"'3 v
.4 ,

xfifiw ..

7'3

3:

»~

r-v,.
w“-‘

1W“ " m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.-, f2

 

ABSTRACT

THE OFF-FARM EMPLOYMENT OF FARM OPERATORS
IN THE UNITED STATES

By Arley Dean Waldo

A significant feature of American agriculture is
the large and increasing number of farm operators who
are employed off the farm. The purpose of this study
was to investigate four aspects of off-farm employment:
(1) the number and characteristics of multiple jobhold-
ers in the farm-operator labor force; (2) the magnitude
and distribution of off-farm wage earnings. (3) the
kinds of industries which seem to attract labor from
agriculture. and (h) the nature of multiple jobholding
over time.

The study was based chiefly on data provided to
Michigan State University for research use by the U. S.
Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance. These data
represented the employment and income of a 1 percent
sample of all persons reporting agricultural self-
employment earnings for social security credits in
selected years. Supplemental data were taken from the

Census of Agriculture, the 1955 Survey of Farmers'

Arley Dean Waldo

Expenditures, and various reports based on the Current
Population Survey.

Approximately 2.2 million farm operators in the
conterminous United States reported agricultural self-
employment earnings for Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability
Insurance coverage in 1957. Persons with earnings from
off-farm sources accounted for 29 percent of all 1957
OASI farm operators. It was estimated that 20.1 percent
had nonfarm wage employment, 9.2 percent had nonfarm
self-employment, and 2.5 percent had farm wage employment.

The percentage rate of off-farm wage employment
varied from 20.0 percent in the West North Central states
to 25.7 percent in the Mountain states. The rate of non-
farm self-employment ranged from h.8 percent in the West
North Central states to 1h.h percent in the Pacific
states.

Off-farm employment was found to be selective with
respect to certain characteristics. Percentage rates of
multiple jobholding for the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor
force ranged from a low of 16.h percent for farm operators
65 years of age and over to a high of 52.9 percent for
farm operators under 25 years of age. The age differen-
tial between single and multiple jobholders was due to
variations in the rate of off-farm wage employment.

There was no significant difference in the rates of

off-farm wage employment for Negro and non-Negro farm

Arley Dean Waldo

operators, but relatively fewer Negro farm operators
reported earnings from nonfarm self-employment. Conversely,
the incidence of nonfarm self-employment was nearly iden-
tical for male and female farm operators, but relatively
fewer female farm operators had off-farm wage employment.

Sporadic participation in the off-farm labor force
characterized multiple jobholding by farm operators. Dur-
ing the period from 1955 through 1957, 29 percent of all
OASI farm operators received off-farm wages in at least
one year, but only 9 percent worked for wages in each of
the three years. It was also found that 60 percent of the
farm operators who apparently migrated out of agriculture
between 1955 and 1957 were multiple jobholders in 1955.

A notable characteristic of the off-farm employment
of OASI farm operators was that 29 percent of all off-farm
jobs held in 1957 were in the government sector. In com-
parison, jobs in manufacturing industries and contract
construction accounted for only 16 percent and 10 percent,
respectively, of all off-farm jobs.

Per capita wage earnings for OASI farm operators
with off-farm employment in 1957 were $951. The distri-
bution of wage earnings was highly skewed. Median wage
earnings were only $518. Nearly one-third of all farm
operators with off-farm employment had wage earnings of

less than $200, and two-thirds had wage earnings of less

Arley Dean Waldo

than $1,000. The level of off-farm wage earnings varied
significantly among geographic regions and with respect
to age, race, previous job experience, level of net self-

employment earnings, and industry of employment.

THE OFF-FARM EMPLOYMENT OF FARM OPERATORS
IN THE UNITED STATES

by

Arley Dean Waldo

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Agricultural Economics

1962

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This thesis was prepared while I was a Graduate
Assistant and, later, Research Associate at Michigan
State University. I am indebted to the Department of
Agricultural Economics for financial support of the
research upon which the study is based.

Several persons have given valuable assistance
and encouragement at various stages. I am especially
grateful to Professor Dale E. Hathaway for his guidance
and criticism throughout my program of graduate study

and the preparation of this thesis.

Arley Dean Waldo

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGNENTS O O O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O 0

LIST OF

TABLE . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

LIST OF APPENDICES O I O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O 0

Chapter
I.

II.

III.

IV.

INTRODUC TION O O I O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Objectives and Scope . . . . . . . . . .
Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

THE DERIVATION OF INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT DATA
FROM OASI RECORDS . . . . . . . . . . . . .

OASI Labor Force Statistics . . .

OASI Agricultural Labor Force Statistics.

Sample Data from OASI Records . . . . .

OASI Sample Data on the Agricultural
Labor Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

THE FARM-OPERATOR LABOR FORCE . . . . . . .

The OASI Farm-Operator Labor Force . . .
Current Population Survey . . . . . . .
Census of Agriculture . . . . . . . .
Regional Distribution of the Farm-
0perator Labor Force . . . . . . . . .
Characteristics of Farm Operators . . . .

THE OFF-FARM.EMPLOYMENT OF FARM OPERATORS .

Census of Agriculture . . . .
Current Population Survey . .
OASI Farm Operators in 1957 .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . .

DIFFERENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF MULTIPLE
JOBH OLDERS o o o O o O c o o o o 0 0 o o 0

Multiple Jobholders . . . . .
Wage Earners . . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . .

iii

Page
ii

xii

105
106
123
129
113
ll+6

147
188

VI.

VII.

VIII.

THE OFF-FARM WAGE EARNINGS OF FARM OPERATORS

Income of the Farm Population from Non-
agricultural Sources . . . . .
The Magnitude and Distribution of Off-
Farm Wage Earnings . . . . . . . . . . .
Sources of Off-Farm Wage Earnings . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DIFFERENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF OFF-FARM
WAGE EARNERS BY INDUSTRY OF EMPLOYMENT AND
LEVEL OF OFF-FARM WAGE EARNINGS . . . . . .

Differential Characteristics by Industry
of Employment . . . . . . .

The Relation of Selected Characteristics
to the Level of Off- Farm Wage Earnings .

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

OFF-FARM EhIPLOYMENT OVER TIIVE o o o o o o o

OASI Farm Operators: 1955 to 1957 . .

Shifts in Labor Force Status: 1955 to 1957
Multiple Jobholding: 1955 to 1958 . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . .

OASI Farm-Operator Data . . . . ' . .
The Off-Farm Employment of Farm Operators
Potential Uses of OASI Farm-Operator Data

APPENDICES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

iv

Page
191

192

201
221
23A

237

238

253
27h

277
278
29h
301
309
312
313
318
327
329

359

Table
11.1 o

II-2.

III-1.

III-2.

III-3.

III-h.

III-5.

III-6.

III'? a

III‘80

111-9 0

LIST OF TABLES

Approximate standard error of estimated size
of population classes for the 1957 OASI
farm-operator labor force . . . . . . . .

Approximate standard error of estimated per-
centages for the 1957 OASI farm-operator
labor force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of persons reporting farm self-
employment earnings for social security
credits for the conterminous United States,

1955-1959 e o o o o o e o o o o c e o o 0

Persons 1A years of age and.over, by farm
self-employment income, for the contermin-
ous United States, 1957 . . . . . . . . .

Farms by economic class of farm, for the
conterminous United States, 195A . . . . .

Farms by economic class of farm, for the
conterminous United States, 1959 . . . . .

Number of farms, as defined in the 195A
Census of Agriculture, with sales of
$2,500 or more and of less than $2,500,
{or the conterminous United States, 195A-

959 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Number of farm operators associated with farms

having sales of $2,500 or more, for the
conterminous United States, 1954-1959 . .

1957 OASI farm operators by geographic region,

fer the conterminous United States . . . .

Percentage distribution of farms enumerated
in the Censuses of Agriculture, by geo-
graphic region, for the conterminous United
States, 195A and 1959 . . . . . . . . . .

Number of commercial farms and number of OASI
farm operators, for the conterminous United

States and eight regions, 1957 . . . . . .

Page

#8

A9

53

66

72

75

76

81

83

85

Table
III-10 o

III-11.

III-12.

III-13.

III'lho

III-l5.

IV’lo

IV-2 o

IV-5 o

Page

Percentage distribution of farm operators
by age, for the United States, 1954 and
1955 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 87

Percentage distribution of the 1957 OASI
farm-operator labor force by age, for the
conterminous United States . . . . . . . 89

Percentage distribution of the 1957 OASI
fanm-operator labor force by age, for
agricultural self-employment coverage
groups, for the conterminous United States 92

Percentage distribution of the 1957 OASI
farm-operator labor force by age, for eight
geographic regions . . . . . . . . . . . . 9A

Percentage distribution of farm operators
reporting in the 195h Census of Agriculture
by age, for eight geographic regions . . . 97

Percentage of male and female workers in the
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force, for
eight regions and the conterminous United
States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10h

Farm operators working off the farm by value
of farm products sold, for the conterminous
United States, 195A . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

Farm operators working off the farm 100 days
or more by value of farm products sold, fbr
the conterminous United States, 195A . . . 11A

Number of farm operators and percentage of
farm operators working off the farm 1 day
or*more and 100 days or more by value of
farm products sold, for the conterminous
United States, 1959 . . . . . . . . . . . . 117

Number of farm operators receiving off-farm
income from specified sources by value of
farm products sold, for the conterminous
United States, 1955 . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

Percentage of farm operators within each
class receiving off-farm income from
specified sources by value of farm products
sold, for the conterminous United States,
1955 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 119

vi

Table
IV'6 o

V-l.

V-3 o

V-h.

V-5.

V-7 o

V-8.

Persons with primary or secondary jobs as
self-employed workers in agriculture, for
the conterminous United States, 1950-1960

1957 OASI farm operators by coverage indica-
gion in 1957, for the conterminous United
tates O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Percentage of farm operators with off-farm
employment, for the conterminous United
States, 1954, 1955, 1957, and 1959 . . .

Percentage of farm operators working off the
farm 1 day or more and 100 days or more,
for eight regions and the conterminous
United States, 195A and 1959 . . . . . .

Farm operators working off the farm as a
percentage of all farm operators within
population cell for value of farm products
sold.and geographic region, for the con-
terminous United States, 1959 . . . . . .

Estimated rate of multiple jobholding in
1957 fer 1957 OASI farm operators, by
geographic region, for the conterminous
United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Estimated rate of multiple jobholding in
1957 for 1957 OASI farm operators, by age,
for the conterminous United States . . .

1957 OASI farm operators with and without
off-farm earnings in 1957 by employment
pattern in 1956, for the conterminous
United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Estimated rate of multiple jobholding in
1957 for 1957 OASI farm operators, by net
earnings from self-employment in 1957,
for the conterminous United States . . .

Estimated rate of off-farm wage employment
in 1957 for 1957 OASI farm operators, by
geographic region, for the conterminous
United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Estimated rate of off-farm wage employment

in 1957 for 1957 OASI farm operators, by
age, for the conterminous United States .

vii

Page

126

133

138

1A9

151

153

158

162

171

17h

178

Table Page

V-9. 1957 OASI farm operators with and without
off-fanm wage employment in 1957 by
employment pattern in 1956, for the
conterminous United States . . . . . . . 181

V-lO. Estimated rate of off-farm wage employment
in 1957 for 1957 OASI farm operators, by
net earnings from self-employment in
1957, for the conterminous United States 187

VI-l. Aggregate off—farm income of farm—operator
families by source of income, for the
conterminous United States, 1955 . . . . 196

VI-2. Net income of the farm population from
nonagricultural sources, 1950-1960 . . . 197

VI-3. 1957 OASI farm operators with off-farm
wage employment in 1957 by taxable wage
earnings, for the conterminous United
States 0 o o o 0 0‘. o o o c o o o o o o 207

VI-A. Estimates of commercial farm operators with
off-farm wage employment by off-farm earn-
ings, for the conterminous United States,

1957 o o o o o o o o o o o o e o o o o o 215

VI-5. Persons with primary jobs as self-employed
workers tn agriculture by industry of
secondary wage job for persons with two
or more jobs, December 1960 . . . . . . 226

VI-6. Wage jobs held by 1957 OASI farm operators
in 1957 by industry, for the conterminous
united States 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 230

VI-7. Wage jobs held by 1957 OASI farm operators:
total, average, and median wage earnings
by industry, for the conterminous United
States 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o c o o o 232

VII-1. Percentage distribution of wage jobs held
by 1957 OASI farm operators in 1957 by
industry, for eight geographic regions . 2A0

VII-2. Percentage distribution of wage jobs held
by 1957 OASI farm operators in 1957 by
industry, by age, for the conterminous
united States 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 2h3

viii

Table Page

VII-3. Percentage distribution of wage jobs held
by 1957 OASI farm operators in 1957 by
industry, by race and sex, for the con-
terminous United States . . . . . . . . 2A5

VII-h. Percentage distribution of wage jobs held
by 1957 OASI farm operators in 1957 by
industry, by wage employment coverage in
1956, for the conterminous United States 2A8

VII-5. Percentage distribution of wage jobs held
by 1957 OASI farm operators in 1957 by
industry, by net earnings from self-
employment, for the conterminous United
States 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O 251

VII-6. Percentage distribution of 1957 OASI farm
operators for whom off-farm.wage earnings
were reported in 1957 by amount of off-
farm wage earnings, for eight regions
and the conterminous United States . . . 256

VII-7. 1957 OASI farm operators for whom off-farm
wage earnings were reported in 1957:
total, average, and median wage earnings,
for eight regions and the conterminous
United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257

VII-8. Percentage distribution of 1957 OASI farm
operators for whom off-farm wage earnings
were reported in 1957 by amount of off-
farm wage earnings, by age, for the con-
terminous United States . . . . . . . . 261

VII-9. 1957 OASI farm operators for whom off-farm
wage earnings were reported in 1957:
total, average, and median wage earnings
by age, for the conterminous United States 263

VII-10. Percentage distribution of 1957 OASI farm
operators for whom off-farm wage earnings
were reported in 1957 by amount of off-
farm wage earnings, by sex and race, for
the conterminous United States . . . . . 265

VII-11. Percentage distribution of 1957 OASI farm
operators for whom wage earnings were
reported in 1957 by amount of wage earn-
ings, by wage employment coverage in
1956, for the conterminous United States 268

ix

Table

VII-13 o

VIII'lo

VIII-2 o

VIII-3 o

VIII-h.

VIII-5 o

VIII-6.

Page

Percentage distribution of 1957 OASI farm
operators for whom wage earnings were
reported in 1957 by amount of wage earn-
ings and net earnings from self-employment,
for the conterminous United States . . . 271

1957 OASI farm operators for whom off-farm
wage earnings were reported in 1957: total,
average, and median wage earnings by net
earnings from self-employment in 1957,
for the conterminous United States . . . 273

Percentage distribution of OASI farm opera-
tors reporting agricultural self-
employment earnings in each year during
the period from 1955 through 1957 by
employment pattern, for eight regions
and the conterminous United States . . . 282

OASI farm operators reporting agricultural
self-employment earnings in each year
during the period from 1955 through 1957
by age, by employment pattern, for the
conterminous United States . . . . . . . 285

Percentage rate of off-farm wage employment
of OASI farm operators reporting agricul-
tural self-employment earnings in each
year during the period from 1955 through
1957 for eight geographic regions and the
conterminous United States . . . . . . . 287

Percentage rate of off-farm wage employment
of OASI farm operators reporting agricul-
tural self-employment earnings in each
year during the period from 1955 through
1957 by age for the conterminous United
States, 1955 to 1957 . . . . . . . . . . 289

Percentage distribution and median earnings
of OASI farm operators reporting agricul-
tural self-employment earnings in each
year during the period from 1955 through
1957 by wage earnings for persons working
off the farm in specified years, for the
conterminous United States, 1955 to 1957 291

1955 OASI farm operators not identified
with agricultural self-employment in 1957
by coverage indication in 1957, for the
United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295

X

Table Page

VIII-7. 1955 OASI farm operators by age, by social
security coverage indication in 1957,
for the conterminous United States . . . 297

VIII-8. OASI farm operators with off-farm employ-
ment, for the United States, 1955-1958 . 303

VIII-9. OASI farm operators with off-farm wage

employment and nonfarm self-employment,
for the United States, 1955-1958 . . . . 304

' xi

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix _ Page
I. STANDARD ERROR 0F ESTIMATES . . . . . . . . 329
II. CLASSIFICATION OF STATES BY GEOGRAPHIC REGION 332

III. ADJUSTMENT OF USDA OFF-FARM INCOME ESTIMATES
TO ACCOUNT FOR UNDERENUMERATED FARMS . . . 33h

IV. EXPANSION OF OASI SAMPLE DATA . . . . . . . . BRO

V. ESTIMATES OF MULTIPLE JOBHOLDING BY OASI
FARM OPERATORS IN 1957 . . . . . . . . . . 3h5

xii

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

Government farm programs have added.measurably to
farm income over the past decade, and large numbers of
people have migrated from the farm sector. There is,
however, general agreement that serious low-income prob-
lems persist in the agricultural sector of the nation's
economy. In 1960, the most recent year for which esti-
mates are available, the median income of rural-farm
families was only $2,875 as compared with $5,620 for
rural-nonfarm families and $5,911 for urban families.1
During the period from 19A? to 1959, the median incomes
of urban and rural-nonfarm families increased by 72 per-
cent and 9A percent, respectively, while the median
income of rural-farm families increased by only 51 per-

cent.2

less than $2,000 in 1959.3

Nearly 1.A million farm families had incomes of

 

1U. S. Bureau of the Census, Current Po ulation
Re orts, Series P-60, No. 37 (January I7, I952) TaEIe l,
p. 25.

2U. 3. Bureau of the Census, Current Po ulation
196E}, TaEIe E,

Reports, Series P-60, No. 35 (January 5,
p. . seed on the 1950'definition of rural-farm and

rural-nonfarm residence.

, 31bid., Table 1, p. 23. Based on the 1960 definition
of ruraI—farm residence.

1

Hbst of the currently proposed programs to improve
the incomes of farm people involve, either explicitly or
implicitly, the transfer of labor from agriculture to
the nonagricultural sector. Lauren Soth suggests, for
example, that "by the end of’this decade the United
States ought to have provided non—farm jobs for about
1% million farm operators who now earn less than $1,500
a year in farming."h Proposals involving the transfer of
labor out of agriculture generally assume that a sizable
portion of the labor force presently in agriculture can
be productively employed in the nonfarm sector. Little
is now known, however, about the shifts that occurNWhen
farm people take either part-time or full-time employment
off the farm. The development of appropriate farm policies
requires closer examination of the processes by which farm
people enter the nonfarm labor force.

Harold G. Halcrow observed in 1957 that "one of the
most important changes suggested in the economic and social
structure of American agriculture is the steady increase
in nonfarm income of farm people and the continued increase

in off-farm employment of commercial farm operators."5

 

#Lauren K. Soth, "Farm.Policy for the Sixties,” Ch. 9
of The American Assembly, Goals for Americans (Englewood
Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., I96OTT p. 215.

5Harold G. Halcrow, ”Opportunities for Off-Farm
Employment," in Polic £95 Commercial A riculture: Its
Relation §g_Econom1c Growth and StaBilIty (Papers SuSEIt-
ted 5y Panelists IppearIng BETEre the Sibcommittee on
Agricultural Policy, Joint Economic Committee, 85th Con-
gress, lst Session; washingtdn: U. S. Government Printing
Office, 1957), p. 389.

The importance of off-farm income in adding to the total
income of farm families is easily demonstrated at the
aggregate level. By 1955, about four out of five farm
families received some income from nonagricultural
sources. Estimates derived from the 1955 Survey of
Farmers' Expenditures indicated that the total off-farm
income of farm-operator families was eight billion dol-
lars in 1955.6 This estimate included $6.9 billion from
nonagricultural sources and $1.1 billion from rent, em-
ployment, etc., on a farm.other than that being operated.
In comparison, the realized net income of farm operators
from farming was $11.5 billion in 1955.7 Income from
nonfarm sources now accounts for more than one-third of
the total personal income of the farm population.

The participation of farm operators in the off-farm
labor force has increased substantially during the period
since world war II. About 27 percent of the farm operators
enumerated in the 19AA Census of Agriculture reported some
off-farmwork.8 In 1959, approximately #5 percent of all

farm operators worked off the farm.9 Furthermore, the

 

6U.S. Bureau of the Census, U. S. Census of Agriculture:
1255, Vol. III, Part 11, Table 8,“ p. A9.

7U.S. Agricultural Marketing Service, The Farm Income
Situation, July, 1960, Table 1H, p. 32.

-8U.S. Bureau of the Census, U. 3. Census ofA _gricu1ture:
1255, Vol. II, Ch. II, Table 26, p. 15.

9U. S. Bureau of the Census,U .S . Census of A riculture:
1 Vol. I, Parts 1- A8, Table 17, various pages. TaBu-
ated by author.

A

percentage of farm operators working off the farm 100 days
or more increased from 23 percent in 19AAlo to 30 percent
in 1959.11

Although it is apparent that income from.off-farm
sources accounts for a considerable share of the aggregate
income of the farm population and.that a large number of
farm operators work off the farm, information concerning
the off-farm employment and earnings of farm operators
lacks both detail and timeliness. The Census of Agricul-
ture, for example, provides statistics on the number of
farm operators working off the farm and the number of days
of off-farm work but does not give any information regard-
ing the kinds of off-farm jobs held by farm operators or
the amount of earnings from off-farm sources. Survey
estimates of the aggregate off-farm earnings of farm-
operator families are available, but data from which.reli-
able estimates of year-to-year changes in the off-farm
earnings of the farm population can be constructed have
not been available.

As opposed to the procedures by which farm income
estimates are derived, estimates of the nonagricultural

income of the farm population are not based upon currently

 

10U. 3. Bureau of the Census US. Census Lf Agricul-
ture:125&,Vol. II, on. XI, TabieT‘Tré's p.

11H. S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census Lf Agricul-
ture: 1 Vol. 1, Parts lo A8, TaBIe 17, mrious pages.
Ta5ulate by author.

reported data. Instead, the U.S. Department of Agriculture
series on the nonfarm income of the farm population is tied
to benchmark estimates obtained from.sample surveys for
several scattered years. Estimates for other years are
then extrapolated from benchmark estimates on the assump-
tion that the farm population's share of total nonagricul-
tural income fluctuates in proportion to changes in the
farm population as a percentage of the total population.
Current estimating techniques preclude reliable estimation
of year-to-year changes in the nonagricultural income of
the farm population, the composition of the nonagricultural
income of farm people in.other than survey years, and the
annual off-farm earnings of farm operators. It has been
frequently asserted that off-farm earnings add stability

to the income of farm operators over time and that off-
farm earnings are important in supplementing the farm
income of farm operators. Little is known, however, about
the relationship between the level of income from farming
and the level of income from off-farm.sources or about the

size distribution of the off-farm earnings of farm operators.

Objectives an_d_ m
This study deals generally with the off-farm work of
farm operators and, more specifically, concentrates on the
eff-farm employment and earnings of commercial farm opera-
tors. Its purpose is to provide estimates indicating the

extent and importance of off-farm employment of farm

operators and to investigate certain hypotheses concerning
the off-farm employment and earnings of farm operators in
the United States.

In 1955 the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insur-
ance (OASI) program of the federal social security system
was expanded to include a major segment of the agricultural
labor force. Data selected from OASI records provide a new
source of information on the employment and earnings of
farm people in both the farm and nonfarm sectors of the
United States economy. Through special arrangements with
the U.S. Social Security Administration, OASI sample data
are being provided to Michigan State University. These
data have served as the primary data for the present study.

Information from the Census of Agriculture and other
sources suggests that multiple Jobholding is an important
attribute of the farm-operator labor force, but detailed
information concerning farm operators who work off the
farm is not available from current sources. The major
objectives of this study are:

1. To determine the number and characteristics
of farm operators who work off the farm;

2. To determine the magnitude and distribution
of the off-farm wage earnings of farm
operators;

3. To determine the kinds of industries which
seem to attract labor from agriculture; and

h. To determine the importance of off-farm
employment in supplementing the income of
farm operators.

7

A unique characteristic of OASI employment data is
that it makes available time-series data on employment
and earnings of individual members of the agricultural
labor force. This feature adds a new dimension to the
study of off-farm work by farm operators and will permit
investigation of areas such as the following:

1. The off-farm employment patterns and income
experiences of farm operators over time;

2. The relationship between the nonfarm em-
ployment of farm operators and fluctuations
in the general level of business activity;
and

3. The stability of off-farm earnings and the
relationship between the level of income
from farming and the level of earnings from
off-farm employment.

Off-farm employment has traditionally been viewed as
a means by which farm operators have been able to supple—
ment low farm earnings and mitigate swings in the level
of farm income. Because of the continuing disparity
between the incomes of farm and nonfarm.families, the
role of off-farm earnings in bolstering the income of
farm families has assumed greater importance in recent
years. Mereover, the high rate of migration from.the
farm sector to the nonfarm sector in the past decade has
raised questions regarding the role of part-time farming
as a transitional stage in the movement of individuals

from full-time employment in agriculture to full-time

employment in the nonagricultural sector. This study

attempts to test four major hypotheses advanced by the

author with regard to the off-farm employment and earnings
of farm operators. These hypotheses include the following:

1. Multiple jobholding in the farm-operator
labor force is selective with respect to
age, race, sex, location, and income;

2. Multiple Jobholding is chiefly an occupa-
tional arrangement by which farm operators
attempt to supplement low farm earnings
but is also important as a transitional
stage in the movement of farm operators
to full-time employment in the nonagricul-
turalgsector;

3. Multiple Jobholders are subject to less
security in the off-farm labor market than
are single iobholders and tend to work off

. the farm on y sporadically; and

h. Off-farm employment does not lend stability
to the level of farm-operator income over
time.

In general, this study is concerned with the off-farm
labor force participation of commercial farm operators in
the conterminous United States during the period since
l95h. Geographic coverage is limited to the #8 contiguous
states so as to achieve greater complementarity with other
statistics on United States agriculture and to avoid cer-
tain problems with respect to the agriculture and labor
force structure of Alaska, Hawaii, and United States ter-
ritories.

IMost of the data presented herein are limited to the
decade from 1950 to 1959. OASI labor force statistics
are available for farm operators for years after 195h,
and major emphasis is on the period from 1955 through

1957. Related data--primarily from the Censuses of Agri-

9

culture, the 1955 Survey of Farmers' Expenditures, and the
Current Population Surveys--are presented for other years.

The labor ferce included in the study is generally
restricted to persons who may be designated as ”commercial"
farm operators. The labor force represented by OASI sample
data includes persons who have received income from agri-
cultural self-employment and satisfied the minimum earning
requirements necessary for participation in the federal
social security program in specified years. Although OASI
farm operators are generally representative of operators
of commercial farms as defined in the Census of Agriculture,
the farm-operator labor force covered by OASI and census
statistics is not identical. At certain points in the
analysis, it will be necessary to account for differences
between the labor force represented by OASI farm-operator
data and that represented by operators of commercial farms.
The labor force represented by OASI sample data is delin-
eated briefly in the following section and more exactly in
chapters II and III.

Procedure
OASI sample data on the agricultural labor force are
obtained from two sources: (1) the Continuous WOrk-History
Sample and (2) the Annual Employee-Employer Wage Card File.
The Continuous work-History Sample is a permanent, l-percent
sample of all social security accounts, which is maintained

regularly by the U.S. Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors

10

Insurance. The records in this sample summarize the com-
plete job experience of workers in employment covered by
the OASI program. The Employee-Employer wage Card File
contains a summary of annual wage and salary earnings of
persons working in covered employment in a given year.
This study utilizes data from both the Continuous werk-
History Sample and the Annual Employee-Employer Wage Card
File for all persons identified as having income from
agricultural sources in specified years. Since 1955, OASI
agricultural labor force statistics have included both
farm operators and hired farm workers.

The characteristics of OASI agricultural labor force
data were first investigated by Uel Blank in his ”OASI
Data of the Farm Labor Force."12 Blank's study;based on
data for persons identified by OASI coverage as having
agricultural earnings from self-employment and/or wages
and salaries in 1955, was chiefly concerned with farm
operators, although hired farm workers received some at-
tention. The main objectives of the study were to define
the population represented by OASI agricultural labor force
statistics, to examine the basic characteristics and poten-
tial of OASI sample data, and to investigate the relation-
ships between OASI statistics and other statistics on the

farm-operator labor force in the United States.

 

12Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Department of Agricultural
Economics, Michigan State University, 1960.

ll

‘QASI Agricultural Lé§2£.22£22.2é22
Agricultural labor force data from OASI records were
transferred to special sets of punch cards by the Bureau
of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance during reutine data
processing and provided to Michigan State University for
research purposes. Two groups of OASI sample data were
available for use at the time the present study was in-
itiated. These data included information from two sets
of Continuous Work-History Cards, and two sets of Annual
Employee-Employer Wage Cards. The two sets of Continuous
work-History Cards included the income and employment
records of the following persons:
1. Persons in the 1937-56 Continuous Work-
History Sample identified as having
covered agricultural earnings from.self-

employment and/or wages and salaries in
1955.

2. Persons in the 1937-58 Continuous WOrk-
History Sample identified as having
agricultural earnings from self-employment
iggéor wages and salaries in 1955 and/or

The two sets of Annual Employee-Employer Wage Cards covered
the wage and salary employment of the following persons:

1. Persons in the 1937-56 Continuous work-
History Sample with covered wage or salary
earnings in 1955.

2. Persons in the 1937-58 Continuous werk-
History Sample with mevered wage or salary
earnings in 1957.

For each person included in one or more of the OASI
agricultural labor force samples, the following were among

the major items of information available:

12

. Year of birth.

Sex.

' 0

Race.

s'»\o a: r-

. Amount of total taxable (for OASI coverage)
earnings, taxable earnings from self-
employment, and taxable earnings from
covered wage and salary employment in
13;? year for the period from 1955 through

5. Sources of covered earnings in each year
,in the period from 1955 through 1957. For
a given year an individual is recorded as
having covered income from none or from
an combination of the following sources:
(1; self-employment in agriculture, (2)
self-employment other than in agriculture,
(3) wa e or salary employment in agriculture,
and (A wage or salary employment other than
in agriculture. *
6. Location of farm operated in 1957.
7. Total net earnings from.self-employment in 1957.
The two sets of Annual Wage Cards provided information on
the amount of annual and quarterly wages and the type and
location of the job in which persons with covered wage or
salary earnings worked in 1955 and 1957.
Characteristics g£_OASI Sample Data
OASI agricultural labor force data provide certain
information heretofore unavailable on a national scale.
At the same time, the characteristics of OASI sample data
place restrictions on its use and.require special attention
throughout the analysis. Only the most important features
of the data will be mentioned here; a more detailed account
of the derivation of OASI labor force statistics is pre-

sented in the following chapter.

13

OASI labor force data are, in.general, taken from
reports and applications filed with the U.S. Social Secur-
ity Administration and come from records maintained by
businesses and.self-employed persons. Individuals whose
records become a part of the l-percent Continuous work-
History Sample remain in the sample permanently. Thus,
it is possible to follow the year-to-year employment and
income experiences of individual members of the labor
force. Among sources of national data, this feature of
OASI labor force data is unique.

The labor force represented by OASI sample data used
in this study includes persons with covered earnings from
agricultural sources in certain years. The farm-operator
labor force included in OASI agricultural labor force sta-
tistics is incomplete as compared with the number of farm
families defined by place of residence in the Census of
Population or the farm-operator labor force defined by
agricultural production and sales criteria in the Census
of Agriculture. OASI data relate to individual income
recipients, not to family, business, or other economic
units. And, as opposed to most survey and census data,
OASI data generally come from actual records rather than
memory.
2gp; Processing

As noted above, OASI labor force data were received

on specially prepared sets of punch cards. To facilitate

1h

data processing information included in the 1937-58 Con-
tinuous work-History Sample and the matching 1957 Annual
Employee-Employer Wage Cards was re-coded and punched

into work decks designed to provide greater flexibility

in obtaining certain cross-tabulations. Because of the
limitations of the data used, nearly all of the statistical
tests calculated in.the course of the analysis were con-
cerned with differences of proportions and medians. Con-
sequently, data processing was limited entirely to punch-
card machines. ,

In addition to data from OASI records, information
was also taken from the published reports of the l95h.and
1959 Censuses of Agriculture and the various labor force,
population, and income reports based on the Current Popula-
tion Survey. Unpublished data from the 1955 Survey of
Farmers' Expenditures and the 1959 Census of Agriculture
were provided through the cooperation of the Bureau of
the Census and the U. S. Department of Agriculture.

Since this study is based upon data taken from a
source not widely used, the characteristics and limitations
of OASI farm-operator data require closer examination.
Chapters II and III are therefore devoted to consideration
of the derivation of OASI agricultural labor force data
and the coverage of OASIfarm-operator data. Succeeding
chapters deal with the fellowing aspects of the off-farm

employment and earnings of farm operators:

15
The incidence of multiple jobholding
in the farm-operator labor force;

The differential characteristics of
multiple jobholders;

The number and.characteristics of farm
operators with off-farm wage employment;

The magnitude and distribution of off-
farm wage earnings;

Sources of off-farm wage earnings;

The relation of selected characteristics
to the level of off-farm wage earnings; and

Off-farm wage employment over time.

CHAPTER II

THE DERIVATION OF INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT DATA
FROM OASI RECORDS

Expansion of the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability
Insurance Programl of the federal social security system
to include most of the agricultural labor force affords
a new source of information on the employment and income
of farm operators and hired farm workers. Labor force
statistics are generated as a byproduct of the OASI pro-
gram, and the use of OASI data must be tempered by the
limitations of a program designed to provide a continuing
source of income for workers who are disabled or retired,
and for the families of deceased workers. The purpose of
this chapter is to examine the characteristics of OASI
labor force statistics, particularly those relating to
the agricultural laborforce, and of the OASI sample data
on the farm-operator labor force which are used in the

present study.2

 

1Disability'insurance has been a part of’the program
only since 1957. Hereafter, the abbreviation OASI will be
used to include the programs administered by the Bureau of
Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (BOASI) both before and
after the inauguration of disability insurance.

2This study is the second under the current project
involving the use of OASI statistics on the agricultural
labor force. The first was completed by Uel Blank. See

16

l7
Q§§;,Lab9£.§2£gg’Statistics

Since OASI labor force statistics are derived as a
byproduct in the administration of the federal social
security program, they are subject to limitations imposed
by statutory and regulatory provisions. The general re-
quirement for the inclusion of an individual worker in
the social security program is that he be the recipient
of earnings from covered employment. Because the OASI
program is intended to provide income protection for indi-
viduals, OASI statistics relate to individual income
recipients, rather than to family or other economic units.
OASI labor force statistics thus represent a population
comprising individual workers who receive income from
certain kinds of employment. In addition, only certain
kinds and amounts of income are eligible for coverage
under the program. Income restrictions affect both the
size of the OASI labor force and the completeness of OASI
income statistics.
Occupational Coverage3

Since inauguration of the federal social security
system with the passage of the Social Security Act of
1935, the OASI program had been expanded to include, by

 

his "OASI Data of the Farm Labor Force" (unpublished Ph.D.
thesis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan
State University, 1960).

3This and following sections rely heavily on U.S.
Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance, Social Security
Handbook gg_Old-A e, Survivors, and Disability Insurance
(Washington: U.S. Government Printing OffiCe n.d:7 and
the monthly issues of the Social Security Bulletin. The
handbook used was based on the law and regulations in ef-
fect on January I, 1960.

18

1960, almost 90 percent of the United States labor force.4
The major occupational groups which still remained outside
the program in 1960 included the following:

1. Civilian employees of the federal government
who were covered by another federal retirement
program;

2. Physicians in private practice;

3. Employees of state and local governments who
had not been covered by a federal-state
agreement;

a. Christian Science practitioners, ministers,
and members of religious orders performing
services in the exercise of their’ministry
who had not elected to be covered;

5. Certain agricultural workers; and

6. Employees of certain non-profit organizations
that had not arranged for sogial security
coverage of their employees.

With the exception of persons in these groups, most wage
and salary workers and most self-employed persons are now
covered by the social security program and, hence, included
in OASI labor force statistics.

Wage and salary workers.--Under provision of the
Social Security Act of 1935, OASI coverage6 was initially
extended to certain groups of nonfarm wage earners begin-

ning in 1937. Although most wage and salary employment is

 

l911.8. Bureau of Old-Age and.Survivors Insurance, Social
Security Handbook gg_Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability
Insurance, p. 3. .

51bid.

6The Social Security Act of 1935 provided only for
old-age insurance. Protection for the survivors of insured
‘workers was added to the program in 1939.

19

now covered by social security, a few kinds of work are
specifically excluded from.the program and.certain other
employment is covered only under special conditions. Most
wage and salary employment included in the social security
program.has been covered for some time, but hired farm
workers were not taken into the program until 1951. The
development of hired farm worker coverage is summarized

in a later section of this chapter.

Self-employed persons.--Social security coverage for
self-employed persons was introduced in 1951 when most
individuals who were self-employed in a trade or business
became eligible for participation in the OASI program.
Farm operators,,ministers, members of certain professions,
and some other self-employed workers were first covered
in 1955. Farm landlords who materially participate in
farming activities and additional groups of professional
people became eligible for coverage beginning in 1956.
Income Coverage

. WOrk in covered employment is the principal criterion
in defining the labor force to which OASI statistics relate.
However, certain restrictions regarding the kinds and
amounts of income which are eligible for coverage under
the program also affect the number of persons included in
the OASI labor force and the interpretation of OASI income
statistics.

jfiggg and salary gg§§g£§.--The definition of taxable
(or covered) earnings for OASI participation based upon

20

wage and.salary employment is, in general, payment received
by an employee for work in a job classified as covered
employment. ‘With the exception of agricultural workers,
domestic workers in private homes, casual workers, and

some services by homeworkers, both cash and noncash wages
are counted as earnings. Most payments under profit-
sharing plans, bonuses and wage dividends, and vacation

pay are also included in calculating total wages.

There has been, since the beginning of the OASI pro-
gram, a limit on the amount of earnings which could be
credited to an individual's social security account in
any one year. Covered earnings could not exceed:

1. $h,800 paid in any year beginning with 1959;

2. $h,200 paid in any year during the period
from 1955 through 1958;

3. $3,600 paid in any year during the period
from 1951 through 195A;

4. $3,000 paid in any year during the period
from 19h? through 1950;

5. $3,000 received for employment in any year
during the period from 19h0 through l9h6;
and

6. $3,000 received from.each employer for
employment in any year during the period
from 1937 through 1939.

Prior to 1947, wages were counted in the year in which
they were earned. Since then, wages have been counted
in the year in which they were paid.

In the case of nonagricultural employment, workers

were included in the OASI program if they received

21

(or, prior to 19h7, earned) $50 or more in wages from a
single employer in a calendar quarter for work in covered
employment. Minimum earning requirements for self-
employed persons and for hired farm.workers are discussed
in the following sections.

Social security taxes on wage and salary earnings are
paid by both the employee and the employer. Each pays
one-half of the tax, which is based on a percentage of
the employee's earnings. The employer is responsible
for reporting the earnings of each of his employees and
for submitting the required tax payments for both parties.
Earning reports are filed quarterly with the Internal
Revenue Service for all but agricultural employees. Em-
ployers of farm.workers report on an annual basis.

Self-employed persons.--The amount of self-employment
income which can be counted for OASI coverage is based on
net earnings from covered self-employment. With minor
exceptions, net earnings from self-employment are total
gross earnings as computed for income tax purposes,
derived by an individual from covered self-employment,
less the usual deductions for business expenses and depre-
ciation allowances permitted in computing income taxes.

In computing total net earnings from.self-employment, an
individual must combine the net earnings (or losses) from
all covered self-employment in which he was engaged.

The amount of self-employment income which can be

credited to an individual's social security account is

22

the amount of the total net earnings from covered self-
employment for the year with the following exceptions:

1. Net earnings for the year must have been
at least $h00;

2. The earnings may not have teen derived by
a non-resident alien; and

3. Self-employment earnings cannot exceed the
maximum taxable earnings (listed above)
less the covered.wage and salary earnings
paid to the individual during the year.
Since the earnings of employees are reported by their
employers, the convention of counting wages first has been
adopted. Thus, if a person both works as a wage earner
in covered.employment and.has income from.covered self-
employment, he must report and pay social security taxes
on his self-employment income only if his wage earnings
are less than the maximum limit on taxable earnings for
the year. If covered wages for the year are less than
the maximum limit on taxable earnings and the sum of wages
and self-employment income exceeds the maximum limit, an
individual is required to report only that portion of his
self-employment earnings necessary to bring his total
income under the program up to the maximum limit on tax-
able earnings.
Self-employed persons are required to report their
earnings annually at the time when they file their federal
income tax returns. For this purpose, a special schedule

(Schedule SE) is included with Schedule C and Schedule F

of Internal Revenue Service Form 1040.

23

Geegraphic,§gyg§agg
All workers in covered employment within the United

States are included in the OASI program. Both United
States citizens and resident aliens are eligible for
coverage. The term "within the United States" means in
any of the states, the District of Columbia, the Virgin
Islands, Puerto Rico, or the territorial waters of these
areas.

Employment outside of the United States is excluded
from coverage unless the employee is a United States cit-
izen working for an American employer or for a foreign
subsidiary of a domestic corporation which has arranged
for coverage. Employees working in connection with an
American vessel or aircraft outside of’the United States
are also eligible for coverage.

Sources of OAS; Statistics

The BOASI obtains employment and income information
from five major sources in the process of administering
the social security program:

1. Applications for social security account
numbers by individual workers;

2. Applications for employer identification
numbers by individual employers;

3. Quarterly wage reports filed by nonagricul-
tural employers and annual wage reports
filed by agricultural employers;

4. Annual reports filed by persons with
covered self-employment income; and

5. Individual applications for social security
benefits.

2h

OASI statistics include three general categories of
information: (1) personal characteristics of individual
workers; (2) type, size, and location of employers'
establishments; and (3) earnings data for individual
employees and for self-employed persons. Information is
available on the age, sex, and race of individual workers
and on the type, number, and location of employers' estab-
lishments. Quarterly and/or annual data are obtained on
the source and amount of covered wage and salary earnings
of individual workers, type and location of self-employment

enterprises, and amount of taxable self-employment income.

OASI Agricultural Labor £2522 Statistics7

Prior to 1951 the agricultural labor force was ex-
cluded from social security coverage. Legislation passed
in 1950 extended OASI coverage to certain "regularly em-
ployed" hired farm workers, but it was not until 1955 that
most of the agricultural labor force, both hired farm
workers and.farm operators, was taken into the program.
Higgg,§g£mmworkers

Development g£_coverage.--Coverage of the hired farm
labor force was initiated by legislation which brought

"regularly employed" farm workers into the OASI labor force

 

7This section relies principally on the Social Securit
Handbook cited above and "Old-Age, Survivors, and DisaBiIIty
Insurance: Development of Agricultural Covera e," Social
Security Bulletin, Vol. 21, No. 6 (June, 1958?, pp. 3-6.
Also see the annual editions of U.S. Internal Revenue Serv-
ice, Farmer's Tax Guide.

25

for quarters beginning after 1950. A worker was generally
deemed to be regularly employed if, after working for one
employer continuously for an entire calendar quarter, he
worked for'the same employer on a full-time basis for at
least 60 days in the next quarter and in succeeding quar-
ters. The 1950 law specifically excluded the following
types of employmentfrom coverage: (1) cotton ginning,

(2) work for noncash remuneration, (3) Producing or har-
vesting gum-resin products, and (A) work by Mexican con-
tract workers.

Coverage of the hired farm later force was greatly
expanded by legislation passed in 1954. Beginning with
1955, hired farm workers were covered if they were paid
$100 or'more in cash wages in a calendar year. Excluded
from coverage were: (1) work for noncash remuneration,
(2) producing or harvesting gum-resin products, (3) work
by Mexican contract workers, and (A) temporary work by
persons from.the British West Indies.

Amendments to the social security program which became
law in 1956 made further changes in the coverage of'hired
farm workers. After 1956, hired farm workers were covered
by social security if (1) they were paid cash wages of
$150 or more by a single employer for agricultural labor
in a calendar year or if (2) they worked for one employer
at agricultural employment on 20 days or more during a

calendar year for cash wages computed on a time basis.

26

wages paid on a piece-rate basis were excluded from cover-
age. The following types of employment were omitted from
coverage: (1) work for noncash remuneration, (2) producing
or harvesting gum-resin products, (3) work by Mexican con-
tract workers, and (4) temporary work by persons from any
foreign country .

Also, after 1956, "crew leaders" of crews furnished
to provide agricultural labor for other persons were con-
sidered.to be the employers of crew members. A crew leader
is defined as a person who pays the members of the crew
and who has not been designated by written agreement as
an employee of the person for whom the work is being done.
This change presumably increased the number of hired farm
workers eligible for social security coverage.

Income coverage.--As opposed to most other types of
employment, only cash wages paid for agricultural work are
counted in meeting the earning requirements for coverage
of hired farm workers. During the period from 1951 through
1954, the cash-pay test was based on the calendar quarter
in which wages were earned. Since 1955 it has been.based
on the calendar year in which the wages were actually paid.

'With the exception of agricultural wages for work
specifically excluded from coverage, the following minimum
earning requirements were applied.to hired farm workers:

1. For calendar years after 1956 an employee
must have received cash wages of $150 or
more from one employer for agricultural
labor, or the employee must have worked

for cash wages paid on a time basis for one
employer on 20 days or more during the year;

27

2. For the calendar years 1955 and 1956 an
employee must have been paid cash wages
of at least $100 by one employer during
the year; and
3. For calendar years during the period
from 1951 through 1954, the employee
must have been regularly employed and
earned cash wages of $50 or more in a
calendar quarter.
Hired farm workers were subject to the same maximum limits
on taxable earnings as those applicable to other wage and
salary‘workers.

Agricultural labor is broadly defined as any work on
a "farm" in connection with cultivation of the soil and
the raising and/or harvesting of agricultural or horti-
cultural products. This includes raising and caring for
livestock, bees, poultry, fur-bearing animals, and wildlife.
A farm is defined so as to include stock, dairy, poultry,
fruit, and fur-bearing animal farms; truck farms, planta-
tions, ranches, nurseries, ranges, and orchards; and.green-
houses used primarily flor the raising of agricultural
products.

Since 1955, as a concession to the problems of farm
record keeping, earning tests for hired farm workers have
been on an annual basis; and the employers of farm workers
have been required to submit only annual reports of wages
paid to employees. However, it is known that about three

percent of the hired farm labor force was incorrectly re-

ported by employers on quarterly social security tax

28

returns in 1955 and 1956.8
£352 Operators

Development g£_coverage.--Farm operators were excluded
from social security coverage in the 1950 legislation. The
1954 amendments, however, covered farm operators on the same
basis as other self-employed persons for years beginning
after 1954. Two methods of reporting taxable self-employment
income were provided for farm operators. The first was the
regular procedure used by other self-employed persons. The
second was an optional reporting method which enabled some
farm operators with very low net incomes, or even net losses,
to participate in the social security program.

The rental income of farm landlords could not be count-
ed as self-employment income in 1955, but the BOASI inter-
preted the law so as to permit coverage of share farmers.

To be eligible for coverage, share farmers must have had
rental arrangements in which the farm operator received a
share of the crops or livestock, or a share of the proceeds
from their sale, and the amount of the share was dependent
upon the quantity produced or the value of products sold.

In 1956 the rules of the optional method for reporting
farm self-employment income were amended. These changes
increased the amount of coverage credits which could be

claimed by farm operators with low net and gross incomes.

 

8U.S. Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance, Farm
Coverage Statistics: 1226, December, 1959, pp. 34-35.

29

The 1956 legislation also confirmed the interpretation of
the 1954 amendments regarding the status of share farmers.

