.4 10.0 14.3

22 to 24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 747 31.6 18.5 8.3 41.6 493 43.2 25.8 7.3 23.5

25 to 29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,275 37.3 22.7 7.2 32.7 978 43.8 28.7 6.9 20.8

30 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . 1,227 28.0 30.6 9.0 32.4 1,029 31.5 35.4 7.8 25.4

Race and Hispanic Origin

White alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,908 32.2 21.0 9.7 37.2 2,684 42.6 27.9 8.3 21.2

Non-Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,036 34.1 23.1 10.0 32.8 2,283 41.8 28.5 8.3 21.4

Black alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 679 26.1 25.0 16.5 32.4 384 38.5 33.1 9.9 18.2

Asian alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 21.2 24.2 5.4 49.2 167 29.9 27.5 8.4 34.1

Hispanic (any race) . . . . . . . . . . 941 25.3 13.8 9.0 51.9 442 46.6 23.3 9.5 20.6

Timing of First Birth3

Before first marriage . . . . . . . . . 2,016 28.7 17.4 14.7 39.2 1,084 46.2 23.5 11.6 18.7

Within first marriage . . . . . . . . . . 2,821 31.0 24.8 7.4 36.8 2,115 39.0 30.9 7.4 22.7

After first marriage . . . . . . . . . . . 240 41.7 19.2 8.8 30.0 186 41.9 24.2 7.5 25.8

Educational Attainment

Less than high school . . . . . . . . 677 13.6 13.7 10.9 61.7 208 37.5 25.0 11.1 26.4

High school graduate . . . . . . . . . 1,255 33.0 15.9 11.5 39.7 717 47.6 20.4 11.3 20.8

Some college . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,665 34.9 19.2 10.6 35.3 1,207 45.5 23.2 8.0 23.4

Bachelor’s degree or higher . . . 1,481 31.5 32.7 9.0 26.7 1,254 34.8 38.0 7.7 19.6

Month Stopped Working

Before Birth

1 month or less1 ............. (5

) (5) (5) (5) (5) 2,717 44.9 30.2 6.8 18.1

2 months . . . ................ (5

) (5) (5) (5) (5) 250 39.2 18.8 9.6 32.4

3 to 5 months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5

) (5) (5) (5) (5) 281 22.4 21.7 14.6 41.3

6 or more months . . . . . . . . . . . . (5

) (5) (5) (5) (5) 137 16.8 17.5 33.6 32.1

Type of Leave Arrangement

Used4

Quit job . . . .................. (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) 845 23.1 14.1 14.3 48.5

Paid leave . . . . . . . . . . ........ (5

) (5) (5) (5) (5) 1,717 42.2 33.4 8.0 16.3

Unpaid leave . . . . . . . . . ....... (5

) (5) (5) (5) (5) 1,312 46.6 33.9 8.5 10.8

Disability leave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5

) (5) (5) (5) (5) 239 33.1 43.5 5.0 18.8

Let go from job . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5

) (5) (5) (5) (5) 108 21.3 23.1 10.2 45.4

Other leave . . . . ............. (5

) (5) (5) (5) (5) 294 36.1 26.2 7.5 30.3

(X) Not applicable.

1 Includes women who responded that they never stopped working during their pregnancy or after their birth. 2 Includes women who were working after one year and those who never returned to work. 3 Refers to marital status at time of first birth. Before first marriage includes never-married women. After first marriage includes first births outside or within

second or subsequent marriages. 4 Leave arrangement may have been used before or after the birth. The total in individual leave arrangements exceed 100 percent because of multiple

answers. 5 Only applicable for women who worked during pregnancy.

Note: 2000–2002 estimates are used for the most recent birth cohort to allow for at least one year of post-birth employment data.

Source: U S Census Bureau Survey of Income and Program Participation 2004 Panel Wave 2
The variations in the timing of

returning to work previously noted

diminish or disappear when only

women who worked during pregnancy are considered. For example,

among all mothers, 14 percent of

mothers with less than a high

school education were working

within 3 months of their child’s

birth, compared with 32 percent of

mothers with a bachelor’s degree

or more. Among mothers who

worked during pregnancy, there

was no statistically significant difference in the percentage returning

within 3 months between those

without a high school education

and those with a bachelor’s degree

or more (38 percent and 35 percent, respectively). 

About 25 percent of Hispanic mothers, regardless of their work status

during pregnancy, were working

less than 3 months after their

child’s birth, compared with 34 percent of non-Hispanic White mothers.

