Labor Market Incorporation of Central American Immigrants in Washington, D.C.

This essay addresses the controversy over whether structural or assimilation theories best explain the labor market incorporation of international migrants in the United States with a case study of recent Central American migrants in Washington, D.C. It considers the structural factors and human capital variables that influence wage levels and employment mobility for Central American women versus those that affect Central American men. Data from a study of 50 Central American households indicate that the variables affecting wage levels and employment mobility are clearly differentiated on the basis of gender. Structural factors have greater significance for men, while human capital variables appear to influence wage levels for women, to a limited extent. But gender factors and structural barriers in the Washington, D.C. area economy pose blocks to women 's occupational success and render them incapable of fully utilizing their human capital advantages. Within the nascent literature on recent Central American migrants to the United States, the theoretical question whether structural or assimilation theory best explains their economic incorporation in U.S. labor markets has yet to be tested. The question issues from the debate about whether the structure of the labor market has greater significance for immigrant economic success than immigrants' individual characteristics (i.e., human capital). Utilizing census data from 1980, one study (Wallace 1986) compares recent Central American and Mexican immigrants and finds that Central American immigrants in California possess significant human capital advantages over Mexican immigrants, including higher education, occupation, and English levels. Yet Central American men earn the same as Mexican men despite these advantages. Wallace surmises that Central Americans might be entering the same stratified labor market as Mexican immigrants and that structural theory would explain men's economic position. Certain groups of Central American women, on the other hand, demonstrate a slight earnings advantage over Mexican female immigrants, leading to the supposition that Central American women follow assimilationist predictions for economic incorporation. The data presented here on Central American migrants to Washington, D.C. broaden the debate about immigrant economic incorporation with a case study of a city that previously did not have an established, low-paid Latino labor force (as in California). In addition, the Washington, D.C. area is representative of a labor market in which professional and service jobs, rather than production and assembly jobs, predominate. In assessing the factors that account for differences in Central American men's and women's wage levels and employment mobility, this study carefully considers the problem of gendered patterns in labor market incorporation. The findings for Central American men support the predictions of structural theory that occupational success depends more on the economic context than on the immigrants' skills. But while superficially, Central American women appear to follow the predictions of assimilation theory as in Wallace's study, this pattern may be limited to low income and low status occupations, as he cautions. This paper posits that wage levels and