Certain income which had been excluded from coverage
in 1955 as rental income was covered, beginning in 1956,
if the farm landlord "materially participated" in the pro-
duction or management of production of agricultural crops
or livestock. A farm landlord is generally deemed to be
materially participating if (1) he "regularly and fre-
quently makes decisions which significantly affect the
success of the enterprise," or (2) he works at least 100
hours on the farm over a period of five weeks or’more, or
(3) he has a rental agreement with the tenant which calls
for participation and.he fulfills any three of the follow-
ing requirements:

1. Advances, pays, or stands good for a sig-
nificant part of the cost of production;

2. Furnishes a significant part of the tools,
equipment, and.livestock used in producing
the commodities;

3. Makes periodic inspections of the production
activities; and

4. Advises and consults periodically with the
tenant.

Since 1956 around 200,000 individuals have been included
in the social security program as materially participating

farm landlords.9

 

9John C. Ellickson, "Distribution of Farm Incomes,"
gggicultural Finance Review, Vol. 23 (April, 1962), p. 27.

30

Income coverage.--Farm operators reporting under the
regular reporting method compute net earnings from self-
employment as gross farm income minus the usual business
deductions allowable for income tax purposes. Instructions
for filing farm social security tax.returns specifically
mention the following items which should be included, in
addition to usual farm earnings, in computing net earnings
from agricultural self-employment:

1. Taxable patronage dividends from cooperatives;

2. Agricultural program payments, including
acreage reserve and conservation reserve
soil bank payments;

3. Taxable commodity credit loans;

4. Refunds or rebates, if they represent a
reduction in a deductible expense item,

including refunds of gasoline tax;

5. Prizes and awards on farm produce or live-
stock;

6. Crop damage payments;

7. Value of merchandise received for farm
products; and

8. Standing crop sales, if not sold with land
which was held more than six months.

Among the items which should not be included are rental
income from real estate (unless the landlord meets the
qualifications of material participation); capital gains
and losses from.the sale of livestock, depreciable property,
and other capital items; and other income from investments.
The limits on the amount of net income which can be

reported depend on the reporting method selected by the

31

farm operator. Under both reporting methods, the maximum
limit on taxable self-employment income is the amount of
total net earnings from.covered self-employment, less the
amount of covered wage and.sa1ary earnings received during
the year, up to the maximum limit on taxable income. The
regular reporting method requires that net self-employment
income be at least $400 for the year. The optional report-
ing method conforms to the same minimum and maximum earn-
ing requirements; but farm operators are allowed, under
the optional method, to count a specified percentage of
their gross farm self-employment earnings as net income
from self-employment.

In 1955, farm operators reporting on a cash basis were
permitted to count one-half of their gross income as net
self-employment earnings provided that their gross farm
income for the year was at least $800 and not more than
$1,800. If gross earnings were more than $1,800 and actual
net earnings were less than $900, net self-employment earn-
ings could be reported as @900 under the optional method.

Beginning in 1956 the optional reporting method per-
mitted all farm operators with annual gross farm incomes
of at least $600 and not more than $1,800 to report two-
thirds of their'gross farm earnings as net income from
self-employment. Net self-employment earnings could be
reported as $1,200 if gross earnings were more than $1,800

and actual net earnings were less than $1,200.

32

Some farm operators who would otherwise have been
ineligible for social security coverage because of low
net incomes have been able to participate in the OASI
program by reporting under the optional methOd. But
low-income farmers were allowed to use the standard
reporting method and, thereby, to avoid payment of self-
employment taxes (thus sacrificing OASI coverage). Use
of the optional method is not compulsory; hence choice
of reporting methods permits some farm operators to
option either into or out of the program at their own

discretion.

Sample Q33; Eggg_QA§; Records
Although the BOASI must maintain social security
accounts fer all persons who have received coverage
credits, it has developed a special l-percent sample of
the covered labor force which provides statistical informa-
tion for program planning and analysis. This sample,
called the Continuous WOrk-History Sample, is the major

source of data for the present study.

33

The Continuous Work-HistorySamplelo

The Continuous Work-History Sample is selected from
a universe made up of all persons to whom.socia1 security
account numbenshave been issued. A two-stage, digital
sampling process is used in drawing the sample. Each
social security account number consists of nine digits
divided into three fields: 000-00-0000. The first three
digits represent the geographic area in which the number
was issued. The fourth and fifth digits indicate a spe-
cific group or sequence of numbers issued in any one
geographic area, and the last four digits comprise the
"serial number."

The initial step in selecting the Continuous work-
History Sample is the selection of a 20-percent sample
made up of all account numbers which contain a ”2" or "7"

in the first place of the serial number. So that the

 

10Further discussion of the development and use of
the Continuous Work-History Sample can be found in the'
following: (1) Jacob Perlman and Benjamin Mandel, "The
Continuous WOrk-History Sample Under Old-Age and Survivor's
Insurance " Social Securit Bulletin, Vol. 7, No. 2 (Febru-
ary, 1944 , pp. 12-22; (2) B. J. Mandel, ”OASI Earnings
Statistics and Their Uses," Monthl Labor Review, Vol. 70,
No. 4 (April, 1950), pp. 421- ; 3) Jacob—PerIman, ”The
Continuous WOrk-History Sample: The First Twelve Years,"
Social Securit Bulletin, Vol. 12, No. 4 (April, 1951),
pp. 3-10; (I) fiiIIiam R. Cummins, "Old-Age and Survivors
Insurance Records: Derivation of Byproduct Data,“ Social
Securit Bulletin, Vol. 15, No. 7 (July, 1952), pp. IO-I4;
(5) B. 3. Mandel, "Sampling the Federal Old-Age and Sur-
vivors Records," Journal of the American Statistical
Association Vol. 48, No{_263_TSeptember, 1953), pp. 462-
475; andTE) B. J. Mandel, "Development of the Continuous
WOrk-History Sample in Old-Age and Survivors Insurance,”
Social Security Bulletin, Vol. 20, No. 3 (March, 1957),
ppe 3"]. an pe 27

34

process of posting annual earnings to individual accounts
can be spread out over the year, the entire file of ac-
counts is divided into four groups. Only one group, includ-
ing all of the accounts in the 20-percent sample, are posted
on a calendar-year basis.

The 20-percent sample is composed of clusters of
1,000 accounts, i.e. those in which the serial number I
begins with a "2" or "7." This sample is stratified by
geographic area, and the Continuous Work-History Sample is
selected systematically by drawing all account numbers in
the 20-percent sample in which the last two digits are
"05;" "20;” "#5," "754' or "95.!I‘

The Continuous WOrk-History Sample is continuous in
the sense that each account which enters the sample remains
in the sample permanently. The selection of the sample is
conducted so as to ensure a sampling ratio of 1-percent of
all account numbers which have been issued. New account
numbers are allocated to field offices in multiples of
500, 20 percent of which have a "2" or "7" in the first
place of the serial number. Thus, a 1-percent sampling
ratio is maintained as the size of the Continuous'WOrk-
History Sample increases with the growth of the labor force.

A few persons are known to hold.more than one social
security account number, but the problem of multiple ac-
count numbers is not significant. A special study in 1951
revealed that the Continuous Work-History Sample overstated

35

the numler of workers with wage credits during the period
from 1937 to 1950 by only 0.3 percent.11

More serious is the problem of identifying persons
who are retired, disabled, or deceased. When current earn-
ings are no longer reported for an individual, after cov-
ered income has been reported in one or more years, a number
of alternative explanations exist. The individual in ques-
tion may be working in non-covered employment, disabled,
deceased, retired, or unemployed. The accounts of retired,
disabled, and deceased workers can be identified from ap-
plications for social security benefits, but the status of
persons who have not qualified fer benefits is usually not
reported. It has been estimated that approximately one-
third of all persons with past covered income who died in
1955 were uninsured at the time of their death and that
about 80 percent of these deaths (approximately one-fourth
of all deaths) were not reported to the BOASI.12 This
problem will diminish over time as a greater proportion
of the labor force meets the requirements fer social
security benefits.

The Continuous Work-History Sample provides, for per-
sons included in the sample, a substantial amount of
information pertaining to the individual and his annual

employment experience. Although the information available

11Mandel, "Development of the Continuous Work-History
Sample in Old-Age and Survivors Insurance," p. 13.

121bid., p. 12.

36

is not a complete history of labor force participation,
it does give a year-to-year record of participation in
employment covered by the social security program. The
major limitations of the sample data are the length of
time in which various types of employment have been
covered and the limits on the amount of earnings which
can be reported fer coverage.

Th2 Employee-Employer Wage Card Filg

As a part of its regular accounting process, the BOASI
must verify and post the quarterly and annual wage reports
filed by employers. This is accomplished by preparing a
punch card for each employee listed on the individual
wage reports. After wage reports from four consecutive
quarters have been processed, the information on the quar-
terly wage card is summarized and punched into a set of
annual wage cards. This set of cards comprises the Annual
Employee-Employer wage Card File. For each worker who
received wage credits during the year, there is one annual
wage for each employer fronlwhich that person received
covered wage or salary earnings.

By collating the information in the current Continuous
WOrk-History Sample with information in the Annual Employee-
Employer wage Card File, it is possible to obtain a more
detailed record of each individual's work experience in a
given year. Within the limits of’the amount of earnings

‘which are subject to social security taxes, the wage cards

37

show the quarterly and annual earnings, and type of
industry and location of each employer for the year. The
specific items of information availatfle from the Employee-
Employer Wage Card File are listed in the next section of
this chapter.

OAS; Sample Q§t§_gg Egg Agricultural L222£.E2£22

The agricultural labor force data utilized in this
study were taken from the Continuous Work-History Sample
and.the matching Employee-Employer Wage Cards. These sam-
ple data included, in general, income and employment data
from the OASI records of social security accounts in the
Continuous WOrk-History Sample to which income from agri-
cultural sources was credited in specified years.

Two groups of OASI agricultural labor force data were
available for analysis in this study. The first group
included data on all persons in the 1937-56 Continuous
Work-History Sample with self-employment and/or wage and
salary earnings from agricultural sources in 1955, and the
matching 1955 Annual Employee-Employer Wage Cards. These
data were used by Uel Blank in his investigation of OASI
agricultural labor force statistics.13 The present study
relies primarily upon OASI sample data made available after
Blank's study. These data included all persons in the
1937-58 Continuous WOrk-History Sample with self-employment

 

13Blank, "OASI Data of the Farm Labor Force."

38

and/or wage and salary earnings from agricultural sources
in 1955 and/or 1957, and the matching 1957 Employee-
Employer wage Cards. 5

The OASI sample data supplied by the BOASI were taken
from.the regular OASI sample files and transferred to spe-
cial sets of punch cards. A total of 181,462 punch cards
were included in the two groups of data. The number of
cards was divided as follows:

Number of
Punch Cards

1. From the 1937-56 Continuous

‘Wbrk-History Sample 33,476
2. From the matching 1955 Employee- -

Employer Wage Card File 51,358
3. From the 1937-58 Continuous

Werk-History Sample 52,210

4. From the matching 1957 Employee-
Employer Wage Card File 44,418

Qa_tg £13m the; Continuous Work-History MEI-.9.

Since this study is based chiefly upon data from the
1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample, discussion will be
limited to the specific items of information which were
available from this sample. A list of'the items included
in the 1937-56 Continuous Work-History Sample can be found
in Blank's thesis.1h

The agricultural labor force sample used in the pres-

ent study is actually a subsample taken from.the 1937-58

 

141bld., pp. 38-39.

Continuous Work-History Sample.

39

This subsample is com-

posed of all persons in the 1937-58 Continuous work-History

Sample who received self-employment and/or wage and salary

earnings from agricultural sources in 1955 and/or 1957.

There were 52,210 persons, represented on the basis of

one punch card per person, in the OASI sample of the agri-

cultural labor force.

The size of’the 1937-58 sample is

related to the 1937-56 sample in the following manner:

4.

Persons with agricultural
earnings in 1955 who were
included in the 1937-56
sample ‘

Persons with agricultural
earnings in 1955 who were
processed after the cut-
off date of the 1937-56
sample (net increase)

Persons with agricultural
earnings in 1957 who were
not identified with agri-
culture in 1955

Total: persons with agri-
cultural earnings in 1955
and/or 1957

Number of
Punch Cards

33,476

4,798

13,936

52,210

The agricultural labor force sample taken from the

1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample included, for each

person in the sample, the following items of information:

1. Social Security account number. This item
permits the identification of individual
workers for collating purposes and indicates
the geographic area in which the account

number was issued.

7.

10.
11.
12.

40

Year of birth.
Sex.
Race. This item is coded as non-Negro or Negro.

Social security benefit status as of January
1, 1958. This item indicates the benefits for
which living workers had qualified and the
benefit status attained by deceased workers.

Year of entitlement or death. This item indi-
cates the year in which living workers became,
or will become, eligible for retirement bene-
gitg and the year in which deceased workers

is .

Cumulative earning credits in the period from
1937 through 1957. This item gives, in dol-
lars, the total amount of covered income
credited to the individual's account during
the period.

Taxable earnings in 1955, 1956, and 1957.
This item gives the total amount of covered
income, in tens of dollars, earned by the
individual in each year.

Number of quarters of coverage in 1955, 1956,
and 1957. This item gives an indication of
the extent, by year, and the regularity of
the individfgl's participation in covered
employment.

First year in which covered income was reported.
Last year in.which covered income was reported.

Number of years in.which covered income was
reported in the period from 1937 through 1957.

 

l5The insured status of individual workers is based
on the number of calendar quarters for which covered earn-
ings have been credited to an individual's social security
account. For a detailed definition of "a quarter of
coverage" see U.S. Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insur-
ance, Social Security Handbook 93,01d-Age, Survivors, and

Disability Insurance, pp. 15-16.

41

13. Indication of continuous or intermittent
employment patterns in the period from
1937 through 1957. Employment patterns
are designated as either continuous or
intermittent. Continuous employment
indicates that covered earnings were
credited to the individual's account in
each year in the period from the first
year employed to the last year employed.

14. Social security insurance status as of
January 1, 1958. This item indicates
the individual's eligibility for social
security benefits and.ls closely related
to benefit status.

15. Coverage indication in 1955, 1956, and

1957. This item indicates the source of
covered earnings in each year. For a
given year an individual is recorded as
having covered income from.none or from
an combination of the following sources:
(1) self-employment in agriculture,
(2) self-em loyment other than in agri-
culture, (3 wage and salary employment
in agriculture, and (4) wage and salary
employment other than in agriculture.

16. Self-employment taxable income in 1955,
1956, and 1957. This item gives the-
amount of income, in tens of dollars,

for which self-employment taxes were paid
in each year.

17. State and county in which self-employment
income was earned in 1957.

18. Industry in which self-employment income
was earned inl957.

19. Total net earnings, in tens of dollars,
from self-employment in 1957.

Similar information was included in the agricultural labor
force sample selected from the 1937-56 Continuous Wbrk-
History Sample.
2a}; £r_oy_1 3113 Employee-Employer Wage gag LL12

In conjunction with the agricultural labor force sam-

ple taken from.the 1937-58 Continuous WOrk-History Sample,

#2

the BOASI also provided a reproduced set of 44,418 annual
wage cards representing the accounts in the 1937-58
agricultural labor force sample to which wage and salary
earnings had been credited in 1957. Not all farm oper-
ators and hired farm workers in the Continuous Work-History
Sample had earnings from wages and salaries in 1957; hence
the wage card sample included fewer persons that did the
agricultural labor force sample.. Furthermore, one wage
card is prepared fer each employer for which an individual
worked during the year. Thus, some persons were repre-
sented by several wage cards on a one-card-per-employer
basis.

For each employer of each wage earner included in the
1957 wage card sample, the following items of information
were included in the set of reproduced punch cards:

1. Type of reporting schedule filed by the
employer.

2. Social security account number of the worker.

3. Social security identification number of the
employer.

Employer establishment number.

Sex of the worker.

Race of the worker.

. Month and year of worker's birth.

ocslman-r

Annual and quarterly wages in dollars and
cents.

9. Number of wage reports, filed by the employer
during the year, in which the worker was
included.

43

10. State and county of employment.
11. Industry in which the worker was employed.
Limitations 2; the Data

It is apparent that the characteristics of OASI
agricultural labor force statistics place certain restric-
tions on the use and interpretation of OASI sample data.
The major limitations and difficulties confronted in using
OASI data'are discussed briefly in this section. Elabora-
tion of certain limitations will be necessary in the chap-
ters that follow. ‘

OASI farm-operator labor force.--The farm-operator
labor ferce represented by OASI data comprises individuals
who have received self-employment income from agricultural
sources in specified years, satisfied the earning require-
ments for OASI coverage, and filed social security tax re-
turns. The labor force represented by OASI farm-operator
data is subject to the following restrictions:

1. Persons with net farm self-employment earn-
ings of less than $400 in any year were not
required to participate in the social secur-
ity program; hence some low-income farm
operators are not included in the OASI farm-
operator labor force. However, persons with
low net incomes or net losses could elect to
report a specified percentage of gross farm
earnings to gain or increase OASI coverage.
For persons with net farm self-employment
earnings of less than $400, OASI participa-
tion was entirely voluntary. Thus, although
most farm operators could participate in the
program regardless of the amount of their net
income, those with net earnings of less than

$400 in any year could legally forego OASI
coverage.

44

2. Farm operators with covered wage earnings
equal to or greater than the maximum tax-
able earnings in any year were not re-
quired to report self-employment earnings
regardless of amount. Consequently, some
multiple job holders who were part-time
farm operators are excluded from the OASI
farm-operator labor force.

3. Beginning in 1956, "materially participat-
ing" farm landlords were included in the
OASI program on the same basis as bona
fide farm operators. All of the persons
in the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force
were presumably bona fide farm operators
in that year. Persons entering the OASI
farm-operator labor force after 1955, were
either bona fide farm operators or materially
participating farm landlords, and the two
groups cannot be identified from OASI
records.

4. Persons with covered earnings from agricul-
tural self-employment can be identified
only for years after 1954. Therefore, the
complete work-history of the farm operator
labor force is not available.

Income data.--The use and interpretation of OASI
income data are also subject to certain limitations. The
most important of these limitations include the following:

1. Earnings from a few types of employment are
not covered by the social security program,
and earnings below specified minimum levels
in covered employment are excluded from
OASI income statistics. Estimates of aggre-
gate farm self-employment income derived
from OASI data do not include the self-
employment earnings of farm operators who
fail to qualify for agricultural self-
employment coverage because of either low
farm incomes or wage earnings equal to or
greater than the maximum limit on taxable
earnings. Estimates of the aggregate total
earnings of persons included in the OASI
farm-operator labor force do not include
earnings from non-covered employment or
earnings below minimum levels in covered
employment.

2.

4.

45

The total amount of self-employment earnings
reported by the OASI farm-operator labor

force includes earnings from both agricultural
and nonagricultural self-employment. For
persons with covered self-employment income
from both farm and nonfarm sources, the amount
of income from each source cannot be deter-
mined.

The group of persons who filed under the
optional reporting method cannot be precisely
identified; hence estimates of the aggregate
net income of the OASI farm-operator labor
force are biased upward because of the re-
porting of gross earnings under the option.

Estimates of the aggregate wage earnings of
persons with covered employment are biased
downward because of the maximum limit on the
amount of wages eligible for social security
coverage.

Other limitations.--The following features also affect

the use of OASI sample data on the agricultural labor force:

1.

2.

Information on the location of the farm busi-
ness is available only for years after 1956.

A small proportion of the covered labor force
is known to hold more than one social security
account number; hence the size of the OASI
labor force is slightly overstated.

The labor force status of persons who have
left agriculture can be accurately determined
only if such persons subsequently entered
covered nonfarm employment. Disabling in-
juries, sickness, and the death or retirement
of uninsured workers are often not reported
to the BOASI.

The limitations and qualifications mentioned here have influ-

enced the present study at various points and will be con-

sidered throughout the analysis.

Reliability 9_f_ the Estimates

As indicated previously, the Continuous WOrk-History

Sample comprises l-percent of all social security accounts

46

selected from a universe made up of all social security
account numbers which have been issued to individual work-
ers. The OASI sample data used in this study were taken
from the records of accounts in the Continuous Werk-History
Sample to which agricultural earnings were credited in
specified years.

It has been assumed throughout the present study that
the OASI sample of the farm-operator labor force represents
a random, 1-percent sample of all persons with covered
earnings from.agricultural sources in the years fer which
data are available. Since it is possible for individuals
to receive social security coverage for past years by
filing late or amended tax returns, the Continuous Work-
History Sample understates the number of'persons with
covered earnings in any year. The extent of understatement
in the size of the OASI labor force is dependent upon the
year in question and the cut-off date of the Continuous
WOrk-History Sample. For example, the size of the 1955
agricultural labor force, as represented by the 1937-56
Continuous Work-History Sample, was equal to 87.5 percent
of the 1955 agricultural labor force represented by the
1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample. Estimates based
upon simple expansion of sample data thus represent per-
sons reporting prior to the cut-off date of a particular
sample. ,

The approximate standard error of estimates relating

to the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force are given in

1

47

Table II-l and Table II-2.16 These standard errors apply
to estimates of individuals reporting agricultural self-
employment earnings for social security coverage prior to
the cut-off date of the 1937-58 Continuous Work-History
Sample. As calculated for this study, the standard error
measures only the variations that occur by chance because
the estimates are based on sample data rather than a com-
plete enumeration of the labor force. It does not account
for errors in reporting or any systematic biases in the
data. The chances are about 68 out of 100 that a sample
estimate will differ from a complete enumeration of the
labor force by less than one standard error and about 95
out of 100 that the difference will be equal to less than

two standard errors.

 

16The approximate standard error of estimated per-
centages for eubsamples of varying sizes and the method
used in calculating the standard error are given in
Appendix I. Also, see Appendix IV for a discussion of
the expansion of OASI sample data.

48

TABLE II-l.--Approximate standard error of estimated
size of population classes for the 1957
OASI farm-operator labor force

 

Estimated Size Standard
of Population Class Error
500 230
1,000 320
2,500 500
5,000 710
10,000 1,000
25,000 1,570
50,000 2,200
100,000 3,080
250,000 4,690
'500,000 6,180
1,000,000 7,330

Note: Sample size equals 21,859.
Source: See Appendix I.

49

TABLE II-2.--Approximate standard error of estimated
percentages for the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force

 

 

Estimated Standard
Percentage Error
1 or 99 0.1
2 or 98 0.1
5 or 95 0.2
10 or 90 0.3
15 or 85 0.3
20 or 80 0.3
25 or 75 0.3
35 or 65 0.4
50 0.4

Note: Sample size equals 21,859.
Source: See Appendix I.

CHAPTER III
THE FARM-OPERATOR LABOR FORCE

It is obvious from the discussion in the preceding
chapter that the procedures, definitions, and regulations
of the social security program introduce certain limita-
tions in the use of sample data drawn from OASI records.
At the same time, however, OASI agricultural labor force
' data include, on an annual basis, information that is not
available from other sources. .Thus, while the limitations
of OASI data must be recognized, this new source of informa-
tion possesses unique advantages for answering certain
kinds of questions about the income and employment expe-
riences of farm operators in the United States.

Before turning to consideration of the off-farm employ-
ment of farm operators, it will be necessary to devote
some attention to the problem of defining "the farm-
operator labor force." The objectives of this chapter are
two-fold: (1) to define and describe the farm-operator
labor force represented by OASI data and (2) to examine
the comparability of OASI farm-operator data with those
provided from other sources. The first three sections of
this chapter therefore deal with the definition of the
OASI farm-operator labor force and the comparability of

50

51

the coverage of OASI farm-operator data, in terms of the
number of persons represented, with the coverage of the
Current Population Survey and the Census of Agriculture.
The concluding sections then examine the characteristics
of the farm-operator labor force represented by OASI sam-
ple data. Estimates for the year 1957 will be taken as a
base in illustrating the relationships between the cover-
age of OASI data and the coverage of data from other

sources.

IhngASl Farm-Operator Lghg§,§g£gg

As used throughout this study, the term "OASI farm-
operator labor force" refers to the labor force comprising
persons who are identified by OASI records as recipients
of covered earnings from.agricultural self-employment in
a specified year. Major emphasis will be given to the
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force.
Enumerative Qgtg ’

Although this study relies primarily on OASI sample
data, some enumerative statistics on the agricultural
labor force have been tabulated by the Bureau.of Old-Age

and Survivors Insurance.l Since the inclusion of farm

 

1Published data on the agricultural labor force can
be found in the following reports issued by the U.S. Bureau
of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance: (1) Farm Covera e
Statistics, 1256 (Baltimore: U.S. Bureau of Old-Age and
survivors Insurance, December, 1959); (2) Social Securit
Farm Statistics, 1955-1959 (Baltimore: U.S. Bureau of Old-
Age and Survivors Insurance, August, 1961); and (3) Hand-
book 2; Old-Age and.Survivors Insurance Statistics: Emgloy-
ment, Wages, and Insurance Status ginorkers in Covere
Employment, 1933'Tfialtimore: U.S. Bureau of OId-Age and
Survivors Insurance, 1961).

 

52

operators in the OASI program beginning with the year 1955,
the number of persons reporting agricultural self-employment
earnings for social security coverage increased from about
2.3 million in 1955 to a high of nearly 2.6 million in.l956
and then gradually declined to a low of around 2.2 million
~in 1959 (Table III-1). The increase in the number of per-
sons with agricultural self-employment coverage from 1955
to 1956 was principally due to the fact that materially
participating farm landlords became eligible for coverage
beginning with the year 1956 and that farm-operators were
generally better acquainted with the program in its second
year. The decline in the number of persons covered since
1956 reflects both the dropping out of persons who were
able to qualify for benefits after a short period of
participation and, perhaps, the decline in the number of
persons with farm earnings above the level required for
coverage.

The number of persons reporting agricultural self-
employment earnings for social security coverage has been
equal to roughly one-half the estimated number of farms as
defined in the Census of Agriculture. The major reason
for the difference in the size of the OASI farm-operator
labor force and the total number of farms is the large
number of persons defined as farm operators in the Census
of Agriculture who do not have sufficient income from

agriculture to satisfy the minimum earning requirements

53

TABLE III-l.--Number of persons reporting farm self-
employment earnings for social security
‘ credits for the conterminous
United States, 1955-1959

 

Year Number

' Reportinga
1955 2.337.500
1956 2,555,900
1957b 2,416,500
1958b 2,389,800
1959 2,210,800

aIncludes estimates for late returns not yet received.
bPreliminary estimates.

Source: Tabulated from U.S. Bureau of Old-Age and
Survivors Insurance Social Securit Farm Statistics 1255-
1959 (Baltimore: U.S. Bureau of Old-Age and.Survivors

nsurance, August, 1961), Table 3, p. 6.

 

for participation in the social security program.as farm
operators.
Sample Qgtg‘

OASI sample data on the farm-operator labor force
represent persons in the Continuous Work-History Sample
who reported agricultural self-employment earnings for
social security coverage in specified years. All estimates
relating to the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force which
are given in subsequent sections of this study have been
tabulated or estimated from sample data. Because of
sampling variability and the incidence of reports processed
after the cut-off date of the Continuous Work-History Sam-

ple, estimates derived from.sample data will not necessarily

54

agree with farm coverage statistics published by the
Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance.

The 1937-58 Continuous WOrk-History Sample represents,
on the basis of a 1-percent sampling ratio, a total of
2,185,900 individuals with covered earnings from agricul-
tural self-employment in the year 1957. This estimate
excludes, as does the entire analysis, farm-operators out-
side the conterminous United States. It will be noted
that the size of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force
represented by the 1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample
falls short of the estimate for 1957 given in Table III-1.
Assuming a sampling ratio of l-percent, the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force represented by the 1937-58 Continuous
‘Wbrk-History Sample accounts for about 90 percent of the
total number of persons with agricultural self-employment
coverage in 1957. Estimates of the size of the OASI farm-
operator labor force derived from the Continuous Work-
History Sample are subject to sampling variability.

Another reason.for the disparity between the estimate given
in Table III-l and that based upon the assumption of a
l-percent sampling ratio is, however, the incidence of
persons reporting after the cut-off date of the 1937-58
Continuous Work-History Sample.

The size of the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force
was, for example, substantially understated by the 1937-55

Continuous Work-History Sample. Under the assumption of

55

a l-percent sampling ratio, the 1937-55 Continuous Work-
History Sample accounted for approximately 80 percent of
the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force. Late returns

for the year 1955 were, of course, included in subsequent
samples. The 1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample thus
indicated a net increase in the size of the 1955 OASI
farm-operator labor force. Assuming a l-percent sampling
ratio, the 1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample accounted
for about 92 percent of the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor
force. A net increase in the number of 1957 OASI farm
operators may also be expected in subsequent samples, but
the incidence of late reports appears to have diminished
now that farm operators have become more familiar with the
program.

To recapitulate, the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor
force generally comprises persons with net farm self-
employment earnings in 1957 of $400 or more plus persons
with net farm earnings of less than $400 and gross earnings
of $600 or more who reported under the optional method.
Generally excluded from the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor
force are the following: (1) persons with net agricultural
self-employment earnings of less than $400 and gross earn-
ings of less than $600, (2) persons with.net earnings of
less than $400 and.gross earnings of $600 or more who did
not elect to report under the optional method, and (3)

persons with wage earnings of $4,200 or more regardless

56

of the amount of their self-employment earnings. The
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force also includes, on
the same basis as bona fide farm-operators, materially
participating farm landlords.

The characteristics of persons included in the 1957
OASI farm-operator labor force merit examination; but,
first, some attention should be given to the number of
persons included in other statistics on the farm-operator
population. Discussion for purposes of comparison will

be limited, insofar as possible, to the year 1957.

Current Population Survey

The Current Population Survey, conducted by the Bureau
of the Census, provides a wide variety of information on
the United States population and the current labor force.
Current Population Survey statistics are obtained from a
monthly survey of a rotating sample of approximately
35,000 interviewed households distributed over the entire
United States.2 Labor force statistics derived from the
Current Population Survey are reported monthly in the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics publication, Employment gpd

Earnings.3 Three types of statistics are available from

 

2For a detailed discussion of procedures and defini-
tions see U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population

Reports, Series P-23, No. 5 (May 9, 1958).

3Prior to July 1, 1959, cps Labor Force Statistics
were published in U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current
Population Repprts, Series P-57.

57

the Current Population Survey: (1) estimates of the total
population and number of households classified by place

of residence, (2) estimates of the current labor force
classified by occupation and by industry of employment

and class of workers, and (3) estimates of the number of
individuals and.households receiving income from specified
sources.

In the Current Population Survey interviewed.members
of households are asked to report the labor force status
of all household.members who are 1h years of age or older.
Employed persons comprise, by definition, all persons who
worked as employees or in their own business or profession
for 15 hours or more during the survey week. Persons tem-
porarily away from their work because of illness, bad
‘weather, vacations, and similar reasons are also classi—
fied as employed persons. Individuals who held more than
one job during the survey week are classified in the occu-
pation and industry in which they worked the greatest num-
ber of hours. Thus, labor force estimates derived from
the Current Population Survey represent an unduplicated
count of the current labor force.

The Current Population Survey included, for the
period from.l95l through 1956, approximately 21,000 inter-
viewed households. About 2,200 of these households, as
determined by place of residence, were farm households.

Since 1956, when the size of the sample was expanded,

58

about 3,500 farm households have been included in the
survey.“
The Farm.Population

In accordance with the procedures of the Census of
Population, Current Population Survey statistics include
estimates of the population classified by place of resi-
dence. For the period from 1950 through 1959 CPS estimates
classified persons as either urban or rural residents on
the basis of residence definitions used in the 1950 Census
of Population. Under the definitions of the 1950 census,
the urban population comprised all.persons living in the
followingplaces:

1. Places of 2,500 or more inhabitants
incorporated as cities, boroughs, and
villages;

2. Incorporated towns of 2,500 or more
inhabitants except in New England, New
Yerk, and.Wisconsin, where "towns" are

_ simply minor civil divisions of counties;

3. The densely settled urban fringe, includ-
ing both incorporated and unincorporated
areas, around cities of 50,000 or more
inhabitants; and

h. Unincorporated places of 2,500 or more
inhabitants outside of any urban fringe.5

All persons living outside of these places are classified

as rural residents.

 

“U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Po ulation Reports,
Series P-27, No. 2h (October 20, I957}, p. 5.

5For more detailed definitions see U.S. Bureau of the
Census, U. S. Census of Population: 1250, Vol. II, Part I,
Ch. B, pp. V ‘ Xe

59

The rural population was further divided into two
categories: (1) rural-nonfarm, and (2) rural-farm. Per-
sons in the latter category make up the farm population.
For Current Population Surveys conducted during the period
from 1950 through 1959, the farm population included all
persons living on farms as determined by their response to
the question, "Is this place on a farm (or ranch)?" If
respondents raised the question, enumerators were instructed
to classify all places in rural areas consisting of house
and.garden only for which cash rent was paid as nonfarm
residences. Persons in institutions, motels, summer camps,
and tourist camps were also classified as nonfarm residents.

The Current Population Survey and the 1950 Census of
Population differ in their treatment of unmarried college
students living away from home. In the 1950 Census of
Population, college students were enumerated as residents
of the communities in which they lived while attending
school. The Current Population Survey defines such per-
sons as residents of their parents' homes. Consequently,

a larger number of college students are included in CPS
estimates of the farm population.6

The farm population in 1957 included 21,606,000 per-
sons,7 and it is estimated that there were 5,218,000 farm

 

6U.S. Agricultural Marketing Service, Farm Po ulation:
Estimates for 1250-22, AMS-80 (1959), February, I980, p. I .

7Ibid., Table IV, p. 10. Under the more restrictive
definition adopted in 1960, the farm population is estimated
to have been 17,656,000 in 1957. See U.S. Economic Research
gervice, Farm Income Situation (PIS-187), July, 1962, pp.
-11 o

60

households in March 1957.8

The latter estimate is sub-
stantially higher than the estimate of the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force and somewhat exceeds the estimate of
h,856,000 farms in 1957.9 A special.study collating informa-
tion from the 1950 Censuses of Population, Housing, and
Agriculture found that 7.5 percent of the persons classi-
fied as farm residents in the 1950 Census of Population
lived on places that did not qualify as farms in the 1950
Census of Agriculture and that 5 percent of the persons
living in farm-operator households as defined in the Census
of Agriculture were classified as nonfarm residents in the

10 The population of farm-operator

Census of Population.
households was equal to 93.8 percent of the rural-farm
population in 1950,11 and the disparity between the number
of rural-farm households and the number of farms in 1957
was of approximately the same magnitude. The number of
rural-farm households exceeded the number of farms by

362,000 in 1957, and.the number of farms was equal to 93.1

percent of the number of rural-farm households.

8U. S. Bureau.of the Census, lCurrent Po ulation Re orts,
Series P- 20, No. 9h (August 2h,1 WEIe III, p. 2.
%.S . Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Statis-

tics: ”2 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office,
1e 687, p. A88.

1ya-IIOU. S. Department of Agriculture, Major Statistical

Series of the U. S. De artment of Agriculture, Agricultural
Handbook—No. 118, Vol. 7, ParmfPopulation, Employment, and

Levels of Living, September I957, p. 6.
11U. 8. Bureau of the Census, Farms and Farm People:

Po ulation Income, and.Housin Characteristics b Economic
Class of Farm (Washington: U.S. Government Printi%g Office,
, p. 38.

 

 

61

Place of residence, it may be contended, is not the
most useful basis of classification for analysis of the
farm-operator labor force. Many rural-farm residents are
employed on a full-time basis in nonagricultural industries
and do not depend upon farming as a means of livelihood.
Some persons, who may be classified as part-time farmers,
operate farms as a supplementary source of income. Others
operate small farms and have no off-farm employment. Some
of these persons are in semi-retirement, and others may be
temporarily unemployed members of the nonfarm labor force
who have fallen back on farming as a.means of subsistence.
Conversely, some persons living in rural-nonfarm and urban
places are primarily dependent upon agriculture for their
livelihood and should be regarded as members of the farm-
operator labor force. The main reason for the large dis-
crepancy between the number of rural-farm households in
1957 and the size of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor
force is the large number of employed persons among the
heads of farm households whose primary employment is in
nonagricultural industries and whose earnings from farming,
if any, are not sufficient to qualify for agricultural
coverage under the social security program.

Industry and Occupation

Labor force estimates derived from the Current Popula-

tion Survey include farm operators in two series. These

series are based upon monthly estimates of the current

62

labor force classified both by occupation and by industry
and class of worker.

It was estimated that 6,222,000 persons were employed
in agriculture in 1957.12 This estimate included 1,687,000
wage and salary workers, 3,304,000 self-employed persons,
and 1,231,000 unpaid family workers. The classification
system used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics is designed
to give an unduplicated count of the current labor force.
Persons who held more than one job during the survey week
are therefore classified in the occupation and industry in
which they worked the greatest number of hours. Conse-
quently, some persons with off-farm employment are classi-
fied as working in nonagricultural industries.

Estimates derived from the Current Population Survey
of July 1957 indicated that a substantial number of workers
designated as having primary jobs in nonagricultural indus-
tries also held secondary employment as farm operators. A
total of 3,5h7,000 persons were classified as self-employed
workers in agriculture on the basis of the July 1957 survey.13
Information on multiple jobholders, obtained in the same

survey, indicated that 529,000 workers held secondary jobs

(as determined by the number of hours spent at each of two

 

12Average of monthly estimates for the calendar year.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Re orts,
Series P-50, No. 85 (June, I958), Table I6, p. IE.

13U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Po ulation
Re orts, Series P-57, No. 181 (August, I95 , a e 7,
p. IE.

63

1h

or more jobs) as self-employed workers in agriculture.
This estimate included h5,000 workers whose primary job
classification was wage and salary worker in agriculture
and h84,000 workers whose primary classification was wage
and salary worker in nonagricultural industries.15 The
total number of workers with agricultural self-employment
as a secondary job was equal to lh.9 percent of the number
of workers with primary jobs as self-employed workers in
agriculture. Counting both primary and secondary job-
holders, h,076,000 persons were self-employed in agricul-
ture in July 1957.

Approximately 3,329,000 persons were employed as
farmers and farm managers in 1957.16 The occupational
classification "farmers and.farm.managers" includes most
persons classified as self-employed workers in agriculture
plus some persons who are classified as hired workers in
the industrial classification.17 The Julyl957 study of
multiple jobholding found that the number of individuals

 

th.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Po ulation fig-
ports, Series P-50, No. 80 (February, 5, TaEIe I, p. 2.

15Self-employed workers and unpaid family workers
with a secondary farm or business were not counted as mul-
tiple jobholders.

16Average of estimates made in January, April, July,
and October, 1957. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current
Population Survey, Series P-50, No. 85, Table I3, p. 36.

17For a discussion of occupation, industry, and class
of worker designations see U.S. Bureau of the Census,
U.S. Census of Population: 1950, Vol. II, Part I, Ch. B,

pp. XVII:_IVIII.

64

with secondary jobs as farmers and farm managers was equal
to 14.9 percent of the total number of workers with farm-

18

ing as their primary occupation. Approximately 4,049,000

persons, counting both primary and secondary jobholders,
held jobs as farmers and farm managers in July 1957.19

The estimate of 4,076,000 persons with primary or
secondary jobs as self-employed workers in agriculture and
the estimate of 4,049,000 persons with primary or second-
ary occupations as farmers and farm managers are both sub-
stantially higher than the estimate of the number of per-
sons reporting agricultural self-employment earnings for
social security coverage in 1957. The disparity between
the size of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force and
the size of the labor force represented by estimates from
the Current Population Survey is chiefly due to the low
farm earnings of’many persons included in the CPS estimates.
A rough indication of the number of workers excluded from
agricultural self-employment coverage in the social secur-
ity program because of income restrictions is given below.
Recipients 2; Farm Self-Employment Income

The Bureau of the Census has estimated that 4,100,000

persons 14 years of age or older received income from

 

l8U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population
Re orts, Series P-50, No. 80, Table 4, p. 3.

19It was estimated that 3,524,000 persons were em-
ployed as farmers and farm.managers in July, 1957. The
estimate of 4,049,000 was calculated as 114.9 percent of
3,524,000. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population
Reports, Series P-57, No. 181, Table 7, p. I4.

65

agricultural self-employment in 1957.20 Because it is
based upon individuals with earnings from agricultural
self-employment, this estimate corresponds closely with

the method used in defining the OASI farm-operator labor
force. The age limit applied to estimates from the Current
Population Survey is inconsequential in comparing the

labor force covered by the two sources. However, the
coverage of OASI farm-operator data is restricted by the
amount of earnings required for participation in the social
security program.

The distribution of persons receiving agricultural
self-employment income in 1957 by amount of income received,
as estimated from.the Current Population Survey, is given
in Table III-2. Around 14.6 percent of the persons receiv-
ing agricultural self-employment income during the year had
net losses, and 31.0 percent had farm self-employment earn-
ings in the range of from $1 to $499. Assuming that persons
in the latter class were uniformly distributed over the
class interval, 24.8 percent of the income recipients had
farm self-employment earnings in the range of from $1 to
$399, and a total of 39.4 percent (1,615,000 persons) had
farm incomes of less than $400. The estimated number of

persons with agricultural self-employment earnings of $400

 

20U. S. Bureau.of the Census, Current Po ulation
Re orts, Series P-60, No. 30 (December, I958i, Ta EIe 27,
p. 45. Self-employment income from farming was received
by 3, 583, 000 families and 210,000 unrelated individuals.

66

.ms .e NN eases lemma .eesseeeov Om.
.ooum mmfimom mphommm moanmasmom psohh50 .mSmmmo map mo swopsm .m. a .oohsom

 

 

.mowpsnfippmfio omwpcoouom scam vopmadoawom

 

 

 

o.ooa ooo.ooa.s Hesse
III III hm>o “am 000 mm
H.o ooa s mom 4N .000 «H
N.o OON m sea ea -ooo.oa
o.H ooo as one a -ooous
m.o oom Nm seems -ooo.e
m.H com me mom m -000.“
m.H 00m mm moons -OOm.s
o.N coo Ne see 4 -ooo.s
m.N oom so mam.m seem m
0.4 000 QON mos.m -ooo.m
s.m oos.oma mom.N -OOm.N
s.s oos men mosHN -ooonN
m.“ com emN see H -OOm.H
o.oH ooo oas mos.a -ooo.a
a.ma 00: men mom :00“.
o.Hm ooo.asN.H ems -H
e.sa ooe.msm. ness
omwpmoohem whenssz Auhmaaonv
oEoomH
pcoahoamsmumaom Shem

 

 

 

 

bmoa .mopmpm vegan: muonfiahopaoo on» now .esoona
pmoshoHQSoumaom Show up .pobo new emu no name» ea amomuomnn.NaHHH mqm<a

67

or more in 1957 is 2,485,000. This estimate is in fairly
close agreement with the estimate of 2,416,500 persons
reporting agricultural self-employment earnings for social
security coverage in 1957.21
The correspondence between the two estimates is, how-
ever, somewhat superficial. First, although the minimum
self-employment income necessary for OASI coverage under
the regular reporting method is $400, the optional report-
ing:method.allowed some persons with net farm incomes of less
than $400 to enter the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force.
In 1957 approximately 500,000 persons used the optional
method for reporting agricultural self-employment earnings.22
This group included both individuals with net earnings of
$400 or more who used the option to increase their earnings
under the program and persons with net earnings of less
than $400 who could not have received coverage under the
regular reporting method. Second, persons with wage earn-
ings of $4.200 or more in covered employment were not
required to report self-employment earnings for social
security coverage, regardless of amount, because they
received maximum coverage on the basis of wage earnings.

In 1955 approximately 40,000 farm operators did not file

self-employment tax returns for this reason.23 Third, a

 

21Abeve, Table III-l.

22U.S. Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance,
Social Security Farm Statistics, 1955-1959, Table 1, p. 3.

23John C. Ellickson, "Distribution of Farm Incomes,"
Agricultural Finance Review, Vol. 23 (April, 1962), p. 27.

68

few individuals presumably combined net farm income of
less than $400 with nonfarm self-employment earnings to
satisfy minimum earning requirements fer OASIparticipa-
tion. Finally, the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force
included materially participating farm landlords on the
same basis as bona fide farm operators. In addition, of
course, estimates based upon sample data are subject to
errors in reporting and to sampling variability.

It appears, however, that most farm operators with
net farm earnings of $400 or more were included in the
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force. Assuming that one-
half of the individuals reporting under the optional
method had net farm earnings of more than $400, about
2.2 million farm operators with net earnings from self-
employment of $400 or more were included in the 1957 OASI
farm-operator labor ferce. It may be assumed that around
2.5 percent of all farm operators with net farm earnings
of $400 or more had wage earnings of $4,200 or more and
were, therefore, unable to receive social security coverage
on agricultural self-employment earnings. Thus, roughly
2.4 million farm operators with net farm earnings of $400
or more appear to have been required by law to report
farm self-employment earnings for social security coverage
in 1957. Since the size distribution of farm self-
employment income is highly skewed, this estimate can be

regarded only as a rough approximation. However, it does

69

suggest that OASI farm-operator data is generally repre-
sentative of individuals with net farm incomes of $400

or more 0

Census g; Agriculture

The quinquennial Census of Agriculture is probably
the best known source of data on American agriculture
and the farm-operator labor force. The primary objective
of the agricultural census is, however, to obtain informa-
tion on agricultural production and organization. Some
infbrmation indicative of the characteristics of the agri-
cultural labor force is available from the census, but the
usefulness of the census for analysis of the farm-operator
labor force is somewhat limited by the definitions and
procedures which are followed.
Definitions and Procedures

The procedure adopted in the Census of Agriculture is
first to define "a farm" and then to designate one person
per farm as "the farm operator." The number of farms and
the number of farm operators are thus regarded as identical.
Only one person is enumerated as a farm operator in the
case of farm partnerships. Moreover, the designation "farm
operator" is made without regard to place of residence or
to the primary occupation of the individual.

The census definition of a farm is purposely designed
so as to include nearly all agricultural production in the

United States. In the 1954 Census of Agriculture places

70

of three acres or more were counted as farms if the annual
value of agricultural production, exclusive of home-garden
products, amount to $150 or more. Agricultural products
either used at home or sold were included in computing the
value of farm production. Places of less than three acres
were counted as farms if the annual walue of products sold
amounted to $150 or more.

The definition of a farm used in the 1959 Census of
Agriculture differed from that used in 1954. Places of
10 acres or more were counted as farms in 1959 if the
annual value of agricultural products sold amounted to
$50 or more. Places of less than 10 acres were counted
as farms if receipts from the sale of farm products were
at least $250 for the yean.,

In both 1954 and 1959 places where the value of agri-
cultural products sold was below the minimum because of
crop failure or other unusual conditions and places which
were being operated for the first time were counted as
farms if they could be expected to equal or exceed the
minimum production requirements under normal conditions.
All land operated under the control of a single individual
or partnership was counted as one farm.

Occupation, not place of residence, would seem to be
the most appropriate criterion for delineation of the farm-
operator labor force. Because of its definitions and

procedures, the Census of Agriculture provides coverage

71

of the farm-operator labor force which conforms to neither
residence nor occupational criteria. Since the census
counts farm operators without regard to place of residence,
it includes as farm operators some persons who live in non-
farm places. At the same time, the census fails to include
some farm operators living on farms because they are mem-
bers of farm partnerships. With reference to occupational
status, the census includes a large number of persons who
operate farms of a very modest scale and whose primary occu-
pations are outside agriculture.”+
Number gg Farm Operators

Nearly 4.8 million farm operators were enumerated in
the 1954 Census of Agriculture. The distribution of farms
in 1954 by economic class of farm is given in Table III-3.
Excluding part-time farms, only 3.3 million farms had agri-
cultural production valued at $250 or more, and fewer than
2.9 million farms (60 percent of all farms) had gross
receipts from the sale of agricultural products of as much
as $1,200. .