However, among those mothers

who worked during their pregnancy, the reverse relationship was

noted—47 percent of Hispanics and

42 percent of non-Hispanic Whites

were working within 3 months of

giving birth.32

For women who worked during

pregnancy, when they returned to

work after their child’s birth was

related to when they left work during their pregnancy. Women who

worked later into their pregnancy

were more likely to return to work

sooner than those who left work

earlier in their pregnancy. For example, 45 percent of women who

16 U.S. Census Bureau

32 The proportion of women who were

working less than 3 months after their child’s

birth was statistically different for Hispanic

women and non-Hispanic White women.

stopped working 1 month or less hours after having their first child

prior to their child’s birth were back for the 1991–1994 and 2000–2002

at work within 3 months of their birth cohorts. For both of these

birth. In comparison, 17 percent of first-birth cohorts, about 9 of 10

women who left 6 or more months women returning to their pre-birth

before their child’s birth went back employer earned around the same

to work within 3 months. pay and 98 percent were at the

same or higher job skill level as The type of leave arrangement before their birth. women used was also related to

when or if they returned to work in Compared with mothers who

the first year after having their returned to their pre-birth employchild. Women who said they quit a ers, a larger proportion of women

job around the time of their first who changed employers for their

birth were less likely to return to first job after childbirth experiwork in the first year of their enced change in at least one of

child’s birth—49 percent compared their job characteristics. For the

with 16 percent of women who 2000–2002 first-birth cohort, 22

used paid-leave arrangements. In percent of women who changed

contrast, women who used paid employers maintained consistency

leave at any time during their preg- in hours, pay, and skill level before

nancy or after their child’s birth and after the birth of their child,

were more likely to return to work compared with 71 percent of

women who had the same less than 3 months after their

employer. Fifty-three percent of child’s birth (42 percent) than were

women who quit their jobs around new mothers in 2000–2002 who

changed employers worked the the time of their first child’s birth

same number of hours after the (23 percent). Women who quit their

child’s birth, compared with 42 job during pregnancy or after their percent in the 1991–1994 cohort. child’s birth would likely have to

expend job-search time to find For women who had their first child

new employment before they could between 2000 and 2002, those who

go back to work. switched employers were more

likely to have a change in salary. Job Characteristics Thirty-one percent of women who Before and After Birth changed employers, compared with

For the 2000–2002 cohort of first 91 percent of women who returned

births, 83 percent of the women to the same employer, had jobs at

who worked during their preg- the same pay level. Some women

nancy and who returned to work may have switched employers with

within 12 months of their child’s better compensation in mind, as 35

birth returned to their pre-birth percent of those who switched

employer (Table 10). Seventy-eight received higher pay, compared with

percent of those who returned to 7 percent of women who stayed

their pre-birth employer experi- with the same employer. However,

enced no change in the number of 34 percent took jobs with different

hours they worked per week, employers at a lower pay level,

about the same as in 1991–1994. compared with 2 percent who

About 1 of 5 women worked fewer returned to the same employer.
In the 2000–2002 first-birth who switched employers. Twenty- took jobs with a new employer

cohort, 95 percent of women three percent of women who took a job at a lower skill level

returning to their pre-birth changed employers took jobs at a than they held during pregnancy

employer worked at a job requiring higher skill level compared with 3 (22 percent) than did women who

the same level of skill as before percent of women who returned to returned to the same employer 

the birth of their first child com- the same employer. However, a (2 percent).

pared with 56 percent of women larger proportion of those who

U.S. Census Bureau 17

Table 10.

Job Characteristics of Women Who Worked During Pregnancy Preceding First Birth and

Returned to Work Within 12 Months After Birth: 1991–1994 to 2000–2002

Characteristic 1991–1994 1995–1999 2000–2002

Women who returned to work (thousands)1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,539 4,466 2,586

Returned to Pre-Birth Employer

Number of women (thousands) . . . . . . . . ......................... 2,750 3,388 2,146

Percent (among women returning to work) . . . . . . . . . .............. 77.7 75.9 83.0

Percent Among Women Returning to Pre-Birth Employer

Number of hours worked after first birth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0

More than before first birth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.8 2.7 1.9

Same as before first birth . . . . . . . . ............................. 77.2 77.6 78.4

Fewer than before first birth . . . . . . . . ........................... 20.0 19.7 19.8