The number of farms in the United States decreased to

3.7 million in 1959 according to final reports from the

 

ZhDueorf has pointed out that of 5,431,000 farm-
operator households in 1950, less than 40 percent were
wholly dependent on agriculture for their livelihood and
about 30 percent listed nonagricultural earnings as the
major source of family income. Louis J. Ducoff, "Class-
ification of the Agricultural Population of the United
States," Journal of Farm Economics, Vol. XXXVII, No. 3

(August, I955}, pp. 5II3523.

72

. 1:. .nl. .Neaa .e .m eases .Ha .so .HH .Hos
awma “manpasoamw< no nausea .m.= .usucoo on» mo omohsm .m.= "eonsom

 

 

.wsaumson mo monsoon nwwpou on one po:_hwa mafimpon “ouoz

 

.II .Hxxw .9 .HH .Ho> .ame “chap
: SOHHMfl Ho mamaoo .m.a .usnseo 0:» Ho swohsm .m.= eon umowpacwmou some

 

 

 

 

o.ooa , aNo.mms.s . Hesse
a.o moo.N assesses
s.ma emammem Heapseeanom
o.NH mem.ssm seapupnsd
to 53.. N3 He sees
o.eH msm.mes s ensao
o. S «no . Haw >H unmao
w.sa mNe.eos HHH needs
.o mammmss HH eneao
m.N moo.sma H ensao

swapsoouem nopssz aspen no

nnaao owaocoom

 

 

 

 

 

sued .nopspm seems:
nsosashopcoo on» you .sham no human oaaosooo ha naushlu.mnHHH mumda

73

1959 Census of Agriculture.25 About 232,000 of the 1.1
million decline in the number of farms from 1954 to 1959
was attributable to changes in the definition of a farm.
As defined in 1954, the number of farms counted in the
censuses actually decreased from 4.8 million in 1954 to
3.9 million in 1959. The number of farms in 1959 by
economic class of farm is given in Table III-4. The

class intervals and definitions were not the same for

the two censuses, but it is possible to compare the number
of farms with gross sales of $2,500 or more. Except where
specifically noted, farms on which gross sales of $2,500
or more were reported in the Census of Agriculture will

be defined as "commercial farms." Table III-5 shows the
estimated number of farms with sales of less than $2,500
and with sales of $2,500 or more for the period from 1954
through 1959. The estimates for 1954 and 1959 were taken
from the Censuses of Agriculture. Estimates for other
years were interpolated with the assumption that the change
in the number of farms was uniformly distributed over the
five—year period. No adjustment was made to account for
underenumeration of farms in the censuses. It will be
noted that the number of commercial farms (i.e. farms with
gross sales of $2,500 or more) remained nearly constant

during the period from 1954 to 1959. Most of the decrease

 

-25Statistics for 1959, which are for the conterminous
United States, were tabulated from U.S. Bureau of the
Cengus, U.S. Census 3; Agriculture: 1959, Vol. I, Parts
1"} e

74

in numlnr of farms occurred among farms with sales of less
than $2,500.

It may be assumed that the number of farm operators
involved in the operation of commercial farms is under-
stated by the Census of Agriculture because of farms
missed in the census enumeration and the exclusion of
extra farm-operator partners. Estimates from a post-
census survey by the Bureau of the Census indicated that
approximately 90,276 farms with gross sales of $2,500 or
more were missed in the 1954 Census of Agriculture.26 This
was the equivalent of 4.3 percent of the commercial farms
enumerated in the census. Unpublished estimates used in
expanding sample data from the 1955 Survey of Farmers'
Expenditures indicate that the number of extra farm-
operator partners involved in the operation of commercial
farms was equal to approximately 1.8 percent of the number

of commercial farms.27

 

26This estimate is based upon the assumption that the
1954 Census of Agriculture accounted for 97.5 percent of
all Class I, II, and III farms and 93.4 percent of all
Class IV farms. See U.S. Bureau of the Census, gig. Census
g£_Agriculture: 1954, Vol. II, p. xxxiv.

27To account for extra farm-operator partners in the
1955 survey, it was estimated that the number of extra
partners was equal to 4.8 percent of the number of Class I
and II farms and 0.7 percent of the number of Class III,
IV, and V farms. The estimate of 1.8 percent represents
a weighted average based upon the assumption that the num-
ber of extra partners was equal to 4.8 percent of the num-
ber of Class I and II farms and 0.7 percent of the number
of Class III and IV farms.

 

.newes escapes .ea eases .msua meted .H .He>_.mwmm nesssaseammm

mm unease .m.= .asusoo can mo_:soh:m .m.= Song vopmasnaa “condom

 

.uswmh Huanonnd wcfiusaoxmn

.oousom eon amofipwsfimov some

 

 

75

 

o.ooa st.mme.m passes
m. 3 st . 8: an esohpounaesm
m.MN mm ”Hem esapnpesm
s.e ms .msm Hs nesao
s.ea saw was s sumac
5.5H and.mmo sH ensue
o.ma mssHNms HHH eesao
s.m Ned oaN HH ensao
m.N mmm.aoa H geese
ommpnoohem nonasz «shun mo
sumac oaaosoom

 

 

 

 

mmma .eepspm eases:
msocfishopnoo on» now .sudm Ho sumac owaosooo he usuamun.suHHH mumda

76

.uofihom pmomno>du on» hobo oopsnanp

saws haanomfisd as: name“ no homes: on» ca owsmzo on» wasp soHpQEdmmm esp mpflz

vmumaoahopcw who: muse» mausoonhouca pom mopssHpmm .ohspHSlowd mo usmcoo
on» :H umpwnoasco messy now one omma use 4mma hon nonmaapmm ”oohsom

.zowpwcfimoo ca omqmmo omu.hn vovsaoxo mason mo men

18:: amp msam mamcmo mmoa on» CH reassessmo mm 00m Na camp mama no means spa:

.mahmm Hasnocn< pamoxe .msumm Ham moodaocfi mama :H 00m N cusp mmoa mo amass

macaw Spas magma Ho gonads on» Ho opmaapno one .OOm m menu whoa Ho modem
and: mahmm mo hoses: onp_maco noncommw cowpwcamov ca owcmno one “opoz

.msumm Hassocn< wcHusaoxmm

 

 

 

 

 

ewH ems m msQ new H sssnseouN omeH
eHN 00H 4 mmN .mNo. N st Hso N mmmH
ssN osN s Hem omH N mos.oeo.N smmH
NsN oss s ooQ me N Nmmuowo.~ omoH
ooQ 0H0 s mmm «Hm N Nem.soo.N mmmH
mNm own 4 ems who N Nsm.HOH.N smoH
unmask HH< 00m aw can» once so meow
eneH.mo eeHem cem.Ne as neHsm _
.

 

ommausmoa .uopwpm copHsa msosasnopcoo on» no“
:OOm m» gasp mama no use egos.no 00m «w mo nods» nun:
.ohspasowuw4 no asnceo 4mma on» ad renames am manna mo monaszna. m HHH mqmda

77

The number'of commercial farm operators for the period
fron.l954 through 1959 is given in Table III-6. These esti-
mates were based upon the assumption that the number of
underenumerated commercial farms in the 1954 and.l959 Cen-
suses of Agriculture was equal to 4.3 percent of the comp
mercial farms counted in the censuses and that the number.
of extra farm-operator’partners was equal to 1.8 percent 7
of the number of commercial farms. Also, it was assumed
that the change in the number of commercial farm operators
was uniformly distributed over the five—year period.

Comparison of the number of farm operators associated
with farms having gross sales of $2,500 (Table III-6) and
the number of persons reporting agricultural self-employment
earnings for social security coverage (Table 111-1) reveals
that the OASI farm-operator labor force has exceeded the.
number of commercial farm operators during the period from
1955 through 1959. The number of persons reporting farm
earnings for social security coverage in the first few
years after the coverage of farm operators includes a
disproportionately high percentage of persons who were
able to quality for social security retirement benefits
with only two years of coverage. The increase in the size
of the OASI farm-operator labor force after 1955 is chiefly
due to the inclusion of approximately 200,000 materially
participating fann Laidlords beginning in 1956. By 1959

the number of persons reporting farm earnings for social

78

TABLE III-6.--Number of farm operators associated with
farms having sales of $2,500 or’more, for the
conterminous United States, 1954-1959

M

 

Number of
Year Farm Operators
1954 2,231,681
1955 2,223,740
1956 2,215,797
1957 2,207,856
1958 2,199,915
1959 2,191,973

 

Source: See text.

security coverage was approximately equal to the number
of commercial farm operators. ,

In 1957 about 2.2 million farm operators were asso-
ciated with farms having gross sales of $2,500 or more,
and about 2.4 million persons reported agricultural self-
employment income for OASI coverage. Excluding approx-
imately 200,000 farm landlords, the number of commercial
farm operators was approximately equal to the number of
farm operators reporting farm earnings under the social
security program. Although nearly all commercial farm
operators, except those with covered wages of $4,200 or
more, could have participated in the social security pro-
gram on the basis of agricultural self-employment earnings,
it should.not be concluded that all OASI farm operators
would have qualified as commercial farm operators in 1957.

Undoubtedly, some commercial farm-operators with low net

79

earnings chose to option out of the program, while some
persons who would not qualify as commercial farm operators
were able to earn coverage credits based upon self-
employment earnings in agriculture. However, it seems
reasonable to expect that OASI farm-operator data are
generally representative of the commercial farm-operator
labor force.

A detailed comparison of the OASI farm-operator labor
force and.farm operators included in the Census of Agri-
culture was made by Uel Blank. His comparison of the 1955
OASI farm-operator labor force with farm operators repre-
sented in the 1954 Census of Agriculture indicated that,
while the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force included
only 36 percent of all census farms, OASI farm operators
accounted for approximately 73 percent of all farm products
sold.28 Farms with gross sales of less than $1,200 com-
prised 40 percent of all census farms but were represented
by 62 percent of the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force.29
It was estimated that 83 percent of the operators of farms
with gross sales of $5,000 or more in 1955 were represented
by sample data on 1955 OASI farm operators.30 Blank's
analysis clearly indicated that the bulk of the 1955 OASI

 

28Uel Blank, "OASI Data of‘the Farm Labor Force"
(unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Department of A ricultural
Economics, Michigan State University, 1960 , p. 131.

291bid.
3°Ibid.

80

farm-operator labor force would have qualified as commer-
cial farm operators and that a high.percentage of all
commercial farm operators were included among OASI farm
operators in 1955-

It seems reasonatde to assume that, for most purposes,
sample data on the OASI farm-operator labor force is gen-
erally representative of farm operators associated with
commercial farms. It has been estimated that there were
approximately 2.2 million commercial farm operators in
1957 and that, excluding approximately 200,000 materially
participating farm landlords, about 2.2 million farm oper-
ators qualified for social security coverage on farm self-
employment earnings in 1957. Furthermore, assuming a
sampling ratio of one percent, 2,185,900 OASI farm operators
were represented, in 1957, by sample data from the 1937-58
Continuous work-History Sample. These data include mate-
rially participating farm landlords on the same basis as

bona fide farm operators.

Regional Distribution 9; the Farm-Operator
mm
Informatimn on farm location, which was unavailable
for the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force, was available
for persons reporting agricultural self-employment earnings

for social security coverage in 1957.31 The distribution

 

31Blank's study of regional variations in the 1955
OASI farm-operator labor f0rce relied on the geographic

81

of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force by geographic
region is given in Table III-7.32 Approximately 51 per-
cent of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force was in the
North Central States. About 29.5 percent of all 1957 OASI
farm operators were in the West North Central region, and
about 21.6 percent were in the East North Central region.
None of the remaining regions had as much as 10 percent of
the total labor fOrce.

TABLE III-7.--l957 OASI farm operators by geographic
region, for’the conterminous United States

W

 

 

 

 

Region Number Percentage
Northeast 159,200 7.3
East North Central 72,200 21.6
‘West North Central 47,900 29.5
South Atlantic 207,300 9.5
East South Central 187,100 8.6
West South Central 194,000 8.9
MOuntain 106,400 4.9
Pacific 112,700 5.2
Unknown 99,100 4.5

Total 2,185,900 100.0

 

Note: Estimated from sample data.
Source: 1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample.

 

area code included in the social security account number
issued to each individual. This code identifies the area
in which the account number was issued but does not neces-
sarily indicate location of the farm from.which self-
employment earnings are currently received.

32The regional classification used throughout this
study corresponds with that used in the 1955 Survey of
Farmers' Expenditures but differs from.the classification
used in.the Census of Agriculture. As used herein, the
Northeast region includes the New England and Middle Atlan-
tic states plus Delaware and.Maryland. See Appendix II for
a listing of the states included.in each region.

82

The geographic location of 4.5 percent of the 1957
OASI farm operators included in the Continuous Work-
History Sample could not be determined. Persons in this
group apparently failed to complete certain items included
on the social security tax return. Since this group of
individuals closely resembled the remainder of the 1957
OASI farm-operator labor force with respect to age, sex,
and race, it may be assumed that persons not reporting
location of farm were distributed geographically in pro-
portion to the location of the remainder of the labor force.
Because certain other items of information were not report-
ed by those who failed to report, location of farm, this
group is excluded from consideration in most cases.

Regional statistics on the farm-operator labor force
are not available from.the Current Population Survey, but
the geographic distribution of 1957 OASI farm operators
can be compared with the distribution of farms enumerated
in the Census of Agriculture. Table III-8 gives the per-
centage distribution for farms included in the 1954 and
1959 Censuses of Agriculture by geographic region. Com-
parison of the regional distribution of all farms in 1954
and 1959 is restricted by the change in definition of a
farm, but the distribution of farms with gross sales of
$2,5000r more is comparable for the two censuses. During
the five—year period from 1954 to 1959, four regions had

relative increases in number of commercial farms. Only one

.mowom ndoaum> .5H canoe mom a canoe
meta spasm H .Ho> sz .onspHSoHde mo nausea .m.= a.msmcoo one mo soon:

meMHmemo- H one N .Hoo H.5oHH NoHH .oe m eHrsH .HH .so HH .Ho> «on .eeseHsoHe 4
mo unaooo .m .3 mdaooo on» no smowsm .m. D Bosh oouoasoamonum can A .HooH “condom

 

 

 

.oeoa to 00m mm mo moamm mmosw nu«3.mshmmo
.GOHuHsHmoo mamas
.ooHpHonou smoae

 

83

 

 

 

 

 

0.00H o.ooH o.OOH c.00H Hepoa

4.m 5.m m.m H.m oHMHowm
o.m o.m 0.4 m.m oHeposoz
H.HH n.0H m.MH o.sH Henpsoo spsom one;
0.5 5.5 N.mH m.oH Hshpseo groom pnem
m.HH H.HH N.mH H.5H oHpssHpe epsom
o.mN a.mN s.HN a.mH Hsupseu sphoz one:
5.0N m.HN o.mH 5.oH Heepsoo npeoz poem
m.m H.m 5.5 5.5 pnmompnoz
lea Ame lNV lHl seeeee
smoH smoH somoH osmoH

0 Durham H m.” OROEEOO ufihdrm HHd

 

ll

 

 

5m5H one smma .eepepm oopHc: msooHshepnoo on» tom .oonoH oHnmewoow 59
.eusuasoHnwd mo nonsense one :H meannessso assmm no soHpanHpuHo owsuooosemun. m HHH mqm<a

84

region, however, had a change of as much as one percentage
point. This was the East South Central region, which had
9.0 percent of all commercial farms in 1959 as compared
with only 7.7 percent in 1954.

The number of commercial farms and the number of 1957
OASI farm operators by geographic region are given in
Table III-9. It will be noted that relatively more 1957
OASI farm operators than operators of commercial farms,
as defined in the census, were located in the North Central
states, the East South Central states, and the Mountain
states. Relatively fewer 1957 OASI farm operators were
found in the Northeast, South Atlantic, West South Central,
and Pacific states. Only in the west North Central region,
however, did the proportion of commercial farm operators
and the proportion of OASI farm operators differ by as much
as 2 percentage points. As a percentage of the estimated
number of commercial farms, the number of OASI farm operators
in 1957 ranged from a low of 89.6 percent in the West South
Central states to a high of 112.8 percent in the West Norfih
Central states. Assuming a sampling ratio of 1 percent,
the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force represented by the
1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample was equal in size
to 105 percent of the number of farms with gross sales of

$2,500 or more.

85

.m cesaoo mo osomuns .Hoo
mmu5mma on» 909% oopoafipom:nm .Hoo

.oaoaom 5Hopmwmnxuoz moosoflpooo
.H oEsHoo seem oopmasoaoouum .Hoo .ooHHoo

Hoohuobam onp Ho>o oopanHpmHo haemomfics no: sowwon zooo 2H menom Howopoesoo mo
woman: one ma owoono om» pomp noHpQESmmo on» spa: ohspasowmw< mo woodmcoo mmma coo
smoa on» Ca vopoHoesco manom mo Hones: one scum vopoHomuopoHuna .Hoo "outflow

.opoa no 00m.~$ mo ooaom mmopw anz menomo

 

 

 

 

o.OOH coo.mmH.N o.OOH mos.o5o.N neonoe HHH
s.m Nmo.mHH o.m N5o.oHH oHeHoee
H.m mms.HHH o.m mmo.s0H sHspssoz
m.o ma~.mom 5.0H da5.©~m HoHHCoo :psom poo:
0.5 mmm.mma m.m Om©.o5a Hoppooo nusom whom
5.5 ssHH5HN N.HH mmH.mmN erssHe< sssom
H.Hm moo m5o a.mN mmo.Hoo Hespeoo sphoz one;
o.NN sNoHsms m.HN omH.Nss Heepsoo sonoz poem
o.5 005 ooH o.m mam.m5H possessoz
. asv Amv Amy Aav mowwom
omopooonom popssz omopsoomom monasz

 

 

whopoaomo shoe Hm<o

 

L

 

 

(|(l
1|(Ilr

m

 

meson HoHonoaaoo .
i
5maa .moonoH pano coo monopm copHsD osooashopmoo

 

one you .opoposomo Show Hm<o mo nomads vow msHom HoHoHoasoo mo Homasznn.onHHH.mAm45

86

Characteristics gprarm Operators

Age, race, and sex are three characteristics which
provide useful information concerning the nature of the
farm-operator labor force represented by OASI sample data.
This section examines the composition of the 1957 OASI
farm-operator labor force with regard to these three
characteristics and, where possible, the composition of
the farm-operator labor force represented by other sta-
tistics.
Agg

Eg§_thg_United States.--The OASI farm-operator labor
force comprises, in general, more older persons than does
the farm-operator labor force enumerated in the Census of
Agriculture. Blank evaluated, in some detail, the age
distributions of the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force
and.the farm operators included in the 1954 Census of
Agriculture.33 He found that the age distribution of all
farm operators reporting age in the 1954 Census was similar
to that of the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force but that
the distribution of 1955 OASI farm operators by age was
slightly flatter and.tended to be bimodal.Bh

The percentage distribution of 1955 OASI farm operators .
and farm operators enumerated in the 1954 Census of Agri-

culture, by age, are given in Table III-10. The median age

 

33Blank, "OASI Data of’the Farm Labor Force," pp. 55-65.
Bthid., p. 56.

87

. o «as . co 11m .Hoo .H oasaoo no oaomnum .aoo
WWW... u end: so as?

no esnmoo .m.= .nsocoo on» no soohsm .m.anua .Hou

.om .e .HuHHH eHoeae.oosoe sorsH shoe or»

.5m.e .m oHosH .HH .Ho>

“oonsom

.noHHopHHhop one mouse» HHo nocoaosHo
.983 .3 083% no modem noon» H3? oaks.“ .Ho unopshoeon
. .nopopn esosmapsoo we on? 5amo noosaooHo

 

 

 

 

H.0n a.ms a.ms Aehoohv
, owe comma:
o.ooa o.ooa 0.00H Hopes
a.ma c.¢H 0.0H ho>o use me
o.NN m.om n.0N soumm
H.HN c.4N 0.4N smume
m.HN m.nN s.sN Hanan
H.4H H.4H N.MH smumm
5.N N.N 5.H mN soon:
as ANV A: Antes:
mmoa ea, nunoponemo Hoaouoasoo Had shopouomo HH< sud

ouopoHowo snob Hmdo

 

 

 

sehspasoahm< no nausea emma

mmmH one smmH .nosspm oopHss

 

on» sea .omo hp ahopoHomo show no mOHpanHpeHc ewopnoonomnn.oauHHH mqmda

88

of the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force was 50.1 years
as compared with 48.8 years and 48.5 years for all farm
operators and commercial farm operators, respectively,
reporting age in the 1954 Census of Agriculture. Nearly
41 percent of all 1955 OASI farm operators were 55 years
of age or over, as opposed to 37 percent of all operators
of farms with sales of $1,200 or more. Approximately 17 per-
cent of the 1955 OASI farm operators were under 35 years of
age as compared with 15 percent of all census operators and
16 percent of the operators of commercial farms in 1954.

Because of the nature of the social security program,
it is not surprising that a disproportionately high per-
centage of persons reporting farm self-employment earnings
for OASI coverage are in the older age groups. The 1957
OASI farm-operator labor force tended to be older than
either the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force or the farm-
operator labor force included in the 1954 census. The
median age of 1957 OASI farm operators was 52.0 years, and
one-fifth of the 1957 OASI farm operators were 65 years of
age or over (Table III-ll). At the other extreme, only
14.8 percent of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force was
less than 35 years of age.

Blank attributed the relatively flatter age distribu-
tion of the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force, as com-
pared with farm operators included in the 1954 census, to

the inclusion of extra partnership operators in the OASI

89

.odnamm amopmHmuxHoz moosofipcoo mmu5moa “oousom

.spmu oamaom seam ooposfipmm “eaoz

 

 

 

 

0.00H o.m Ao>o use m5
a.mm o.mH #5 I mo
0.0m 5.4N so 1 mm
m.mm H.~N an 1 m4
a.mm 5.mH as 1 mm
5.HH 4.5 an n on
m.5 5.: mm 1 mm
H.N o.N sN . oN
4.6 s.o oN sees:
oMmpeoeoom neonmmmmo Has mmw
osapoHseso no ewopooouom

nonopm topaz: msocwahopsoo one new .omo 59 eonom honed
toastedonsnse Hmeo 5moH one go soHssloann.emesssoeom--.HH-HHH mHmse

90

labor ferce and to the incentives for older persons to
qualify, if possible, for social security benefits.35
These explanations apply equally to the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force. In addition, the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force includes materially participating
farm landlords who would not have been included as farm
operators in the census and who were not included in the
1955 OASI farm-operator labor force. The hypothesis is
suggested that farm landlords tend to be older than bona
fide farm operators and that the higher proportion of
older persons in the 1957 OASI farmsoperator labor force

is due, at least partially, to the inclusion of materially
participating farm landlords. Some evidence bearing upon

this hypothesis can be offered.

The 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force comprises four
mutually exclusive coverage groups. These groups, classi-
fied on the basis of years in which self-employment earn-
ings from agricultural sources were reported for social
security coverage, are defined as follows:

1. Persons with covered earnings from agricultural
self-employment in each of the years 1955, 1956,

and 1957.

2. Persons with covered earnings from agricultural
self-employment in 1957 only.

 

35Ihid., pp. 57-58. However, it should also be noted
that farm operators enumerated.in the census may tend to
understate age. See, for example, Hugh H. W01fenden,
Population Statistics and Their Compilation (Rev. Ed.;
Chicago: The University of CEIcagoPress, 1954), pp. 53-59.

91
3. Persons with covered earnings from agricultural
self-employment in 1956 and.l957 but not in 1955.

4. Persons with covered earnings from agricultural
self-employment in 1955 and 1957 but not in 1956.

This method of classification distinguishes most people who
qualified for social security coverage as materially partic-
ipating farm landlords from those who were bona fide farm
operators. Of the nearly 2.2 million 1957 OASI farm oper-
ators represented by the 1937-58 Continuous WOreristory
Sample, approximately 1.4 million persons had covered agri-
cultural self-employment earnings in each of the years 1955,
1956, and 1957. About 100,000 persons reported agricultur-
al self-employment earnings in 1955 and 1957 but not in
1956; about 270,000 persons reported earnings from agricul-
tural self-employment in 1957 only; and about 400,000 per-
sons reported agricultural self-employment earnings in 1956
and 1957 but not in 1955. Since the rental income of mate-
rially participating farm landlords has been covered by the
social security program only for years after 1955, most of
the farm landlords are no d0ubt included in the group with
covered earnings from agricultural sources in 1956 and 1957
but not in 1955.

The percentage distribution of 1957 OASI farm opera-
tors by age, for each coverage group, is given in Table
III-12. The median ages of farm operators in the four
groups ranged from 48.2 years for persons with agricul-

tural self-employment coverage in 1955 and 1957 to 55.4

92

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.oagaom 5Hopoamnxh03 moosoapooo mmu5moa ”oohsom
.opoc oagaou Scam oopoaHpem “opoz
seesaw
0.0m a.mm N.ms 5.Hm o e ssHooz
0.00H 0.00H 0.00H 0.00H deuce
m.m 5.m s.m m.m so>o one 55
m.NH m.mH m.oH m.HH e5 1 mo
N.NN m.sN 5.5H o.mN so . mm
5.0N 0.5H a.mN o.NN an 1 ms
0.0H N.mH 5.HN n.0N as 1 mm
0.6 s.o “.5 5.5 Hm a on
¢.5 5.m «.0 ~.¢ 5m 1 mm
m.m 0.m o.N 0.0 em a 0m
~.~ m.0 «.0 H.0 0N Hots:
5mmH 5muommH 5mummmH 5mnomumm5H Huummmv
shoppom owoso>oo pooamoamsmjmaom Hoaspasoanud

 

seesaw oopHsD osooHshepooo on» you

.omsouw owouo>oo pooshoaoaoumaom Hohspasownws pom
.owo 5n eouom Honda Hopohoeouauom Hmdo 5m5H on» no :oHaanHanv omopcoohomua.mHuHHH 0:049

93

years for persons with agricultural self-employment coverage
in 1956 and 1957. Approximately 27 percent of the persons
in the latter group were 65 years of age or over as compared
with no more than 19 percent in any of the other three
groups. Thus, it is suggested that the inclusion of mate-
rially participating farm landlords has been partially
responsible for the disproportionately high percentage of
older persons in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force.

The group of 1957 OASI farm operators with agricultural
self-employment coverage in each of the years 1955, 1956,
and 1957 presumably excludes most materially participating
farm landlords and older persons who were able to qualify
for retirement benefits after receiving coverage in only
two years. As compared with commercial farm operators
enumerated in the 1954 Census of Agriculture, however, this
group also included more persons 65 years of age or over and
fewer persons under 35 years of age.

Egg geographic regions.--Among 1957 OASI farm operators
in eight geographic regions, there appears to be substantial
differences in age. The median age of 1957 OASI farm opera-
tors ranged from a low of 49.0 years in the Mountain states
to a high of 56.7 years in the East South Central states
(Table III-13). OASI farm operators in the South generally
tended to be older than OASI farm operators in either the
North or'the West. More than one-fourth of the 1957 OASI

farm operators in the South Atlantic and East South Central

9h

 

 

 

 

.oagaom 5Hopmamuxaoz moonsfipsoo 051555H "ooHSom
.opoo magsom Boom ooposHpnm 3902
50.333
N.N5 6.55 0.55 5.05 5.55 s.5s N.N5 0.65 owe ssHoe:
0.00H 0.005 0.005 0.00H 0.00H 0.00H 0.00H 0.00H Hence
«.e H.s 5.5 0.m 0.5 H.s 5.5 5.5 no>o one 55
5.5a 0.5a 0.5a a.0« «.ma m.HH H.5H 0.5H :5 a 50
5.¢« 5.mH 5.5« 5.5« 5.5« m.«« «.4« 5.5« 40 u 55
H.e« s.«« 5.4« «.H« 5.«« «.«« 5.H« 0.H« 45 u 54
5.5H 5.5« «.0H 4.5H 5.0H m.o« a.mH 0.0« a: u 55
H.5 0.w 5.0 5.4 5.5 «.5 H.5 «.m 45 u 05
5.4 5. 0.5 4.« 5.5 «.0 5.5 «.5 5« u 5«
5.H 5.« «.H 5.H 4.H 5.« «.« 4.« ¢« 1 0«
4.0 5.0 4.0 «.0 5.0 0.0 5.0 s.0 0« seem:
onHoom :Hopnsoz Houpooo Heapsoo oHpooHp< flamenco Hehpcoo ammonphoz answer“
arson rpsom spsom speoz speoz owe

 

 

 

seem

 

 

one:

 

pose

 

 

sees, _

nooawon oHnmanwoow psto sou .ows 5n

venom momma Hoponoaouahom H040 555H on» yo moansnahano owopoeonomnn.5H|HHH mamas

95

states were 65 years of age or over. The disproportionately
high number of older persons in these regions seems to be
associated with the agricultural self-employment coverage pat-
tern of the farm operators. Approximately 25 percent of the
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force in the South Atlantic 7
states and 24 percent in the East South Central states had ~
agricultural self-employment coverage in 1956 and 1957 but not
in 1955. No more than 19 percent of the farm operators in the
remaining regions were included in this coverage group. The
median ages of persons with agricultural self-employment cover-
age in 1956 and 1957 only were 57.1 years and 58.5 years in the
South Atlantic and East South Central states, respectively.

The preponderance of persons with agricultural self-
employment coverage in 1956 and 1957 but not in 1955 does not,
however, account for the age differential between 1957 OASI
farm operators in the South Atlantic and East South Central
states and those in other states. The median ages of persons
with agricultural self-employment coverage in each of the
years 1955, 1956, and 1957 were 53.7 years in the South Atlantic
states and 56.8 years in the East South Central states. These
estimates exceed the median ages of all 1957 OASI farm operators
in each of the other six regions. Although the inclusion of
materially participating farm landlords in the social security
program may have resulted in the coverage of persons whotend
to be older than bona fide farm operators, the age differen-

tials among geographic regions are not wholly attributable to

96

variations in the proportion of persons with agricultural
self-employment coverage in only years after 1955. There
seem to exist genuine differences among regions in the
distribution of 1957 OASI farm operators by age.

The distribution of farm operators enumerated in the
1954 Census of Agriculture, by age, is given in Table
III-l4 for eight geographic regions. As shown previously,
the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force tends to include
a disproportionately large number of older persons. In
contrast with the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force,
however, census farm operators in the South Atlantic and
East South Central states did not tend to be older than
farm operators in other regions. Both the median and
average ages of census farm operators in the South Atlantic
and East South Central states were lower than the median
and average ages of farm operators in the Northeast, West
South Central, and Pacific states in 1954.

It may be concluded that OASI farm operators generally
tend to be older than farm operators enumerated in the
Census of Agriculture. This age differential is primarily
attributable to the inclusion of materially participating
farm landlords in the OASI farm-operator labor force, the
incentives for older persons to attempt to qualify for
social security benefits, and the omission of extra farm-

operator partners from the Census of Agriculture.

.0HH .5 .5H ersH
"oopsom

 

“onspasonwdomm usesoo .m.0 .osmsoo one no sooasm .m.=

 

.HH .06 .HH .Ho> .meH

.5Ho>HpoomooH .onoo5 0. 05 one whoo5 5. H5 one: nonopm
oHpooHp< sHuoHS one uooawdm_3oz one :H esopohomo Show How homo owono>< .oHnoHHmponsu

.Honpso 50 uopstoHouo
.mnod5soz coo onmsmaom ontsaooHn

.cmoahuoz 0cm onozoaen mmHosHowms

 

97

 

 

 

 

A who 83
0.65. 0.00 N.65 0.50 5.50 5.00 0.50 560 ems omssopH

Amhoohm
H.65 5.50 5.50 5.50 6.50 0.50 5.50 0.65 some seHoez
6.66H 6.66H 6.66H 6.66H 6.66H 6.66H 6.66H 6.66H Hosea
5.0H 5.5H 6.5H («.5H 5.5H 5.5H 0.0H 5.0H peso one 50
N.NN 5.5H 6.HN N.5H 5.5H 5.5H 5.6N 0.HN 00 - 55
5.5N 0.0N H.0« 0.0« 5.0« «.0« 0.5« o.0« 05 u 50
5.5« «.5N 5.«N 5.5N o.0« 5.5« 5.5N H.«« 00 u 55
«.HH 5.0H 0.HH 5.«H 5.«H H.0H 5.5H 0.HH 05 u 5«
5.6 5.H 0.H 5.N N.N o.N 5.H 0.H 5N sees:
OHHfiowm Gad ago: Hdhpnmo 3.5.200 QOH0W0HD< Hwhwcoo Huh 9530 dpuwmnfioz AoHdOhv

sesom 06660 00:60 speoz sunoz 604
one: room some seem

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

nsonoH 0Hnmohwoom psmHo How

owe 50 oHspHsOHHw< mo
osucoo 455a osp oH wchHoaoH unapohomo Show mo oOHpanhano owspooohomnu.0HIHHH mummy

98

Raga

Income differentials between white and nonwhite work-
ers indicate that race is an important characteristic of
the farm-operator labor force. For example, the median
.income of nonwhite males in the rural-farm population was
only $408 in 1957 as compared with $1,835 for white males.36
Consequently, it would appear that the income and employment
experiences of the nonwhite labor force merit examination.
The fact that nonwhite workers tend to have substantially
lower earnings than white workers suggests, however, that
nonwhite workers may be poorly represented in the OASI
farm-operator labor force.

Although strictly comparable statistics on the racial
composition of the farm-operator labor force are lacking,
sufficient information is available to indicate the rela-
tive number of nonwhite farm operators. Approximately 10.1
percent of the farm operators enumerated in the 1954 Census
of Agriculture were nonwhite workers and nearly all of the
nonwhite farm operators were Negroes.37 In comparison,
only 1.6 percent of the 1957 OASI farm operators included
in the 1937-58 Continuous work-History Sample were Negroes.

 

36U. S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population
Reports, Series P-60, No. 30, Table I7, p. 32.

37U. S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census of Agricul-
ture: 1 , Vol. 11, Ch. 1, Table T, p.048. 01' the
4,782,4 arms counted in the 1954 census, 467,656 were
operated by Negroes and 15,994 were operated by other
nonwhites.

99

Blank argues that the low social and economic status
of Negroes has contributed to the low proportion of Negroes
reporting agricultural self-employment earnings for social
security coverage.38 Low earnings would certainly pre-
clude the coverage of many Negro farm operators. The
Census of Agriculture does not, of course, provide informa-
tion on net income from farming; but census data are not
inconsistent with the hypothesis that low farm earnings
have prevented many Negro farm operators from.receiving
social security credits on agricultural self-employment
earnings. Although 70 percent of all nonwhite farm-
operators reported gross farm sales of $1,200 or more in
1954 as compared with 60 percent of all farm operators,39
about 60 percent of the nonwhite farm operators were ten-
ants as opposed to only 20 percent of the white operators.“O
Thus, while a higher proportion of nonwhite persons may
have operated commercial farms, a much higher percentage
of nonwhite farm operators also received only a share of
gross farm earnings. Disregarding the differential between

net earnings, it would seem that a higher percentage of

white than nonwhite farm operators could be expected to

 

380f. Blank, "OASI Data of the Farm Labor Force,"
pp e 66'67 e

390.8. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census of Agricul-
ture: 19 , Vol. II, Ch. X, Table I9, pp. 990-991 and
EH. XI, able 3, p. 1162. Tabulated by author.

hOIbido, Ch. X, Table 3, p. 955-

100

have gross farm earnings sufficient to qualify for social
security coverage.

The number of nonwhite farm operators declined by 41
percent from 1954 to 1959.1+1 Because of the change in the
definition of a farm, the hypothesis that a disproportion-
ately large number of nonwhite farm operators was excluded
from the 1959 census by the change in definition is sug-
gested. Final census reports from 16 southern states“2
indicate that 151,130 places were not counted as farms
in 1959 because of the change in definition. Only 28,955
of these places (19.2 percent of the places excluded by
the change in definition) were operated by nonwhites."’3
Nonwhites accounted for 20.0 percent of the census farm
operators in the South in 1954‘”+ and 16.5 percent in 1959.45
Although the proportion of nonwhites among persons excluded
from.the 1959 census because of the change in the defini-
tion of a farm was slightly larger than the proportion of

nonwhites counted in the census, the substantial reduction

in the number of nonwhite farm operators from 1954 to 1959

 

“lOnly 285,845 nonwhite farm operators were enumerated
in the 1959 census. U. 3. Bureau of the Census, U. 8. Census
gflAgriculture:12 9, Vol. 1, Parts 1- 48, Table 4, various

pages.
thncluding Delaware and Maryland.

“3U. S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census of Agricul-
ture: 1959, Vol. I, Parts 22- 37, Ta BIe I0, var1ous pages.

#50. 3. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census of A ricul-
ture:125 , Vol. II, Ch. x, Table 6“p.‘9567‘CEIcfiI§tEd‘by

author.
55U. S. Bureau of the Census, U. S. Census of Agriculture:

_229,'V01. 1, Parts 22- -37, Table 1— and TaEIe 4, various
pages. Calculated by author.

101

was apparently caused by the movement of a higher percent-
age of nonwhite farm operators off the farm and was not
merely the result of changes in the definition of a farm.
Only 6.3 percent of the change in the number of nonwhite
farm operators from 1954 to 1959 was due to the change in
definition.

In summary, nonwhite workers accounted for approxi-
mately 10.1 percent of the farm operators enumerated in
the 1954 Census of Agriculture and 7.7 percent of those
enumerated in the 1959 census. Estimates of employed pert
sons by occupation and color are not available for 1957
from the Current Population Survey, but about 8.5 percent
of the persons employed as farmers and farm managers in

46 Approximately

February, 1958, were nonwhite workers.
90 percent of the Negro farm operators included in the
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force were located in the
South. Negro farm operators accounted for 8.4 percent
of the 1957 OASI farm operators in the South Atlantic
states, 5.6 percent in the East South Central states, and
2.1 percent in the West Central States.
Sex

Although farming is generally regarded as an occupa-

tion predominantly restricted to males, female workers

constituted 6.4 percent of the 1957 OASI farm—operator

 

héU.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Po ulation
Reports, Series P-57, No. 188 (March, I958), Table I6,
p. .

102

labor force. In comparison, an average of 163,000 female
workers were included among the 3,304,000 persons classi-
fied as self-employed workers in agriculture during the
year l957.h7 The number of female workers was equal to
4.9 percent of the total number of self-employed farm
workers. About the same proportion of persons who were.
classified as farmers and farm managers in 1957 were
female workers."8
Females accounted for 7.1 percent of the 4,100,000
income recipients with agricultural self-employment income
in 1957.’+9 Relatively fewer females than males reported
farm self-employment earnings of $500 or more, and the
percentage of females with sufficient income to qualify
for agricultural self-employment coverage might thus be
expected to be lower than the percentage of‘males able to
qualify for coverage. Approximately 66 percent of the
female income recipients and 44 Percent of the male income
recipients had farm self-employment earnings of less than
$500 in 1957, and females accounted for only about 4.5
percent of all persons who received agricultural self-

employment income of $500 or more in 1957.50

 

47U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Po ulation

Reports, Series P-50, No. 85 (June, I958), Tab e , p.35.
Average of monthly estimates for the calendar year.

h81bld., Table 13, pp. 36—37.

h9U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population
Reports, Series P-60, No. 30, Table 27, p. 45.

501bid., calculated by author.

103

The relatively higher proportion of female workers
in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force seems due to
the inclusion of materially participating farm landlords
in the social security program. Females comprised only
3.4 percent of all persons with agricultural self-employment
coverage in each of the years 1955, 1956, and 1957. Among
persons with agricultural self-employment coverage for only
years after 1955, females accounted for approximately 13
percent.

The number of female workers included in the 1957
OASI farm-operator labor force ranged from a low of 5.2
percent of all 1957 OASI farm operators in the Northeast
and Mountain states to a high of 9.8 percent in the South
Atlantic States (Table III-15). Although the dispropor-
tionately large number of female farm operators in the
South Atlantic and East South Central states is associated
with a disproportionately large number of persons in these
regions who received their first year of agricultural self-
employment coverage after 1955, the inclusion of materially
participating farm landlords in the social security program
does not seem to account for regional variations in the
percentage of female farm operators. Among persons with
agricultural self-employment coverage in each of the years
1955, 1956, and.l957, female workers accounted for about
5.6 percent of the 1957 OASI farm operators in the South
Atlantic states and about 4.2 percent in the East South Cen-

tral states as compared with an average of 3.4 percent for

all regions.

104

TABLE III-15.--Percentage of male and female workers in
the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force, for
eight regions and the conterminous
United States

 

 

Male Female

Region Farm Operators Farm Operators
Northeast 94.8 5.2
East North Central 93.2 6.8
west North Central 94.7 5.3
South Atlantic 90.2 9.8
East South Central 91.7 8.3
West South Central 94.5 5.5
Mountain 94.8 5.2
Pacific 93.9 6.1
All regions 93.6 6.4.

 

 

 

Note: Estimated from.eample data.

Source: 1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample.

CHAPTER IV
THE OFF-FARM EMPLOYMENT OF FARM OPERATORS

Estimates of the number of farm operators working off
the farm and the aggregate off—farm earnings of farm oper-
ators suggest that multiple jobholding is an important
characteristic of the farm—operator labor force. Detailed
information indicative of the scope and nature of off-
farm work by farm operators has not been available on the
national level. The primary purpose of this chapter is
to examine statistics concerning the number of farm opera-
tors working off the farm and to determine the comparabil-
ity of multiple-jobholding data from OASI records with
those provided from other sources. Chapter V will then
deal with the characteristics of multiple jobholders in
the farm-operator labor force and the general hypothesis
that significant differences exist between the character—
istics of single and multiple jobholders.

In addition to data taken from OASI employment
records, aggregate data on the off-farm employment of farm
operators is available from three sources: (1) the Census
of Agriculture, (2) special sample surveys undertaken by
the Department of Agriculture, and (3) the Current Popula-

tion Survey conducted by the Bureau of the Census.

105

106

Although studies of local areas are numerous, these are
the only major sources of aggregate statistics on the
off-farm work of farm people.

Any estimate of the number of farm operators working
off the farm is meaningful only with reference to the farm-
operator labor force to which it relates. This is clearly
demonstrated in comparing estimates from the Census of
Agriculture, the Current Population Survey, and the Con-
tinuous work-History Sample. Apart from problems of sampling
variability and errors of response or reporting, differ-
ences occur in estimates of off-farm work because of differ-
ences in the farm-operator labor force represented by the
estimates and differences in the operational definition of

off-farm work.

Census 23 Agriculture

The coverage and definitions of the Census of Agricul-
ture were discussed in the preceding chapter. Despite its
lack of detail, the Census of Agriculture does provide
useful information concerning the number of farm operators
who work off the farm. Moreover, additional information
relating to the off-farm employment and income of farm
operators, as defined in the Census of Agriculture, is
alailable from special sample surveys.
Typg‘g§_Estimates

The 1954 and 1959 Censuses of Agriculture included

four items concerning off-farm work and other income. The

107

following questions were asked of a sample of farm
operators1 in the 1954 census:

1. How many days this year did you work off
your farm?

2. Did any other member of your family living
with you have a nonfarm job, business, pro-
fession, or work on someone else's farm this
year?

3. Have you any income this year from any of
the following sources--sale of products from
land rented out, cash rent, boardas,old-age
assistance, pensions, veterans' allowances,
unemployment compensation, interest, dividends,
profits from nonfarm business, and help from
members of your family?
4. Will the income which you and your family
received from work off the farm and from
other sources . . . be greater than the
total value of all agricultural products 2
sold or to be sold from your place this year?
Off-farm work was defined to include work at a nonfarm job,
business, profession, or on someone else's farm. Exchange
work was specifically excluded. Since the census was com-
pleted before the end of the calendar year, farm operators
were asked to include the number of days which they expect-
ed to work off the farm before the end of the year.
The 1959 Census of Agriculture included similar ques-

tions on off-farm work and other income; however these

 

1The sample consisted of certain specified farms plus
20 percent of all remaining farms. For elaboration of the
sampling procedure see U. S. Bureau.of the Census, QpS.
Census pf Agriculture: 1954, Vol. II, pp. xix-xx.

21bid., p. 1371.

108

questions were asked of all farm operators in 1959 while
the estimates for 1954 were based on the responses of a
sample of farm operators. No information was obtained in
either census concerning the kind of off-farm work done by
farm operators and family members or the amount of income
received from off-farm sources.

A special Survey of Farmers' Expenditures was con-
ducted jointly by the Department of Agriculture and Bureau
of the Census in 1955. Although the major objective of
the survey was to collect information concerning the pro-
duction and living expenditures of farm-operator families,
some data indicative of the sources and amounts of off-
farm income of farm-operator families were obtained.

The definitions used in the sample survey were the
same as those of the 1954 Census of Agriculture, and the
sample was designed to correspond with the coverage of the
1954 census.3 Family income questions were included in
the second of two questionnaires used in the survey. Esti-
mates of the amount of off-farm income received by farm-
operator families were based on data from a total of 3,985

schedules representing the conterminous United States.

 

3For a discussion of the procedures and definitions
of the survey see U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census
pf Agriculture: 1954, Vol. III, Part 11, pp.-I:4. Income
statistics derive rom the survey can be found in this
report and in the following: (1) U.S. Department of Agri-
culture, Farmers' Expenditures in 1 p1 Re ions, Statis-
tical BulIetin No. 224, April, 195 ; and (25 H. O. Halcrow,
"Part-Time Farming," Ch. VIII of U.S. Bureau of the Census,
Q;§. Census pf Agriculture: 1254, Vol. III, Part 9.

109

The survey provided data on the amount of off-farm

income received by the farm operator from each of the

following sources:

1.
2.
3.
h.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

lo.
11.

12.

Farm custom work;

Farm trucking and hauling;

Nonfarm business;

Farm work for wages or salary;

Nonfarm work for wages or salary;

Rental of farm real estate;

Rental of nonfarm real estate;

Boomers and boarders;

Interest, dividends, trust funds, or royalties;
Veterans' pensions and compensation, veterans'
school allotment, or servicemen's family allot-
ment;

Retirement pay, unemployment compensation,
old-age pension, annuities, alimony, regular

contributions, or welfare received; and

Any other personal income.

Separate estimates of aggregate off-farm income from both

farm and nonfarm sources were derived for the wife and for

other family members.

Published estimates from the survey include aggregate

income from each of the sources listed above for the United

States and major geographic regions and for the United

States by economic class of farm. No information was tab-

ulated on the type of off-farm job or business from which

off-farm earnings were received, and no estimates of the

110

distribution of off-farm income among persons with income
from specified sources were provided.
Number 9; Multiple Jobholders

The most recent census report on part-time farming
notes that "farm operators who work at other occupations
simultaneously with some farming have increased substan-
tially in terms of percentages."4 The 1930 Census of Agri-
culture found that three out of ten farm operators worked
off the farm one day or more in 1929; whereas, by 1954,
nearly one-half of the farm operators enumerated in the
Census of Agriculture reported some off-farm work.5 Fur-
thermore, during the period from 1929 to 1954 the propor-
tion of farm operators working off the farm 100 days or
more increased from 11.5 percent to 28.5 percent.6

In the 1954 Census of Agriculture approximately 2.2
million farm operators (45.0 percent of all farm operators)
reported some off-farm employment during the calendar year.7
Of the farm operators working off the farm in 1954, 38.1
percent worked at off-farm jobs on 1 to 99 days, and 61.9

percent worked off the farm on 100 or more days.8 It has

 

“Halcrow, "Part-Time Farming," p. 7.
51bid.
61bid.

7U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census pf Agriculture:
1255, Vol. 11, Ch. 11, Table 26, pp. 152-153.

31bid., pp. 152-154. Tabulated by author.

111

been noted that in the Census of Agriculture one person
per farm is designated as the farm operator without regard
to primary occupation. Because of the relatively low
gross sales and acreage limits required for a place to be
counted as a farm, the census includes a large number of
small farms which do not provide full-time employment for
the operator. Consequently, a substantial number of farm
operators, as defined in the census, are actually employed
in nonfarm jobs on what is normally considered to be a
full-time basis and depend only to a very limited extent
upon farming as a source of income.

Casual observation suggests that the percentage of
farm operators working off the farm varies inversely with
the scale of the farm operation. Census estimates of the
number and percentage of farm operators working off the
farm in 1954 by gross farm sales clearly support this
hypothesis. The percentage of farm operators working off
the farm in 1954 ranged from a low of 20.2 percent for
operators of farms with gross sales of $25,000 or more to
a high of 65.4 percent for operators of farms with gross
sales of less than $250 (Table IV-l). The relation of
the percentage of farm operators working 100 days or more
off the farm.to gross farm sales is equally apparent.
Nearly 28 percent of all farm operators worked off the
farm 100 days or more in 1954, but the percentage ranged

from less than 8 percent for operators of farms with gross

112

sales of $10,000 or more to around 56 percent for operators
of farms with gross sales of less than $250 (Table IV-2).
Approximately two-thirds of all farm operators working off
the farm 100 days or more in 1954 operated farms with gross
sales of less than $1,200.

The most recent data on off-farm employment are pro-
vided by the 1959 Census of Agriculture. Final census
reports for the conterminous United States indicate that
approximately 1.7 million farm operators (44.9 percent of
all farm operators) worked off the farm in 1959.9 Among
farm operators with off-farm employment in 1959, about 33.5
percent worked off the farm on,l to 99 days and about 66.5
percent worked off the farm on 100 days or more.10 Approx-
imately the same percentage of farm operators in the con—
terminous United States worked off the farm in 1959 as in
1954, but a higher percentage worked at off-farm jobs on
100 days or more in 1959 than in 1954. Because of the
change in the definition of a farm, however, comparisons
of estimates for 1954 and 1959 are not strictly valid.

When operators of places not counted as farms in 1959
because of the change in definition are included, about

46.2 percent of all farm operators (as defined in 1954)

 

. 9U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census 2; Agricul-
ture: 1 , Vol. I, parts 1-48, Table 17, various pages.
Calculate y author. Excludes operators of Abnormal farms.

loIbid., Calculated by author. Excludes operators of
Abnormal farms.

113

 

In .1:..moaa .e .s capes Ha .eo HH .Ho>_ «wml. .ouao
nasoaum¢ mo nausea .m.o .msncoo on» Hoeaaensm .m. : Bonn nonmasoawo .ooudom

 

.mmmao :ofipwasmom on» a“
whopmnomo Show Haw mo ommpcooaom e no snow esp mmo wcwxnoz unopwhomo enema

.nahmm Hmsuocn< mo myopmpomo wdwuzdowmm

 

 

 

 

 

o.ws o.ooa asmsmma. Hesse
~.o~ m.H Hmolem shoe to ooo.m~
~.sa a.“ mom.ana see.s~ - ooo.ea
N.Hm ~.0H mmm.o- smm.o - ooo.m
m.om a.ma Hmo.mm~ mmm.s - acm.m
a.m¢ a.ma Nmp.¢mm ®m¢.~ I oo~.a
a.mm s.o~ Hem.ssm sea.s - ems.
a.mo s.o~ ma~.ssm ohm ens» snug
nlllllm:acaompow ommpaoonmm hops: Annmaaonq
can pass mo ovum demon on» HMO axh03.nhopmho o naom uponcoum Show Ho odaa>

 

 

E

4mma .mopmum .vopana msonaahopmoe onp_uom
caom mposuomm_sham mo odam> hp spam on» mmo mcaxnoz unopmnomo spawns. H >H mqm<e

114

 

.moaa .0 .s capes .Ha .eo .HH .Ho> .mwma

Honduasofinm¢ mm ndnemo .m.: .050200 on» Mo swondm .m.: Scum ooumHSono ”monsom

.mfihwm Haemocp< Mo muopwhomo mnwusaoxmm

 

 

 

 

0.0m 0.00H 0Hs.mmm.a House

0.0 0.0 004.0H once to 000.00
s.0 0.0 00H.mm 000.00 - 000.0H
0.0a s.0 000.00 000.0 - 000.0
0.0a 0.0 00N.Hma 000.0 - 000.0
s.sm 0.sH 000.00H 000.0 - 00~.H
n.0m 0.00 000.00s 00H.H - 000
0.00 0.00 000.000 000 none more

meanaomnow ommpmoopod mwmmmz AmmmHHonv

caeaoasz we seem

 

 

magma on» who meaxhoz muoumhomo

 

Uaom nauseoum Spam Mo 05Hm>

 

smma .mopmpm ocean: msocfisuopcoo on» now .0Hom mposuoum
show no osaa> up whoa so 0000 ooa sham one Hmo wcaxuoz muopwuomo ahmmuu.mn>H mqm<a

115

reported off-farm work in 1959, and approximately 68.5 per-
cent of all farm operators with off-farm employment worked
off the farm on 100 or more days during the year.

The percentage of farm operators working off the farm
in 1959 by value of farm products sold is given in Table
IV-3. The percentage of farm operators with off-farm
employment varied from a low of 19.6 percent for operators
of farms with gross sales of $40,000 or more to a high of
58.2 percent for operators of farms with gross sales of
from $50 to $2,499. None of the three classes with gross
sales of $10,000 or more had as many as 10 percent of the
operators within each class working 100 days or more Off
the farm. At the other extreme, nearly one-half of the
operators of farms with gross sales of from $50 to $2,499
worked off the farm at least 100 days in 1959.

The Census of Agriculture includes, by definition,
only one farm operator per farm; but estimates from the
1955 Survey of Farmers' Expenditures permit calculation
of the number of farm operators, including extra partner-
ship operators, with off-farm earnings in 1955. Of an es-
timated 4,760,050 farm operators in 1955, approximately
443,000 operated nonfarm businesses, 1,439,000 worked for

others for wages or salaries at nonfarm jobs, and 322,000

 

lllpid., Table 10 and Table 17, various pages.
Calculated by author. Excludes operators of Abnormal
farms.

116

worked as hired farm laborers (Table IV-4). Two factors
should be noted with reference to these estimates. First,
although extra partnership operators are included, these
estimates are biased downward because they do not account
for farms missed in the 1954 Census of Agriculture.12
Second, the three categories included in Table IV-4 are

not mutually exclusive; hence the total number of persons
with off-farm earnings from at least one of the three
sources in 1955 is overstated by the sum of the persons
included in the three categories.

The Census of Agriculture, while including most kinds
of work off the farm as off-farm employment, provides no
information on the relative importance of different sources
of off-farm earnings. Estimates from the 1955 survey do
permit, however, some evaluation of the major sources of
off—farm earnings of farm operators. Among all farm
operators in 1955, it is estimated that 9.3 percent had
earnings from nonfarm self-employment,30.2 percent had
wages or salaries from working for others in nonfarm jobs,
and 6.8 percent had wages or salaries from employment as
hired farm workers at some time during the calendar year
(Table IV-S). We have seen that the rate of multiple job-

holding13 tends to vary inversely with the size of the farm

 

le.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers' Expendi-
tures ippl2§5 p1 Re ions, p. 10.

13Throughout this study the term "rate of multiple job-
holding" refers to the number of persons holding two or more
jobs as a percentage of all persons within a given class.

117

.mwmw henspasoatm< mm

 

.mommm msofih0> .ba 0Hn0s .wJIH apnea .H .Ho>

admmoo .m.s .msmcoo on» mo smondm .m.: Bonn 0090H=oa0o "meadow

.msh0m H0Euocn< mo mnopmuomo wca0saoxmm

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

0.00 0.00 000.000.m annoy
0.0 0.00 000.000 ones he 000.00
0.0 0.00 000.000 000.00 - 000.00
0.0 0.00 000.000 000.00 - 000.00
0.00 0.00 000.000 000.0 . 000.0
0.00 0.00 000.000 000.0 . 000.0
0.00 0.00 000.000.H 000.0 - 00
onmlxno 0000 who: no >0 . mmuop0nmmo Anh0aaonw
Hawk on» mac 00x90; whogwuo 0 mo 0 0peoonom mo ponEdz 0Hom mpos0oum 890m Mo 05H0>

 

 

 

 

omma .mop0pm 00900» msocfieuopcoo map you

.0Hom muos0oum sh0m mo 05H0> hp egos ho 0000 OOH 0:0 ones no 000 H ah0m
on» umo meaxuos unop0uoao 5&09 mo om0pcoonom 0:0 anopwhomo Hymn mo nonsszsu.mn>H mqm<a

118

 

 

In. nhH0 .0 .00 00000 000 00 .0 .0 00000 .00 0000 .000 .Ho>_.0wmm
“ouspasoaawd Ho 000200 .m.D .050000 0:» mo smehsm .m.= Scam 0000050H00 "oonsom

.wqfi0eson mo 0000009 000000 00 000 pom 00E 0H0000n “00oz

.mpop0uomo 00000000000 mppxm mafi0daocH0

 

 

 

0004000 00Wq000.0 0000000 00oo0
000.00 000000 000.00 mess to 000.00
000.00 000.00 000.00 000.00 - 000.00
000.00 000.000 000.00 000.0 - 000.0
000.00 000.000 000.00 000.0 - 000.0
000.00 000.000 000.00 000.0 - 000.0
000.00 000.000 000.000 000.0 . 000
000.00 000.000 000.000 000 seen snag
pcmamoamam Annmmwonwi

unoahoamsm 0m03 suwm

 

emu: sudmnoz

 

mmocfimsm summaoz

 

0Hom 00000oum 300m mo 00H0>

 

mmoa .00p0pm 00000: 000:08A000o0 0:0.pom .0H00 00000000 8000 no 00H0> 09
0000000 000M00000 8099 080000 800mammo wca>000ou 0000000000 800% no nonazzun.0u>H mgm<e

119

.000500050mxm .0005500 mo 00>55m mama 09p scum 0000 005500 w5005wax0 50 0005 500p005mom
00000050|5hwm 09» mo 000050000 00900095055 050 0I>H 00909 5000 0000050000 “0055om

.050000000 00905050500 00050 w5005005H0

 

 

 

0.0 0.00 n.mx 000005000 004
0.00 0.00 0.00 0000 00 000.00
0.0 0.00 0.0 000.00 - 000.00
0.0 0.00 . 0.0 000.0 - 000.0
0.0 0.00 0.0 000.0 . 000.0
0.0 0.00 0.00 000.0 - 000.0
0.0 0.00 0.00 000.0 - 000.
0.0 0.00 0.00 000 0000 0000
H505N0095m Annmadonm
p5050oaa5m 0w03 5500 0m03.500m5oz 0005005m 5000502 000m 09050050 5505 mo 0500>

 

 

 

mmma .00000m 00005: 050505500500
090 now .0000 00050050 5509 no 0500» 09 0005500 000000050 5050
050050 55001900 w50>00005 00000 9000 509003 0000000050 500% mo 0wwn5ooummau.ma>H mqmde

120

business. With reference to value of farm products sold,
the percentage of farm operators with off-farm earnings
from nonfarm.businesses and from farm wage employment sug-
gests no consistent relationship between the rate of nonfarm
self-employment or the rate of farm wage employment and
size of farm.. There is exhibited, however, a tendency
for the percentage of farm operators with nonfarm wage
employment to vary inversely with the amount of gross farm
sales},+

Estimates of the off-farm employment of commercial
farm operators are available only for the last decade.‘
In 1949 approximately 25.1 percent of the operators of
farms with gross sales of $2,500 or more worked off the.
farm.15 The proportion of commercial farm operators with
off-farm employment increased to 31.6 percent in l95h16
and to 34.3 percent in 1959.17 The increasing rate of
off-farm employment among commercial farm operators over
the past decade has been associated with an increase in

the proportion of farm operators working off the farm 100

 

1“It should be noted that these estimates include
extra farm-operator partners.

150.8. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census g£_A ricul-
ture: 195 , Vol. II, Ch. XI, Table 2, p. llhh and p. 6.
Calculate by author.

16Ibid. Calculated by author.

l7U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census 2: Agricul-
ture: 1959, Vol. I, Parts l-h8, Table 17, various pages.
Calculated by author.

121

days or more. Among commercial farm operators with off-
farm employment, approximately 3h.h percent worked off
the farm 100 days or more in 191+9.l8 In 1954 approximately
37.2 percent of all commercial farm operators reporting
off-farm employment worked off the farm on 100 days or
more;19 and, by 1959, about 49.3 percent of the commercial
farm operators working off the farm reported 100 days or
more of off-farm employment.20
In summary, the participation of farm operators in
the off-farm labor force increased from a rate of 26.8 per-
cent of all farm operators in 1944 to hh.9 percent in 1959,
and the percentage of farm operators working off the farm
100 days or more increased from 23.3 percent in 19A4 to
29.8 percent in 1959.21 Most of the increase in the off-
farm employment of farm operators occurred in the immediate

post-war period. By 1949, 38.8 percent of all farm opera-

22
tors reported some off-farm employment. Because of the

 

18U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census 3; A ricul-
ture: 1951., Vol. II, Ch. x1, Table—2T pT‘IIII and—LEM. .
calculated by author.

19gggg, ,Calculated by author.

20U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census 9: Agricul-
ture: 1222, Vol. I, Parts l-h8, Table 17, various pages.
Calculated by author.

21Estimates for l9hh are from U.S. Bureau of the Cen-
sus, U.S. Census 9£_A riculture: 1 , Vol. II, Ch. II,
Table-26, p. l§3 and Eh. ll, Table , p. 1168. Estimates
for 1959 were calculated from U.S. Bureau of the Census,
U.S. Census 2; Agriculture: 1959, Vol. I, Parts 1-48, Table
I7: various pages. The estimates are not strictly compar-
able because of the change in the definition of a farm.

22U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census g§_Agricul-
ture: l9§ , Vol. II, Ch. II, Table 26, p. I55.

122

low acreage and gross sales requirements which must be met
for a place to qualify as a farm, it is not surprising
that a large number of farm operators work off the farm.
Even among commercial farm operators, however, a substan-
tial number of individuals depend upon off-farm employment
as a source of current earnings.

The apparent trend toward more off-farm employment,
particularly among the operators of commercial farms, sug-
gests that increasing off-farm employment opportunities
accompanied by low farm incomes (relative to nonfarm in-
comes) in recent years have resulted in an expansion of
the multiple-jobholding segment of the farm-operator labor
force. It is not clear, however, that a high rate of
multiple jobholding among farm operators reflects more
than a temporary stage of adjustment in American agricul-
ture. Low farm incomes have no doubt led many farm oper-
ators to seek supplementary earnings from off-farm sources.
However, there has also occurred during the post-war period
substantial migration of farm operators from agriculture
to full-time employment in the nonagricultural sector.

To the extent that multiple jobholding serves as an inter-
mediate step in moving from full-time employment in agri-
culture to full-time employment in the nonagricultural
sector, the increase in off-farm employment of farm opera-
tors may be indicative of the failure of the nonagricul-

tural sector to provide full-time employment for the large

123

numbers of people attempting to leave agriculture. Cross-
sectional data, such as those provided by the Census of
Agriculture, provide little information.with which to test
the general hypothesis that off-farm employment is impor-
tant not only as a temporary means of supplementing low farm
earnings or a permanent occupational arrangement but also

as a transitional stage in migrating from agriculture to

the nonagricultural sector.

Current Population Survey

Although labor force statistics based upon the Current
Population Survey represent an unduplicated count of em-
ployed persons, special studies of multiple jobholding
have been made annually since 1956. These studies provide
additional informationon the number of farm operators with
off-farm employment.
Type_2£_Estimates

The definitions and procedures of the Current Popula-
tion Survey have already been discussed. Although labor
force estimates from the Current Population Survey relate
to employed persons classified by occupation and industry
in which they worked the greatest number of hours, some
information on multiple jobholding is available. Beginning
with the year 1956, supplementary data on persons holding

more than one job have been collected during one of the

124

monthly surveys in each year.23 Estimates based upon
these data are useful for two reasons. First, as shown
in Chapter III, they provide an indication of the number
of persons who are classified in nonagricultural indus-
tries with reference to primary jobs but who are also
employed in agricultur on a part-time basis. Second, they
provide estimates of the number of farm operators who
simultaneously work both on and off the farm and give
some indication of the kinds of off-farm jobs held by
farm operators.

For the purpose of providing estimates of multiple
jobholding, detailed information on the number and type
of all jobs held by persons included in the regular Cur-
rent Population Survey is collected. Since questions
concerning the labor force status of members of sample
households relate to a specified one-week period, only
persons holding two or more jobs during the survey week
are classified as multiple jobholders. In general, multi-
ple jobholders are defined as persons included in one of

the three following categories:

 

23Estimates relating to multiple jobholding in the
years 1950, 1956, 1957, and 1958 are given in U.S. Bureau
of the Census, Current Population Re orts, Series P-SO,
No. 30 (March lT—‘ITI, 5 ), No. 74 (A—RI‘pri , I957), No. 80
(February, 1958), and No. 88 (April, 1959), respectively.
More recent estimates are available in Gertrude Bancroft,
“Multiple Jobholders in December 1959," U.S. Bureau of
Labor Statistics, S ecial Labor Force Reports, No. 9
(October, 1960); ang in JacobScHiffman, "Multiple Job-
holders in December 1960," U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Special Labor Force Reports, No. 18 (October, 1961).

125
1. Individuals who hold jobs as wage or salary
workers with two or more employers;
2. Individuals who are self-employed and also
hold at least one job as a wage or salary
worker; and
3. Individuals whose primary job is that of unpaid
family worker but who hold a secondary job as
a wage or salary worker.
Persons holding secondary jobs as unpaid family workers are
not counted as multiple jobholders. In addition, persons
whose primary job is that of self-employed worker are not
counted as multiple jobholders if their secondary job con-
sists of additional farm or nonfarm self-employment. Thus,
for example, self-employed workers in agriculture are
classified as multiplejobholders only if they hold second-
ary jobs as wage or salary workers. Therefore, estimates
of the off-farm employment of farm operators based upon the
Current Population Survey are less inclusive, in terms of
the number and kinds of off-farm jobs held, than are esti-
mates from the Census of Agriculture.
Number of Multiple Jobholders
3 Estimates based upon the July 1956 Current Population
Survey included 3.7 million persons with primary jobs as
self-employed workers in agriculture (Table IV-6). Of this
number, 402,000 persons (10.9 percent of all self-employed
workers in agriculture) also held secondary jobs during

the survey week. In addition to persons with primary jobs

as self-employed workers in agriculture, 626,000 persons

126

 

ul|||.|||||. .mthoz .mptommm
oopom ponmq HmHoomm .mOHpmempm poem 0 :mmhsm .m. D DODH hmmsmoma 2H mpmvHospow
mHmeHsz GMEHHHsom noomw new .0 .oz .mppomom venom popmg HwHom m .moHpmempm honmq
mo dmmpsm .m. : .mmmH nonsmomm :H mpouHonnow mHmeHsz amonocmm ovdpppmu 8099 cam

”mmmmH HHhaH. mm .02 use .HmmoH .Htmstnmev om .oz :emmH HHtmav He .02 cm m mmemm
mayo mm COHpdeme pnmnuso .mdmcmo one mo smmmdm .m. a Scam umpmHsono .oopSOm

 

.HHmzmm use mammHH oesHoaH OQOH hoe mmpmaHpmmm

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.OOH N.HH m.o m.mm, oomH umpsmomm
o.ooH a.mH H.o o.mb omoH mongoose
o.OOH 0.HH 0.H 0.0m mmmH sHsH
o.QOH 0.HH H.@ 0.55 HHOH HHse
o.oon, m.eH m.@ «.05 mmoH eHse
compsnwhpmmm ommucmoummH
000 wme. m oceamms ooo mom ooo Immmm oomH umesmomm
ooo mom m 000 mHm ooo 00H ooo :Omm m mmaH nonemomm
000 .045. m 000 mme 000 How ooo Isms m mmoH eHsH
coo .050. H ooP 0mm ooP mmm ooP NQH m emmH HHsH
ooolmmm e 000 ems coo NOH ooo mom m mmmH HHss
mcompmm,wmhoHae o ampedz
endeSoHpm< mmeHozpow mpouHonpow
:H mpmxnoz onSpHsoHumd onHpHQE. mammwm
vomonsmumHom :H mpmxpoz UmHOHQam oASpHSoHAw¢ :H Meow was sumo:
mm mpow :sz IHHmm mm meow Hem muoxpoz UmmonemnHHmm mm
mcompom HH< nucoomm 29H: mcomsmm meow HnmsHum anz mcompmm
Htluflllt 111-F hi!“

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

oomH30mmH .mopmpm cmpHCD msocHapmpcoo map pom .onspHSoHnwm
cH unexpok UwHwHQEoanmm mm mQOn Humvcooom no mpmerm ngz mcomummau.ou>H mqm<e

127

with primary jobs as wage and salary workers also held
secondary jobs as self-employed workers in agriculture.
Thus, a total of 4,326,000 persons held either primary

or secondary jobs as self-employed workers in agriculture,
and it is estimated that 1,028,000 of these workers (23.8
percent of all workers) also held other jobs during the
survey week.

During the period from 1956 through 1960, the rate
of multiple jobholding among persons with primary or
secondary jobs as self-employed workers in agriculture
ranged from a high of 23.8 percent in 1956 to a low of
20.1 percent in 1958 (Table IV-6). The rate of multiple
jobholding among self-employed workers in agriculture ap-
pears to be substantially lower than the rate of multiple
jobholding among farm operators enumerated in the Census
of Agriculture. Although this difference may be attributed,
in part, to differences between the populations repre-
sented by the estimates and to sampling variability, much
of the disparity occurs because of differences in the
definition of multiple jobholding. All off-farm work,
excluding exchange work, is counted in classifying multi-
ple jobholders in the Census of Agriculture. As opposed
to this procedure, self-employed persons with a secondary
farm or business are not counted as multiple jobholders
in the Current Population Survey. Census estimates of

off-farm employment thus include all off-farm work from

128

which either wages or salaries or nonfarm self-employment
earnings are received, while Current Population Survey esti-
mates include only off-farm wage and salary employment. Con-
sequently, since the census does not provide separate estimates
of off-farm wage and salary employment, estimates from the

two sources are not comparable.

The use of multiple-jobholding estimates from the Current
Population Survey must also take into account the time period
to which the estimates relate. The estimates presented in
Table IV-6, it will be noted, are based upon the labor force
participation of workers during the survey week and are de-
rived from data collected in only one survey each year. Dur-
ing the five-year period for which annual estimates are avail-
able, the month in which information on multiple jobholding
was collected was changed from July to December. The size of
the labor force comprising self-employed workers in agricul-
ture is at or near its peak in July and near its lowest level
in December. It seems'reasonable to assume that off-farm
work by farm operators may be low in the month of July and
relatively high in the month of December. Hence, it is diffi—
cult to reconcile the estimates of the rates of multiple job-
holding for the period from 1956 through 1958 with those for
1959 and 1960.

It must also be recognized that estimates based upon the
Current Population Survey are indicative only of the number

of persons holding two or more jobs during a given week.

129

Estimates of the type included in the Census of Agriculture
represent the number of farm operators who have qualified

as farm operators and who have been employed off the farm,
not necessarily simultaneously, during a given year. Because
estimates from the Current Population Survey relate to a much
shorter period of time, they may be expected to indicate a
lower rate of multiple jobholding than do estimates from the

Census of Agriculture.

OASI Farm Operators in 1222

The labor force represented by OASI data on persons
with self-employment earnings from agricultural sources is
approximately equal in size and is similar in coverage to
that represented by Census of Agriculture data relating to
commercial farm operators. Multiple jobholders in the OASI
farm-operator labor force can be identified by classification
of sources of covered earnings. 9
2123 of Estimates

All of the individuals included in the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force, by definition, reported agricultural
self-employment earnings in the year 1957 for social security
coverage. Continuous Work-History records permit the iden-
tification of mutually exclusive coverage groups classified
by sources of covered earnings in a given year. The follow-
ing sources of covered earnings can be distinguished:

l. SEF: Self-employment earnings from agricultural
sources.

130
2. SEO: Self-employment earnings from nonagricultural
sources.

3. WSF: Wage or salary earnings from working for
others at agricultural jobs.

4. W80: Wage or salary earnings from working for
others at nonagricultural jobs.

Given the restriction that all individuals must have had
self-employment earnings from agricultural sources in
1957, each person in the 1957 OASI farm—operator labor
force is included in one of eight coverage groups for the
year 1957. These coverage groups, identified by the ab-
breviations given above, include the following combina-

tions of covered earnings:

1. SEF

2. SEF - wso

3. SEE - wso - WSF

4. SEF - war

5. SEF - SEO

6. SEF — SEO - wso

7. SEE - SEO - wso - WSF
8. SEF - sac - WSF

Since OASI farm operators can be identified as multi-
ple jobholders only with reference to sources of covered
earnings, estimates of the off-farm employment of farm
operators included in the OASI farm-operator labor force
do not account for all work off the farm. The amount of
off-farm work not covered by OASI data is, however, rela-

tively small. Most kinds of employment are now included

131

in the social security program; consequently the kinds of
off-farm work not covered by OASI data are largely re-
stricted to employment in which the minimum earnings re-
quirements for social security coverage were not met. In
reporting self-employment earnings for social security
coverage, individuals are to combine the earnings from
all self-employment enterprises in which they were engaged.
Thus, OASI records should reflect all nonagricultural self-
employment of OASI farm operators. With respect to wage
and salary employment, 1957 OASI records should, in general,
reflect the wage or salary work of all persons except those
earning less than $50 in any calendar quarter in non-
agricultural employment and those earning less than $150
in the calendar year in agricultural employment.
Number 92 Multiple Jobholders

It is estimated that approximately 71 percent of the
1957 OASI farm—operator labor force received covered earn-
ings from.only agricultural self—employment in 1957. The
remaining 29 percent reported, in addition to agricultural
self-employment earnings, covered earnings from one or more
of the following sources: (1) nonagricultural self-
employment, (2) work at nonagricultural jobs for wages and
salaries, and (3) work at agricultural jobs for wages or
salaries.

The distribution of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor

force by sources of covered earnings in 1957 is given in

132

Table IV-7. Excluding persons reporting after the cut-
off date of the 1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample,
it is estimated that 29.2 percent of the 1957 OASI farm
operators had covered earnings from off-farm sources in
1957. Among the 636,400 farm operators with covered
earnings from two or more sources, more than one-half
reported a combination of agricultural self-employment
earnings and earnings from nonagricultural wage or salary
employment. This group accounted for 17.6 percent of all
1957 OASI farm operators and 60.5 percent of all individ-
uals with covered earnings from two or’more sources.
Persons with self-employment earnings from both agricul-
tural and.monagricultural sources were next in importance
with 7.3 percent of the total labor force. None of the
other coverage groups accounted for as much as 2 percent
of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force.

Nonfarm wage employment24 was the most common source
of off-farm earnings in 1957. Income from nonagricultural
wage and salary employment was reported by 20.1 percent
of the 1957 OASI farm operators. Earnings from nonagri-
cultural self—employment were reported by 9.2 percent of
the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force, and 2.5 percent
had covered earnings from working for others at agricul-

tural jobs. Individuals with covered earnings from more

 

2("No distinction is made between wage earnings and
salary earnings. The term "wage employment" thus includes
both wage and salary employment.

133

.onamm huopmHmnxpoz mooschcoo mmnbmoH ”condom

.bmmH cH sham mo :oHpmooH
mCHnnoQoh pom mcomnom wchsHocH sumo ngawm no comma nonmaHpmm "mpoz

 

 

 

o.OOH oomqanwm Hayes
H.o ooo.m mm: - omm emm
H.o cemrH em; - om; - 0mm mam
e.H ooe.um om; - omm emm
m.e ooo.mmH omm mam
5.H oo~.em am; new
s.o 00H.mH em: - om; mam
8.5H oom.amm om; mam
w.ou cem.mem.H mum
owwucvohmm hang—«Hz . thH CH GOHPQOHUHMW Omahaboo

 

 

 

 

 

 

meadow copHaD msocHahopnoo
on» you .HmoH :H :oprOHeeH owaum>oo an ntopgtogo stem Hm<o emmHuu.e->H mamas

 

HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

134

than two sources accounted for only 2.6 percent of the
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force.

Estimates of the rate of multiple jobholding among
farm operators vary with both the labor force represented
by the estimates and the definition of off-farm work. As
noted previously, approximately 45 percent of all farm
operators enumerated in the 1954 and 1959 Censuses of
Agriculture reported some off-farm work. No estimates
of the kinds of off—farm work done are available from
published census reports, but estimates from the 1955
Survey of Farmers' Expenditures indicate that about 6.8
percent of all farm operators (including extra partnership
operators) worked for others at agricultural jobs, 30.2
percent worked for others at nonagricultural jobs, and
9.3 percent had income from nonfarm self-employment.25

The rate of multiple jobholding among operators of
commercial farms (i.e. farms with gross sales of $2,500
or more) is lower than for operators of noncommercial
farms. It was indicated above that, for commercial farm
operators, 31.6 percent in 1954 and 34.3 percent in 1959
reported off-farm employment in the Census of Agriculture.
The 1955 Survey of Farmers' Expenditures found that 6.3

percent of all commercial farm operators worked for others

 

250alculated from U. 8. Bureau of the Census,U .8.
Census of Agriculture: 1954, Vol. III, Part 11, Table 8,
p. 49 and Table I2, p. SI and from unpublished estimates
of the 1955 farm-operator labor force used in expanding
data from the 1955 Survey of Farmers' Expenditures.

 

135

at agricultural jobs in 1955, 21.0 percent worked for
others at non-agricultural jobs, and 6.3 percent had in-
comes from nonagricultural self-employment.26

Estimates of multiple jobholding from the July 1957
Current Population Survey indicated that, among persons
with either primary or secondary jobs as self-employed
workers in agriculture, 22.4 percent of the farm-operator
labor force had off-farm wage employment during the sur-
veyweek.27 An estimated 18 percent of all persons with
primary or secondary jobs as self-employed workers in
agriculture had nonfarm wage or salary employment, and
4.4 percent worked on other farms for wages or salaries.28
The disparity between the multiple-jobholding rates esti-
mated from the July 1957 survey and the rates estimated
from the 1955 Expenditure Survey presumably reflect differ-
ences between the percentage of farm operators with off-
farm employment during a given week and total participa-
tion of farm operators in the off-farm labor force over
the period of an entire year.

The I957 OASI farm operator labor force corresponds
generally with the labor force represented by Census of

Agriculture data on the operators of farms with gross

 

26Ibid. Calculated by author.

27U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population
Reports, Series P-50, No. 80. Calculated by author.

231bid. Calculated by author.

136

sales of 82,500 or more. Moreover, estimates of multiple
jobholding among 1957 OASI farm operators seem to corre-
spond, within the limitations of the social security pro-
gram, with estimates for commercial farm operators from
the 1954 and 1959 Censuses of Agriculture and the 1955
Expenditure Survey. Assuming that all persons included

in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force qualify as
commercial farm operators, certain differences between
estimates for the commercial farm-operator labor force

and estimates for the OASI farm-operator labor force are
to be anticipated because of the procedures and regula-
tions affecting OASI employment data. Nearly all kinds
of off-farm work in which farm operators might be engaged
are covered by the social security program, but income
restrictions would affect a small percentage of farm
operators with off-farm wage employment. Persons report-
ing self-employment earnings for social security coverage
are to combine net earnings from all types of self-
employment enterprises. Thus, estimates of the percentage
of persons with nonfarm self-employment for the commercial
farm-operator labor force and for the OASI farm-operator
labor force should be comparable. Ignoring the inclusion
of materially participating farm landlords, estimates of
the over-all rate of multiple jobholding from OASI records
should therefore be slightly lower than estimates based
upon all off-farm employment regardless of the level of

off-farm earnings.

137

In addition to the failure of OASI records to iden-
tify as multiple jobholders persons with wage earnings
below the level required for social security coverage,

a second factor also affects estimates of the over-all
rate of multiple jobholding based upon OASI records.

Even if all individuals included in the OASI farm-operator
labor force qualified as commercial farm operators, a
small number of commercial farm operators would not be
included as OASI farm operators because they would have
received maximum coverage on the basis of off-farm.wage
earnings. This factor would have the effect of reducing
moderately the number of commercial farm operators includ-
ed in the OASI farm-operator labor force and of reducing
disproportionately the number of commercial farm operators
with off-farm wage employment who would be classified as
OASI farm operators.

The effect of the limitations of OASI employment
data are perhaps best illustrated by comparing the covered
off-farm employment of 1957 OASI farm operators and the
off-farm employment of the farm-operator labor force rep-
resented by estimates from the 1955 Expenditure Survey.
Let us assume, for purposes of comparison, that 2,200,000
farm operators (including extra partnership operators)
were involved with the operation of commercial farms in
1957. Estimates of the off-farm employment of commercial

farm operators are given in Table IV-8.

138

. .oHasmm myopmHmuxnoB

usoschsoo mmunmoH onp Bonn oopstnwe .bmmH :H Show Ho coHpmoOH wchpoaon nos mcomuom

wcHosHocH sumo onsmm no women mopmsHpmmuu¢ .Hoo .mn>H oHnwe song topmHsonouum .Hoo
.mn>H oHnma Bonn cop¢H50Hmoau~ .Hou .HI>H mHnma Song oopmHsonouuH .Hoo "condom

.onos no 00m.~# Ho mmHom macaw 39H: omonp mm vmcHHoo ohm ushmm HmHouoeaoo "opoz

oHanHm>m pozu

 

 

 

 

 

 

N.@ m m.o a pnoshonso
umHom summsos HH¢
H.o~ a 0.HN m paws
uhOHmao own: ahwmcoz
m.N m m.© m puma
Imonso owe: Sham
0.HN a m m psmamoHQSo
own: shamummo HH<
m.om m.¢m m 0.Hm puma
uHOHmso summummo HH<
lav va ANH HHM
ummH mmmH mmmH 4mmH
.unopmhomo .msnwm HMHopmssoo .nsamm HmHonoaaoo .mshmm HmHohoaaoo psoEHonsm summnmmo
spam H30 .Ho muopwummo . tHno mpopmpmmo Jmo E3933 _

 

 

 

 

omoH new .nmoH .mmoH .emoH .nopnpm empHeo naoaHeaopeoo
on» you .pnoahonao shamnmmo ngz unopmnomo sash mo omapsmonomnu.mu>H mum<e

139

It is estimated that 21.0 percent of all commercial
farm operators worked for others at nonfarm jobs in 1955
and that 20.1 percent of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor
force received covered wages and salaries from nonfarm
sources in 1957. Nearly all nonfarm wage employment is
covered by the social security program, and the minimum limit
on taxable nonfarm wages is only 850 received from one
employer in a calendar quarter. Although it seems reason-
able to believe that most farm operators with nonfarm wage
or salary employment would satisfy this requirement, close
agreement between the two estimates cannot be interpreted
as being indicative of comparable coverage. Some commer-
cial farm operators with off-farm wage employment were ex-
cluded from the OASI farm-operator labor force because they
received maximum coverage on the basis of wage earnings
alone. Others did not, in fact, have sufficient wage earn-
ings to qualify for wage coverage.

Unpublished sample data from the 1955 Survey of
Farmers' Expenditures provide a basis for estimating the
number of multiple jobholders excluded from the 1957 OASI
farm-operator labor force because of the income limitations
of the program. Approximately 9 percent of the commercial
farm operators reporting wage earnings in the 1955 survey
received wage earnings of $4,200 or more during the year.
Assuming that 27 percent of the commercial farm-operator

labor force worked off the farm for wages and salaries in

140

1957,29 it is estimated that around 594,000 commercial
farm operators had off-farm wage or salary employment in
1957 and that 53,460 commercial farm operators had wage or
salary earnings of $4,200 or more. Since persons in the
latter group would have been ineligible for agricultural
self-employment coverage in 1957, they would have been
excluded from the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force.
Thus, it is estimated that approximately 2,146,540 commer-
cial farm operators would have been eligible for agricul-
tural self-employment coverage in 1957 and that 540,540
of these farm operators received wage or salary earnings
during the year. For commercial farm operators eligible
for inclusion in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force,
about 25.2 percent worked off the farm for wages and sal-
aries.

Not all of the commercial farm operators who were
both eligible for inclusion in the 1957 OASI farm-operator
labor force and working off the farm for wages or salaries
had sufficient wage earnings to qualify for wage coverage.

Among commercial farm operators reporting wage earnings in

 

29Estimates from the 1954 and 1959 Censuses of Agri-
culture indicate that the rate of multiple jobholding among
commercial farm operators increased at an annual rate of
2.7 percent between 1954 and 1959. Applying this rate of
increase to estimates from the 1955 Survey of Farmers'
Expenditures, it is estimated that 6.5 percent of the com-
mercial farm-operator labor force had off-farm wage employ-
ment in 1957 and that 21.5 percent had farm wage employment.
The estimate of 27 percent, as used in the text, represents
the sum of these two estimates adjusted downward to allow
for persons with wage or salary earnings from both farm and
nonfarm sources.

141

the 1955 survey, approximately 11 percent received either
farm wage earnings of less than $150 or nonfarm wages
earnings of less than $50 during the year. Consequently,
it is estimated that around 65,340 commercial farm opera-
tors with off-farm wage employment were eligible for in-
clusion in the 1957 farm-operator labor force but would

not have been identified as having off-farm wage earnings
by OASI records. Of the estimated 2,146,540 commercial
farm operators who would have been eligible for agricul-
tural self-employment coverage in 1957, it is therefore
estimated that 475,200 would have been identified as recip-
ients of covered earnings from off-farm wage and salary
employment. This estimate is equal to 22.1 percent of the
number of commercial farm operators estimated to have been
eligible for agricultural self-employment coverage in 1957
and differs from the percentage of 1957 OASI farm operators
with off-farm wage and salary earnings by only 0.2 percent-
age points.

Although the percentage rate of nonfarm wage employment
|for the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force was roughly
equal to the rate of nonfarm wage employment for commercial
farm operators in 1955, it will be observed that a consid-
erable difference exists in the percentage rate of farm
wage employment. Approximately 6.3 percent of all commer-
cial farm operators worked as hired farm laborers in 1955,

but only 2.5 percent of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor

142

force received covered wage or salary earnings from agri-
cultural sources in 1957. To receive social security
coverage, hired farm workers must have received 8150 in
cash wages from one employer during the calendar year.
The higher income required for coverage of hired farm
workers and the temporary nature of partétime work on
someone else's farm suggest that the percentage rate of
farm wage and salary employment among OASI farm operators
would tend to be lower than the rate among commercial
farm operators sampled in the Expenditure Survey. Nearly
one-third of the commercial farm operators reporting farm
wage employment in the 1955 survey had wage earnings of
less than 8150. Consequently, the disparity between the
farm wage employment of commercial farm operators and the
rate of covered farm wage employment among 1957 OASI farm
operators is chiefly due to the high percentage of com-
mercial farm operators who have farm.wage earnings below
the minimum level required for social security coverage.
Since earnings from all self-employment enterprises
are to be combined in calculating taxable self-employment
earnings for social security coverage, minimum income
requirements do not affect the reporting of self-employment
income from nonagricultural sources. It is estimated that
6.3 percent of all commercial farm operators had earnings
from nonfarm self-employment in 1955 and that 9.2 percent

of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force received

143

covered self-employment income from nonagricultural
sources. Although sampling variability may account for
part of the difference between the two estimates, the
higher rate of nonfarm self—employment among 1957 OASI
farm operators seems to reflect the inclusion of mate-
rially participating farm landlords in the sample. For
persons reporting agricultural self-employment earnings
for social security coverage only in years after the
coverage of farm landlords, 14.1 percent reported income
from nonagricultural self-emplOyment. Among persons with
agricultural self-employment coverage in each year during
the period frmn 1955 through 1957, only 6.3 percent re-~

ported income from nonagricultural self-employment in

1957.

Summary

Multiple jobholding is an important characteristic
of the farm-operator labor force in the United States.
Periodic estimates based on the Census of Agriculture
indicate that there has been a notable increase in off-
farm employment among the operators of both commercial
and noncommercial farms. The percentage rate of‘multiple
jobholding tends to vary inversely with size of farm as
measured by gross farm sales, but one of the most signif-
icant features of'American agriculture has been the con-
tinued increase in the rate of off-farm employment among

the operators of farms with gross sales of at least

144

$2,500. More than one-third of the commercial farm
operators enumerated in the 1959 Census of Agriculture
reported some off-farm employment during the year, and
approximately one-sixth of all commercial farm operators
reported working off the farm on 100 or more days.

It is estimated that 29 percent of the persons
reporting agricultural self-employment earnings for
social security coverage in 1957 had covered earnings
from off-farm sources. Although the labor force repre-
sented by OASI farm-operator data is not identical with
that represented by census and survey data on commercial
farm operators, estimates of multiple jobholding among
OASI farm operators are about in line with survey esti-
mates for commercial farm operators. Excluding materi-
ally participating farm landlords, multiple employment
rates among 1957 OASI farm operators appear to be nearly
identical for nonfarm self-employment, to understate
slightly participation in nonfarm.wage and salary employ-
ment, and to understate substantially participation in
farm wage employment as compared with estimates for com-
mercial farm operators in 1955. For all types of off-
farm employment, the percentage of OASI farm operators,
including materially participating farm landlords, with
off-farm earnings in 1957 is lower than the estimated
percentage of commercial farm operators with off-farm
earnings in 1957 by somewhere in the range of from 1 to 4

percentage points.

145

It should be noted, however, that understatement of
the percentage of persons with offefarm employment does
not to any marked extent restrict the usefulness of OASI
employment data on farm operators. Persons excluded from
the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force fall generally
into two categories: (1) those with net farm self-employ-
ment earnings of less than $400 and/or gross farm self-
employment earnings of less than $600, and (2) those with
off-farm.wage earnings of $4,200 or more. Among persons
included in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force, only
those with very low off-farm earnings are not counted as
multiple jobholders. Most OASI farm operators with notable
participation in the off-farm labor force are therefore
identified by social security employment records as multi-
ple jobholders.

Nonfarm wage employment was the predominant source of
off-farm earnings among members of the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force. It is estimated that 20.1 percent
of all 1957 OASI farm operators had covered nonfarm wage
earnings, that 9.2 percent had covered nonfarm self-
employment earnings, and that 2.5 percent had covered farm
wage earnings. Only 2.6 percent of all 1957 OASI farm
operators had covered off-farm earnings from more than

one source.

CHAPTER V
DIFFERENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF MULTIPLE JOBHOLDERS

Farm operators generally have a remarkably high rate
of participation in the off-farm labor force, but frag-
mentary information suggests that off-farm employment is
selective with respect to certain characteristics. The
major objective of this chapter is to examine evidence
bearing upon the general hypothesis that multiple job-
holders in the farm-operator labor force differ from
operators who are not employed off the farm with respect
to geographic region, age, race, sex, previous job expe-
rience, and earnings from self-employment.

Information pertaining to the selectivity of off-
farm employment in the farm-operator labor force must be
taken, for the most part, from OASI employment records.
Other sources of national data, because of their lack of
detail, provide little information on the differential
characteristics of multiple jobholders. An exception is
Census of Agriculture information on variations in off-
farm employment of farm operators by geographic region.

Since there is reason to believe that farm operators

with self-employment earnings from nonagricultural sources

146

147

may differ from farm operators with off-farm wage or sal-
ary earnings, this chapter is divided into two sections.
The first section compares all farm operators who work
off the farm with farm operators who have covered earn-
ings from only agricultural self—employment. The second
section will then distinguish between farm operators

with off-farm wage or salary employment and farm operators

with covered earning from only self-employment.

Multiple Jobholders

For the purpose of analyzing the differential char-
acteristics of multiple jobholders included in the farm-
operator labor force, this Section.will distinguish between
persons with earnings from only agricultural self-employment
and persons with earnings from both agricultural self-
employment and at least one off-farm source. By counting
as multiple jobholders all individuals with earnings from
more than one source, it should be noted that no distinc-
tion is made among farm operators with the following kinds
of off-farm work:

1. Farm operators with earnings from nonagricultural
self-employment;

2. Farm operators with nonagricultural wage or salary
employment;

3. Farm operators with agricultural wage or salary
employment; and

4. Farm operators with earnings from more than one
off-farm source.

148

All farm operators with off-farm employment, regardless
of the kind of off-farm work done, are counted as multi-
ple jobholders.

Geographic Region

Farm operators enumerated 3p the Census pf Agri—

 

culture.--It is useful at this point, for descriptive
purposes, to examine census data regarding variations in
the off-farm employment of farm operators among major
geographic regions. The percentage of farm operators
working off the farm in 1954, as reported in the 1954
Census of Agriculture, ranged from a low of 35.7 percent
in the West North Central states to a high of 52.7 per-
cent in the Pacific states, and the percentage working
off the farm 100 days or more ranged from a low of 15.5
percent in the West North Central states to a high of
40.1 percent in the Pacific states (Table V—l).

The percentage of farm operators reporting off-farm
employment in the 1959 Census of Agriculture ranged from
a low of 35.5 percent in the West North Central states
to a high of 51.5 percent in the Pacific states (Table
V—l). The percentage of farm operators working off the
farm 100 days or more in 1959 ranged from 18.0 percent
to 40.0 percent in the West North Central and Pacific
regions, respectively. Since the definition of a farm
in the 1959 census differs from that used in the 1954

census, intercensus comparisons are not strictly valid.

149

 

.mowmm msopr> .bH.oHnme

.wle nahwm .H .Ho> .mme "oMSpHsonw¢.Mm msmcoo .m.: .usmcoo on» no smonsm .m.: Eon

.LmopMHamma-nHIoem m .Hoo

.mmH-~mH .aa .om mHome .HH .eo .HH .Ho> . me noaapHaoHa a

mo msmcoo .m.: .mSmeoo on» no smousm .m.: Scam vopmHsanuum new H .Hoo “monsom

.meumm Hmeaosnd mo myopmummo meHosHoxmn

.meumm sthocn< mo nuopmhmao wcHosHoCHm

 

 

 

 

 

 

m.o~ o.ea a.mm 0.HH meonma HHH
o.oa «.Hm H.oa a.mw, oHoHcmm
o.o~ H.me o.mm m.o¢ :Hmpoaos
a.mm e.oe H.Hm o.we Hmapoco groom one:
o.om n.oe a.mm e.ea Hmnpemo groom poem
m.~m H.oa H.Hm m.ea oHoomeH epaom
o.mH a.mm m.mH a.mm Hoppeoo epaoz poo;
:.Hm m.©¢ 4.0m 0.0: Hwnpcoo spuoz puma
a.mm c.5e o.om o.oe onmocpnoz

egos wwvmmmn 00H who: wmwzmm H onofivwwvmzmm 00H» who: wwyhmm H eonom
HmmowwwxwwzeMMWQMmeo mmwdwmmxwwzmmwwpwmwao

 

 

 

 

omoH com emoH .mmpopm ompHeo
msoeHshmpsoo on» one meonoh pano mom .mhoe no ammo OOH

cam onoe ho hue H Show on» mmo wcHxnoz mnopmuomo Show Ho owmpemopmmun.Hn> mum<e

150

Regional variations in the percentage of farm opera-
tors working off the farm tend to be associated with
regional variations in the distribution of farms by value
of farm products sold. The percentage rates of off-farm
employment of farm operators in 1959 by geographic region
and gross farm sales are shown in Table V-2. It will be
observed that only among farm operators in the West North
Central states was the proportion of farm operators work-
ing off the farm less than the national rate for each
class of farm sales. In 1959 approximately 34.3 percent
of all commercial farm operators in the conterminous
United States reported some off-farm work. The percentage
of multiple jobholders in the commercial farm-operator
labor force ranged from a low of 29.5 percent in the West
North Central states to a high of 38.3 percent in the
West South Central states.