Pay level after first birth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 100.0 100.0 100.0

Higher than before first birth . . . . . . . . .......................... 7.5 7.9 7.0

Same as before first birth . . . . . . . . ............................. 88.3 89.0 91.1

Lower than before first birth . . . . . . . . ........................... 4.1 3.1 1.8

Skill level after first birth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 100.0 100.0 100.0

Higher than before first birth . . . . . . . . .......................... 5.6 3.6 3.0

Same as before first birth . . . . . . . . ............................. 92.6 94.1 95.3

Lower than before first birth . . . . . . . . ........................... 1.8 2.3 1.7

Hours, pay, and skill level all the same as before . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69.1 70.5 71.1

Different Employer After First Birth

Number of women (thousands) . . . . . . . . ......................... 790 1,078 440

Percent (among women returning to work) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 22.3 24.1 17.0

Percent Among Women Returning to Different Employer

Number of hours worked after first birth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0

More than before first birth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22.7 19.6 13.6

Same as before first birth . . . . . . . . ............................. 41.6 47.7 53.4

Fewer than before first birth . . . . . . . . ........................... 35.8 32.7 33.2

Pay level after first birth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 100.0 100.0 100.0

Higher than before first birth . . . . . . . . .......................... 38.0 34.0 35.2

Same as before first birth . . . . . . . . ............................. 34.7 41.4 30.9

Lower than before first birth . . . . . . . . ........................... 27.3 24.7 34.1

Skill level after first birth . . . . . . . . ............................... 100.0 100.0 100.0

Higher than before first birth . . . . . . . . .......................... 24.8 28.0 22.7

Same as before first birth . . . . . . . . ............................. 53.9 53.1 55.7

Lower than before first birth . . . . . . . . ........................... 21.2 18.9 21.6

Hours, pay, and skill level all the same as before . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.0 21.3 22.3

1

Excludes self-employed women and women whose pre-birth employer went out of business.

Note: 2000–2002 estimates are used for the most recent birth cohort to allow for at least 1 year of post-birth employment data.

Source: 1991–1994: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports, P70-79 (Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns: 1961–1995), Table K;

1995–1999: Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), 2001 Panel, Wave 2; and 2000–2002: SIPP, 2004 Panel, Wave 2.
CONCLUSIONS SOURCE OF THE DATA The institutionalized population,

which is excluded from the popu- Since the 1960s, women have The population represented (the lation universe, is composed pri- experienced gains in education population universe) in the 1984, marily of the population in correc- beyond the high school years and 1985, 1996, 2001, and 2004 panels tional institutions and nursing have continued to delay childbear- of the SIPP is the civilian noninsti- homes (91 percent of the 4.1 mil- ing to older ages. The work experi- tutionalized population living in the lion institutionalized population in ence of women both before and United States. The SIPP is a longitu- Census 2000). during the pregnancy preceding dinal survey conducted at 4-month

the birth of their first child has intervals. The employment history ACCURACY OF also increased. Women are more and maternity leave information THE ESTIMATES

likely to work both before and dur- were part of the Fertility History

ing their pregnancy than they were Statistics from surveys are subject topical module collected in the SIPP

30 to 40 years ago and are work- to sampling and nonsampling error. panels referenced below. The data

ing later into their pregnancy. All comparisons presented in this in this report were collected from

Sixty-four percent of women who report have taken sampling error June through September 2004

worked during their pregnancy in into account and are significant at (2004 Panel), June through

2001–2003 did so into the last the 90-percent confidence level September 2001 (2001 Panel),

month of their pregnancy. In addi- unless otherwise noted. This means August through November 1996

tion, more women are working the 90-percent confidence interval (1996 Panel), January through April

within a year of giving birth (64 for the difference between the esti- 1986 (1985 Panel), and January

percent in 2000–2002 compared mates being compared does not through March 1986 (1984 Panel).

with 39 percent in 1976–1980 and include zero. Nonsampling errors in The number of designated housing