1957 OASI farm operators.--The 1937-58 Continuous
Work-History Sample included 6,364 multiple jobholders
among the 21,859 persons with covered self-employment
earnings from agricultural sources in 1957. As indicated
previously, 991 persons included in the sample represent-
ing the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force failed to
report location of farm and certain other items in 1957.
These individuals were omitted in analyzing the differ-
ential characteristics of multiple jobholders in the 1957

OASI farm-operator labor force. The estimates presented

151

 

.mme nonspHSopr<.Mm

 

mumcoo .m.: .mSmcmo esp mo snapsm .m.: 809% vopmHsOHmo “oohsom

.mowmm mSOHam> .bH oHnme .man magma .H .Ho>

.ooosHoXo ohm mapmm Hmenoen< Ho muopmuomo "opoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m.am m.ea c.oH a.mm o.o~ H.Hm e.wm, a.mm mconca HH<
m.omn «.Hm o.mH o.m~ a.mmw m.oe “.mn (m.Hm, oHMHomm
N.HH H.me a.oH o.HN m.om N.N: a.mm o.no choeaoz
m.mm n.oe a.mH a.mm N.HH 5.Ha o.me m.om Hmapdoo groom one;
~.om e.oa H.m~ e.Hm o.mm a.mm m.mm o.Nm Hmepomo spoom pnmm
N.Hm ¢.oe a.mm 0.0” m.~m H.mm m.om o.mm oHpeme4 spsom
m.a~ a.mm H.aH m.~a a.ma m.aa a.mm a.mm Homeeee entoz new;
m.nm m.o¢ m.mm a.mm H.mm >.um m.me o.mo Hosanna eppoz pmmm
N.Hm c.54 m.m~ e.am a.mm m.om o.ne n.no unmoepaoz
muopmaomo neopmnomo once mommmm mmo.oH ooono moo.e omeqm eonmm
Sham. Shah AC 09. On... On. . OP _ OP .
HchamaWoo HH< ooo.oNAmoowHom. woowmwo.wmmnwumwomwmoo mm

mmmH .mopmpm vopHsm msocHShopcoo on» now
.:0Hwon 0H£mmhwoom new oHom uposooum snow 90 osHm> pom HHoo :oHpmHsmom
:ngHz encumpoao Show HHm mo omwpcoouom m am Show on» mmo mequoz whopwhomo sawhnn.mn> mqmda

152

in the remainder of this chapter are thus based upon a
sample of 6,175 multiple jobholders included among an
over—all sample of 20,868 individuals with covered self-
employment earnings from agricultural sources in the year
1957-

Variations in the location of farm operators with
off-farm earnings in 1957, as compared with the location
of persons with only agricultural self-employment earn-
ings, are reflected by the percentage rates of multiple
jobholding shown in Table V-3. These rates express the
number of multiple jobholders as a percentage of all 1957
OASI farm operators. For the 1957 OASI farm-operator
labor force, the rate of multiple jobholding ranged from
a low of 24.8 percent in the West North Central states to
a high of 35.8 percent in the Pacific states. As compared
with the rate of multiple jobholding for commercial farm
operators in 1959 (Table V-2), the estimated rates for
the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force differ from the
census rates by more than 2 percentage points in only four
of the eight regions. Most notable of these differences
are those for the East North Central and East South Cen-
tral states, in which the 1959 census rates exceeded the
rates for the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force by 8.9
percentage points and 6.3 percentage points, respectively.
Part of the difference between census data and OASI esti-
mates can, of course, be attributed to sampling varia-

bility and to changes in off-farm employment patterns in

153

TABLE V-3.--Estimated rate of multiple jobholding in 1957
for 1957 OASI farm operators, by geographic
region, for the conterminous United States

 

 

Estimated Rate of

 

Region Multiple Jobholding_
Northeast 33.7
East North Central 28.4
West North Central 24.8
South Atlantic 32.7
East South Central 29.9
West South Central 34.9
Mountain 35.2
Pacific 35.3
All regions 29.6

 

Source: See Appendix V.

the period from 1957 to 1959. In addition, however, the
disparity between census rates of off—farm employment in
1959 and multiple-jobholding rates for 1957 OASI farm
operators may be largely due to the uneven geographic
distribution of farm operators with off-farm wage earnings
of $4,200 or more and of farm.operators with off-farm wage
earnings below the level required for social security
coverage.

Despite differences between census statistics and
estimates relating to the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor

force, it is apparent that the percentage of farm operators

154

with off-farm employment tends to vary among the major
geographic regions of the country. For persons included
in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force, multiple job-
holding was less common in the East North Central, West
North Central, and East South Central states than in the
five regions constituting the remainder of the contermin-
ous United States. Persons with covered earnings from
off-farm sources did, however, account for no less than
about one-fourth of all 1957 OASI farm operators within
each of the eight major geographic regions.
Agg

For several reasons the age of multiple jobholders
in the farm-operator labor force and the age of farm
operators with earnings from only agricultural self-
employment may be expected to differ substantially.
First, multiple jobholding may be associated with persons
who are attempting to supplement low farm earnings and to
accumulate additional capital in the course of becoming
established in agriculture on a full-time basis. Persons
working off the farm f0r this reason would generally be
expected to be in the younger age groups. Second, multi-
ple jobholding may be associated with the process of mov-
ing from full-time employment in agriculture to full-time
employment in the nonagricultural sector. Finally, multi-
ple jobholding may be associated with the long-run occupa-

tional pattern of persons who operate small farms while

155

relying upon off-farm employment as their main source of
livelihood. Most of the persons included in the latter
category are presumably included among the operators of
noncommercial farms. Although multiple jobholding may
constitute a long-range occupational pattern for some com-
mercial farm operators, the declining income of farm peo-
ple relative to the income of nonfarm people over the past
decade suggests that part-time farming is more closely
associated with the efforts of farm people to maintain

or improve family income levels.

The high rate of migration from farms in recent years
suggests the additional explanation that off—farm employ-
ment is serving as an intermediate step in moving from
full-time employment in agriculture to eventual full-time
employment in the nonagricultural sector. The number of
farm operators has declined substantially over the last
decade, but most of the decrease has occurred among the
operators of noncommercial farms. The number of commer-
cial farm operators decreased by less than 2 percent dur-
ing the period from 1954 to 1959. Although information
indicative of the extent to which persons have shifted
from the commercial farm-operator labor force to the non-
farm labor force is lacking, the number of commercial farm
operators who have completed the process of moving from
agriculture to full-time employment in the nonagricultural

sector may be relatively small as compared with the number

156

of farm operators who rely upon off-farm employment as a
means of supplementing low farm earnings but who do not
envisage migration from agriculture.

Regardless of the objectives of farm operators who
work off the farm, it seems reasonable to expect that mul-
tiple jobholding among farm operators is predominantly
associated with persons in the younger age groups. Farm
operators who rely upon off-farm employment as a method
of supplementing low farm earnings may tend to be younger
than single jobholders because of the greater difficulties
with which older farm operators are confronted in seeking
off-farm work. Use of offrfarm earnings to increase the
rate of capital accumulation may tend to be confined
principally to younger farm operators. Furthermore, the
presumably greater reluctance of older farm operators to
attempt a permanent change in occupation would also tend
to result in the inclusion of a disproportionately high
percentage of younger farm operators among those to whom
off-farm employment is a transitional step in moving to
full-time employment in the nonfarm sector.

At least one factor, however, may tend to offset
partially a preponderance of younger farm operators among
multiple jobholders in the farm-operator labor force.

That factor is the incidence of individuals, among multi-
ple jobholders, with off-farm earnings from nonfarm self-
employment. An employment pattern consisting of a combina-

tion of agricultural and nonagricultural self-employment

157

may be most common among persons who have used capital
accumulated in one business, either farm or nonfarm, to
become established in a second business. It is reason-
able to expect that such persons may tend to be older
than single jobholders in the farm-operator labor force.
The number of multiple jobholders with both farm and
nonfarm self-employment is not large; and, although mul-
tiple jobholders with self-employment earnings from both
farm and nonfarm sources may tend to be older than single
jobholders, it remains reasonable to hypothesize that the
percentage rate of multiple jobholding is higher among
farm operators in the younger age classes.

Estimates of the rate of multiple jobholding by age
class are given in Table V-4. It is clearly evident that
the rate of multiple jobholding in the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force tended to be disproportionately high
among farm operators in the younger age classes. The
median age of multiple jobholders was 47.0 years as com-
pared with 54.2 years for persons with covered earnings
from only agricultural self-employment in 1957. Approx-
imately 24 percent of all 1957 OASI farm operators without
off-farm earnings were 65 years of age or more. In con-
trast, only 11 percent of all multiple jobholders were
in this age class.

As shown in Table V-4, marked differences exist in

the rate of multiple jobholding among various age groups.

158

TABLE V-4.--Estimated rate of multiple jobholding in
1957 for 1957 OASI farm operators, by age,
for the conterminous United States

 

 

 

(Yégis) Miltlglgegogfigldlgg
Under 25 52.9
25 - 34 37.8
35 - 44 37.4
45 - 54 32.3
55 - 64 25.4
65 and over 16.4
All operators , 29.6

 

Source: See Appendix V.

It is obvious that the incidence of off-farm employment
is greatest among persons under 25 years of age and tends
to decrease as one moves from the youngest age class to
the oldest age class. The difference between the rate

of multiple jobholding for persons 25 to 34 years dfage
was not significantly different from the rate for persons
from 35 to 44 Years of age, but the rate for persons from
25 to 44 years of age was notably greater than the rate
for persons from 45 to 54 years of age. Similarly, mul-
tiple jobholding was more common among persons from 45 to
54 years of age than among persons from 55 to 64 years of
age, and the incidence of multiple jobholding was sub-

stantially greater for persons in the latter age class

159

than for persons 65 years of age or more. In summary,
the percentage rate of off-farm employment ranged from
a high of 52.9 percent for farm operators under 25 years
of age to a low of 16.4 percent for persons 65 years of
age or more. Approximately 39 percent of all 1957 OASI
farm operators under 45 years of age worked off the farm
in covered employment in 1957 as compared with only 25
percent of all 1957 OASI farm operators 45 Years of age
or older.
Rgpg

Negro farm operators,as noted previously, comprised
less than 2 percent of the 1957 OASI farm—operator labor
force. It is also estimated that only 8,000 Negro farm
operators were included among the 609,500 multiple job-
holders in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor who reported
location of farm in 1957. This estimate is equal to 1.3
percent of all multiple jobholders.

The rate of multiple jobholding among non-Negro
OASI farm operators in 1957 was 29.7 percent as compared
to only 24.0 percent among Negro farm operators. Despite
the small sample of Negro farm operators in the 1957 OASI
farm-operator labor force, the difference in the percent-
age rate of multiple jobholding between Negro and non—
Negro farm operators was statistically significant at
the 5 percent level. Thus, it is concluded tan.off-farm

work in covered employment was less common among Negro

160

farm operators than among non—Negro farm operators for
individuals included in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor
force.

S3;

Although normally regarded as atypical members of
the farm-operator labor force, female workers made up 6
percent of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force. The
inclusion of materially participating farm landlords in
the OASI labor force has apparently resulted in a dispro-
portionately large number of female workers being included
in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force as compared
with other estimates of the participation of female work-
ers in farming. For this reason, and because female
workers seem to be generally less common among multiple
jobholders than among single jobholders, it is hypothesized
that female workers in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor
force tend to have a lower rate of multiple jobholding
than do male workers.

It is estimated that 28,700 female workers were in-
cluded among the multiple jobholders in the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force who reported location of farm in
1957. This estimate is equal to 4.6 percent of all multi-
ple jobholders. The percentage rate of multiple jobholde
ing differed significantly at the 5 percent level between
male and female workers. Male workers in the 1957 OASI

farm-operator labor force tended to have a higher rate of

161

participation in covered off-farm employment than did
female workers. Approximately 30.2 percent of all male
farm operators had covered earnings from off-farm sources
in 1957, while only 21.4 percent of all female farm opera-
tors were classified as multiple jobholders in 1957.
Previous Job Experience

Earlier the general hypothesis was advanced that
off-farm work by farm operators is important both as a
method by which farm operators attempt to supplement low
farm earnings and as a transitional step in shifting from
agriculture to full-time employment in the nonagricultural
sector. Although migration from agriculture is a subject
not within the scope of the present study, the continuity
of multiple jobholding among farm operators merits atten-
tion. This aspect of multiple jobholding will be consid-
ered more fully later in the analysis. At this time we
will confine ourselves to an examination of the 1956 employ—
ment patterns of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force.
In general, it is hypothesized that individual employment
patterns in a given year tend to be closely associated
with employment patterns in the preceding year and that
a high proportion of farm operators with off—farm employ-
ment in a given year were also multiple jobholders in the
preceding year.

Estimates of the 1956 employment patterns of 1957
OASI farm operators with and without off-farm employment

in 1957 are given in Table V-5. Since the 1957 OASI

162

.onemm heapmHmnxho3 mdoschcoo wmubmmH "condom

.bmmH eH spam no eOHpmoOH wsthommw
no: mcomnoa pom pesooom op oopmsmom poz .wpmo onemm Scam umpwermm "opoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.oOH oom.eHo o.ooH oom.ooa.H Hmooe
m.oH oom.oHH o.mn oom.maH.H HHco mmchamm
pemE>0HQEoIHHom HmASpHSOHpm<
N.Hn ooo.eoe o.NH oom.mmH mmeHonmm atmo-eeo
m.m oon.mm e.o oom.mmH cmmnmeoc oz
MMmpeoouom humawz owmpmwopmm ponmmz QmoH eH cpoppmm peoENOHmmw
emoH eH mMechmm emoH eH mmchnmm

 

 

enthummo anz mpopmpomo semmumMo psoanz myopmaomo

 

 

mopmpm copHeD msosHenopeoo on» uom .ommH :H neonate peoEHOHaso
an emoH oH nmeHoamc anmeuemo noompH: can esz nnoocacao ance Hmeo emoH--.m-> mHmHe

163

farm-operator labor force is defined with respect to employ-
ment patterns in the year 1957 only, it includes some per-
sons with no covered earnings in the year 1956 and some

with covered earnings from only sources other than agricul-
tural self-employment in 1956. The individuals classified
in Table V-5 as having off-farm earnings in the year 1956
thus include both farm operators who had covered earnings
from off-farm sources and persons who were not identified

as farm operators in 1956.

Marked differences exist between the 1956 employment
patterns of single and.multiple jobholders in the 1957
OASI farm-operator labor force. Among 1957 OASI farm
operators without off-farm earnings in 1957, 9.4 percent
had no covered earnings in 1956, 12.6 percent had covered
earnings from sources other than agricultural self-employ-
ment, and 78.0 percent had covered earnings only from
agricultural self-employment. For multiple jobholders in
the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force, it is estimated
that 5.5 percent had no covered earnings in 1956, 75.2
percent had covered earnings from sources other than agri-
cultural self-employment, and 19.3 percent had covered
earnings only from agricultural self-employment. Exclud-
ing persons with no coverage in 1956, approximately 80
percent of the 1957 OASI farm operators with covered earn-
ings from.off—farm sources in 1957 also had covered earn-

ings from off-farm sources in the preceding year.

164

The reader is reminded that some multiple jobholders
in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force who had covered
earnings in 1956 were not identified with agricultural
self-employment in the year 1956. In addition to the 1957
multiple jobholders who had no coverage in 1956, it is
estimated that 22.1 percent of the 1957 farm operators
with off-farm employment in 1957 had no covered earnings
from agricultural self-employment in 1956 but did have
covered earnings from off-farm sources. This group in-
cludes persons who were not farm operators in 1956, per-
sons who were farm operators in 1956 but whose earnings
from farming were not sufficient to qualify for agricul-
tural self-employment coverage, and persons who had cov-
ered wage earnings in 1956 equal to the upper limit on
taxable earnings regardless of whether or not they were
farm operators in 1956.

Among persons identified by social security records
as members of the OASI farm-operator labor force in both
1956 and 1957, 26.1 percent reported covered earnings from
two or more sources in 1957. It is estimated that 73 Per-
cent of these workers also had covered earnings from two
or more sources in 1956. The other 27 percent reported
only agricultural self-employment earnings fer the year
1956.

The percentage rate of multiple jobholding among

individuals with covered earnings from agricultural self-

165

employment in both 1956 and 1957 was 26.2 percent in 1956
and 26.1 percent in 1957. Despite the nearly identical
rates of off-fanm employment, however, there was substan-
tial movement of farm operators into and out of the off-
farm labor force. Over the two-year period approximately
33.2 percent of all persons with covered earnings from
agricultural self-employment in both 1956 and 1957 also
reported covered earnings from off-farm sources in at
least one of the two years, but fewer than 20 percent
were classified as multiple jobholders in both 1956 and
1957. Of the farm operators with off-farm employment in
at least one of the two years, only 57.7 percent had off-
farm employment in both 1956 and 1957. Approximately
21.3 percent had off-farm employment in 1956 but not
1957, and approximately 21.0 percent had off-farm employ-
ment in 1957 but not in 1956.

Limiting the analysis to persons with covered earn-
ings from agricultural self-employment in both 1956 and
1957 excludes, of course, all persons not identified by
social security records as farm operators in both years
because they received maximum coverage on the basis of
off-farm wage earnings. Also excluded from consideration
are persons who were engaged in farming in both years but
whose farm earnings were below the lower limit required
for social security coverage and persons who actually

shifted into or out of farming during the period. To the

166

extent that the number of multiple jobholders among per-
sons who actually shifted into or out of farming during
the period offsets the number of farm operators with off-
farm employment in both years who were excluded from the
sample as a result of the limits on taxable earnings, the
estimates of movements into or out of the multiple-job-
holding segment of the farm-operator labor force given
above apply generally to farm operators in the contermin-
ous United States. The net effect of.biases caused by
limits on taxable earnings cannot be specified on the
basis of OASI data alone. It seems fair to conclude, how-
ever, that farm operators enter and leave the off-farm
labor force in substantial numbers although the rate of
off-farm employment for the aggregate farm-operator labor
force may increase at a fairly stable rate from year to
year.
Net Earnings from Self—Employment

It was noted previously that the percentage of farm
operators with off-farm employment appears to vary in—
versely with size of farm as measured by gross sales of
farm products. This tendency lends support to the gener-
ally accepted notion that multiple jobholders in the farm-
operator labor force are predominantly individuals who
operate small farms and, either by choice or because of
their inability to expand farm size, take off-farm employ-

ment to supplement low farm earnings or to provide a major

167

part of net earnings from current productive effort.
Off-farm work by operators of larger than average farms

is sometimes regarded as both less common than for opera-
tors of smaller farms and often the result of unforeseen
events which have forced temporary participation in the
off-farm labor force. Thus, it is usually assumed, either
explicitly or implicitly, that operators of smaller than
average farms tend to have a higher rate of participation
in the off-farm labor force than do operators of larger
than average farms. As shown earlier, census data clearly
support this assumption. However, the existing relation-
ship between the rate of off-farm employment and farm size
is sometimes regarded as evidence that the rate of multi-
ple jobholding tends to vary inversely with the level of
net farm earnings. Although operators of larger than
average farms may tend to have higher net farm earnings
than do operators of smaller farms, it does not necessar-
ily follow that the rate of off-farm employment varies
inversely with net farm earnings.

Delineation of multiple jobholders by source and
amount of off-farm earnings will be deferred at this
point, and no attempt will be made here to distinguish
between multiple jobholders with earnings from nonagricul-
tural self-employment and those with earnings from off-
farm wage employment. Because it is not possible to

determine the amount of agricultural self-employment

168

earnings for individuals with covered self-employment
earnings from both agricultural and nonagricultural
sources, we will first deal with the hypothesis that

the rate of multiple jobholding tends to vary inversely
with the level of total net earnings from self-employment.
{ore specifically, we will be concerned with the hypoth-
esis that the rate of multiple jobholding among individuals
with net self-employment earnings of $2,000 or more in
1957 was less than the rate of multiple jobholding among
individuals with net self-employment earnings of less

than $2,000.

Approximately 65 percent of all persons included in
the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force reported net earn-
ings from self-employment of less than $2,000 in 1957.

It is estimated that 29.5 percent of these individuals
had covered earnings from two or more sources. For 1957
OASI farm operators with net self-employment earnings of
$2,000 or more, 29.8 percent had covered earnings from
off-farm employment in 1957. The difference between the
percentage of individuals with net self—employment earn-
ings of less than $2,000 who worked off the farm and the
percentage of individuals with net self-employment earn—
ings of $2,000 or more who worked off the farm was not
significant.

It will be observed that the rate of multiple job-

holding appears to decrease slightly with increasing net

169

earnings from self-employment for the three class inter-
vals below $6,000 (Table V-6). For the three classes with
net self-employment earnings of $6,000 or more, the per-
centage of individuals with covered earnings from off-

farm sources appears to increase with increasing net
earnings from self-employment. These estimates are not
inconsistent with the hypothesis that the rate of multi-
ple jobholding tends to vary inversely with the level of
net earnings from agriculture. The high rate of off-

farm employment among farm operators with net self—
employment earnings of $10,000 or more is associated with

a disproportionately large number of persons with earnings
from nonagricultural self-employment. Approximately 9.6
percent of all 1957 OASI farm operators reported covered
earnings from nonagricultural self-employment in 1957,

but 33.5 percent of all persons with net self-employment
earnings of $10,000 or more in 1957 reported self-employment
earnings from both agricultural and.nonagricultural sources.
The relationship between farm and nonfarm self-employment
earnings for persons with earnings from both sources cannot
be ascertained, but the relationship of farm earnings to
the incidence of off-farm wage employment will be considered

in the concluding section of this chapter.

Wage Earners
Whereas the preceding section of this chapter was

generally concerned with the dichotomic classification

170

comprising single and multiple jobholders in the farm-
operator labor force, this section distinguishes between
farm operators with off-farm earnings from wages or sal-
aries and farm operators without off-farm wage or salary
employment. It has been noted that approximately 21.9
percent of all 1957 OASI farm operators received covered
earnings from off-farm wage employment in 1957. Persons
with off-farm wage employment accounted for about 75.1
percent of all multiple jobholders included in the 1957
OASI farm-operator labor force.

The major objective of this section is to examine
evidence relevant to the general hypothesis that farm
operators with off-farm wage employment differ notably
from other farm operators with respect to specified char-
acteristics and to determine the extent to which off-farm
wage employment appears to be selective. In the preceding
section we found that multiple jobholding appears to be
selective with respect to certain characteristics, but
no distinction was made between farm operators with off-
farm wage employment and those with earnings from non-
agricultural self—employment. Because it seems likely
that individuals with nonfarm self-employment differ in
certain characteristics from individuals with off-farm
wage employment, this section deals specifically with farm

operators who work for others for wages or salaries.

171

TABLE V-6.--Estimated rate of multiple jobholding in 1957
for 1957 OASI farm operators, by net earnings
from self-employment in 1957, for the conter-
minous United States

 

 

 

Net Earnings from Estimated Rate
Self-Employment of
(Dollars) Multiple Jobholding

Less than 2,000 29.5

2,000 - 3,999 . 29.1

4,000 - 5,999 27.4

6,000 - 7,999 30.1

8,000 - 9,999 32-7
10,000 or more 44.8

All operators

Source: See Appendix V.

Estimates presented in this section are based upon a
sample of 4,589 individuals with off-farm wage earnings
from covered employment in the year 1957. This sample
represents all 1957 OASI farm operators reporting covered
earnings from wage employment who were included among an
over-all sample of 20,868 persons with covered earnings
from agricultural self-employment in 1957. Excluded from
consideration are 991 persons who failed to report loca-
tion of farm and certain other items fer the year 1957.
The classification system used throughout this section
differentiates between OASI farm operators with off-farm

wage employment in 1957 and those without off-farm wage

172

employment. Since a small number of individuals reported
both nonagricultural self-employment earnings and off-
farm wage or salary earnings in 1957, the class designated
as having covered off-farm wage employment includes some
farm operators with nonagricultural self-employment for
the year. Also, the class designated as not having off-
farm wage employment in 1957 includes some persons with
covered earnings from both agricultural and nonagricultural
self-employment. Thus, the latter class includes all
single jobholders in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor.
fbrce plus specified multiple jobholders. The former
group includes only multiple jobholders for whom at least
one job was classified as off-farm wage or salary employ-
ment.
Geographic Region

Estimates derived from the 1955 Survey of Farmers'
Expenditures suggest that the percentage of farm operators
with off-farm wage employment varies substantially among
major geographic regions. Ignoring the problem of double
counting of persons with both farm and nonfarm wage employ-
ment, these estimates indicate that the percentage of farm
operators (including both commercial and noncommercial
farm operators) working for others for wages or salaries
in 1955 was notably lower in the East North Central, West
North Central, and South Atlantic states than in the five

remaining regions.l Although information concerning

 

lU.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers' Expenditures
i_n 19 p1 Regions, Statistical Bulletin No. 224, April 1958,
Tab e l, p. 15

173

variation in the off-farm wage employment of commercial
farm operators by geographic region is lacking, the
hypothesis is advanced that the proportion of commercial
farm operators with off-farm wage and salary employment
is lower among farm operators in the East North Central,
West North Central, and South Atlantic states than among
farm operators in the remainder of the conterminous United
States. This hypothesis was accepted when tested at the
5 percent level of significance. Among 1957 OASI farm
operators in the East North Central, West North Central,
and South Atlantic states, it is estimated that 21.0 per-
cent had covered earnings from off-farm wage employment
in 1957. In comparison, about 23.8 percent of all 1957
OASI farm operators located outside these states had
covered off-farm wage earnings in 1957.

The estimates presented in Table V-7 indicate that
1957 OASI farm operators with off-farm wage and salary
employment may have been more predominant in the Northeast,
South Atlantic, East South Central, West South Central, and
Mountain states than in the North Central and Pacific
states. The rate of off—farm wage employment, which ex-
presses the number of farm operators with off—farm wage
and salary employment as a percentage of all farm opera-
tors within a given class, ranged from a low of 20.0 per-
cent in the West North Central states to a high of 25.7

percent in the Mountain states. Although some differences

174

TABLE V-7.--Estimated rate of off-farm wage employment in
1957 for 1957 OASI farm operators, by geograph-
ic region, for the conterminous United States

 

 

Estimated Rate of

 

Region Off-Farm Wage Emplgyment
Northeast 23.7
East North Central 21.5
West North Central 20.0
South Atlantic 22.8
East South Central 22.7
West South Central 25.1
Mountain 25.7
Pacific 21.4
All regions 22.0

 

Source: See Appendix V.

seem to exist among geographic regions with respect to the
rate of off—farm wage employment, the estimates given in
Table V-7 suggest that these differences are relatively
small.

The reader will recall that the rate of multiple job-
holding ranged from a low of 24.8 percent to a high of
35.8 percent among major geographic regions. That the
range in the rate of off-farm wage employment is sub-
stantially less than the range in the rate of multiple
jobholding implies that considerable variation may exist

among geographic regions with respect to the incidence

175

of farm operators with earnings from nonagricultural self-
employment. Among 1957 OASI farm operators, approximately
9.2 percent of all persons reported earnings from nonagri-
cultural self—employment, but it is estimated that the
rate of nonagricultural self-employment ranged from a low
of 4.8 percent in the West North Central states to a high
of 14.4 percent in the Pacific states. Consequently, it
is concluded that a large part of the regional variation
in off-farm employment is due to differences in the inci-
dence of nonfarm self-employment and not to variations in
the rate of off-farm wage and salary employment.

ggg _

Several reasons were given earlier for suspecting
that the rate of multiple jobholding is associated with
the age of the farm operator, and estimates of multiple
jobholding among members of the 1957 OASI farm-operator
labor force suggest that the rate of multiple jobholding
tends to be highest among farm operators in the youngest
age classes and to decrease with increasing age. It was
also suggested previously that, among all multiple job-
holders, individuals with nonagricultural self-employment
earnings may tend to be older than farm operators with
off-farm wage and salary employment. If this is the case,
we may expect to find that the rate of off-farm wage
employment varies more among persons in different age

groups than does the rate of multiple jobholding.

176

Two related hypotheses are offered: (1) that the
percentage of farm operators with off-farm wage employ-
ment is higher among farm operators under 45 Years of age
than among farm operators 45 years of age or more, and
(2) that the percentage of farm operators with earnings
from nonagricultural self-employment is lower among farm
operators under 45 years of age than among farm operators
45 years of age or more. The former hypothesis was ac-
cepted. It is estimated that 31.5 percent of all 1957
OASI farm operators under 45 Years of age had off-farm
wage employment in 1957 as compared with only 17.2 per-
cent of all 1957 OASI farm operators 45 years of age or
more.

Excluding multiple jobholders with covered earnings
from both nonagricultural self-employment and off-farm
wage employment, it is estimated that the percentage of
all 1957 OASI farm operators with nonagricultural self-
employment in 1957 was 7.2 percent for persons under 45
years of age and 7.8 percent for persons 45 years of age
or more. The difference between these two percentages
was not statistically significant at the 5 percent level.
Therefore, while off-farm wage and salary employment
appears to be much more common among farm operators under
45 years of age than among farm operators 45 Years of age
or more, nonagricultural self-employment appears to be no
more common among individuals in the latter age group than

among individuals under 45 years of age.

177

Farm operators working off the farm for wages or
salaries tend to be notably younger than other farm
operators. The median age of 1957 OASI farm operators
with off-farm wage employment in 1957 was approximately
45.3 years as compared with 53.9 years for farm operators
without off-farm wage employment. Nearly 75 percent of
all 1957 OASI farm operators with covered wage earnings
in 1957 were less than 55 years of age, and approximately
48.5 percent were included in the range of from 35 to 54
years of age.

Estimates of the rate of off-farm wage employment
for six age classes ranged from a low of 9.7 percent for
farm operators 65 years of age and over to a high of
49.4 percent for farm operators under 25 years of age
(Table V-8). The estimates presented in Table V-8 clearly
suggest that the incidence of off-farm wage employment
decreases with increasing age. The extremely high rate
of off-farm wage employment among individuals under 25
years of age suggests that persons in this age group may
typically be much more mobile with respect to occupation
than older farm operators.

Egg;

Information concerning the rate of off-farm employ-
ment among Negro and non-Negro farm operators is not
available from the Census of Agriculture, and relatively

few Negro farm operators were included in the 1957 OASI

178

TABLE V—8.--Estimated rate of off-farm wage employment in
1957 for 1957 OASI farm operators, by age,
for the conterminous United States

 

 

 

(Ygggs) Off-Fzgmmgggg Esplo;£ent
Under 25 49.4
25-34 31.6
35 - 44 29.1
45 - 54 23.4
55 - 64 17.6
65 and over 9.7
All operators 22.0

 

Source: See Appendix V.

farm-operator labor force. The hypothesis was advanced
that the rate of off-farm wage employment is lower for
Negro farm operators than for non-Negro farm operators,
but the difference between the proportion of Negro and
non-Negro farm operators with off-farm wage employment in
1957 was not significantly different from zero at the 5
percent level. It is estimated that approximately 22.0
percent of all non—Negro farm operators included in the
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force had covered wage or
salary earningsfrom off-farm sources in 1957 as compared
with 21.0 percent of all Negro farm operators.
It would seem that the difference in the rate of

multiple jobholding for Negro and non-Negro farm operators

179

can be attributed to the difference in the incidence of
nonagricultural self-employment. Approximately 9.7 per-
cent of all non-Negro farm operators reported earnings
from nonagricultural self-employment for social security
coverage in 1957. In comparison, only 3.0 percent of all
Negro farm operators included in the 1937-58 Continuous
W0rk-History Sample were recorded as having, in 1957,
covered earnings from nonagricultural self-employment.
pr

Earlier it was shown that, for female workers included
in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force, the rate of
multiple jobholding appears to be substantially lower
than the rate of multiple jobholding for male farm opera-
tors. With reference to off-farm wage employment, it is
estimated that only 13.6 percent of all female farm opera-
tors worked for others for covered wage or salary earnings
in 1957 as compared with 22.6 percent of all male farm
operators.

In contrast to their lower rate of participation in
off-farm wage employment, female farm operators were asso-
ciated with nonagricultural self—employment at about the
same rate as male farm operators. The percentage of female
and male farm operators included in the 1937-58 Continuous
W0rk-History Sample who reported covered earnings from
nonagricultural self-employment in 1957 were 9.1 percent

and 9.6 percent, respectively.

180

Previous Job Experience

The hypothesis that individual employment patterns
in a given year tend to be closely associated with employ-
ment patterns in the preceding year was considered with
respect to single and multiple jobholding in the first
section of this chapter. It is reasonable to expect that
a high proportion of the farm operators with off-farm
wage employment in a given year have also been associated
with off-farm wage employment in the preceding year. The
reader is again reminded that the 1957 OASI farm-operator
labor force is defined without regard to sources of cov-
ered earnings in other years; consequently some individ-
uals included in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force
either had no covered earnings in 1956 or were identified
only with off-farm employment.

Estimates relating to the 1956 employment patterns of
1957 OASI farm operators with and without off-farm wage or
salary employment in 1957 are given in Table V-9. Among
farm operators in the 1957 sample, it is evident that off-
farm wage employment tends to be associated with off-farm
employment in the preceding year. It is estimated that,
for 1957 OASI farm operators without off-farm wage employ—
ment in 1957, 9.4 percent had no social security coverage
in 1956, 8.5 percent had covered earnings from off—farm
wage employment, and 82.1 percent had earnings from self-

employment only. In comparison, it is estimated that,

181

no: mcommom pom pesooom op copmdnom poz

.oHaemm HmopmHmnxhoz meosCHpcoo mmubmoH "oohsom

.bde :H swam Ho :OHpmooH werhoaou

.mumo mHmamm Souk tomeHpmm "mpoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.ooH ooo.mme o.ooH ooo.emo.H Hence
a.mm ooo.ooH H.mm oom.emm.H aHeo mmcHeumc

peoBHOHQEoIHHom
o.He ooo.omm m.m ooo.mmH nmeHeamc cmmz atmouemo
e.e . ooH.om e.o ooe.~mH ommnceoo oz

ommpcoohmm honasz emancoonom honesz ommH :H
shoppmm newshoHQEM

nmmH :H peoENOHaam mme Nme CH pCmEMOHmem owmz

sameummo anz mwopmaomo

 

aammummo paoesz mnonmamoo

 

 

 

mopmpm ompHeD msoanhopsoo map pom .ommH cH choppmm newshoneo he bmmH
cH pnmSHOHmEm own: summummo nsospH3.o:m 39H: muopwpomo Show Hmdo hmmHnn.on> mumde

182

among 1957 OASI farm operators who had covered earnings

from off-farm wage employment in 1957, 4.4 percent had

no coverage in 1956, 71.9 percent had covered earnings

from off-farm wage employment, and 23.7 percent had

covered earnings from self-employment only. Of the
individuals with social security coverage in both 1956

and 1957, more than three-fourths of those with off-farm
wage and salary employment in 1957 were also identified with
wage and salary employment in 1956.

As indicated previously, not all members of the 1957
OASI farm-operator labor force were identified with agri-
cultural self-employment in 1956. Because of actual
changes in occupational status and limitations on the
reporting of earnings forsocial security coverage, only
82.1 percent of the persons included in the 1957 OASI
farm-operator labor force were identified with agricultural
self-employment in both 1956 and 1957. Among persons
reporting agricultural self-employment earnings for social
security coverage in both years, approximately 19.8 per-
cent received covered earnings from off-farm wage employ-
ment in 1957, and approximately 19.9 percent received
covered wage earnings in 1956.

Despite the nearly identical rates of off-farm wage
employment for the two years, there appears to have been
substantial movement into and out of the off-farm labor
force. It is estimated that 25.9 percent of the individ-

uals identified with agricultural self—employment in both

183

1956 and 1957 were also identified with off-farm wage

and salary employment in at least one of the two years.
Only about 53.7 percent of all persons with off-farm

wage employment in at least one year, however, worked

off the farm for wages or salaries in both 1956 and

1957. Thus, while the annual rate of off-farm.wage
employment did not change significantly from 1956 to
1957, there seems to have been a rather large shift among
the individuals comprising the group of OASI farm opera-
tors working off the farm for wages or salaries.

Another measure of the extent to which the labor
force status of farm operators changes from one year to
the next is the number of persons whose employment class-
ification in 1957 differed from that of the preceding
year. As shown earlier, the labor force status of members
of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force is identified
as one of eight mutually exclusive employment combinations
for the year 1957. These employment combinations include
individuals with only agricultural self-employment earn-
ings in 1957 or with earnings from both agricultural and
nonagricultural self-employment in conjunction with one
of the following wage employment classifications: (1) no
wage or salary employment, (2) nonfarm wage employment,
(3) both nonfarm and farm wage employment, or (4) farm
wage employment. Considering only shifts between these

eight categories, it is estimated that only 68.6 percent

184

of all 1957 OASI farm operators had identical employment
classifications in 1956 and 1957. The employment classi-
fication of the remaining 31.4 percent changed between
1956 and 1957. Included in the latter group are persons
who entered the labor force for the first time in 1957
and persons whose employment classification changed be-
tween 1956 and 1957 because of limitations on the report-
ing of self-employment earnings for social security
coverage.

Individuals who were new entrants in the farm-operator
labor force and those who were prevented from reporting
self-employment earnings in either 1956 or 1957 because of
the maximum limit on taxable earnings are excluded from
the labor force identified with agricultural self-employment
in both 1956 and 1957. Among persons included in the OASI
farm-operator labor force in both 1956 and 1957, it is
estimated that the off-farm employment status of 16.5 per-
cent of all individuals changed between 1956 and 1957.
Since this estimate represents only shifts in the employ-
ment pattern of persons who were identified with agricul-
tural self-employment in both years, it presumably under—
states the actual magnitude of shifts in the labor force
status of individuals operating farms in any given year.
It should also be noted that changes in employment class-
ification account only for shifts between various combina-

tions of self-employment and.wage employment in the

185

agricultural and nonagricultural sectors and do not account
for farm operators who changed jobs within a given category.
Net Earnings from Self-Employment

Earlier it was shown that no significant difference
existed between the rate of multiple jobholding among 1957
OASI farm operators with net self-employment earnings of
less than $2,000 and the rate among farm operators with
net self-employment earnings of $2,000 or more. However,
it was also shown that multiple jobholders in the higher
income classes included a disproportionately large number
of persons with self-employment earnings from both agri-
cultural and nonagricultural sources. Because of the
intermingling of self-employment earnings from agricultural
and nonagricultural sources, no attempt was made to examine
the relationship between the level of net farm earnings
and the incidence of multiple jobholding. It is possible,
however, to examine the relationship between the level of
net farm earnings and the incidence of off-farm wage and
salary employment.

Two hypotheses are suggested with reference to the
rate of off-farm wage employment: (1) that the rate of
off-farm wage employment tends to be lower among farm
operators with net earnings from self-employment of $2,000
or more than among farm operators with net self-employment
earnings of less than $2,000; and (2) that for persons

with covered self-employment earnings from only agricultural

186

sources the rate of off-farm wage and salary employment
tends to be lowest among farm operators with net farm
earnings of $2,000 or more. It is estimated that around
71.8 percent of all 1957 OASI farm operators with covered
off-farm wage employment in 1957 had net self-employment
earnings of less than $2,000 as compared with 62.4 percent
of all farm operators without off-farm wage employment.
The difference between these two percentages was signif-
icantly different from zero at the 5 percent level.

Estimates of the percentage rate of off-farm wage
employment by net earnings from self-employment are given
in Table V-lO. It was found that about 24.5 percent of
all persons with net earnings from self-employment of
less than $2,000 received covered earnings from off-farm
wage and salary employment in 1957 and that only 17.5
percent of all persons with net self-employment earnings
of $2,000 or more worked off the farm for wages and sala-
ries. It is concluded, therefore, that off-farm wage and
salary employment is more prevalent among farm operators
with net self-employment earnings of less than $2,000
than among farm operators with net self-employment earn-
ings of $2,000 or more.

Since social security records do not distinguish
between the amounts of agricultural and nonagricultural
self-employment earnings reported by individuals with

earnings from both sources, these persons must be excluded

187

TABLE'V-lO.--Estimated rate of off-farm wage employment
in 1957 for 1957 OASI farm operators, by
net earnings from self-employment in 1957,
for the conterminous United States

 

 

Net Earnings from Estimated Rate
Self-Employment of
(Dollars) Off-Farm Wage Employment
Less than 2,000 24.5
2,000 - 3,999 19.8
4,000 - 5,999 13.1
6,000 - 7,999 14.7
8,000 - 9,999 12.1
10,000 or more 13.2
All operators 22.0

 

Source: See Appendix V.

in dealing specifically with the hypothesis that the rate
of off-farm wage employment varies inversely with the
level of net earnings from farming. Approximately 1.9
million 1957 OASI farm operators received self-employment
earnings from only agricultural sources in 1957, and it
is estimated that 66.5 percent of all farm operators
included in this group reported net farm earnings of less
than $2,000. Specifically tested was the hypothesis that
the percentage of farm operators with off-farm wage or
salary employment for individuals with net farm earnings
of less than $2,000 was less than or equal to the per-

centage for individuals with net farm earnings of $2,000

188

or more. The difference between the rate of off-farm
wage employment for these two groups was significant at
the 5 percent level. Therefore, it is concluded that

the incidence of off-farm wage employment tends to be
greatest among farm operators with low farm earnings.

It should be noted, however, that off-farm wage employ-
ment occurs at a substantial rate among all income
classes and that off-farm wage employment is not confined

to farm operators with low farm earnings.
Summary

Estimates for the year 1957 indicated that the per—
centage of 1957 OASI farm operators working off the farm
varied from a low of 24.8 percent in the west North Cen-
tral states to a high of 35.8 percent in the Pacific
states. Large differences were found in the rate of
nonagricultural self-employment. The proportion of OASI
farm operators with earnings from.monagricultural self-
employment ranged from a low of 4.8 percent in the West
North Central states to a high of 14.4 percent in the
Pacific states. Regional variations in the rate of off-
farm wage employment were less pronounced. The proportion
of 1957 OASI farm operators with covered wage employment
ranged from a low of 20.0 percent in the West North Cen-
tral states to a high of 25.7 percent in the Mountain

states.

189

Off-farm employment is highly selective with respect
to age of the farm operator. No significant difference
in the rate of nonagricultural self-employment was found
between 1957 OASI farm operators under 45 years of age
and those 45 years of age or more. The percentage of farm
operators with off-farm wage employment tended, however,
to decrease with increasing age. Approximately 31.5 per-
cent of all 1957 OASI farm operators under 45 years of
age had off-farm wage employment in 1957 as compared with
only 17.2 percent of all farm operators 45 years of age
or more. The rate of off-farm wage employment ranged from
a low of 9.7 percent for farm operators 65 years of age
or more to a high of 49.4 percent for those under 25 years
of age.

Negro farm operators worked in off-farm wage employ-
ment at approximately the same rate as non-Negro farm
operators. However, only 3.0 percent of all Negro farm
operators reported covered earnings from nonagricultural
self-employment in 1957 as compared with 9.7 percent of
all non-Negro farm operators.

It is estimated that only 13.6 percent of all female
workers included in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor
force had covered off-farm wage earnings in 1957. In
comparison, about 22.6 percent of all male farm operators
had off-farm wage employment. The rates of nonagricul-
tural self-employment for male and female farm operators

were approximately equal.

190

An outstanding feature of the off-farm employment
of farm operators was the large shift of individuals com-
prising the multiple jobholding segment of the OASI farm-
operator labor force. Among farm operators with off-farm
wage employment in 1956 and/or 1957, only slightly more
than one-half were identified with off-farm wage employ-
ment in both years.

No significant difference was found between the rate
of multiple jobholding for 1957 OASI farm operators with
net self-employment earnings of less than $2,000 and the
rate for farm operators wdth net self-employment earnings
of $2,000 or more. Off-farm wage employment was, however,
more prevalent among farm operators in the former group
than among those in the latter group. Approximately 24.5
percent of all persons with net self-employment earnings
of less than $2,000 had off-farm wage employment in 1957
as compared with 17.5 percent of all persons with net

self-employment earnings of $2,000 or more.

CHAPTER VI
THE OFF-FARM WAGE EARNINGS OF FARM OPERATORS

It is apparent that farm operators who work off the
farm account for a sizable proportion of the farm-operator
labor force in the United States, but we have yet to
examine information indicative of the amount of earnings
received by farm operators from off-farm sources. That
is the purpose of the present chapter. First, it will be
necessary to review briefly the method by which official
estimates of the income of the farm population from non-
agricultural sources is prepared and to determine the
composition of the aggregate off-farm income of farm-
operator families. Second, we will attempt to demonstrate
that earnings data from the Continuous Work-History Sample
can be used to construct estimates of the magnitude and
size distribution of the off-farm wage earnings of the
commercial farm-operator labor force. Finally, we will
investigate the kinds of off-farm wage and salary employ-
ment which seem to attract labor from the farm-operator

labor force on a part-time basis.

191

192

Income pf the Farm Population from Nonagricultural Sources

Most Department of Agriculture estimates relating to
farm income and expenditures are derived from currently
reported data;1 however, the USDA series on the income of
the farm population from nonagricultural sources is based
on benchmark estimates obtained from sample survey data.
Annual estimates of nonfarm income are interpolated or
extrapolated from benchmark estimates on the assumption
that "changes in the farm population's share of total non-
agricultural income are proportionate to changes in the
farm population as a percentage of the total population."2
Benchmark Surveyg

The first part of the series is based on three inde-
pendent surveys conducted during the period from 1933
through 1936.3 The first was a survey of part—time farm-
ing Which was directed by the Civil Works Administration.
This survey covered parts of 1933 and 1934. The second
was the Consumer Purchases Study covering 1935 and 1936.
The third survey, taken in 1936, was a survey of applicants

for Federal Land Bank loans. A single estimate of the

 

1For a general description of USDA estimates of farm
income and expenditures see U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Major Statistical Series of phg U.S. Department 9; Agricul—
ture, Agricultural Handboak No. llS, Vol. 3, Gross gag Npp
Farm Income, December, 1957.

2Ibid., p. 4.

3Here the author has drawn generously from Ernest W.
Grove, "Sources and Methods: Income of the Farm Population
from Nonfarm Sources," March 4, 1955 (typewritten).

193

nonfarm income of farm people was derived from these sur-
veys for the year 1935 and extended back one year to 1934.
The series on nonfarm income was actually initiated
in 1943 and begins with the 1934 estimate. Various
sources--including Census of Population data on wage and
salary income in 1939, Census of Agriculture statistics
on days of off-farm work by farm operators, and the 1941
study of Rural Family Spending and Saving in Wartime--
were utilized in bringing the series up to date. When
the 1946 survey of farm-operator family incomeh was com-
pleted, the series was tied to the 1946 and 1935 bench-
mark estimates and the intermediate data were discarded.
Additional benchmark estimates were obtained for the
years 1949, 1950, and 1955. The 1949 benchmark was based
upon a study of farm-operator family income conducted in
conjunction with a matched sample of schedules from the
1950 Censuses of Population, Housing, and Agriculture.5
Unpublished data from the April 1951 survey of consumer
incomes by the Bureau of the Census served as the basis

of the 1950 benchmark estimate.

 

“See Nathan M. Koffsky and Jeanne E. Lear, The Size
Distribution pf Farm Operator's Income ip 1946, U.S.
Bureau of Agricultural Economlcs, September, I950.

 

5The survey data are reported in U.S. Bureau of the
Census, Farms and Farm People: Population, Income and
Housing Characteristicslpy Economic Class of Farm (Wash-
ington: U.S. Government Printing Office, l952). Also
see Ernest W. Grove, "Per Capita Income by Economic Class
of Farm, 1949," Agricultural Economics Research, Vol.
VIII, No. 2 (April, 19567, pp. 51-58.

194

Additional information on the nonfarm income of farm
people was collected in the 1955 Survey of Farmers' Ex-
penditures. These data have provided the most recent
benchmark estimate of nonagricultural income.6 The accu-
racy of survey estimates is, of course, subject to ques-
tion. Users of the 1955 survey estimates are warned that
net income from farming, as reported in the survey, was
probably understated by one-third or more; but they are
also advised that "the total off-farm income reported in
the survey appears to be about in line with other esti-
mates."7 It should be noted, however, that the "other
estimates" to which the report refers are those which
have teen derived by extrapolating from previous survey
estimates. There are no independent checks on the 1955
survey estimate, and there is no assurance that the level
of the series is not substantially different from the true
level.

Benchmark Estimates

The procedures of the 1955 Expenditure Survey will
not be considered here, but the method by which benchmark
estimates are derived from survey estimates of the non-
agricultural income of farm-operator families merits

examination. Survey estimates of the off-farm income of

 

6At the time of this study estimates were being pre—
pared from a similar survey conducted in 1960.

7U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census pf Agricul-
ture: 195 , Vol. III, Part 11, p. 2.

195

farm-operator families in 1955 by source of income are
given in Table VI-l. The total off-farm income of farm-
operator families was estimated at approximately $8 bil-
lion in 1955. Total nonfarm income was slightly more than
$6.9 billion.

The Department of Agriculture series on the net in-
come of the farm population from nonagricultural sources
indicates that the nonfarm income of the farm population
was $6.3 billion in 1955 (Table VI-2, Column 1). The sur-
vey estimate differs from the estimate included in the
nonfarm income series because the series excludes trans-
fer payments. The benchmark estimate for the series was
therefore calculated by subtracting the amount of transfer
payments from the survey estimate. Transfer payments
amounted to $515,391,000 for farm operators and nearly
$125,000,000 for wives and other family members. Total
transfer payments were equal to approximately $640 million,
and the benchmark estimate for 1955 was calculated by sub-
tracting that amount from the survey estimate of the ag-
gregate nonfarm income of farm-operator families.

The series on nonfarm income has recently been revised
to represent the aggregate personal income of the farm
population from nonfarm sources. Estimates included in
the revised series differ from those of the former series
in several ways (Table VI-2, Column 2). Most important is

the fact that transfer payments are included in the revised

196

TABLE VI-l.--Aggregate off—farm income of farm-operator
families by source of income, for the con-
terminous United States, 1955

 

 

 

Source Income
(Thousands of Dollars)
Income received by farm operator: 6,383,624
From farm sources 956,479
Farm wages or salary 229,593
Rental of farm real estate 455,880
Other income 271,006
From nonfarm sources 5,427,145
Nonfarm wages or salary 3,193,617
Nonfarm business 996,408
Transfer payments 515,391
Other income 721,729
Income received by wife: 828,916
From farm sources 22,401
From nonfarm sources 806,514
Income received by other family members: 793,932
From farm sources 87,848
From nonfarm sources 706,084
Total off-farm income of farm-operator
families: 8,006,472
From farm sources 1,066,728
From nonfarm sources 6,939,744

 

Note: Details may not add to totals because of
rounding.
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census

 

of Aggiculture: 1954, Vol. III, Part 11, December, 1956,

Table 8, p. 49.

197

TABLE VI-2.--Net income of the farm population from
nonagricultural sources, 1950 - 1960

 

 

 

 

 

 

Former Series Revised Series
Year (Millions of Dollars) (Millions of Dollars)
(l) (2)
1950 5,300 6,045
1951 5,600 6,329
1952 6,100 6,553
1953 6,000 6,271
1954' 5,800 5,850
1955 6,300 6,140
1956 6,700 6,565
1957 6,600 6,649
1958 6,400 6,712
1959 6,800 7,143
1960 6,900a 7,243
aPreliminary.

Source: U. 8. Agricultural( Marketin Service, The
Farm Income Situation, FIB-179 (July, 19 0) Table 3H,
p. 34, FIS 181 (February, 1961), Table2 , p. 4, and
FIS- 187 (July, 1962), Table 3H, p. 40

198

series. In addition, the new series apparently excludes
the nonfarm income of farm operators and hired farm work-
ers not living on farms. Unfortunately, detailed informa-
tion concerning the method by which the revised series was
constructed is not available.

Limitations and Shortcomings

 

In appraising the USDA series on the nonfarm income
of farm people, Grove recognized three major limitations:
(1) the lack of a breakdown by type of income, except for
benchmark years as provided by sample survey data; (2)
the disparity between farm-operator households, which are
usually sampled in income surveys, and the farm popula-
tion; and (3) the problem of understatement of income by
respondents.8 Granting the importance of these limita-
tions, other shortcomings may also be cited.

The sample for the 1955 Survey of Farmers' Expendi-
tures was drawn from a universe comprising all farms
actually enumerated in the 1954 Census of Agriculture.

In expanding the sample data, an allowance was made for
the downward trend in the number of farms, but no adjust-
ment was made to account for undernumeration of farms in
the 1954 census. The census counted 4,782,416 farms in
1954; and the Bureau of the Census has estimated that

419,000 farms, about 8.1 percent of the estimated total

 

8Grove, "Sources and Methods: Income of the Farm
Population from Nonfarm Sources."

199

number of farms, were missed in the enumeration.9 Exclu-
sion of underenumerated farms from the universe represent-
ed by the 1955 survey has important implications with
regard to the accuracy of the survey estimate of aggregate
off-farm income.

Since the farms missed in the 1954 census and subse-
quently excluded from the universe sampled in 1955 tended
to he places with lower than average gross farm sales,10
they presumably were, for that reason, places with higher
than average off-farm income. Adjustment of the survey
estimates to include farms not represented by the survey
sample adds approximately $768.8 million to the aggregate
off-farm income of farm—operator families in 1955 and
$697.6 million to the aggregate nonfarm income of farm-
operator families.11 This adjustment increases the sur-
vey estimates of aggregate off—farm and nonfarm income by
9.6 percent and 10.1 percent, respectively.

The series on the net income of the farm population
from nonagricultural sources should, by definition, include
the total nonfarm income of all persons living on farms.

As indicated above, however, the estimates on which the

 

9U.s. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census pi; Agricul-
ture: 1954, Vol. II, pp. xxxii-xxxiv.

 

10Ibid. On the basis of a special post-census survey
the Census Bureau estimated that onl. 33,000 of the under-
enumerated farms had gross sales of $5,000 or more in 1954
and that farms with gross sales of less than $1,200 ac-
counted for nearly two-thirds of the underenumerated farms.

 

llEstimates derived by author. See Appendix III.

ZOO

series is based represent the nonfarm income of farm-
operator families. Consequently, the benchmark estimates
exclude, in addition to the nonfarm income of families
missed in the census, estimates of the nonfarm income of
non-operator families residing in rural areas. The num-
ber of such families is probably not large, and the omis-
sion tends to be offset by the inclusion of the nonfarm
income of farm-operator families residing in urban and
rural-nonfarm places.12 Although the extent to which
these two factors offset one another is not known, the
net error may not be large.

Annual estimates of nonfarm income are interpolated
or extrapolated from benchmark estimates on the assumption
that the farm population's share of total nonfarm income
varies in proportion to changes in the farm population as
a percentage of the total population. Thus, for example,
if total nonfarm income remains unchanged from one year
to the next, it is assumed that the farm population's
share of total nonfarm income varies directly with the
change in the farm population as a percentage of the total

population. According to Grove, "in actual practice, the

 

12It has been estimated that, in 1950, about 95 per-
cent of the people living in farm-operator households were
classified as farm residents in the Census of Population
and that 92.5 percent of the persons designated as farm
residents in the Census of Population lived on places which
were classified as farms in the Census of Agriculture.
U. S. Department of Agriculture, Major Statistical Series
9; the U.S. Department 9: Agriculture, Agricultural Hand-
book No. 118, Vol. 7, Farm Population, Employment, and
Levels 9: Livin , September, 1957, p. 6.

 

201

estimate for any given year is calculated by extrapolat-
ing the benchmark per capita figure for the farm popula-
tion in proportion to the change in the total nonagricul-
tural income per capita for the total population, and
multiplying the result by the farm.popu1ation in that
year."13 If, during the course of cyclical fluctuations
in the general level of employment, farm people are among
the first to lose nonfarm jobs in downswings and the last
to be re-hired in upswings, the nonfarm earnings of farm
people may exhibit cyclical fluctuations which differ
from those portrayed by the current nonfarm income series.

It is concluded that, although other limitations
exist, the most serious shortcomings of the present series
are the lack of information on year—to—year changes in
the nonfarm income of farm people and the assumption on
which benchmark estimates of nonfarm income are extrapolated
for other years. Income and employment data from social
security records will permit further examination of the
hypothesis that farm operators are marginal members of
the nonfarm labor force.

The Magnitude and Distribution pf
Off-Farm Wage Earnings
It was suggested in Chapter I that income from off-

farm sources constitutes a sizable share of the total

 

13Grove, "Sources and Methods: Income of the Farm
Population from Nonfarm Sources," p. 2.

202

income of farm-operator families in the United States.
Because of the broad definition of a farm, however, esti-
mates indicative of the nonagricultural earnings of farm-
operator families represent a population which includes a
substantial number of families who derive the bulk of
their income from nonfarm sources and for whom farming is
an incidental occupation. For this reason, we have teen
primarily concerned in this study with the commercial
farm-operator labor force. It has been shown that a
large number of commercial farm operators receive earnings
from off-farm wage employment and/or nonfarm self-employment.
Information on the aggregate farm and off-farm earnings
of commercial farm operators is sketchy, but some esti-
mates which suggest the relative importance of the farm
and off-farm earnings of commercial farm operators are
available.
Commercial Farm Operators

U. S. Department of Agriculture estimates for the
period from 1947 through 1956 show that off-farm income
has become increasingly important to both commercial and
noncommercial farm-operator families. For the period from
1947 through 1949, off-farm income accounted for approxi-
mately 13 percent of the total family income of commercial
farm-operator families; whereas, by 1956, off-farm income

represented about 26 percent of the total income of these

203

families.14 On an aggregate basis it is estimated that
the family income of commercial farm-operator families

in 1956 was equal to approximately $12 billion. Of this
amount, it was estimated that $8.9 billion (74.2 percent)
came from farming and that 83.1 billion (25.8 percent)
came from off-farm sources.15 It should be noted that
the latter estimate includes, in addition to income from
current productive effort, income from sources such as
the rental of real estate and returns on investments.
Furthermore, these estimates account for the income of
both farm operators and family members. Estimates from
the 1955 Survey of Farmers' Expenditures show that the
total earnings of commercial farm operators from nonfarm
self-employment and off-farm wage employment represented
approximately 47 percent of the aggregate off-farm income
of commercial farm-operator families in 1955.16 Thus, it
may be fair to conclude that off-farm earnings of commer—
cial farm operators from current productive effort were

equal to approximately $1.5 billion in 1956.

 

ll’fNathan M. Koffsky and Ernest W. Grove, "The Current
Income Position of Commercial Farms," in Policy for Com-
mercial Agriculture: Its Relation to Economic Growth and
Stability (Papers Submitted by Panellsts Appearing Before
the Subcommittee on Agricultural Policy of the Joint
Economic Committee, 85th Congress, 1st Session; Washington:
U. 8. Government Printing Office, 1957), p. 84.

 

l5;p;g., Table l, p. 86. Calculated by author.

16U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census 9f A ricul-
ture: 1954, Vol. III, Part 11, Table 8, p. 49. Calculated

by author.

 

204

Commercial farm operators (i.e. operators of farms
with gross sales of $2,500 or more) received about $799
million from working for others for wages or salaries in
1955.17 Per capita off-farm wage earnings were equal to
about $364 for commercial farm operators in 1955.18 No
estimate of the average wage earnings of commercial farm
operators with off-farm wage employment is readily avail-
able, but it is possible to derive an approximation based
upon survey data. Earlier it was noted that about 6.3
percent of all commercial farm operators received earn-
ings from farm wage employment in 1955 and that 21.0 per-
cent received earnings from nonfarm wage employment.
Assuming that the percentage of commercial farm operators
with both farm and nonfarm wage earnings was equal to the
percentage of 1957 OASI farm operators with covered wages
from both farm and nonfarm sources, it is estimated that
approximately 26.5 percent of all commercial farm opera-
tors received income from off-farm wage employment in 1955.
Based upon the size of the commercial farm-operator labor
force represented by aggregate income estimates derived
from the 1955 Expenditure Survey, it appears that the per
capita wage and salary earnings of commercial farm opera-

tors who worked for others for wages or salaries in 1955

were equal to approximately $1,372.

 

17lpgg. Calculated by author.

18Ibid. Calculated by author using unpublished esti-
mates of the farm-operator labor force used in expanding
data from the 1955 survey.

205

OASI Farm Operators lg 1957

 

Income data from.the Continuous Work-History Sample
affords a new source of information on the off-farm.wage
earnings of farm operators. In this section we will
examine the amount and size distribution of off-farm wage
earnings of persons who reported agricultural self-employ—
ment earnings for social security coverage in the year
1957. As presented in this section, all estimates of the
wage earnings of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force
are based upon a sample of 4,445 individuals for whom
wage earnings were reported in 1957. No information was
available on the wage earnings of persons not reporting
location of farm in 1957. In addition, of the 4,589 wage
earners reporting location of fanm in 1957, the amount
of wage earnings for 144 individuals was not available
from the Continuous Work-History Sample.

Excluding persons for whom the amount of wage earn-
ings was not reported in 1957, it is estimated that the
aggregate covered wage earnings of the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force were equal to $422.6 million in 1957.
The per capita wage earnings of individuals with covered
off-farm wage and salary employment in 1957 were approxi-
mately 3951. Because of the limitations of OASI farm-
operator data, both the aggregate and the average wage
earnings of OASI farm operators in 1957 were substantially
less than the corresponding estimates for the commercial

farm-operator labor force in 1955.

206

I The size distribution of the off-farm.wage earnings
of OASI farm-operators provides a more adequate measure
of the extent to which members of the farm-operator labor
force are dependent upon off-farm wage employment than
do estimates of the per capita wage earnings of farm opera-
tors. An estimate of the distribution of 1957 OASI farm
operators by taxable wage earnings in 1957 is given in
Table VI-3. Since the estimate shown here represents
only wage earnings taxable under the social security pro-
gram, the lower limit of the distribution is approximately
$50 for individuals with nonfarm wage earnings and $150
for individuals with farm wage earnings. In both cases
the upper limit is p4,200. Despite these limits, the
highly skewed distribution of off-farm wage earnings is
readily apparent. The median wage earnings of 1957 OASI
farm operators with covered wage or salary employment in
1957 were equal to only $518 as compared with per capita
wage earnings of $951. Nearly one-third of all farm
operators who worked off the farm for wages or salaries
had off-farm wage earnings of less than $200, and approx-
imately two-thirds had wage earnings of less than $1,000.

Comparison pf Estimates

 

Although OASI farm—operator data represent, in gen-
eral, commercial farm operators, estimates of the aggre-
gate wage earnings of OASI farm operators can be expected

to differ from estimates of the aggregate wage earnings

.mamsmm hpopmfimuxhog mooscflpcoo mmubm0H “moASOm

.nmma :fi mwcfinhmo mwmz symmummn mo pndoem wcfiphommh no:
mcomnom pom padooom op vopmznuw poz .mpmu mamamm 50pm vopmsfipmm "mpoz

 

 

207

 

o.ooa oon«¢¢¢ ampoe
n.a oooqo whoa to ooo.s
o.N oom.~a 000.; . 00m.m
o.m oom.ma ome.m . ooo.m
m.m 00m.na mom.m - cem.m
H.m cem.mm mos.m . ooo.m
m.o oom.sm oom.a - 00m.H
H.0H oom.s¢ mm¢.H . ooo.a
m.o ooo.mm mom . oom
m.o ooa.o~ mos - coo
m.o oom.~¢ mam . ooe
a.ma oom.oo mam - com
0.0m oos.oma oom swap mmmq
Annmaaoaw puma ca
owmpcmoamm . gonadz mwcflchmm mwmz Ehwmummo

 

 

mmpmpm Umpwcs msocfishmpcoo on» non .mwcflcuwm mwmz manmxwp
an mmma ca unmezoamso mww3.enwmummo npflzcmMOpmnwmo Show Hm¢o bmaauu.muH> mqmde

208

of commercial farm operators for two reasons. First, commer-
cial farm operators with wage earnings of $4,200 or more
from covered employment in 1957 were ineligible for social
security coverage on farm self-employment earnings because
they would have received maximum coverage on the basis of
wage earnings alone. Consequently, these individuals would
not have been identified by social security records as farm
operators. Second, among commercial farm operators includ-
ed in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force, individuals
with wage earnings under the minimum level required for
social security coverage would not be identified as multi-
ple jobholders by social security records. In most cases
these individuals were those with nonfarm wage earnings of
less than $50 in a calendar quarter and those with farm
wages of less than $150 from one employer during the cal-
endar year.

The effect of provisions of the social security pro-
gram upon estimates of off-farm wage earnings for the OASI
farm-operator labor force will be, as compared with esti-
mates for all commercial farm operators, to include a
lower percentage of the total labor force as off-farm
wage earners and to lower the average wage earnings of
farm operators. The extent to which estimates for OASI
farm operators and commercial farm operators differ can
be illustrated with the use of estimates derived from the

1955 Survey of Farmers' Expenditures. As indicated

209

previously, approximately 582,144 commercial farm-
operators (including extra farm-operator partners)
worked off the farm for wages or salaries in 1955. The
aggregate wage earnings of commercial farm operators in
1955 were equal to approximately $798,973,000. It will
be possible, with the use of survey data, to estimate
the number of commercial farm operators eligible for
social security coverage on both farm self-employment
earnings and off-farm wage earnings in 1955 and the ag-
gregate covered wage earnings of farm operators eligible
for social security coverage.

It was suggested earlier in this chapter that the
1955 survey estimates understated the aggregate off-farm
income of farm-operator families because no adjustment
was made to account for farms not counted in the 1954
Census of Agriculture. Among commercial farm operators,
it is estimated that 91,237 farm operators were excluded
from the universe represented by the survey estimates for
the year 1955.19 Assuming that the rate of off-farm wage
employment and average wage earnings for these farm opera-
tors were equal to those for commercial farm operators
sampled in the 1955 survey, it is estimated that the sur-
vey estimate excludes 24,l78 commercial farm operators,
including extra partnership operators, who received wage
and salary earnings in 1955 and aggregate wage and sal-

ary earnings equal to approximately $33,172,000. After

 

19See Appendix III, Table III-B.

210

accounting for farm operators excluded from the universe
sampled in 1955, it is therefore estimated that a total
of 606,322 commercial farm operators received aggregate
wage and salary earnings equal to $832,145,000 in 1955.

Of the commercial farm operators surveyed in 1955,
it is estimated that about 23 percent of those with wage
employment worked on farms and that the remaining 77
percent worked at nonfarm jobs. The estimates given in
the preceding paragraph take into account the small num-
ber of farm operators who had both nonfarm and farm wage
employment, so it will not be necessary to make further
adjustments to account for these individuals. About 7
percent of all commercial farm operators receiving farm
wages reported wage earnings of $4,200 or more in the
1955 survey, and about 10 percent of those receiving non-
farm wages reported earnings of 54,200 or more. Given
the estimated number of commercial farm operators with
wage and salary employment in 1955, the percentage with
farm wage employment and nonfarm wage employment, and
the percentage within each class with wage earnings of
$4,200 or more, it is estimated that 56,449 commercial
farm operators with wage employment in 1955 would have
been excluded from the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor
force.

Approximately 28 percent of all commercial farm op-

erators with farm wage employment in 1955 reported wage

211

earnings of less than $150, and approximately 6 percent
of those with nonfarm wage employment reported wage
earnings of less than $50. Consequently, it is estimated
that 39,047 commercial farm operators had farm wages of
less than $150 in 1955 and that 28,012 commercial farm
operators had nonfarm wage earnings of less than $50.
Ignoring the fact that a few wage earners could have
had nonfarm wage earnings in excess of $50 without qual-
ifying for social security coverage, approximately
67,095 commercial farm operators with off-farm wage and
salary employment would not have been classified as
multiple jobholders in the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor
force because of the lower limit on taxable wages and
salaries. In all, it is estimated that 123,508 commer-
cial farm operators with wage employment in 1955 would
have been either excluded from the 1955 OASI farm-
operator labor force or not identified as multiple job-
holders by social security records. Calculated as a
residual, approximately 482,814 commercial farm operators
were eligible for social security coverage on both farm
self-employment earnings and off-farm wage earnings in
1955.

Income data provided by the 1955 survey permit
estimation of the aggregate wage and salary earnings of
commercial farm operators who were eligible for both

farm self—employment and off-farm wage employment coverage

212

in 1955. Using unpublished survey estimates of the
average wage earnings of each of the four groups of
commercial farm operators not counted as multiple job-
holders because of the limitations of social security
coverage, it is estimated that the aggregate wage and
salary earnings of commercial farm operators not iden-
tified as wage earners in the 1955 OASI farm-operator
labor force were equal to $355,787,000. Hence, it is
estimated that the aggregate wage earnings of commercial
farm operators eligible for social security coverage on
both farm self-employment and off-farm wage earnings
were equal to $476,358,000 in 1955. For commercial
farm-operators designated as having covered off-farm
wage earnings, per capita wage earnings would have been
approximately $987.

As compared with estimates for all commercial farm
operators, it is concluded that OASI employment records
would have accounted for approximately 80 percent of
the individuals with wage earnings from either farm or
nonfarm sources and about 57 Percent of the aggregate
wage earnings of commercial farm operators in 1955.
Although these estimates are based upon sample data and
do not account for noncommercial farm operators included
in the OASI farm—operator labor force, they may serve to
indicate the extent to which OASI and commercial farm-

operator estimates can be expected to differ. It will be

213

noted that the estimated per capita wage earnings of
1957 OASI farm operators with covered off-farm wage
employment differs from the estimated per capita wage
earnings of commercial farm operators eligible for
OASI coverage on both agricultural self-employment
earnings and off-farm wage earnings in 1955 by only $36.
OASI Estimates for Commercial Farm Operators

Although the OASI farm-operator labor force is not
identical with the commercial farm-operator labor force,
the similarity between the two groups appears sufficient
to permit estimation of the off-farm wage earnings of
commercial farm operators from OASI sample data. To
construct such an estimate, it will be assumed that all
persons included in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor
force would have qualified as commercial farm operators.
In addition, certain assumptions are necessary to account
for commercial farm operators not included as wage earn-
ers in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force. For this
purpose, the following assumptions, based upon sample
data from the 1955 Survey of Farmers' Expenditures, are

made:

1. The 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force includes
as wage earners 80 percent of all commercial
farm operators with off-farm.wage employment

in 1957.

2. Among all commercial farm operators with off-
farm wage employment in 1957, 11 percent re-
ceived wage earnings below the minimum level
necessary to be included as multiple jobholders

214

in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force,
and 9 percent were excluded from the 1957
OASI farm- -operator labor force because they
received wage earnings of 84, 200 or more in
covered employment.

3. For commercial farm operators with off-farm
wage employment in 1957 who were not repre-
sented by OASI wage employment data, the per
capita wage earnings of those with wage earn-
ings below the level required for OASI cover-
age were 843, and the per capita wage earnings
of those with earnings of 84, 200 or more were
86,082.

Given the assumptions listed above, the distribution given
in Table VI-3 for 1957 OASI farm operators with covered
wages in 1957 may be extended at each end to provide an
estimate of the distribution of commercial farm opera-
tors with off-farm wage employment by off-farm earnings
in 1957. This has been done in constructing the distri-
bution shown in Table VI-4. The estimates shown in this
table represent all 1957 OASI farm operators with off-
farm wage employment in 1957, including those individuals
for whom the amount of wage earnings in 1957 were not
reported, plus estimates of the number of individuals
with wage earnings below the minimum level required for
social security coverage and the number of individuals
excluded from the actual 1957 OASI farm-operator labor
force because they received wage earnings of 84,200 or
more in covered employment. The distribution of OASI

farm operators recorded as having wage employment in

1957 but for whom the amount of wage earnings was not

215

.mep mom “meadow

 

 

 

0.00a 0mm.smm ampoe
m.m 0mm.0a whoa to 000.0
a.m 00m.ma 000.m - 000.m
m.4 m0>.m~ 000.4 - 000.4
a.m msm.0m 000.m - 000.m
N.N N004m4 000.~ - 000.m
a.ma 0mm.me 000.4 . 000.a
4.40 Hmm.4mm 000 u a
mmmpcmopmm Amnssz mwcwwwmwawmwabwmwmmwmo

 

 

 

 

umma .mmpwpm 0mpflcb msocfieuwpcoo map pom .mw:H:hmo apmmumwo

an unmeaoamao mmw3.8pmmummo Spa: myopmpmmo Spam Hmflopmaaoo mo mmpwaapmMII.4uH> mqmde

216

reported was assumed to be distributed in proportion to
persons for whom the amount of wage earnings was reported.
It was estimated that 65,698 commercial farm operators were
included in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force but not
recorded as wage earners because of low wage earnings. It
was also estimated that 53,752 commenfial farm operators were
not eligible for inclusion in the 1957 OASI farm—operator
labor force because they received wage earnings of 84,200
or more in 1957. Information necessary to estimate the dis-
tribution of persons included in the latter group by amount
of off-farm wage earnings was derived from the 1955 survey.
It should be recognized that the estimates given in
Table VI-4 are based upon sample data which includes mate-
rially participating farm landlords and excludes bona fide
farm operators who reported after the cut-off date of the
1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample. Ignoring this fact
for the moment, it is estimated that 597,250 commercial farm
operators worked for others for wages or salaries in 1957.
The highly skewed distribution of wage earners in the com-
mercial farm—operator labor force is evident. The estimates
given here indicate that nearly two-thirds of all commercial
farm operators with off-farm wage employment in 1957 had wage
and salary earnings of less than 81,000. The median wage
earnings of commercial farm operators working off the farm
in 1957, as estimated from a more detailed breakdown than

shown in Table VI-4, were only 8517.

217

As mentioned earlier, the aggregate wage earnings
of persons for whom covered wages were reported under
the social security program in 1957 were equal to approx-
imately 8423 million. For persons working off the farm
in covered wage employment, per capita wage earnings were
equal to 8951. Among commercial farm operators surveyed
in 1955, the average wage earnings of those with wage
earnings below the level required for social security
coverage were 843, and the average wage earnings of those
with wages of 84,200 or more were 86,082. Assuming that
OASI farm operators with off-farm wage employment in 1957
but for whom the amount of wage earnings was not reported
had average wage earnings of 8951 and that the two groups
of farm operators whose wage earnings were not represent-
ed by OASI sample data had average wage earnings of 843
and 86,082, it is estimated that the aggregate wage earn-
ings of commercial farm operators in 1957 were equal to
8784 million. This estimate represents per capita wage
earnings of 81,313 for commercial farm operators with
off—farm.wage or salary employment. In comparison, it
will be recalled that the per capita wage earnings of
commercial farm operators in 1955 were approximately
$1,372.

At this point it will be useful to reconsider briefly
the correspondence between the OASI farm-operator labor

force and the commercial farm-operator labor force. It

218

has been estimated that there were 2,079,403 farms with
gross sales of 82,500 or more in 1957. This estimate

was based, however, upon interpolation between the num-
ber of commercial farms enumerated in the 1954 and 1959
Censuses of Agriculture. When this estimate is adjusted
to account for underenumeration of commercial farms in
the censuses and extra farm-operator partners using esti-
mates applied in expanding sample data from the 1955
Survey of Farmers' Expenditures (see Appendix III), it

is estimated that there were 2,210,675 commercial farm
operators in 1957. Assuming a slight increase between
1955 and 1957 in the number of commercial farm operators
with off-farm wage and salary employment, it was previ-
ously estimated that 27 percent of all commercial farm
operators had off-farm wage earnings in 1957.20 Applying
this percentage to the estimated number of commercial farm
operators in 1957, it is estimated on this basis that
596,882 commercial farm operators worked off the farm for
wages and salaries in 1957.

The estimates of off—farm wage employment of commer-
cial farm operators derived from OASI sample data in this
chapter represent an aggregate labor force of 2,239,652
individuals comprising an estimated 2,185,900 persons

included in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force plus

 

20Above, Chapter IV, n.29.

219

53,752 commercial farm operators with wage earnings of
84,200 or more in 1957. It was estimated that this
labor force included 597,250 farm operators with off-
farm wage or salary employment. This was the equiva-
lent of 26.7 percent of the aggregate labor force.

In terms of both the total size of the labor force
and the proportion of the labor force with off-farm
wage employment, the two sets of estimates given above
are nearly identical. Nevertheless, it should be remem-
bered that the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force
includes materially participating farm landlords as
well as bona fide farm operators. Thus, it cannot be
contended that the OASI farm-operator labor force and
the commercial farm-operator labor force are identical.
Moreover, it should also be noted that no allowance has
been made in any of the above estimates to account for
individuals reporting agricultural self-employment earn-
ings for social security coverage after the cut-off date
of the 1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample. Includ-
ing estimates for late reports, the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force was estimated to have included
2,416,500 persons. It was also indicated earlier that
approximately 200,000 farm landlords have annually qual-
ified for agricultural self-employment coverage since
1956. Therefore, accounting for both late returns and

materially participating farm landlords, the number of

220

bona fide farm operators who qualified for agricultural
self-employment coverage in 1957 included about 2,216,500
persons. This estimate is approximately equal to the
size of the commercial farm-operator labor force but
exceeds slightly the number of commercial farm operators
who would have been eligible for agricultural self-
employment coverage in 1957.

The commercial farm-operator labor force and the
OASI farm-operator labor force, although not identical,
appear to represent populations which are very similar.
Data from sources other than social security records
undoubtedly afford more reliable estimates of the size of
the commercial farm—operator labor force; but, in view
of the close correspondence in the off-farm employment
and earnings estimates presented above, it is concluded
that OASI farm-operator data are useful in constructing
estimates of the off-farm wage employment and earnings
of commercial farm operators. OASI sample data account
only for about 80 percent of the commercial farm operators
with off-farm wage employment, and information from other
sources is required to account for all commercial farm
operators working off the farm. However, the fact that
OASI estimates are based upon samples considerably larger
than those which have been used to estimate off-farm
earnings in the past and that OASI data are available

on an annual basis suggests that the use of OASI data

221

in estimating the off-farm wage employment and earnings
of commercial farm operators could provide marked improve-
ment over estimates available from other sources with

respect to reliability, detail, and timeliness.

Sources 9; Off-Farm Wage Earnings

 

The importance of off-farm wage earnings in supple-
menting the aggregate income of farm operators in the
United States has been widely recognized, but informa-
tion on the kinds of off-farm employment held by farm
operators has, until recently, been available only from
scattered local studies. Social security records from
the Annual Employee-Employer Wage Card File provide sample
data on the off-farm wage employment of OASI farm opera-
tors classified by industry of employment. This section
utilizes wage employment data for the year 1957 to
investigate the sources of off-farm wage and salary
earnings of farm operators.

Interpretation 9: the Estimates

 

Estimates presented in this section are based pri-
marily upon sample data relating to persons with agricul-
tural self-employment earnings in 1957 who were included
in the 1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample. The data
were taken, however, from the matdiing 1957 Annual
Employee-Employer Wage Card File. The foregoing sections
of this chapter have been concerned with the number of

farm operators working off the farm and the amount of

222

earnings received by farm operators from off-farm wage
and salary employment. No distinction was made between
persons with wage earnings from a single source and
persons with wage earnings from two or more sources.
Because the purpose of this section is to provide esti-
mates of the number of farm operators working in various
industry groups and because a few farm operators do work
in more than one type of industry during the course of

a year, this section will focus on the number of off-
farm wage jobs held by farm operators. Since the number
of wage jobs held can be expected to exceed the number
of farm operators working off the farm, caution should
be exercised in relating the estimates given in this sec-
tion to those presented earlier.

The Annual Wage Card File contains supplementary
information dealing with the wage and salary employment
of individual workers included in the Continuous Work-
History Sample. As represented by the two samples, how-
ever, the number of farm operators with wage or salary
employment are not identical. Some 1957 OASI farm opera-
tors identified by the Continuous Work-History Sample as
recipients of covered wage earnings in 1957 were not
included in the 1957 Annual Employee-Employer Wage Card
file. This discrepancy is largely attributable to the
fact that the cut-off dates of the two samples are not
the same. Since it is possible for individuals to file

amended or late social security tax returns, the number

223

of persons receiving social security coverage for any
given year is subject to change. To avoid prolonged
delays in data processing, cut-off dates are arbitrarily
established for each sample. The cut-off date for the
1957 Annual Employee-Employer Wage Card File preceded
the cut-off date for the 1937-58 Continuous Work-History
Sample; therefore individuals reporting agricultural
self-employment earnings for the year 1957 after the cut-
off date of the 1957 Annual Wage Card File but before
the cut-off date of the 1937-58 Continuous Work-History
Sample are not represented by detailed wage employment
data. These persons would.have been included in the
sample data on the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force
taken from the 1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample,
but they would have been excluded from the 1957 Annual
Employee-Employer Wage Card File. Consequently, the num-
ber of 1957 OASI farm operators with covered wage or
salary employment in 1957, as estimated from the 1937-58
Continuous Work-History Sample, exceeds the number of
persons represented by the matching 1957 Annual Wage
Card File.

The disparity between the number of 1957 OASI farm
operators with off-farm wage and salary employment who
were included in the 1937-58 Continuous Work-History
Sample and the number who were represented in the 1957

Annual Employee-Employer Wage Card File is relatively

224

small. It is estimated that 477,800 1957 OASI farm
operators received covered earnings from off-farm wage
or salary employment in 1957. More than 90 percent of
these individuals were included in the 1957 Annual Wage
Card File. Since information on the industry in which
wage earners were employed is included only in the
Annual Wage Card File, estimates of the sources of
off-farm wage and salary earnings are based upon data
which exclude approximately 10 percent of the 1957 OASI
farm operators who had covered earnings from off-farm
wage and salary employment in 1957.

It was shown earlier that the Annual Employee-
Employer Wage Card File includes one wage card for each
employer from which an individual received covered wage
or salary earnings during the calendar year. Because a
few persons worked off the farm at more than one job
during the year, the number of wage cards exceeds the
number of persons represented by the sample. Approxi-
mately 78 percent of all individual workers included in
the set of matching wage cards for the year 1957 held
only one covered wage or salary job during the year.
About 16 percent held two jobs from which they received
covered wage or salary earnings, and approximately 6
percent held three or more covered wage jobs. The esti-
mates presented in this section were based upon a sample
of 5,663 wage cards representing the off—farm wage and

salary employment of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force.

225

Industry pf Employment

The purpose of this section is to determine the
relative importance of various industries in providing
off-farm wage and salary employment for farm operators.
Individuals with covered wage or salary earnings from
more than one employer are included in the following
estimates on the basis of once for each covered wage
job held during the year. Consequently, these estimates
represent the number of wage and salary jobs held by
1957 OASI farm operators in the year 1957. They do not
represent the number of individual farm operators with
off-farm wage or salary employment.

Recent estimates of multiple jobholding from the
Current Population Survey provide certain estimates
indicative of the relative importance of various indus-
tries in providing off-farm.wage and salary employment
for the farm—operator labor force. Estimates of the
percentage distribution of multiple jobholders with
primary jobs as self-employed workers in agriculture in
December 1960 by industry group of secondary job are
given in Table VI-5. Since self-employed persons with
a secondary farm or business are not counted as multiple
jobholders in the Current Population Survey, the estimates
shown here include only persons with secondary wage or
salary employment.

It will be noted that nearly 25 percent of all per—

sons with off—farm wage or salary employment in December

226

TABLE VI- 5. --Persons with primary jobs as self— -employed
workers in agriculture by industry of sec-
ondary wage job for persons with two or
more jobs, December, 1960

 

 

 

 

Industry of Secondary Job Percentage Distribution
Agriculture 24.5
Construction 8.7
Manufacturing 15.4
Transportation and public utilities 18.3
Wholesale and retail trade 9.6
Services 13.5
Public administration 9.1
Miscellaneousa 0.9

Total 100.0

 

aIncludes wage and salary workers in forestry, fish-
eries, and mining.

Source: U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Multiple
Jobholders in December 1960, Special Labor Force Report,
No. 18, October, 1961_ Table B, p. A-6.

 

1960 held secondary jobs as hired workers in agriculture.
Transportation and public utilities ranked second in
terms of percentage of all multiple jobholders, followed
by manufacturing and by wholesale and retail trade, in
that order. These estimates indicate that work on some-
one else's farm may account for the off-farm wage earn-
ings of a great many farm operators and that the number
of farm operators with wage earnings from agricultural

sources is about equal to the number of farm operators

227

working in construction and manufacturing industries
combined.

Since the estimates given in Table VI-5 relate to
persons who were classified as having primary jobs as
self-employed workers in agriculture, it should not be
concluded that these estimates are indicative of the
sources of off-farm wage earnings for all farm operators.
It seems likely that the distribution by industry of
persons with secondary jobs as self-employed workers in
agriculture but with primary jobs off the farm would
differ from the estimates given in Table VI-5 for work-
ers with primary jobs as self-employed workers in agri-
culture. In particular, we might expect to find a much
lower percentage of farm operators with primary off-
farm jobs working as hired farm laborers and a higher
percentage working in nonagricultural industries. In
addition, of course, it should be remembered that Current
Population Survey estimates relate to a specific, one-
week period and not to the annual off-farm employment of
farm operators.

Aside from persons excluded from agricultural self-
employment coverage because of the upper limit on tax-
able income for social security coverage, estimates of
the off-farm wage and salary employment of all farm
operators are represented by OASI data provided that

minimum earning requirements were satisfied. Social

228

security data on off-farm wage and salary employment
represent a labor force which differs from that portrayed
by the Current Population Survey; therefore estimates of
the source of off—farm wage earnings derived from social
security data may tend to differ from estimates of the
off-farm wage and salary employment of persons with
primary jobs as self-employed workers in agriculture.
Estimates relating to the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor
force are for the calendar year; whereas Current Popula-
tion Survey estimates are for a particular survey week.
Also, a disproportionately large number of farm operators
with off-farm wage employment in agriculture are excluded
from social security data on multiple jobholding because
many such persons did not have sufficient wage earnings
to qualify for social security coverage. It may there-
fore be expected that estimates based upon covered wage
and salary employment will differ considerably from esti-
mates based upon other data with regard to the percentage
of farm operators with agricultural and nonagricultural
wage and salary employment.

The estimated number of wage and salary jobs held
by 1957 OASI farm operators in 1957 by major industry
group is given in Table VI-6. The industry classifica-
tions used by the Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insur-
ance for the year 1957 are based on the 1945-49 Standard

Industrial Classification Manual of the U. 8. Bureau of

229

the Budget and differ slightly from the revised industry
classifications shown in Table VI-5.

Most striking of the estimates shown in Table VI-6
is that nearly one-third of all off-farm wage and salary
jobs held by 1957 OASI farm-operators during the year
1957 were associated with government at the federal,
state, or local level. Wholesale and retail trade ranked
second in terms of percentages with approximately 18 per-
cent of all off-farm wage and salary jobs, and manufactur-
ing ranked third with about 16 percent. Agriculture,
forestry, and fishing were represented by only about 11
percent of all off-farm wage jobs reported in 1957.
Wage Earnings py Industry

Although the number of off-farm wage jobs provided by
various industries gives some indication of the industries
upon which farm operators are dependent for off-farm wage
and salary earnings, equally important is the amount of
earnings received by farm operators from employment in
the different industries. Thus, for example, while govern-
ment employment accounted for approximately 29 percent of
all covered off-farm wage jobs in 1957 and manufacturing
industries accounted for only about 16 percent, it is not
improbable that the average wage earnings for jobs in
manufacturing establishments are substantially higher
than the average wage earnings for jobs in government.

It also seems reasonable to expect average wage earnings

V .

 

 

230

.mafim ammo mwmg 90%OHQEMImmhoamam Hmscc< hmma “oohsom

.mppomop opma m03H02fi op cmpm5ncw poz

.mumv mamemm Scum 00meHpmm "opoz

.mnoh 0mfiMflmmmHocs 02m magmaMflmmmaoco: mmvsaoCHm

 

 

 

0.00H 00m.00wI ameoe

0.H oom.m mmdomcmaamomfiz
H.0N 000.00H Umflmfimmmaoco: I pcmechm>00
0.0 000.0m mmofi>pmm
4.H 00m.w mumpmm Amos 0cm .oocmLSmcw .mocmcwm
o.NH 00H.HOH mumpp Hampop 0cm mammmaona
0.4 00m.mm moflpfiafip: ofiansm
0.ma 00H.mm mcwpdpommscmz
0.0a 00m.0m composppmcoo pomppcoo
o.N 00m.a4 wsaeaz
m.0a 000.00 wcwnmam 0cm .mnpmmuom .wLSpH50H9w<

uwmpcmohmm amnesz hnumscsH

 

 

mmpmpm 0mpflcs msoQHEhopcoo esp mom
.spemseea as smma ea mpepmpeeo seem Hmao emoa as 0am: meow ewes--.0-H> mamae

N

‘231

in agricultural jobs to be lower than average wage earn-
ings in manufacturing establishments.

The amount of wage earnings was not reported for
approximately 4 percent of the wage and salary jobs rep-
resented by the matching sample taken from the 1957
Annual Employee-Employer Wage Card File. Estimates of
the aggregate and average wage earnings within each
industry group have therefore been based upon sample
data which represent the off-farm wage and salary employ-
ment of approximately 86 percent of the 1957 OASI farm
operators with covered earnings from off-farm wage
employment in 1957. No adjustment has been made to
account for off-farm jobholders not represented by the
wage card sample or for jobs for which the amount of
wage earnings was not reported.

Estimates of the aggregate, average, and median wage
earnings for the off-farm wage jobs held by 1957 OASI
farm operators-in 1957, by industry, are presented in
Table VI-7. Excluding jobs for which the amount of wage
earnings was not reported, it is estimated that the
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force received aggregate
wage and salary earnings of 8401.7 million from a total
of 541,300 jobs during the year 1957. These estimates
represent the off-farm wage and salary employment of
approximately 86 percent of all 1957 OASI farm operators,

including individuals not reporting location of farm in

232

mwcacawm mmmz_mo pzdoew moan: mom mDOn mousaoxm

.mafim upmo mme AmmoHQEMImmhoaaem Hmsccm bmma "meadow

.wcflvcsoh no mmdmomn waspop op 00m no: has mawmpmn .0mppommn no: mm:

.mpmv wadsmm Eoum copmaapmm “mpoz

.m90n UmHMflmmmHocs 0cm maanMHmmmHoco: mmusaocHw

 

 

 

mnm» mmn 5.H04 oomaamw, Hmpoe
«a: How 0.0 00080 annomcmaawomfiz
and no: 0.00 00m.b4a UmHMfimmmaoco: I pcmecnm>oo
was 040 H.4m 00H.0m meeaeeem
m0m 400 0.0 000.0 mpmpmm Hams 02m .oocmmSmcw .wocmcfim
mo: mun n.0b 000.m0 mumnp Hfiwpmn 0cm mammmaona
5mm 0H0 a.ma 00N.mm weapaaaps eaaeee
e45 mna.a m.~0a 00m.em meapspommscez
mmm mmo 4.mm 000.00 ceasesppmeoe pomppcoo
mmm mos m.s 005.0H mcaeaz
mmm mus m.m4 00m.00 weaemam use .sppeeeom .epseaseaem4
mmAmHHom mo
Ampeaaoav Aepmaaoav meoaaaezv meow
mmcficnmm mwcflchmm mwcficnmm mo hppmsvcH
ommg cmficmz mmmz mmwnm>< nonasz .

 

ewes aeeoe

 

 

 

mmpmpm umpflca adocHEpmpcoo map pom .mhpmmwcw kn mwsficuwm mwmz
cwfiwma 0cm .mmmum>w .Hmpop “umma ca mQOpmmoQo Spam Hmdo bmma >9 uams mQOn mwmznn.buH> mqm<e

233

1957, designated as recipients of covered off—farm wage
and salary earnings in 1957. It was previously estimated
from the 1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample that the
aggregate wage earnings of persons reporting location of
farm in 1957 were equal to about 8422.6 million. Exclud-
ing the wage jobs held by persons not reporting location
of farm in 1957, the 1957 Annual Employee-Employer Wage
Card File accounted for approximately 92 percent of the
aggregate wage and salary earnings of the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force.

Three of the nine major industry groups represented
in Table VI-7 appear to differ notably with respect to
the level of average and median wage earnings. Non-
classified government jobs accounted for approximately
29 percent of all off-farm wage and salary jobs held by
1957 OASI farm-operators but only about 17 percent of
the aggregate wage earnings of the 1957 OASI farm-operator
labor force. Within this category wage earnings averaged
only 8465 per job, and the wage earnings of more than
one-half of all government jobs were less than 8200.

At the other extreme, jobs in manufacturing establish-
ments accounted for only 16 percent of all off-farm jobs
but were the source of approximately 26 percent of the
aggregate covered wage earnings of the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force. The average and median wage earn-

ings of jobs in manufacturing industries were 81,178 and

234

8747, respectively. Ranking second in median wage earn-
ings and third in earnings per job were jobs in service
industries. Although average and median wage earnings
were not uniform within the other six industry groups,
it is suggested on the basis of 1957 earnings that, in
terms of average and median levels of wage earnings,
government jobs tend to be less important and jobs in
manufacturing and service industries more important than

off-farm wage and salary jobs in other industries.

Summary

It was estimated that the aggregate covered wage earn-
ings of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force, excluding
persons for whom the amount of wage earnings was not
reported, were equal to 8422.6 million in 1957. Per
capita wage earnings for farm operators with covered
wage employment in 1957 were approximately 8941.

Some farm operators are either excluded from the
OASI farm-operator labor force or not identified as hav-
ing off-farm employment. Estimates based on the 1955
Survey of Farmers' Expenditures indicated that 9 percent
of all commercial farm operators with off-farm wage em-
ployment would have been excluded from the OASI farm-
operator labor force because they received wage earnings
of 84,200 or more in covered employment. In addition,

approximately 11 percent received wage earnings below

235

the minimum level required for social security coverage.
As compared with estimates for all commercial farm
operators, OASI employment records would have accounted
for approximately 80 percent of all persons with off-
farm wage employment and 57 percent of the aggregate
wage earnings of commercial farm operators in 1955.

An important aspect of multiple jobholding by farm
operators is that a large number of farm operators who
work off the farm have relatively low off-farm wage
earnings. The median wage earnings of 1957 OASI farm
operators with covered wage or salary employment in
1957 were equal to only 8518. Nearly one-third of all
1957 OASI farm operators who worked off the farm had
wage earnings of less than 8200, and approximately two-
thirds had wage earnings of less than 81,000.

One of the most striking features of the off-farm
wage employment of 1957 farm operators was that more of
the off-farm jobs held by farm operators in 1957 were
in the government sector than in any other major indus-
try group. Approximately 29 percent of all off-farm
wage jobs reported in 1957 were associated with govern-
ment at the federal, state, or local level. In compar-
ison, 18 percent were in wholesale and retail trade; 16
percent were in manufacturing; 11 percent were in agri-
culture, forestry, and fishing; and 10 percent were in

contract construction.

236

Jobs in three of the nine major industry groups
differed substantially from the aggregate estimates with
respect to both average and median wage earnings. The
average and median wage earnings for all jobs held in
1957 were 8742 and 8353, respectively. However, for
jobs in the government sector, wage earnings averaged
only 8465 per job; and median wage earnings were only
8172. At the other extreme, the average and median
wage earnings for jobs in manufacturing industries were
$1,178 and 8747, respectively. Jobs in service indus-
tries ranked second in median wage earnings (8612) and

third in wage earnings per job (8949).