17 percent in 1961–1965). surveys may be attributed to a vari- units in sample in Wave 1 was ety of sources, such as how the sur- 62,700 (2004 Panel), 50,500 (2001 One in four women quit their jobs vey was designed, how respondents Panel), 49,200 (1996 Panel), 17,800 before or shortly after the birth of interpret questions, how able and (1985 Panel), and 26,000 (1984 their child in 2001–2003. Paid willing respondents are to provide Panel). The number of eligible units leave benefits were received by 49 correct answers, and how accu- and the number interviewed in percent of pregnant workers in rately the answers are coded and Wave 1 were 51,400 and 43,700 for 2001–2003; 39 percent of preg- classified. To minimize these errors, the 2004 Panel; 40,500 and 35,000 nant workers received unpaid the Census Bureau employs quality for the 2001 Panel; 40,100 and leave; and 9 percent took disability control procedures throughout the 36,700 for the 1996 Panel; 14,400 leave. Data in this report also show production process including the and 13,400 for the 1985 Panel; and that 83 percent of mothers who overall design of surveys, the word- 20,900 and 19,900 for the 1984 returned to work within 12 months ing of questions, review of the work Panel. In Wave 2 of the 2004 Panel, of their child’s birth returned to of interviewers and coders, and sta- 40,600 interviews were obtained their same employer. Women who tistical review of reports. The SIPP from 44,100 eligible units. In Wave returned to their same employer weighting procedure uses ratio esti- 2 of the 2001 Panel, 28,100 inter- had a good chance of returning to mation, whereby sample estimates views were obtained from 30,500 a job with the same pay, skill level, are adjusted to independent esti- eligible units. In Wave 2 of the 1996 and hours. mates of the national population by Panel, 35,000 interviews were age, race, sex, and Hispanic origin. Overall, these findings indicate that obtained from 37,500 eligible units. This weighting partially corrects for women are staying longer at work, In Wave 4 of the 1985 Panel, bias due to undercoverage, but returning more rapidly after having 11,400 interviews were obtained biases may still be present when their first child, and, in general, from 13,500 eligible units. In Wave people who are missed by the choosing to incorporate work life 8 of the 1984 Panel, 11,100 inter- survey differ from those inter- with childbearing and childrearing views were obtained from 13,500

more than did women in the 1960s. viewed in ways other than age, eligible units. 

18 U.S. Census Bureau
U.S. Census Bureau 19

race, sex, and Hispanic origin. How <www.sipp.census.gov/sipp CONTACTS

this weighting procedure affects /workpapr/wp230.pdf> Maternity leave issues: other variables in the survey is not (SIPP Quality Profile), and Tallese D. Johnson precisely known. All of these con- <www.sipp.census.gov/sipp <tallese.d.johnson@census.gov> siderations affect comparisons /usrguide/sipp2001.pdf> 

across different surveys or (SIPP User’s Guide). USER COMMENTS

data sources.

MORE INFORMATION The Census Bureau welcomes the

For further information on the comments and advice of users of The report is available on the source of the data and accuracy of its data and reports. If you have Internet <www.census.gov> by the estimates, including standard any suggestions or comments, clicking on the letter “F” in the errors and confidence intervals, go please write to: “Subjects A to Z” section of the to <www.sipp.census.gov/sipp

Web page and selecting “Fertility of Chief, Housing and Household /sourceac/S&A2_SIPP2001_w1tow9

_20050214.pdf> or contact Charles American Women Data.” Scroll Economic Statistics Division

D. Sissel of the Census Bureau’s down to the maternity leave data U.S. Census Bureau

Demographic Statistical Methods section. Other research on mater- Washington, DC 20233

Division via e-mail at nity leave can be found in the fol- or send an e-mail inquiry to: lowing report: Kristin Smith and <charles.d.sissel@census.gov>. <hhes@census.gov>. Amara Bachu, Women’s Labor Force

Additional information on the SIPP, Attachment Patterns and Maternity

including questions on the topical SUGGESTED CITATION Leave: A Review of the Literature,

modules, can be found at the fol- Population Division Working Paper Johnson, Tallese D., 2007.

lowing Web sites: Series, No. 32, U.S. Census Bureau, Maternity Leave and Employment

<www.sipp.census.gov/sipp Washington, DC, 1999. This report Patterns: 2001–2003. Current

/sourceac/s&a96_040501.pdf>, is on the Internet on the Population Report, P70-113. U.S.

<www.sipp.census.gov/sipp/> “Population: Working Papers” sec- Census Bureau, Washington, DC.

(main SIPP Web site), tion under “Subjects A to Z.”
U.S. Department of Commerce

FIRST-CLASS MAIL Economics and Statistics Administration POSTAGE & FEES PAID

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU U.S. Census Bureau

Washington, DC 20233 Permit No. G-58

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

Penalty for Private Use $300