CHAPTER VII

DIFFERENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF OFF-FARMIWAGE EARNERS BI
INDUSTRY OF EMPLOYMENT AND LEVEL OF OFF-FARM WAGE EARNINGS
_ we have already examined the extent to which the
characteristics of farm operators with off-farm wage
employment differ from the characteristics of farm opera-
tors without off-farm.wage employment and found that not-
able differences exist. It must be recognized, however,
that considerablevariation exists in the wage earnings
received by farm operators who work off the farm and that
the characteristics of farm operators working in various
industries may differ.’ The purpose of this chapter is.
two-fold. First, because similar information is not avail-
able from.ether sources, we will investigate the differen-
tial characteristics of farm operators with off-farm wage
or salary employment by industry of off-farm employment.
Second, we will focus on the relation of selected charac-
teristics of farm operators to the level of off-farm wage,
earnings. Since information indicativeof the character-
istics of commercial farm.operators who work.off the farm
but who are not included as multiple jobholders in the
Continuous WOrk-History Sample is lacking, the estimates
presented in this chapter represent individuals in the

237

238

1957 OASI farm-operator labor force who received covered

earnings from.both agricultural self-employment and off-

farm wage employment in the year 1957.
Differentigl.§E§§:;§:;izgécs 21;;ngggggy .

In Chapter VI it was shown that substantial varia-
tions exist with respect to the number of farm operators
working in the nine major industry groups. Also we
found that the median and averagewage earnings of wage
and salary jobs held by_farm operators are not uniform
among industries. The objective of this section is to
determine whether or not the distribution of 1957 04151
farm operators by industry of off-farm wage employment
differs with respect to selected characteristics of farm
operators. To avoid difficulty in classifying farm
operators who worked in more than one off-farm Job during
the year, the estimates presented in this section relate
to the number of off-farm Jobs held by farm operators.
Geographic gggigg’ o, ‘

Certain differences in the type of off-farm jobs
held by farm operators in various geographic regions can
beanticipated. For example, estimates of the off-farm
employment of farm operators (both commercial and.non-
commercial farm operators) suggest that off-farm work on
someone else's farm is more common in the South and West

than in-the North.1 Moreover, it seems reasonable to

 

-10.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers' Egpendi-

tures in l b Re ions' Statistical Bulletin 0. ,
""iTApr ,‘I9 , raft—fir , p: 115.

 

239

expect that the incidence of work in manufacturing indus-
tries is highest in the Northeast and East North Central
states. Detailed information indicative of the kinds of
off-farm jobs held by farm operators in various geograph-
ic regions is not available for purposes of comparison.

Estimates of the distribution of wage and salary
jobs_held by 1957 OASI farm operators in 1957 are given
for eight major geographic regions in Table VII-1. It
‘will be observed that the relative importance of various
industry groups in providing off-farm wage employment
for farm operators varies substantially. As predicted,
the number of wage jobs in agriculture, forestry, and
fishing appears to be disproportionately greater in the
South and West than in the North. The percentage of
wage Jobs included in this class ranged from a low of
5.1 percent in the East North Central states to a high
of 27.5 percent in the Pacific states. Jobs in manu-
facturing establishmentswere, in contrast, relatively
more common in the Northeast and East North Central
states than in the other regions. The percentage of
‘wage jobs in.manufacturing industries was 25.1 percent
and 21.2 percent in the Northeast and East North Central
states, respectively. Among the remaining six regions
the percentage of manufacturing jobs ranged from a low
of 7.5 percent in the west South Central states to a
high of 16.8 percent in the Mountain states.

240

 

as spam no cofipoooa unannomen no: scouted neusaowm .spuu madame scam copeswpum

.eaah when ems: hehoHABMneehoamsm Housed bmaa “eohsom

. .hmoa
“evoz.

.moon.voauaneeaons use mandamamnmaonos eocsaosHe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.ooH no.0ea .o.ooa o.ooaw o.ooa o.ooa o.ooa smogw mason
«4 e4 N.N who i? wens o.« a: u§8§deem§
a.mm e.m~ a.mu o.em «.4m «.Hm m.e~ ~.o~ soundneeaeeoe y seeaeeeeeo
e.e 5.5 H.e a.“ e.m e.e m.“ e.e soonest»
m.a a.a m.a m.m m.a 0.H 0.H aha assume Hues
. a . ._ - . . 65 305.325 .038st
o.ea m.ua «.ma «.4H H.oa. ~.o~ m.>a e.ea ness» masses one eaeeeaeez
o.m o.m n.~ e.~ e.m one s.m chm eoapaaap: assess
s.ea m.ea “is e.~H m.ea «.Ha a.mm u.a~ meanspeemseez
a.ma n.oa «.ma m.o m.u m.oa e.m w.» eoaeoshpeeoo sequence
«.0 o.« y- 0.“ 0.H m.~ m.a e.a manna:
‘ . . , wees-am
m.s~ e.ea e.ea a.ma o.s H.m H.m o.m ens .sepeeeeu .eespaseaeme
oauaoe assesses aenosoo Hosanna oapseapdwwmnpeeo Hahvmeo nude _ . n .
. epsom apnea nesem .eeeez neeoz -eoeez seemseeH
pmfl ‘ Dad 0.30 PIG ‘ ‘

 

esowueh oasesuwoeu mamas mom .hupmsmsuhn
mama so neopeeeee enememeo smoa an odes neon emu: mo.eoapseaephae emeeeeeeomu-.H-HH> mamas

2&1

The most important source of off-farm wage employ-
ment, in terms of number of Jobs, was government. For
the conterminous United States, nonclassified Jobs in
local, state, and federal governments accounted for
nearly 30 percent of all wage Jobs held by 1957 OASI
fanm operators. In comparison with other regions, rel-
atively fewer Jobs in government were held by farm opera-
tors in the Mountain and Pacific states. muong all
regions, the percentage of government jobs ranged from
a low of only 12.1 percent in the Pacific states to a
high of 36.0 percent in the East South Central states.
In the‘West North Central, South Atlantic, and East
South Central states nonclassified government Jobs rep-
resented more than 30 percent of all covered off-farm
wage and salary Jobs held by members of the 1957 OASI
fhrm-operator labor force.
is: A ,

g. With reference to age of the farm.operator, it is
hypothesized that Jobs in manufacturing industries and
in contract construction are generally more common among
individuals in the younger age classes and that older
farm operators who work off the farm.tend to work pre-
dominantly in jobs other than in manufacturing and con-
tract construction. The percentage distribution of wage
Jobs held by 1957 OASI fanm operators in 1957 by industry
tend to support this hypothesis. The percentage of wage

2h2

Jobs in industrial establishments ranged from.a high of
19.3 percent for persons under 25 years of age to a low
of 11.5 percent for persons 65 years of age or more
(Table VII-2). Jobs in contract construction tended to
be most common among 1957 OASI farm operators in the
range of from 25 years to 51+ years of age. In addition,
jobs in wholesale and retail trade also tended to be
relatively more important among younger farm operators
and to decrease in importance with increasing age.

The estimates presented in Table VII-2 indicate
that work on someone else's farm.may be relatively less
important for individuals in the range of from 35 years
to 5k years of age than for individuals either less than
35 years of age or 55 years of age or more. Only about
9 percent of the Jobs held by farm operators in the range
of from 35 years to 51+ years of age were in agriculture,
forestry, and fishing. Among persons in the other four
age classes, the percentage of jobs in this class ranged
from a low of approximately 12 percent for persons in
the range of’from 25 years to 3h years of age and 55 years
to 6k years of age to a high of 15.6 percent for persons
under 25 years of age.

It is also suggested, on the basis of estimates for
the 1957 OASI farmeoperator labor force, that the per-
centage of government jobs held by farm operators varies

directly with age. Of the covered wage and salary jobs

2h3

.oaah undo owe: hohoaasmueohoamsm Hesse< bmoa

.spsv mamas» Scam mopesapem

nooasom

”opoz

.nnon oofiuamomaoss use canaamwoeeaooom mousaomHm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.ooa o.ooa 0.00H o.ooa o.ooa o.ooa Hence
N.N 5.0 n.~ 5.H w.o h.a ansooceaaoomaz
n.0m H.0m 0.0m H.0m o.NN w.ba commammmaoso: u poosmho>oo
N.oa m.w «.0 ¢.m b.m m.m nooabaom
>.m m.a ¢.H H.H m.o 5.H mumpmo Home
use .oocmpdmsfi .oommewh
a.ma m.uH s.sa m.ma o.oa m.o~ some» dampen new easemaonz
m.~ H.~ o.m o.m s.m 0.HH eoapaaap: campus
a.ma a.ma «.ma ~.na m.wa m.oa wanesposesses
0.4 m.m H.0H m.HH 5.HH m.m mowposapmsoo pomApmoo
«.0 m.o o.m o.a o.N m.o messes
e.ma 0.HH m.m o.e m.ma e.ma weaemao
new .hhpmoaom .ohdpasofihwd
s 3 any mm: “mm me. it
no 0 d hapnsucH

 

 

 

 

.nepopm ocean: aromatheucoo one how .owd he..hapnscsa hp bmaa :H

esopseeee seam Hmeo sham an eaoe meow ewes do eeapsnaeeeae .mspeoenom--.~-HH> mamas

Zhh

held by 1957 OASI farm operators, nonclassified govern-
ment jobs accounted for 17.8 percent of all Jobs held
by farm operators under 25 years of age and increased

in importance with increasing age. Nearly #0 percent
of all wage jobs held by persons 65 years of age or’more
were associated with government at the local, state, or
federal level.

Memes;

Although relatively few Negro farm operators and
relatively few female workers are included in the 1957
OASI farm-operator laborforce, the kinds of’off-farn
wage employment held by persons in these classes deserve
attention. First, with respect to race, it is suggested
that Negro farm operators tend to be associated pre-
dominantly with jobs involving manual labor. Therefore,
the hypothesis is advanced that work as hired farm
laborers and in manufacturing industries and contract
construction is relatively more important for Negro farm
operators than for non-Negro farm operators. Table VII-3
includes estimates of the distribution of wage jobs held
by Negro and non-Negro farm operators by industry of ‘
employment. These estimates tend to support the hypoth-
esis suggested above.‘ Nearly 33 percent of all jobs
held by Negro farm operators in the 1957 OASI farm-
operator labor force were in agriculture, forestry,_and

fishing; and approximately 38 percent were in either

2A5

.oawm undo ewes nohoamsm1oohoamsm Headed bmma ”oomsom

.spso mamas» Bonn oopssapnw

"epoz

.nnofi vowmaonmaoss u:m.eansamaonmaosos mousaosHs

 

 

 

 

 

 

o.ooa o.ooa o.ooa [o.ooa Hence

\w.o baa, n.H and assessaaaeonaz
o.m a.aa m.m o.om eoaoaeaeaoeoe . peeaeneseu
o.em o.e «.HH e.e .oeaseem
m.m 44H med eta use .eommmwwwmo.wwmmsam
«.mm 5.5H «.0 o.om oeeep.aaeeee one ensueaees
H.H 5.4 y- e.e assesses: assess
~33 0.3 on: or? afiespoamsee:
m.4 m.oa 4.- mam composapunoo posapsoo
“.0 o.N In o.N magmas
e.m o.oa o.Nm “flea .sspeeepwemumwmammmeme
caesium estp iwoawez cements m havesomw

-Kom comm .. . A

 

 

 

 

-eepmpm condos anomashopsoo one mom

6

111.1
[a

1-, Humilmphasuf.

.wea use some up .hapmsuma he mama ma eaopsuemo
amen undo mama so uaem upon ewe3.mo moansnaupeau emspmeeaemuu.mnHH> mnm<a

2A6

contract construction or manufacturing industries.
Conspicuously low is the percentage of all jobs held by
Negro farm operators which were associated with govern-
ment.

Among female farm operators, it would seem reasonable
to expect that jobs in agriculture, contract construction,
and manufacturing industries are less common than among
male farm operators. The estimates given in Table VII-3
tend to support this hypothesis; however it should be
noted that the percentage of jobs held by male and female
workers in manufacturing industries were approximately
equal. Most notable among the major industry groups are
services and nonclassified government Jobs. Nearly 37
percent of all jobs held by female workers included in
the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force were classified
in service industries. .In comparison, on1y6 percent of
all Jobs held by male farm operators were included in
this category. The opposite situation was true of’non-
classified government jobs. Approximately 30 percent
of all Jobs held by male farm operators in 1957 were
included in this class, while only8.6 percent of the
Jobs held by female workers were associated with govern-
ment.

Previous ggb,Experience
Ithas been contended at times that farm operators

are discriminated against when they seek part-time

2t»?

employment off the farm. Although the distribution of
off-farm wage Jobs held by farm operators differs from
that of single jobholders in the nonfarm labor force,
little evidence bearing upon the hypothesis that far-
operators have significantly more difficulty in entering
certain kinds of off-farm employment is available. If
it is true that entry into certain kinds of work, espe-
cially jobs in.manufacturing industries, is more diffi-
cult for farm operators than for members of the nonfarm
labor force, one might expect that the kinds of jobs
held by farm operators who are new entrants in the off-
farm labor force would differ from those held by farm
operators who have had previous experiencein off-farm
employment. Thus, the hypothesis is advanced that, as
‘compared with farm operators who had off-farm wage employ-
ment in the preceding year, persons without off-farm Job
experience are less likely to work in.manufacturing
industries and.more likely to work in, say, agriculture
and government. . f .

In Table VIIeh are given the distribution of covered
wage and salary jobs held by 1957 OASI farm operators by
industry. These estimates indicate no major differences
between the industries in which farm operators without
off-farm wage employment in the preceding year worked
and the industries in which other farm operators worked.

Approximately 1h.5 percent of the jobs held in 1957 by

2h8

-ooseseam senses sees one eseaem asosesm-ase3 «senespeeo mmnsmms
spec oases. sou.“ cepmsspem

.oHsh undo ewes ashoadsm
.seoasom

“epoz

.unon vesmsneeaons_cmu «spasmsmnsaoso: neosaosHe

L

 

 

0.00H . o. OOH Hence

INLH H.H snsoesoaaeossx
m.m~ b.0m vesasnnmaomoe n oceanaobom
mew 4.5 eoosbsom
#oH mod Ogdvuo HGOH
.. use .eosmmsems .eossssh
m.ma m.oa cums» assess one mammoaomz
m.s. e.m eesesssss assess
a . 3H m. in wcsssposmssmz
n.0, ¢.NH cosposapssoo possumoo
s.~ e.s oases:
m.Ha m.m newsman

use .hapeehom caspasossm<

 

omma,ms pmoahoamam emsz
shamummo mafia shopmaeao

 

0mm." 3 usaoaosm emlz
snamnumo psompsz eaepsuemo

 

hapmsusH

EE

. condom menses esomssaepseo one new
o.moa as ewmaoboo psoshoamse ems: an .mapnsuss he hmma as
unopsmemo sham Hmdo nmma he nae: anon ewes Ho :ospspsapesv emspmeermuu. 43HH> wands

A
c I.

2A9

farm operators without off-farm wage employment in 1956
were in manufacturmng industries as compared with 15.9
percent of the jobs held by persons with off-farm wage
employment in the preceding year. However, jobs in agri-
culture, forestry, and fishing'were also more predominant
among persons with wage employment in the preceding year
than among persons without wage employment in 1956.
About 30.7 percent of the Jobs held by farm operators
who had no wage employment in previous years were in
government, but this percentage exceeded that for farm
operators with off-farm wage employment in the previous
year by only about 2 percentage points.' It seems fair
to conclude that, although some differences may exist
between the industries in which farm operators with
previous job experience work and those in which new
entrants to the off-farm labor force work, these differe
ences do not appear to be large. However, employment was
generally at a fairly high level in 1957, and.new entrants
to the off-farm labor force may find certain kinds of
employment more difficult to obtain when jobs are less
plentiful. .
fist.Earniggs Iggg,Self¥Employment

we have feund that off-farm wage and salary employ-
ment is more prevalent among farm operators with net
self-employment earning of less than 32,000 than among
those with net self-employment earnings of $2,000 or more.

250

It also seems probable that incidence of off-farm wage
employment in various industry groups also varies con-
siderably with the level of net earnings from self-
employment. Because farm operators with higher selfe
employment earnings may tend generally to operate farms
which require a larger share of the operators time, it
is suggested that farm operators with larger than aver-
age net self-employment earnings are less likely to hold
offefarm jobs which require "full-time" employment.
Consequently, the hypothesis is suggested that the inci-
dence of off-farm wage employment in industries such as
mining, contract construction, and manufacturing tends
to diminish with increasing net earnings from self-
employment. Conversely, it is suggested the percentage
of all wage Jobs in finance, insurance, and real estate
and in government is larger for farm operators with higher
than average net earnings from self-employment.
Estimates of the percentage distribution of wage
jobs held by 1957 OASI farm operators by industry are
given in Table VII-5 forfarm operators classified by
level of net earnings from self-employment. These esti-
mates clearly tend to support the hypothesis suggested
above. For Jobs in mining, contract construction, and
manufacturing, the percentage of all off-farm.jobs fall-
ing into these classes is greatest among farm.operators

wdth net self-employment earnings of less than $2,000

251

uoohoamam Hmoee< mama use oamasm huopmamuxaos nooseapaoo mmubmma

.eaah demo owe: nohoamam
"eohsom

.epev a.means seam ceases-M .932
.30“. voflfinesaoesosu eanswmwnemaoeo: nousaosHs

 

 

 

 

 

Ix

 

 

 

o.oofi.. .o.ooa o.ooa\ ; . o.ooa Hesse

_~.a ,owo 0.H. 1Nna emsooeoaaeouaz
one; n.0m s.mm mess swaesmumaoaon - pecansosoo
m.a ~.m a.“ m.e .osapgom
4.~ m.a m.a 4.H Lepmomo Huey use .eoesnsmea .eoneeah
4.5H «.ma m.oa «.ma oust» Hanson use assesses;
«.4 «.4 ~.n ¢.s assesses: ceases
m.e 0.0 spud m.sa weasspoumsesz
ohm mam ash ¢.HH cowposhpueoo pomhpeoo
0.0 to “A N.N .955:
4.HH m.s o.a 4.aa weanuam use aupucsoo .onspasoauwe

.tma.t. ems.“ ems.“ 000 N .
.m .. an.“ “means new .fl

xfeepmpm vegan: msonaahopsoo on» non
unushoaaaeumaem scum nwswsame pee.hn .hupusvna up how
utopeseao some Hmco smma en as»: snow and: Ho eonpsnasuuaeo

omdpceohemul. .ml HHb flqmda

252

and tends to decrease, in general, with increasing net
self-employment earnings. The incidence of Jobs in
finance, insurance, and real estate appears to increase
‘with increasing net self-employment earnings; however,
even among farm operators with net self-employment earn-
ings of $6,000 or more, jobs in this category accounted
for only atnut 2.h percent of all wage and salary Jobs.
Considerably more noticeable is the variation in the
percentage of nonclassified government Jobs. The per-
centage of government Jobs ranged from a low of 2h.3
percent for farm operators with net self-employment earn-
ings of less than $2,000 to a high of 50.3 percent for
farm operators with net self-employment earnings of from
$h,000 to $5,999. Although the percentage was slightly
lower for government jobs held by farm operators with

net earnings of $6,000 or more from selffemployment, it
seems readily apparent that jobs in government are rela-
tively less important, as a percentage of all jobs, among
farm operators with lower than average net self-employment
earnings. Because of differences in the kinds of Jobs
held by farm operators with lower than average net earn-
ings from self-employment, however, it appears likely
that these individuals may tend to have higher wage earn-
ings than other farm operators who worked off the farm
for wages or salaries. This aspect of off-farm wage
employment will be the subject of the concluding section
of this chapter.

253
The Relation of Selected Characteristics
to €E€“r3?31 of‘03f3Farm_ Eggg_Earnings

0n the basis of infermation about the level of wage
earningsfor jobs in various industries and the charace
teristics of farm operators who are employed in wage or
salary jobs, one may suspect that certain relationships
exist between the level of offefarm earnings and selected
characteristics. The objective of this section is to
investigate the relation between selected characteristics
of farm operators with off-farm wage employment and the
level of off-farm wage earnings.

Geographic Region .

We have seen that some variation exists among the
eight major geographic regions of the conterminous United
States in the percentage of 1957 OASI farm operators with
covered wage earnings in 1957. It will be recalled that
the percentage of farm operators who received wage or sal-
ary earnings ranged from allow of 20.0 percent in the west
North Central states to a high of 25.7 percent in the
Mountain states. Among the other six regions, the rate
of off-farm wage employment varied by less than h per-
centage points.‘ The relative importance of off-farm wage
employment among farm operators in different geographic
regions cannot, however, be judged solely by the percent-
age of farm operators working off the farm. Therefore,
some attentionshould also be given to variations in the

size distribution of off—farm wage and salary earnings.

25h

Estimates based upon the 1955 survey of Farmers'
Expenditures suggest that farm operators with off-farm
wage employment in the Northeast, East North Central,
Mountain, and Pacific states tend to have higher average
wage earnings than do farm operators in the four remain-
ing regions.2 The size distribution of off-farm wage
earnings tends to be highly skewed; consequently esti-
mates of average wage earnings may be misleading and are
less useful than estimates of median wage earnings or
the percentage of farm operators falling into selected
income classes. To facilitate comparisons, statistical ‘
tests relating to the significance of differences between
the wage earnings of various groups of farm operators
are based upon differences between the proportions of farm
operators with off-farm wage employment who received
covered wage or salary earnings of less than $600 in the
year 1957. .

It was shown earlier that the median wage earnings
of all 1957 OASI farm operators with covered wage earn-h
ings in 1957 were approximately $518 and that about 53.9
percent of all 1957 farm operators for whom wage earnings
were reported had wage earnings of less than $600. With
reference to location, let us first consider two groups
of 1957 OASI farm operators with off-farm wage employment
in 1957. The first group comprises multiple jobholders

 

2Ibid.

255

in the Northeast, East North Central, Mountain, and
Pacific states. The second includes farm operators in
the South Atlantic, East South Central, west South
Central, and West North Central states. The hypothesis
is advanced that the percentage of farm operators with
wage earnings of less than $600 is lower for persons
in the former group than for persons in the latter group.
Among farm operators working off the farm in the North-
east, East North Central, Mountain, and Pacific states,
approximately $8.5 percent of those with off-farm wage
or salary employment in 1957 had wage earnings of less
than_$600. Among farm operators in the remaining states,
about 57.8 percent of those with wage employment in 1957
had wage earnings of less than $600. The difference
between these percentages was significant at the 5 per-
cent level. .

Estimates of'the percentage distribution of 1957
OASI farm operators with off-farm wage or salary employ-
ment in 1957 by amount of off-farm wage earnings are
given in Table VII-6 for eight geographic regions. In
Table V1157 are presented estimates of the total, average,
and median covered wage earnings of 1957 OASI farm opera-
tors in each region. These estimates are based upon an
aggregate sample of h,hh5 individuals for whom off-farm
wage and salary earnings in 1957 were reported. No adjust-

ment has been made to account for individuals who were

256

.oaasmm hpoumamuxhos moosmfipeou mmsbmma

“common

.hmma ma nonsense poo no: mmeflehme owo3_mo posses

son: you snowmen mom unmoved op consumes poz ..opmv cannon Scum cepmaapem “epoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.00s 0.00s 0.00m o.ooH 0.00s 0.00s 0.00m 0.00s o.ooH dupes
m.a m.~ 0.H 0.0 0.H m.a 0.H 0.H N.N ones to 000.4
mom a,“ «Wm sea ~.~ 0.4 mtm 0.m 4.~ 000nm - 00mnm
0,0 ~.a H.4 44N s.~ o.N m.~ ~44 atm 004nm - 000 m
0.m m.0 s.m mtm 4.4 4.4 Hem “44 0.4 000nm . 00mnm
H.“ «.0 a.4 a.“ at“ 4.4 0.4 0.m mam aa4n~ - 000 a
m.0 m.0 4.5 04m 5.“ a,“ a,“ «.5 ate . .000 a . oomua
H.0H «to «.ma a.ma 0.e “.5 H40 «Jon mtaa 0m4. . 000.
m.o 4.m m.0 0.0 0.m «.0 0.0 mam 04m 000. u com.
m.o H.m 0.0 H.s 4.m 4.0 m.o 0.0 .4.m 005 u 000
0.0 H.0H m.m 4.m H.m 0.0a m.oa m.m a.m 000 s 004
a.ma m.m 4.4a m.ma a.ma -m44a n.4a a.ma 0.4a mom u com
0.0m 04am n.0m ocmm a.mm a.mm 0.4m >.>m u.o~ 00H s a
acadmom OHHHodm :flmpgoz Hdhpnoo Hmhpflmo Ofiubdflpd Hahn—.30 Hwhpfioo Homo AunHHOQq
HH< . . spoon spoon .epsom epsoz nusoz -eosoz puma ma macaques
one; pus one: and one: and n ..

nepopm mouse: moooashousoo.omp use osoamea pgwae

new .uweficnso ows3.shmmnmno mo assess hp hmoa ea mongoose ens: ewsaeneo
ewes susMuHuo sonz_nom unopeneeo sham Hmao bmoa no soapsnfinpufiu ewspseosemuu.ouHH> mqm<a

257

monsoon masses on one pom.hsi oaaspeo
mons.uou msoeuem you unsound on anemones poz

.oamsmm hhopaamuxhoztesessfipsoo mmubmma "common

.mefiwm50h mo

.umma :« mongoose no: as: awsacase one: no assess
.spso oagase.sonm copsaapem “epoz.

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

04w Hum! 0.~M4 000+444 meanest and

mom «mm.a ”N.Hm oounnm oneness
mmo coora o.h~ ooorhm endorse:
004 040. 4.0m 00mn04 Haspeoo space on»:
4N4 wa mrmm 00m404 Amhpsoo :noom poem
044 4N0 0.H4 004rm4 uapqsapa space
404 43 0.43 000.43 Hugues epsoz 0.03
000 0m0.a H.00H 004r00 Huspeoo nonoz poem
oao 4n04H 4.mm cowsum . wesenphoz

0mm” £an anaemia Joshua
ewe . ems awoke» one A

 

nepmpm ocean: nsocasuepnoo
on» was nooamen names you mwsasnse ems: mwwoos_0os .ouesobs .aspop .wmoa
ma oepuoaea one: awcasnme oms3_musmnuuo 30:3.aoq shopsuomo_ahdm Hmdo bmoauu.anH>_mum<e

 

 

258

designated as wage earners by OASI records but for when
information on the amount of wage earnings was not avail-
able. The reader is again reminded that the range of

wage and salary earnings taxable under the social security
program in 1957 was from approximately $50 to $h,200.

It is clear from Table VII-6 that the size distribu-
tion of off-farm wage and salary earnings is not identical
among geographic regions. Although about one-half of all
farm operators with off-farm wage employment in 1957 had
covered wage earnings of less than $600, the percentage
of 1957 OASI farm operators with wage earnings of less
than $600 ranged from a low of 40.5 percent in the Pacific
statesto a high of 58.8 percent in the west North Central
states. As indicated above, among OASI farm operators with
-covered wage earnings from off-farm sources in 1957, indi-
viduals in the Northeast, East North Central, Mountain,
and Pacific states tended to have notably higher off-farm
wage earnings than did individuals in otherregions.

For the four regions in which the proportion of wage
. earners with wage earnings of $600 or more was significant-
-1y higher, the per capita wage earnings for persons with
off-farm wage or salary employment ranged from a low of
about $1,000 in.the Mountain states to a high of about
$1,322 in the Pacific states (Table VII-7). Median wage
earnings in these four regions ranged from a low of approx-

imately $606 to a high of approximately $905 in the East

259

North Central and Pacific states, respectively. In the
west North Central, South Atlantic, East South Central,
and west South Central states, the average wage earnings
of 1957 OASI farm operators with off-farm wage or salary
employment ranged from a low of $834 in the West North
Central states to a high of $92k in the South Atlantic
states. 'Within each of these four regions it is esti-
mated that more than one-half of all persons with off-
farm wage employment had wage earnings of less than $500.
Median wage earnings ranged from a low of about $h2s in
the East South Central states to a high of about $h90 in
the west South Central states.
is: _, a

. The rate of off-farm wage and salary employment in
the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force tends to vary
inversely with age. The percentage of 1957 OASI farm
operators with covered offefarm wage employment in 1957
ranged, in descending;order, from A9.# percent for per-
sons under 25 years of age to 9.7 percent for persons
65 years of age or more. Since older farm operators may
tend to be both less willing than younger farm operators
to work off the farm on a "full-time" basis and less able
to secure the kinds of off-farm work in which wage earn-
ings are highest, it seems reasonable to suggest the
hypothesis that the off-farm wage and salary earnings of
elder farm operators tend to be lower than the wage

earnings of younger farm operators.

260

The specific hypothesis tested was that the propor-
tion of 1957 OASI farm operators with covered wage earn-
ings who had wage earnings of less than $600 in 1957 was,
among individuals in the range of from 25 years to At
years of age, equal to or less than the proportion of
individuals outside of this range who had wage earnings
of less than $600. For individuals outside the range of
from 25years to Ah yearsof age, 55.7 percent had wage
earnings of less than $600 in 1957. Of those in the
range of from 25 years to ht years of age only 51.5 per-
cent had wage earnings of less than $600. The difference
between.these percentages was significant at the 5 per-
cent level. Therefore, it is concluded that farm opera-
tors with off-farm wage employment who are in the range
of from 25 years to #4 years of age were more likely to
have had wage earnings of $600 or more than were other
farm operators. .

Estimates of the distribution of 1957 OASI farm opera-
tors with covered off-farm wage employment in 1957 by
amount of off-farm wage earnings are given in Table VII-8
for six age classes. It will be observed that the per-
centage of farm operators with wage and salary earnings
of less than $600 ranges from a low of 50.6 percent for
persons in the range of from 25 years to 34 Years of age
to a high of 6h.1 percent for persons 65 years of age or
more. Although the proportion of individuals under 25

.oaqamm mhopmamlxhoz moossapeoo wmuhmoa “ooasom

.000H :0 cepnomon no: no: mwsfismoe owe: me pesoao

 

261

 

 

 

sons.hom snowmen mom pssooom op oopmsnum poz .spmo magnum Bonn wepmsaumm “opoz
0.004 0.00s. 0.000_ 0.000 0.00H 0.000 0.004 00000
0.H 0.H 0.H 4.0 0.H 0.0 4.0 egos n0000.4
0.« 0.H 4.« 0.0 0.0 4.« «.0 000.0 - 000.0
0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.« 004.0 - 000.0
0.0 0.0 0.4 0.« 0.4 «.0 0.« 000.« - 000.«
H.0 5.0 «.4 0.0 4.0 «.0 «.0 004.« - 000.«
0.0 «.4 ”.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 000MH - 000MH
0.00 0.0 .0 0.HH 0.0a 0.0 0.«H 004 a - 000 H
0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 «.0 000. - 000.
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 «.0 «.0 000 - 00
0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 000 - 00
0.04 «.00 4.4a «.«a «.«H 0.40 0.00 000 - 00«
0.00 4.«0 0.«0 0.«0 4.00 0.0« 4.0« 00H - a

muosasm . Adamaammu
some nose 0 00 40-00 40-04 44-00 40-0« 0« “.000 0000 so emanates

. n . . ems: sum.1 ..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

iii; ll [I‘1‘ii

condom moods: esonHShopsoo on» new .ows ha .mwea
unneo owe: seem-mus mo assess no 0004 on nonsense egos eweasnse owes
sham-Hue mom: son euepsaono sash Hmmo 000a no soapsnahpnau_emmoeeouem-.m-HH> mumda

262

years of age who had covered wage earnings of less than
$600 appears to be larger than the proportion of persons
in the range of from 25 years to At years of age who had
wage earnings of less than $600, the estimates presented
in Table VII-8 suggest that the percentage of persons in
the range of from 45 years to 5h_years of age who received
wage earnings of less than $600 was roughly equal to the
percentage among persons in the range of from 25 years to
LA years of age. ‘

- Estimates of the total, average, and median wage
earnings of 1957 OASI farm operators with off-farm wage
and salary employment in 1957 are given in Table VII-9
for six age classes. For the three classes comprising
persons in the range of from 25 years to St years of age
per capita wage earnings ranged from a low of approxi-
mately $968 to a high of approxbmately $1,007 and.median
wage earnings ranged from a low of $541 to a high of
$587. lMedian wage earnings for persons included in the
three remaining classes were less than $500.
assesses , , w

With reference to race, the hypothesis is suggested
that the wage earnings of Negro farm operators who work
off the farm tend to be lower than the wage earnings of
non-Negro farm operators. Specifically tested was the
hypothesis that the proportion of Negro farm operators

with covered wage and salary earnings of less than $600

263

.eamamm 0noum4m-xno3 esoocfipcoo m0-0mma “season

.0004 :4 economeu no: no: mmsfimamo ewes no assess son:
now escapee pom unsound op voomshum 902 .0900 causes seam,0opmaaoem “opoz

 

 

 

man Hum o.NN: oou.¢¢4 House
000 400- 0000 000000 toso.0=a 00
404 ««0 , 0.00 000.00 40 - 00
440 000 0.404 000.404 40 - 04
400 000.4 0.444 0000444 44 - 00
000 00004 0.00 000000 40 - 0«
004 000. w 0.4« 004.0« 0« 00000
Jflmmmfl N ”WNW—.mmmw NIHGHH OMNWMEMMMHHHEM .onOnhaHCW .MC3 aflhd 0H. v
eww3.:saoo: ewes ewspo>< ems: Hosea .mo.aooasz owd

 

 

 

 

 

eepspm cepHsD esosasuepsoo
on» you .ows 09 eweaease ems: ss40ea one .ewmaobs .aspop .0004 :4
messages one: emsasnse ewes sham-mmo son: now enopsuoao snow H040 0004-.m-HH> Manda

264

was equal to or less than the proportion of non-Negro
farm operators with wage and salary earnings of less
than $600. Despite the small number of Negro farm opera-
tors included in the 1937-58 Continuous werk-History
Sample, the differences in proportions was sufficient to
provide a basis for rejecting the test hypothesis at the
5 percent level. It is estimated that 63.6 percent of
all Negro farm operators with covered off-farm wage em-
ployment had wage earnings of less than $600 as compared
with only 53.8 percent of all non-Negro farm operators
who worked off the farm (Table VII-10).

As noted above, relativelyfew Negro farm operators
were included in the sample representing the 1957 OASI
farm-operators labor force, and estimates indicative of
the off-farm wage and salary earnings of Negro farm
operators who worked off the farm were derived from a
sample of 66 Negro farm operators. Based upon this sam-
ple, it is estimated that the average wage earnings of
OASI Negro farm operators working off the farm in 1957
were $70k. In comparison, the average wage earnings of
non-Negro OASI farm operators were approximately $95k
in that year. The median wage earnings of Negro and
non-Negro farm operators were approximately $h36 and $521,
respectively. .

Although the incidence of off-farm wage and salary

employment was lower among female operators than among

265

.e4msmm 0.430.274.4004 noose-Boon 00.0004 "ooasom

.0004 044 009.4000.“ poses: uwfisuse ems: no pssoassomz no.4
0:00.424 no.4 #4450000 3 000.2430 902 .0430 04050 80.4.4 00908334 .302

 

0.004 x .‘ 0.004 , 0.004 . 0. 004 44000

 

once .40 000 .4

000. 0- 000.0
004.0 - 000..0
000.« - 000 «
004W - 000.. «
000.4 - 000. .4
x 000. 4
000. - 000.
000 - 000
000 - 004
000 - 000
004 - 4

.03le 40.34403
eosm . . New ; v 0004 8.4 mwfigm

Co. 0

#010 O\\OI\M\OM l H

O'.‘

MOMOQ O\D m4mm H

H

O'OOIO'OO

.‘.'.‘.o...e
.‘O'.~.-.-

O O \

\OOJ‘MQQQQNHN

'. .e

H M000 00 JMMN H
---l H
O\
0\
.d'
H
I

COMO (fir-IN O\Q\O Own

,. 0-0-

N [Nb-HHVOO t-IO I 1A
O‘md'mmfl MOOOOHA

O
M

H
coco4xococo4m40ozm
O
O
N

A m

 

 

 

[E
@-

 

 

 

 

 

009000 04.90:: 048550300 one .484 .394 one we» .00. .umefifioe
ems: atom-Hue .40 95.830 09 0004 :4 coupon: one: nwfiusaso ems:
atom-who son: non monotone shay 40.40 0004 .40 443934.4an ewspseomem-u.04-.HH> "4.43.4.

266

male farm operators in the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor
force, it is difficult to predict whether or not the level
of off-farm wage earnings differs between male and female
farm operators. Without predicting direction, it is there-
fore hypothesized that the level of off-farm wage and
salary earnings of female workers differs from the level
of earnings of male workers. It is estimated that 54.1
percent of all male farm operators receiving covered wages
and salaries in 1957 had wage earnings of less than $600.
and that t8.0 percent of all female workers had wage earn-
ings of less than $600 (Table VII-10). At the 5 percent
level, however, the difference between the percentage of
male and female workers with wage earnings of less than
$600 was not statistically significant.

- Among OASI farm operators included inthe 1937-58
ContinuoustOrk-Histo y Sample, the average and median
‘wage earnings of male and female farm operators were
notably different. sThe average wage earnings of female
farm operators who worked off the farm were $1,12h as
compared with only $9hh for male farm operators. The
median wage earnings of female workers were approximately
$688, while the median wage earnings of'male workers were
approximately 3513.

Previous ggb‘Experience

Although there were no major differences between

industries in which farm operators with off-farm employment

267

in the preceding year worked and those in which other
farm operators worked in the year 1957, it seems probable
that significant differences exist in the level of off—
farm wage and salary earnings of these two groups. ‘We
have seen that there occurs among farm operators sub-
stantial movement into and out of the off-farm labor force.
A large number of farm operators appear to participate in
the off-farm labor force only sporadically, and it is
suggested that these individuals are dependent upon farm
earnings as their major source of income. Consequently,
the hypothesis is advanced that, among farm operators
who work off thefarm, those with wage and salary employ-
ment in the preceding year tend to have substantially
higher wage and salary earnings than do farm operators
who did not work off the farm.in the preceding year.

The hypothesis tested was that the percentage of
1957 OASI farm operators with covered wage earnings of
less than $600 was, for persons without covered off-farm
wage employment in 1956, equal to or less than the cor-
responding percentage for persons who received covered
wage or salary earnings in 1956. This hypothesis was
rejected at the 5 percent level of significance. As
shown in Table VII-ll, approximately 73.h percent of all
1957 OASI farm operators who had covered wage earnings
in 1957 but not in 1956 had wage and salary earnings of
less than $600 in 1957. In comparison, it is estimated

268

.o4mamm 0hopm4m-xho3_msosm4pcoo 00-0m04 ”season

.0004.s4 ooppomea pom ones mws4mase owes no assess moms
mom snowmen mom 9050000 on oopnsfivs poz .mpsu o4aamm_sosm oopss4pum .seuoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.004 0.004 40000
o.N «.0 shoe to ooou4
0.0 «.0 000.0 - 000.0
4.4 4.4 004.. 0 - 000.0
0.4 0.4 000. « - 000 «
0.0 0.« 004.« - 000.«
0.0 0.0 000. 4 - 000.4
4.44 «.0 004.4 - 000.4
4.0 0.4 000 - 000.
“.0 0.0 000 - 000
.0 0.0 000 - 004
0.«4 0.04 000 - 00«
0.4« 0.04 004 - 4
0004 :4 psmmne4mam emsa 0wm4 m4 pmosho4msm mums. ~0h044oav
sash-mmo mp4a:maopmnomo sash-mmo psomp43 unopeneao 00w“ :4 mws4samm
0 444.46,...-

  

.sspspm 0.04:0
esos4suopmoo on» new .0004 :4 emmneboo psoa0o4mae ems:
0p .ewm4mpso emez.mo assess 09 0004 :4 oopuomea oaos_mws4mnse

emm:_aoms.nom shoaouomo Show Hmdo 0004 Ho :o4psnwaon40 owspmoosemI-.44IHH> Hands

269

that only about A6.5 percent of all 1957 OASI farm opera-
tors who had covered wage earnings in both 1956 and 1957
had wage and salary earnings of less than $600 in 1957.
Approximately 27 percent of all individuals for whom

covered wage and salary earnings were reported in 1957
had no covered off-farm wage employment in the preceding
year. For farm operators included in this group. per
capita wage and salary earnings were equal to approxi-
mately $51k, and.median wage earnings were equal to ap-
proximately 3h61. About 73 percent of the members of the
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force who received covered
wage earnings in 1957 also had covered wage earnings in
the preceding year. The per capita wage earnings for
farm operators included in this group were about $1.115
in 1957. Median wage earnings for these individuals were
equal to approximately 8711.
£33 Earnings gggg’SelfeEmployment

. we have already found that farm operators with higher
than average net self-employment earnings have a lower
rate of participation in off-farm wage and salary employ-
ment than do other farm operators. Also. we have found
that a disproportionately large number of the farm opera-
tors. among farm operators with higher than average net
self-employment earnings. who work off the farm.are
employed in government jobs and that the levelof wage

earnings for jobs in government tend to be lower than

270

for Jobs in other industries. Therefore, it seems plaus-
ible to suspect that the level of off-farm wage and sal-
ary earnings tends to vary inversely with the level of
net earnings from self-employment.

Estimates of the distribution of 1957 OASI farm
operators by amount of off-farm wage and salary earnings
in 1957 are given in Table VII-12 for four groups of
farm operators classified by level of net earnings from
self-employment. From the standpoint of the proportion
of farm operators with wage and salary earnings of less
than $600, it is apparent that the level bf off-farm
wage earnings tends to be lowest among individuals with
net self-employment earnings of $2,000 or more. Approx-
imately #9.1 percent of all farm operators who had off-
farm wage employment in 1957. among persons with net _
self-employment earnings of less than 32.000. had covered
wage earnings of less than $600. For persons with net
self-employment earnings of from $2.000 to $3,999, about
6h.5 percent had wage earnings of less than $600. In
comparison. 71.6 percent of the farm operators with net
self-employment earnings of from $h,000 to $5,999 and
69.8 percent of those with net self-employment earnings
of $6.000 or more had wage and salary earnings of less
than $600 in 1957.

Estimates of the per capita and median wage earnings
of 1957 OASI farm operators who had covered off-farm

271

you escaped you 9250000 on wopuSncm poz

.oHQamm whopm4muxho3 msosc4pcoo wmubmmH “cannon

.th4 :4 uopaomon no: 003 nws4saso emu: mo undone aoaz

.0000 040300 scum copma4unm “09oz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 40000
0.4 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.4 .000 to 000H4
0.0 0.0 --- 4.4 0.0 000nm . 000.0
0.4 0.4 0.0 4.4 4.4 004.0 - 000.4
0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.4 000 a u 000 0
4.0 4.4 4.0 0.0 0.0 004nm . 000mm
4.0 4.4 0.0 4.0 0.0 000.4 - 000.4
4.04 m.4 4.0 0.0 0.04 004‘ u 000 4
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 000. s 000.
0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 000 u 000
0.0 0.04 0.0 440 0.0 000 4 004
0.04 04m4 0.04 0.04 «.44 000 u 00«
0.00 0.04 0.40 0.0m 0.00 004 a 4
uhmflhdfl
.003. .000 to 000.0 000.0-000.4 000.0-000.~ 000.0 400044000
444 . . . . . 00m» 0004 0mm4 :4 amc4ca0m
and o : pcmawo ms 0 Sop mm: and we owe and u

nonmpm 0094s: msoc4sneuno0 020 you .pcoaho4maoam4om_aohm mwn4shmo
pom 0:0 mwc4cudo emu: mo undone hp me4 c4 copuomee onos_mm:4sh¢o
owmz_aons_aou maopeaodo sham 4040 bmm4 mo 004000490040 omepcoonomus.m4u44> m4m<a

272

employment in 1957 are given in Table VII-l3. It will

he observed that the per capita and median wage earnings
of farm.operators with net self-employment earnings of
less than $2,000 were substantially higher than the wage
earnings of farm operators with net self-employment earn-
ings of $2,000 or more.. Among persons included in the
former group, wage and salary earnings averaged about
$1,053, and median wage earnings were equal to $626.

For the three classes with net self-employment earnings
of'$2,000 or more, per capita wage earnings ranged from

a low of $588 to a high of $800, and median wage earnings
ranged from_a low of $195~to a high of $331. Although
the difference in the level of per capita and median wage
earnings of persons with net self-employment earnings of
less than $2,000 and of $2,000 or more is sizable, the
estimates given in Table VII-13 do not lend support to
the hypothesis that the level of eff-farm wage earnings
tends to be lowest among faronperators with the highest
earnings from self-employment. Among 1957 OASI farm
operators with net self-employment earnings of $2,000 or
more, both per capita.and median wage earnings were lowest
for the class comprising individuals with net self—

employment earnings of from $4,000 to $5,999.

273

.o4qa0m 0hopm4muxnoz

00o::4p:oo 00

0004

“eonsom

.0004 :4 00000000000:_u03 00:4:000 0003 we 0:5000
8003.000 0:00000 you 0:0o000 on 00000000 no: .0900 040800 thm 0000a4pnm "opoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

040 400 0.004 0000444 40000

000 000 0.44 000.44 0000 00 000.0

404 000 0.44 000.04 000.4 - 000.4

444 400 0.40 004.40 000.4 - 000.4

040 440.4 0.044 000.044 000.0 0000 0004

Awu044oo 40004400 i«0.4044044 no 0:0444423 000:00m Nunmflmmmqllll
00:4:000 o 03. 00:4:00m.o .3 ,0m:4:00m,0w03. 0003 no 0004 :4

:04002 om0uob< 40900 000302 0005004mafiuu40m

. aoah.0m:4:00m pez

 

mopapm-0op4:n 000:4shop:oo 0:» now .0004 :4 0:05004maou0400.aopu
00:4:000 00:.0n 00:4:000 0003 :04uoa.0:0 .mm0ua>0 .4000» “0004 :4
copuomon 0:03.0w:4:00o 0002.0:0mu000 8003.0om.0aop0nemo sham 4m<o 00041:.041440 04m<0

274
Summary

Estimates for 1957 OASI farm operators with off-farm
wage employment revealed substantial variations in the
distribution of off-farm jobs by industry classification
as related to certain characteristics of the farm-operator
labor force.

Regional variations in the relative number of jobs in
three industry groups--agriculture, forestry, and fishing;
manufacturing; and government--were particularly notable.
Jobs in agriculture, forestry and fishing were relatively
more common in the East South Central, west South Central,
Mountain, and Pacific states than in the remaining regions.
Jobs in manufacturing industries were most numerous in the
Northeast and East North Central states where they account-
ed for 21.2 percent and 25.1 percent, respectively, of all
off-farm Jobs.‘ The percentage of jobs in government ranged
from a low of only 12.1 percent in the Pacific states to a
high of 36.0 percent in the East South Central states.

Jobs in manufacturing, contract construction, public
utilities, and wholesale and.retail trade tended to be
most common among younger farm operators and to decrease
in importance with increasing age. Conversely, jobs in
government were less prevalent among younger members of
the 19570ASI farm-operator labor force and tended to in-

crease in importance with increasing age. Significant

275

differences were also found with respect to race and sex
of the farm operator. A disproportionately large number
of Negro farm operators worked as hired farm laborers

and in contract construction. Jobs in service industries
and in wholesale and retail trade were relatively more
common among female than male farm operators.

Comparison of farm operators with and without off-
fanm employment in the preceding year indicated no major
differences in the distribution of off-farm wage jobs in
1957 by industry classification. However, the industry
of off-farm employment was related to the level of net
earnings from self-employment. Among farm-operators
with net self-employment earnings of less than $2,000 in
1957, relatively more farm operators worked in contract
construction and in manufacturing industries and relatively
fewer held jobs in government. .

_ The level of off-farm wage earnings also varied sig-
nificantly with respect to certain characteristics of the
farm-operator labor force. Regional estimates of the off-
farm wage earnings of multiple jobholders indicated that
average and.median wage earnings were substantially higher
in the Northeast, East North Central, Mountain, and Pacific
states than in the remaining states. Among the former
regions, median wage earnings ranged from a low of $606

in the East North Central states to a high of $905 in the
Pacific states. Median wage earnings for each of the

regions in the latter group were less than $500.

276

_Among 1957 OASI farm operators 25 years of age and
over, the level of off-farm wage earnings tended to de-.
crease with increasing age. median wage earnings ranged
from a high of $587 for persons in the range of from 25
years to 3A years of age to a low of $393 for persons
65 years of age or more. The median wage earnings of
Negro farm operators were only 3&36 as compared with
$521 for noneNegro farm operators. Among female and
male farm operators with off-farm employment in 1957,
median wage earnings were $688 and $513, respectively.

Multiple jobholders with off-fanm wage employment _
in the preceding year had significantly higher wage earn-
ings in 1957 than other multiple jobholders. Amongfarm
operators who had nocovered off-farm wage employment in
. 1956, median wage earnings were equal to approximately
$h6l. Farm operators with off-farm employment inboth
1956 and 1957 had median wage earnings of $711 in 1957.
The level of off-farm wage earnings was also substantially
higher among farm operators with net self-employment earn-
ings of less than $2,000. ZMedian wage earnings for multi-
ple jobholders in this classwere $626 in 1957 as compared
with $518 for all multiple jobholders.

CHAPTER VIII
OFF-FARM.EMPLOYMENT OVER TIME

The present study has been limited, up to this point,
to an analysis of the characteristics and employment pat-
terns of farm operators in a single year. Although the
previous job experience of OASI farm operators has been
considered, major attention has been given to the off-
farm employment of individual workers who reported agri-
cultural self—employment earnings for social security
coverage in the year 1957. Consequently, the preceding
parts of the analysis have been chiefly concerned with
individuals identified as members of the 1957 OASI farm
operator labor ferce without regard to sources of covered
earnihgs, if any, in other years.

The purpose of this chapter is to examine the off-
farm employment and earnings of farm operators over time.
An important feature of OASI labor force statistics is
that they provide annual data on the employment and.income
experiences of individual workers. However, the date upon
which this study is based cover only a relatively short
period of time. Estimates of'multiple Jobholding by OASI

farm operators are available from preliminary tabulations

277

278

of data taken from.the 1937-59 Continuous WOrk-History
Sample. These data include all persons reporting agri—
cultural self-employment earnings for social security
coverage during the period from 1955 through 1958. But
detailed information on the OASI farm-operator labor
force has been processed only for the period from 1955
through 1957. The scope of this chapter is therefore
limited. Hopefully, it will provide a useful point of

departure for subsequent investigations.

93s; 1313 Operators: $222 t_9_ 1.251

A unique characteristic of labor force data taken
.from social security records is that the employment and
income experiences of individual workers can be traced
over time. This section deals with the off-farm employ-
ment of persons identified as recipients of covered earn-
ings from agricultural self-employment in each year dur-
ing the period from 1955 through 1957. Because it excludes
all persons who were not identified as farm operators over
the entire three-year period, the estimates presented in
this section do not represent the total OASI farmpoperator
labor force in any of the three years. It is estimated,
on the tasis of the 1937-58 Continuous wereristory Sample,
that 1.A million farm operators reported agricultural
self-employment earnings for social security coverage in
all of the years in the period from 1955 through 1957.

As a matter of convenience, these individuals will be

279

referred to as members of the 1955-56-57 OASI farm-
operator labor force.

Estimates relating to the 1955-56-57 OASI farm-
operator labor force are based on a sample of 13,352
individuals included in the 1937-58 Continuous WOrk-
History Sample who were recorded as having covered earn-
ings from agricultural self-employment in each of the
years 1955, 1956, and 1957. This sample does not repre-
sent the entire OASI farmeoperator labor force in any one
year, and estimates relating to the 1955-56-57 OASI farm-
operator labor force should not be regarded as represent-
ativeof the total OASI farm-operator later force. In
general, the 1955-56-57 OASI farm-operator later force
excludes persons who entered.the farm-operator labor
force after 1955 and persons who migrated out of agricul-
ture prior to 1958. Due to the limitations of OASI labor
force data, however, certain other persons who may have
been fanm operators over the entire period are also ex-
cluded from consideration. These persons generally fall
into one ofhthe following categories: (1) individuals
with farm earnings in one or more years below the minimum
level required for*social security coverage and (2) indi-
viduals with wage or salary earnings in excess of $h,200
in covered employment in one or more years regardless of
the level of farm earnings. It will also be observed

that, by confining the analysis to the 1955-56-57 OASI

280

farm-operator labor force, most individuals who had qual-
ified for social security coverage as materially partici-
pating farm landlords were also eliminated from considera-
tion.

Multiple J obholding

Examination of the previous jdb experience of the
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force indicated that there
is substantial movement into and out of the multiple-
jobholding segment of the farm-operator labor force. It
is estimated that, in 1957, approximately 6.3 percent of
the members of the 1955-56-57 OASI farm—operator*labor
force reported covered earnings from nonagricultural self-
employment and that 19.5 percent had covered earnings
from.cff-farm wage and salary employment.‘ It is reason-
able to suspect, however, that a considerably higher pro-
portion of the 1955-56-57 OASI farm-operator labor force
had covered earnings from off-farm sources in at least
one year during the period from 1955 through 1957.

On the basis of data from the 1937+58 Continuous WOrk-
History Sample, it is estimated that 38.7 percent of all
1955-56-57 OASI farm operators had covered earnings from
off—farm sources in at least one year during the period
from.l955 through 1957. Only 61.3 percent of all 1955-
56-57 OASI fanm operators were classified as having

covered earnings from only agricultural self-employment

281

over the three-year period. Approximately 28.9 percent
had covered wage or salary employment in at least one
year, and 9.8 percent had no wage employment but did have
covered earnings from nonagricultural selfeemployment.

Geographic Eggigg.--Estimates of the percentage rate
of multiple jobholding among farm operators in a single
year suggest that the rate of multiple jobholding over
a three-year period may vary by geographic region. The
percentage distribution of 1955-56-57 OASI farm operators
by employment pattern over the period from 1955 through
1957 is given in Table VIII-l for eight regions. It will
be noted that three classes are used in designating em-
ployment patterns. The first includes allpersons who
had covered wage or salary employment in at least one
year during;the period from 1955 through 1957 regardless
of whether or not they had covered earnings from non-
agricultural self-employment in any year. The second
category includes persons who did not have covered wage
or salary earnings during the three-year period but who
did report covered earnings from nonagricultural self-
employment in at least one year. The final category
includes all persons whose only source of covered earn-
ings during the period from 1955 through 1957 was agri-
cultural self-employment. _

As shown in Table VIII-l, the percentage of l955-56- ‘

57 OASI farm operators who were classified as multiple

282

.eamamm hhopmamnxhoa_nsossapcoo mmuhmoa “eonsom

.smma as spam
we soapeooa msfipnomon no: encased msausaowo some oadsse.sonm wepssapom "opoz

.pwep ooe mofiuowopmo mo coapmcsHQXe pomp

.smma as some so assessed as eososunsaos

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.00H N.Ho w.m m.mm macawon HH4
0.00H nabs n.ww J¢.mm oamfioom
0.00H m.am JJHH H.5m campuses
0.00H m.bm mew m.mm ashpsoo nvsom pnez
0.00H o.mm H.m otmm espouse nusom poem
otooa o.om ~.o m.0m oapcsapd spsom
o.ooa b.oo N.m a.mm asupsoo sphoz use:
0.00H a.mo o.w a.mm ashpsoo mehoz poem
o.ooa a.mm a.ma m.hm pusonpaoz
pnoawdamam puoawoamsm pcoahoamam
dence and n 02 u om ass :02 owm3,ssmmnmmb . macawom
mmmenwwth.shoppmmpmoahoamsm “ML?

 

JIHII

mopwpm woman: esoaaauopsoo
one one escawoh pmwwo how .cuoppsm newshoamso hp mama nwsosnp
mama Bonn floated on» weansu use» some a“ mwcwsnso newshoHQSoumaee
stspHsoHums mswphomeh uncommono Show Hmdo mo soaasnwupmav owspcoouomun.anHHH> mqmde

283

Jobholders in at least one year during the period from
1955 through 1957 ranged from a low of 33.3 percent in
the West North Central statesto a high of 53.7 percent
in the Pacific states. Regional variations in the rate
of multiple jobholding for the three-year period corre-
sponded closely with regional variations in the rate of
multiple jobholding among 1957 OASI farm operators in
the year 1957. In both instances, the incidence of multi-
ple Jobholding appeared to be highest in the Mountain and
Pacific states and lowest in the East North Central and
west North Central states. It should also be noted that,
while the incidence of off-farm wage and salary employment
‘was lower than the national average in the Pacific states,
an additional 25.3 percent of all 1955-56-57 OASI farm
operators in the Pacific states reported covered earnings
from nonagricultural self-employment in at least one year.
Agg.--The relation of age of the farm operator to
the rate of multiple jobholding over the period from 1955
through 1957 indicates that the incidence of off-farm
employment was highest among persons less than 35 years
of age and tended to decrease with increasing age. It is
estimated that 52.1 percent of all 1955-56-57 OASI farm
operators less than 35 years of age worked off the farm
in at least one year during the period from 1955 through
1957. Although the proportion of farm operators with

off-farm employment was lower for the older age classes,

284

a significant percentage of older farm operators also
worked off the farm in at least one of the three years.
Among 1955-56-57 OASI farm operators 65 years of age or
more in 1957, 26.0 percent reported off-farm employment
during this period.

The distribution of 1955-56—57 OASI farm operators
in three employment groups by age in 1957 is shown in ‘
Table VIII-2. These estimates suggest that persons with
off-farm employment tended to be younger than individuals
‘whose only source of covered earnings during the three-
year period was agricultural self-employment. Moreover,
farm operators with off-farm wage and salary employment
tended to be younger than farm operators whose only
source of off-farm earnings was nonagricultural self-
employment._ The median age of 1955-56-57 OASI farm opera-
tors was h6.7 years in 1957 for persons in the former
group and 52.2 years for those in the latter group. In
comparison, the median age of 1955-56-57 OASI farm opera-
tors with no covered off-farm employment during this
period was 5h.l years.

Off-Farm‘flggg,Employment.

It should be noted, in examining the off-farm employ-
ment of the members of the 1955-56-57 OASI farm-operator
labor force, that the period from 1955 through 1957 was
one of general expansion in the nonfarm sector. Over

this period the number of persons employed in the

285

one owe mmwpnomen pom escaped wsfiosaowe sumo madame Scam oopsawpnm

.oansmm hhopufimlxhoa msosmfipmoo mmummma

"eohsom

.hmma am Show me composed weapnomom pom omomp

“opoz

.pxep eon moHMOMopso mo soauscmamxe hows

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.H“ H.sm N.N“ s.os matsmsv ems senses
o.ooa 0.00H 0.00H o.ooa Hopes
m.ma a.mm ©.ma 4.0a whoa no mo
o.mm >.©N m.om 5.0m so u mm
a.mm m.mm 0.Hm «.4N em I ma
m.om H.wH o.oa H.0N 4: u mm
o.HH m.o m.ma o.oa em I am
0.H m.o m.o o.N mm hove:
owepmoopom ommpmoohom ommpmoohom emwpcoomom
neopmmmmo sash pummwoamam pcomHoamsm pmomwoamam Anemowv
Hm<o flea ansmuemo oz -oaom stemsoz some ass - smsa as sw<

 

 

 
  

mmwoe-mmoa «compose as» ea am

 

 

nopspm copes: msomflahopmoo amp pom .cnoppsm usoshoamae
up .ews hm mama swoops» mmma Scam ooahon on» unmade mosh some :4
anemones psoshoamsoumaom Hanspasoflpwm wcfipaomeh esopsnomo seem Hm<osu.NnHHH> mqm<a

286

nonagricultural labor force increased from around 56.2
million in 1955 to 58.1 million in 1956 and 58.8 million
in 1957.1 The annual average level of unemployment was
4.A percent of the total civilian labor force in 1955,
A.2 percent in 1956, and A.3 percent in 1957.2 Conse-
quently, shifts in the off-farm employment of OASI farm
operators during the period from 1955 through 1957 may
be expected to reflect the influence of expansion in
the nonfarm economy.

flag: of off-farm gage employment.--The percentage
rate of off-farm wage and salary employment among members
of the 1955-56-57 OASI farm-operator labor force in-
creased from 16.7 percent in 1955 to 19.1 percent in
1956 and 19.5 percent in 1957. Estimates of the per-
centage rate of off-farm wage employment by geographic
region are given in Table VIII-3.

. It will be observed that, among 1955-56-57 OASI farm
operators included in the 1937-58 Continuous work-History
Sample, increases in the rate of off-farm wage employment
were recorded in each of the eight major geographic
regions between 1955 and 1956. The aggregate rate of

off-farm wage employment for the conterminous United

 

10.3. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of
the United States: 1961 (82nded.; Washington: U.S.
Government Printing—Uffice, 1961), Table No. 268, p. 203.

 

2Ibid. Average of monthly estimates of unemployed
persons as a percentage of the civilian labor force.

.oamsmm hnounamnxhos esossapmoo mmuhmma "eohsom

. .hmoa ea sham no moapmooa
mmapnoaen pom snowmen wmwvsaoxe spew oagaee Scam oopsfiapnm ”epoz

.smaa as some so assessed as assessesaoa

287

 

 

 

m.ma H.0H 5.0H soonest Ha<

H.5H a.ma n.0H camaoem
meow wtsw o.NN campuses
m.am mama a.ma flamenco meson one:
otmm QJNN mean Huhpsoo mason poem
mafia h.ma n.5H oapmwapd mason
ates s.oa mesa assuage apnea p.03
a.ma 4.0a o.ba Hegemoo mpuoz poem
s.o~ a.ma «.ma pnsaepnoz
same ones mums «cosmos

 

 

 

bmoa op mama .eoumpm ocean: esomwshepmoo on»
one ecoamea camoehmoem pmwao mom mama mwsouma mmoa scam moaned one
moment use» some ma ewmwmmee psoshoaasoumaee asmspasoaams moapuomeh
snowshoes shew Hmdo Ho amoshoamse ewes shemumuo mo open emepmeonomuu.mnHHH> Hands

288

States increased by 2.4 percentage points from 1955 to
1956, and regional increases in the rate of off-farm
wage employment ranged from a low of 0.8 percentage points
in the East South Central states to a high of h.5 per-
centage points in the West South Central states. Between
1956 and 1957 the aggregate rate of off-farm wage employ-
ment increased slightly. However, the number of 1955-56-
57 OASI farm operators working off the farm in covered
wage employment increased notably in only three of the
eight regions from 1956 to 1957. Percentage rates of
off-farm wage employment in 1957 remained at about the
same level as in 1956 or decreased from the level of the
preceding year in the five remaining regions.

Estimates of the percentage rate of off-farm wage
employment over the three-year period by age are given
in Table VIII-h. The general increase in the percentage
rate of off-farm employment between 1955 and 1956 was
reflected among 1955-56-57 OASI farm operators in each
of the six age classes. Shifts in the rate of off-farm
wage employment between 1956 and 1957 were largely con-
fined to three age classes. Particularly notable was
the increase from 30.3 percent to 50.0 percent in pro-
portion of farm operators under 25 years of age who had
covered wage earnings in 1956 and 1957, respectively.

Level g£_off-fgrm wage,earnings.—-Increases in the
annual rate of off-farm wage employment among 1955-56-57

289

.eamasm muopmfimuxm63Vesosswpsoo mmnbmma ”oomsom

.bmma ma swam Mo moapwooa wmaumomeu no: once» one
owe wsflpmoooh pom nsouhom.w:«usaoxo some madame any“ oopmsapea “opoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

a.ma a.ma e.oa anspsnsno Ha<
@.w N.OH 0.m whoa ho no
meme a.ma send so . mm
o.om o.om «.ma em - ms
s.o~ m.s~ 0.HN es . mm
m.s~ etsm deem em . mm
0.0m n.0m m.o~ mm noes:
mwma same «was impasse
same as use

 

 

emma on mama .aopspm eases: msosasnopsoo
can use one as name masons» mass sons coated use wastes
use» mode as nmswmhso pmoahoamaonuaem Henspasofihms mmwpnomeh

unopepomo Show Hmdo mo newshoamse ewes sumunmmo no easy emsomoomemun.¢uHHH> aqmds

290

OASI farm operators included in the 1937-58 Continuous
Work-History Sample were accompanied by increases in the
level of off-farm wage and salary earnings. It is esti-
mated that the median wage and salary earnings of 1955-56-
57 OASI farm operators with covered earnings from off-farm
wage employment were $317 in 1955, $3h3 in 1956, and
$384 in 1957 (Table VIII-5). The level of median wage
earnings thus appears to have increased more between
1956 and 1957 than between 1955 and 1956. Estimates of
average wage earnings suggest the same pattern. Per
capita wage and salary earnings for persons working off
the farm were approximately $619 in 1955, $686 in 1956,
and $776 in 1957.

It should also be noted that significant changes
occurred in the size distribution of off-farm wage earn-
ings between 1955 and 1957. The number of 1955-56-57
OASI farm operators working in covered wage employment
increased from 209,200 in 1955 to 2hl,500 in 1956 and
250,600 in 1957. The total increase over the three-year
period was equal to approximately 19.8 percent of the
number of farm operators with off-farm wage employment
in 1955. However, the number of farm operators with
wage earnings of $2,000 or more increased by 88.h percent
during the period from 1955 through 1957, and.the number
of farm operators with wage earnings of from $1,000 to

$1,999 increased by h3.8 percent. In comparison, the

291

.oaassm stopsamnanos ssoseapcoo mausmma

“condom

.uopnooen won as: owmwmneo owes

 

 

 

 

HO ugoad 5033 no.“ uGOOHOQ wflfififidoflo avid admgn 80h.“ cwudfiwvufl "09.02
sum Imam New. massaaoev
mmsashee owes suave:
o.ooa o.ooa o.ooa Hesse
m.o 7~.o w.o atom to coo”;
H.~ s.a a.a ems m . 00m m
N.N m.a o.a mmemn . ooonm
o.« «.m m.a momma - cem.~
H.e ~.m o.m mos.m - ooosm
~.m m.s m.m moo.” - com a
~.s «.9 a.m moses - cools
m.o m.s m.m moo. : com.
«.0 e.> 0.» wow u coo
a.m m.m e.oa mom - cos
o.sa H.sa a.ma own - com
H.5m m.em o.oe 00« use» smog
mums mama mama impedance,
_ nwmfimhmm emm3

 

 

 

same as “mas .sopspm eases: assaaanopcoo as» too
.unsom moamfioeme a“ show one mac weaxuos.esoeuom mom
ewsasnme own: he mama swoops» mmoa scum season one weapon
use» some ma ewmammoo pmommoamsenmaem amnspasofihms mmfipmomem

mmopsnomo anon Hmdo mo ewmamhme meadow use soapsnaupmfio owopmeouemuu.muHHH> mqm<e

292

number of persons with wage earnings of less than $1,000
increased by only 9.5 percent.

The larger increase in median and per capita wage
and salary earnings between 1956 and 1957 was related to
the previous job experience of farm operators working
off the farm. Earlier it was found that persons with
off-farm employment in the preceding year seem generally
to have substantially higher average wage and salary
earnings than other farm operators with covered off-farm
employment. Individuals who had covered wage and salary
earnings in each year during the period from 1955 through
1957 accounted fer around one-half of the 1955-56-57
OASI farm operators with off-farm wage employment in
each year. It is estimated that, for persons in this
group, per capita wage earnings were equal to approxi-
mately $775 in 1955, $949 in 1956, and $1,003 in 1957.

In this instance, the increase in the level of per capita
wage earnings was significantlygreater between 1955 and
1956 than between 1956 and 1957.

The larger, over-all increase in per capita wage
earnings between 1956 and 1957 was therefore associated
with shifts in the composition of the multiple Jobholding
segment of the farm-operator labor force. Only about
29.9 percent of the 1955-56-57 OASI farm operators with
covered off-farm wage employment in 1957 did not have

covered off-farm employment in the preceding year. In

293

comparison, approximately 38.0 percent of the farm opera-
tors with off-farm wage employment in 1956 did not have
covered wage employment in 1955.

Regularity'gf off-farm wage employment.--Regular
participation in the off-farm labor force appears to
characterize only a fairly small proportion of the 1955-
56-57 OASI farm operators included in the 1937-58*Contin-
uous Work-History Sample. Among members of the 1955-56-
57 OASI farm-operator labor force, it is estimated that
28.9 percent received covered wage and salary earnings
in at least one year during the period from 1955 through
1957. .However, only about 9.2 percent of all 1955-56-57
OASI farm operators had off-farm wage employment in each
of the three years. Among all persons who worked off
the farm in at least one year during the period, approx-
imately 40.5 percent had off-farm wage or salary employ-
ment in only one year, 27.8 percent in only two years,
and 31.7 percent in all three years. Around one-half
of the farm operators working off the farm in any one
year during the period from.l955 through 1957 were per-
sons who had covered wage earnings in each of the three
years.

A significant characteristic of the 1955-56-57 OASI
farm-operator labor force was the sporadic participation
of individual workers in the off-farm labor force. It is
estimated that 29.4 percent of the 1955-56-57 OASI farm

294

operators working in covered off-farm wage employment in
1955 did not have covered wage and salary earnings in the
following year.’ About the same proportion of all persons
with off-farm wage emplOyment in 1956 were not identified
with off-farm wage and salary employment in 1957.

mmmmm: 222221221

A relatively large number of 1955 OASI farm operators
were not identified with farming in both 1955 and 1957.
Of the nearly 2.2 million individuals who reported agri-
cultural self-employment earnings for social security
credits in 1955, it is estimated that only 70 percent
reported agricultural self-employment earnings in the
year 1957. The 1937-58 Continuous WOrk-History Sample
indicates that a total of 647,700 persons who were included
in the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor ferce were not iden-
tified with agricultural self-employment in 1957. This
group includes both individuals who were not recorded as
having social security credits for the year 1957 and those
whose only coverage was for earnings from sources other
than agricultural self-employment. The 1957 coverage
indication of 1955 OASI farm operators who were not iden-
tified with agricultural self-employment in 1957 is given
in Table VIII-6.
Retired and Deceased Workers

It is reasonable to expect that a large number of

the 1955 OASI farm operators who were not engaged in

295

.oamssm hnopnamuxnos esosmapmoo wmubmma “season

.eepmpm copes: neonaanopmoo on» no madness commooa

snowmen row a eosaoma moan: spec madame Bonn voussapem “ouoz

 

 

 

 

o.ooa och.ueo 7 Honey
H.o com an: n can
H.o 004 hmz u ems 1 0mm
5.H 00w 0H omz 1 can
m.o 900 as 0mm
s.~ cos ea mm;
~.H 000 Mm mmz u on:
cabu con .mba om:
m.oo 00« can owano>so oz
emupmeoaem henna: wnma ma
soapsofiva ewshobeo

 

 

 

nepspm woman: amp mom
.Nmoa ma soapwoaoefie ewouoboo an bmma ma oneshoamseamaea

asaspasoaams no“: newness-ow no: soapstone stem Hmdo mmoaun. 0-HHH> wands

296

covered employment in 1957 were individuals who were able
to qualify for social security retirement benefits at the
end of two years of participation in the program. In ad-
dition to retired persons, however, the group with no
coverage in 1957 also includes persons whose earnings
were below the minimum level required for social security
coverage, persons who were disabled or involuntarily un-
employed, and deceased workers. No attempt will be made
here to distinguish precisely between individuals who
fall into these different categories, but the age dis-
tribution of OASI farm operators who were not covered by
social security in 1957 provides some indication of the
relative importance of retirement from farming..

‘ Persons without social security coverage in 1957
accounted for approximately 60 percent of all persons

who reported agricultural earnings in 1955 but who were
not identified with agriculturalself-employment in 1957.
Of the 1955 OASI farm operators with no social security
coverage in 1957. it is estimated that 57.8 percent were
65 years of age or more in 1957 (Table VIII—7). The
median age of persons in this group was approximately
66.4 years in 1957 as compared with 52.7 years for all
persons included in the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor
force. Because of the age distribution of persons without
coverage in 1957, it is concluded that death and retire-

ment have accounted for the bulk of the persons who

297

.oamamm mhoumfimnmpoa usosafipmoo wmubmofl "oopsom

.mpwu nausea Eomm voumawpum “epoz

.nopspm copes: nsosfisuopmoo one no someone cousooa eaosvabfiosfi son a .bmoa
ma emmao>oo umoshoamaenmaom Homspasofimws psomufls «moaned mom .eoosaomHs A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N.Nm a.mo o.ma m.Hm mnsosv
o s memos:
o.ooa 0.00H 0.00H o.ooa Hopes
m.¢m m.hm o.oa a.ma shoe no mo
m.am m.ma o.mH o.s~ so - mm
4.Hm 0.HH w.mm a.mm on u m4
4.aa :.oa b.m~ o.om 44.: mm
m.HH o.m a.ma N.NH em n mm
¢.H m.o m.¢ H.H mm noon:
ommpcoonom ammumoonom eumucoomom owmpmmenom
mama as
neopemomo owed :a psoSmOHQEMImaom mmma :H Anamowv
Bush omomo>oo oz HwhspHsoHnw< some newswoaaamumaom bmma a“ om<
Hm<o HH< tempo ommno>oo Handesownw<

 

 

 

n

 

ma ma :oapmofiumH owe

 

ao>oo

 

 

snowmen copes: nsomfiahopsoo one mom .hmma ma soapsOHcmH
ewmuoboo spamsoee deacon he .ews he unopsnomo shew Hm<o mmmauu.nuHHH> mqm<e

298

dropped out of the OASI labor force between 1955 and 1957.
As indicated earlier, however, the labor force status of
persons without coverage cannot be determined exactly.
We can ascertain only that these individuals did not
qualify for social security coverage in the year 1957.
It is not possible to distinguish between retirements and
deaths because a substantial share of deaths among unin—
sured workers are not reported. Moreover, although it is
'probable that most of the individuals in the age class 65
years of age or more are persons who have retired from
farming or who are deceased, some may be operating small
farms with earnings below the level required for social
security coverage.
0ff-Farm.Migration

It is estimated, with respect to off-farm migration,
that about 11.9 percent of all members of the 1955 OASI
farm-operator labor force were not identified with agri-
cultural self-employment in 1957 but were recorded as
having covered earnings from other sources in that year.
This group accounted for approximately 40 percent of all
1955 OASI farm operators who did not have agricultural
self-employment coverage in l957. ’0f the persons in
this group, 84.1 percent reported covered earnings from
wage and Salary employment in 1957. The remaining 15.9
percent reported nonagricultural self-employment as their

only source of covered earnings in 1957. All 1955 OASI

299

farm operators with covered earnings from only sources
other than agricultural self-employment in 1957 cannot
be regarded unequivocally as individuals who migrated
off the farm. Nonetheless, it is suggested that this
group is largely confined to persons who actually shift-
ed out of farming during the period between 1955 and
1957. _

Off-farm migration is generally assumed to be most
' common among farm operators in the younger age groups.
The age distribution of 1955 OASI farm operators who
had covered earnings only from sources other than.agri-
,cultural self-employment in 1957 tends to support the
hypothesis that farm operators who shift out of farming
are typically younger than other farm operators. The,
median age of persons in this group was only 45.0 years
in 1957, and nearly 75 percent of these individuals were
less than 55 years of age in 1957 (Table VIII-7). In
comparison, the median age in 1957 of all 1955 OASI farm
operators was 52.7 years, and approximately 50 percent
of the members of the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force
were 55 years of age or more in 1957.

Earlier it was suggested that off-farm employment
may presage a shift to full-time employment in the non-

agricultural sector for some farm operators.‘ Estimates

from the 1937-58 Continuous Work-History Sample indicate

300

that approximately 216,500 members of the 1955 OASI farm-
operator labor ferce were recorded as having covered
earnings from wage and salary employment in 1957 but were
not members of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor ferce.
Among persons in this group, the incidence of off-farm
wage employment in 1955 was substantially higher than

for the entire 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force. It
is estimated thatl9.3 percent of all 1955 OASI farm
operators were recorded as having covered earnings from
off-farm wage and salaryemployment in 1955. In compar-
ison, it is estimated that 59.7 percent of the 1955 OASI
farm operators who had apparently shifted out of farming
and into full-time wage employment by 1957 had covered
earnings from off-farm wage and salary employment in
1955.

Approximately 29.5 percent of all 1955 OASI farm
operators with covered off-farm wage employment in 1955
were identified by OASI records as full-time members of
the off-farm labor force in 1957. ‘Excluding 1955 OASI
farm operators who had no social security coverage in
1957, it is estimated that 32.3 percent of all 1955 OASI
farm operators with off-farm wage and salary employment
in 1955 were identified as having covered off-farm wage
earnings in 1957 but were not identified as having agri-
cultural self-employment earnings in that year. On the

basis of this evidence, it seems fair to conclude that

301

eff-farm.work by farm operators often leads to full—time
employment off the fanm and that a large proportion of

the farm operators who shift out of farming have had
experience in off-farm employment before moving completely

out of agriculture.

Multiple Jobholding: 1955 to 1258

There has been a marked trend over the past decade
toward increased off-farm employment among farm operators.
Earlier it was noted that the proportion of commercial
farm operators reporting off-farm employment in the Cen-
sus of Agriculture increased from 25.1 percent in 1949
to 31.6 percent in 1951. and 34.3 percent in 1959. How-
ever, annual estimates of the number of farm operators
working off the farm.have not been available. we have
therefore been unable to ascertain the impact of year-
to-year fluctuations in the off-farm employment and earn-
ings of farm operators. I
5222a; Estimates , .

. Data from the Continuous Work-History Sample will
permit investigation of year-to-year changes in the rate
of'multiple jobholding, but information is available at
present for only a 'limited time period. Preliminary
tabulations of data from the 1937-59 Continuous work-
History Sample have provided estimates of the rate of

multiple jobholding among OASI farm operators for the

302

period from 1955 through 1958. These estimates are given
in Table VIII-8. .

Annual estimates of the percentage rate of multiple
jobholding indicate that the proportion of farm operators
working off the farm may have decreased slightly between
1955 and 1956 and increased during the period from 1956
through 1958. The higher rate of'multiple jobholding in
1955 was, however, attributable to the higher incidence
of nonfarm self-employment in that year. About 12 per-
cent of all 1955 OASI farm operators reported covered
earnings from nonfarm self-employment, while only 9 per-
cent of all 1956 OASI farm operators included in.the
1937559 Continuous WOrk-History Sample were recorded as
having covered earnings from nonagricultural self-employment
(Table VIII-9). The percentage rate of nonagricultural
self-employment was approximately 9 percent in each of
the years 1956, 1957, and 1958; and.there is no obvious
explanation fer the difference between the rate of non-
agricultural self-employment in 1955 and the rates in
succeeding years.

Separate estimates of the rate of off—farm wage and
salary employment indicate a gradualincrease in the pro-
portion of OASI farm operators receiving covered wage and
salary earnings over the four-year period. As shown in
Table VIII-9, estimates based on the 1937-59 Continuous
work-History Sample indicate that the percentage of OASI

303

.oamamm whopmwmnxaoz usosmfipsoo mmubmma “ooasom

.mmhspom opea mom pmsooom on comments poz .wpso madame scam oopmawpmm “09oz

 

 

H.Hm oos.smo oom.oma.m mama

m.s~ commune coassmasm been

a.mm oom.soe oomrmss.~ seas

«.mm cemrmmo oooxoma.~ mama

mmwoaomnow sandman: pmosmoamsm shemnmmo ehopomono sham use»
no ovum owmpmoomom spas snowshomo mo honmsz Hm<o no honasz

 

 

 

wmma-mmma _
assess seems: on» too .pcussoanas anee-ooo nus: soapstone anew Hmso--.w-HHH> mamas

301+

.eamaom knapefimuxmoz anon—mango mmuhmma ”eonsom

.mmhspoh one.“ new umsoooe op someones poz .epso oamaoe 89C oops—53m “epoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m.o ooo.mo~ a.mm cem.m~m muss
~.o co“.mo~ o.NN cem.ams anon
0.0 oom.-~ m.H~ ooo.amm mama
«.ma cem.mo~ n.oa oom.a~s mmma
_ inn. amend-Em: ._ pm egoammm pm. aflommsm. . ,
IHHom atomsoz Ho nmaom snowmoz no? ems: 3.3.7.30 mo pmoflmoamsm emo3 new:
seem omspoooaofi unopmnompmo memes—m sump ewopmoomom whoponomb mo Lehman .Hoo.»
pmoaoamam pmogoamam
.. swans so- .iph‘snopmmwnfstsm sq! awesome.-. .... -,fie-mtmosno.. sum or..-

mmmaummoa .sosspm sense: on» too .paossoadso
umaeu Eons—om one pmofimoaoso owes Eomummo new: snowshoes Show HmdonionHHHb 5mg.

305

farm operators with covered wage employment increased
by 2.2 percentage points between 1955 and 1956, 0.5 per-
centage points between 1956 and 1957, and 1.8 percentage
points between 1957 and 1958.

Changes in the requirements for social security
coverage must be taken into account in comparing annual
estimates of the off-farm employment of OASI farm opera-
tors. Farm operators first became eligible for partici-
pation in the social security program in 1955. Older
farm operators were able to qualify for retirement bene-
fits, under special provisions, with only two years of
coverage. Consequently, there was an added incentive
for older farm operators to attempt to qualify for social
security credits in the early years of the program. This
fact was undoubtedly responsible, in part, for the inclu-
sion of a disproportionately large number of older per-
sons in the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force.

Since many older persons would.have become eligible
for retirement benefits by the end of 1956, the percent-
age of older farm operators would have been expected to
decline for years after 1956. The incidence of off-farm
employment tends to be lowest among persons in the older
age groups. Hence, the expected change in the age com-
position of the OASI farm-operator labor force would
presumably tend to increase the aggregate rate of off-

farm employment.

306

A second factor, however, has affected the composi-
tion of the OASI farm-operator labor force for years
after 1955. Materially participating farm landlords
were included in the social security programs beginning
in 1956 on the same basis as other farm operators. It
appears that farm landlords included in the OASI farm-
operator labor force after 1955 tended to be older than
other members of the labor force. The inclusion of farm
landlords therefore seems to have offset the drop-out of
older farm operators who were able to qualify for social
security retirement benefits at the end of 1956. Conse-
quently, the expected change in the age composition of
the OASI farm-operator labor force was not reflected by
comparison of the 1955 and 1957 OASI farm-operator labor
force.

Persons entering the OASI farm-operator labor force
after 1955 also tended to have a slightly higher rate of
multiple jobholding than members of the 1955 OASI farm-
operator labor force. Part of this difference may be due
to a higher rate of multiple jobholding among farm land-
lords. However, movements in the annual rate of off-
farm employment for the 1955-56-57 OASI farm-operator
labor force corresponded closely with those for all OASI
farm operators during the period from.l955 through 1957.
It is therefore concluded that this factor has not sig-
nificantly influenced the aggregate rate of’multiple
jobholding.

307

Two other changes have affected the labor force
represented by OASI farm-operator data and the reporting
of off-farm wage earnings. First, the minimum level of
gross farm earnings required for the coverage of farm
operators reporting under the optional method was lowered
from $800 in 1955 to $600 for years after 1955. Second,
the minimum level of annual wage earnings required for
the coverage of hired farm workers was raised from $100
in 1955 and 1956 to $150 for years after 1956. Neither
of these changes are thought to significantly influence
aggregate off-farm employment rates.

Shifts in Off-Farm flagg Employment

The hypothesis was suggested in Chapter I that farm
operators working off the farm may tend to be less secure
in their nonfarm jobs than are single jobholders in the
nonfarm sector. Thus, farm operators who work off the
farm may be among the first to lose nonfarm jobs when
the general level of unemployment begins to rise and among
the last to be re-hired when the unemployment level falls.
The social security data processed in the course of the
present study did not provide an adequate basis for com-
paring shifts in the off-farm employment of farm operators
in expansion and contraction years, but some general
observations may be offered.

The years 1955, 1956, and 1957 were characterized

by increases in the number of persons employed in the

308

nonfarm labor force and by annual average unemployment
rates ranging from h.2 percent to h.h percent of the total
civilian labor force. Two factors relating to the off-
farm employment of farm operators were particularly nota-
ble during this period of expansion in the nonfarm econ-
omy. First, among persons identified as farm operators
over the three-year period, there occurred an increase
both in the percentage rate of off-farm.wage employment
and in the level of off-farm wage earnings. Second, a
substantial number of farm operators apparently migrated
out of agriculture between 1955 and 1957. OASI farm
operators who shifted from.farming to off-farm employment
during this period tended to be younger than persons who
remained in agriculture. Moreover, a disproportionately
large number of farm operators who migrated out of agri-
culture were persons who had previously held off-farm jobs.
The level of unemployment began to increase in the
last quarter of 1957, and an average of 6.8 percent of
the civilian labor force was unemployed in 1958. If in-
creases in the general level of unemployment are associated
with decreases in the proportion of farm operators working
off the farm, we would expect to find that the percentage
rate of off-farm wage employment had fallen between 1957
and 1958. Estimates based on preliminary tabulations of
data fronlthe 1937-59 Continuous WOrk-History Sample
indicate, however, that the proportion of OASI farm

309

operators with covered wage earnings from off-farm employ-
ment increased from 22.0 percent in 1957 to 23.8 percent
in 1958. Further investigation of shifts in the off-farm
wage employment of farm operators between 1957 and 1958

is warranted but must await more complete analysis of

OASI sample data for the year 1958.
Summary

One of the most significant characteristics of the
off-farm employment of farm operators is their sporadic
participation in the off-farm labor force. Among persons
who reported agricultural self-employment earnings for
social security coverage in each of the years in the
period from 1955 through 1957, it was estimated that 38.7
percent had covered earnings from off-farm sources in at
least one of the three years. Approximately 28.9 percent
of all 1955-56-57 OASI farm operators had off-farm wage
employment during this period, but only 9.2 percent had
off-farm.wage employment in each of the three years.

The rate of off-farm wage employment among members
of the 1955-56-57 OASI farm-operator labor force increased
from 16.7 percent in 1955 to 19.1 percent in 1956 and
19.5 percent in 1957. Particularly significant was the
increase in off-farm wage employment among farm operators
under 25 years of age. Among farm operators in this age

class, the rate of off-farm wage employment increased

310

from 26.5 percent in 1955 to 30.3 percent in 1956 and
50.0 percent in 1957.

Significant changes also occurred in the size dis-
tribution of off-farm wage earnings between 1955 and 1957.
The number of farm operators with wage earnings of $2,000
or more increased by 88.h percent during this period. In
comparison, the number of 1955-56-57 OASI farm operators
with wage earnings of from $1,000 to $1,999 and of less
than $1,000 increased by h3.8 percent and 9.5 percent,
respectively. Per capita wage earnings for farm operators
with off-farm employment increased from $619 in 1955 to
$686 in 1956 and.$776 in 1957. _

It was estimated that approximately 30 percent of
all persons who reported agricultural selfhemployment
earnings for social security coverage in 1955 were not
identified with agricultural self-employment in 1957.
About 60 percent of the persons not identified with farm-
ing in 1957 had no covered earnings in that year. The
remaining #0 percent had covered earnings only from sources
other than agricultural self-employment.

Off-farm.work by farm operators often leads to full-
time employment off the farm, and a large proportion of
farm operators who shift out of farming have had previous
experience in off-farm employment prior to migrating out
of agriculture. 0f the 1955 OASI farm operators who were

identified as full-time members of theoff-farm labor

311

force in 1957, it was found that 59.7 percent had covered
off-farm wage employment in 1955. Approximately 29.5
percent of all 1955 OASI farm operators with off-farm
wage employment in 1955 had apparently become full-time
members of the off-farm labor force by 1957.

Preliminary estimates based on the 1937-59 Continuous
WOrk-History Sample showed that the percentage rate of
off-farm wage employment among all OASI farm operators
increased from 19.3 percent in 1955 to 21.5 percent in
1956, 22.0 percent in 1957, and 23.8 percent in 1958.

It isespecially significant that the rate of off-farm
employment increased between l957 and 1958 at a time when
the general level of unemployment in the nation had in-

creased substantially.

CHAPTER IX
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The objective of this study was to investigate cer-
tain aspects of the off-farm employment and earnings of
farm operators in the conterminous United States. One
of the significant features of American agriculture has
been the continued decline in the number of farms and.in
the size of the farm population. During the period from
1950 to 1961 the number of farms decreased from around
5.6 million to 3.8 million.’ The farm population decreased
over this same period from approximately 23.0 million in
1950 to lh.8 million in 1961. By 1961 the farm popula-
tion accounted for only 8 percent of the total population
of the conterminous United States.

Most of the decline in number of farms over the past
decade has been confined to farms with gross sales of
less than $2,500, and a larger proportion of all farms
are now classified as commercial operations. Despite
this trend, however, off-farm earnings have represented
an increasingly larger share of the total income of the
farm population. As a percentage of personal income from
all sources, income from.nonfarm sources increased from C

an average of 28.8 percent during the period from 1949

312

313

to 1951 to 36.3 percent during the period from 1959 to
1961. The rate of off-farm employment among commercial
farm operators increased from 25.1 percent in 1949 to

34.3 percent in 1959.

QAS; Farm-Operator Data

This study has relied chiefly on employment and
earnings data taken from the records of individual workers
who reported agricultural self-employment earnings for
social security coverage in specified years. The farm-
operator labor force represented by OASI employment data
does not correspond with the labor force represented by
other sources of national data. But OASI employment
records provide certain information which has heretofore
been unavailable.
Derivation,g£.QA§; Employment Qgtg

Labor force statistics are a byproduct of the admin-
istration of the federal Old-Age, Survivors, and Disabil-
ity Insurance program. Persons with earnings from agri-
cultural self—employment have been included in the OASI
program since 1955, and annual data relating to the employ-
ment and earnings of farm operators are now available from
social security records. These data represent individual
workers who have reported agricultural self-employment
earnings for social security coverage. Because of restric-
tions on the amount and kinds of income which can be

credited to an individual's social security account, the

31h

number of persons with agricultural self-employment
coverage in any one year is substantially less than,
for example, the number of farm operators represented
by the Department of Agriculture series on number of
farms.

Self-employed persons must have net earnings of
at least 3400 during the year to qualify for social
security coverage. ‘Wage earners are required to have
earnings of at least $50 from a single employer in a
calendar quarter for nonfarm work or, in years after
1956, $150 in a calendar year for farm work. Covered
earnings were limited to no more than 3h.200 per year
for each person during the period from 1955 through
1958. Self-employed persons with wage or salary earn-
ings of $4.200 or more in any year were not permitted
to report self-employment earnings for social security
coverage. Hence, some farm operators with off-farm wage
employment are excluded from the OASI farm-operator labor
force.

An alternative method of computing taxable self-
employment earnings has been open to farm operators.
Under the optional reporting method, individuals with
low net self-employment earnings or net losses have been

able to report a specified percentage of gross earnings

for social security coverage. Farm operators with gross

315

earnings of not more than 31,800 were allowed to report
an amount equal to one-half of gross earnings in 1955

and two-thirds of gross earnings in years after 1955
provided that these amounts were not less than $400. The
optional reporting method thus permitted (but did not
require) the coverage of farm operators with gross farm
earnings of as little as $800 in 1955 and $600 in years
after 1955. _

OASI income and employment data are compiled from
reports filed with the Bureau of Old-Age and.Survivors
Insurance by individual workers and employers. These
data represent the earnings and characteristics of in-
dividual income recipients working in covered employment
and generally come from actual records rather than memory.
QA§I_Sample Data

This study has been based primarily upon sample data
for persons who reported agricultural self-employment
earnings for social security coverage. These data in-
cluded items selected from the Continuous Work-History
Sample and.the Annual Employee-Employer Wage Card Files
maintained by the Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insur-
ance. The Continuous Work—History Sample is a permanent,
l-percent sample of all individuals to whom social secur-
ity account numbers have been issued since the inaugura—
tion of the social security program. The Annual Employee—

Employer Wage Card File includes the records of all

316

persons with covered wage and salary employment in a
single year.

The farm-operator labor force sample used in this
study was selected by drawing the records of all persons
in the Continuous WOrk-History Sample who reported agri-
cultural self-employment earnings for social security
coverage in specified years. Also available were the
annual wage cards for persons with covered wage employ-
ment in 1957. It was generally assumed throughout the
study that the sample data represented a random, l-percent
sample of all persons reporting agricultural self-employ-
ment earnings prior to the cut-off date of the Continuous
Work-History Sample. Estimates relating to the number of
OASI farm operators tend to understate slightly the actual
size of the labor force due to the exclusion of persons
reporting after the cut-off date. Moreover, as suggested
in Appendix IV, the sampling ratio for farm operators may
be slightly less than the assumed, l-percent rate. Con-
sequently, no particular case is made for estimates of
the total number of OASI farm operators.

Ihg_1221_QA§; Farm-Operator La22§_fig§gg

. The present study has been devoted principally to an
investigation of multiple jobholding among persons with
agricultural self-employment coverage in the year 1957.
In general, the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force

included persons with net farm self-employment earnings

317

in 1957 of $400 or more plus persons with net farm earn-
ings of less than $h00 and gross earnings of $600 or more
who elected to report under the optional method. The
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force excluded farm opera-
tors with net earnings of less than $A00 who did not
report on an optional basis and those with off-farm wage
earnings of $4,200 or more regardless of the amount of
their self-employment earnings.

The 1937-58 Continuous WOrk-History Sample represented
a total of around 2.2 million farm operators in 1957.

The size of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force was
equal to roughly one-half of the estimated total number
of farms in 1957. The major reason for the disparity
between the size of the OASI farm-operator labor force

and the size of the labor force represented by Department
of Agriculture and Current Population Survey estimates is
that the latter includes a large number of persons who

are engaged in farming on only a minimal basis. The

OASI farm-operator labor force may be regarded as general-
ly representative of "commercial" farm operators.

OASI farm operators generally tend to be older than
farm operators enumerated in the Census of Agriculture.
The median age of 1957 OASI farm operators was 52.0 years,
and 20 percent of all 1957 OASI farm operators were 65
years of age or over. Negro farm operators accounted

for only 1.6 percent of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor

318

force, and female workers accounted for 6.A percent of

the total labor force.

The Off-Farm Employment gi_§agm_0perators
Estimates based upon the Census of Agriculture
indicate that multiple jobholding is an important char-
acteristic of the commercial farm-operator labor force.

The rate of multiple jobholding among the operators of
farm with gross sales of $2,500 or more increased by
37 percent during the period from 1949 to 1959. Over
this same period the proportion of commercial farm opera-
tors working off the farm on 100 or more days approxi-
mately doubled. Employment data from.social security
records have provided information for closer examination
of the nature of multiple jobholding among commercial
farm operators.
331:3 <_3_i_‘ Multiple Jobholding

Approximately 29.2 percent of the members of the
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force received covered
earnings from off—farm employment in 1957. Nonfarm wage
and salary employment was the most common source of off-
farm earnings. It was estimated that 20.1 percent of
all 1957 OASI farm operators had nonfarm wage employment
in 1957, 9.2 percent had nonagricultural self-employment,
and 2.5 percent had farm wage employment. Persons with
a combination of farm self-employment and nonfarm wage
employment accounted for 60.5 percent of all multiple
jobholders.

319

Estimates of the rate of multiple jobholding among
1957 OASI farm operators appeared to be slightly lower
than the percentage of commercial farm operators working
off the farm. As compared with 1955 survey estimates
for operators of farms with gross sales of $2,500 or
more, multiple employment rates for 1957 OASI farm
operators tended to be nearly identical for nonfarm self-
employment, to understate slightly participation in non-
farm wage employment, and to understate substantially
participation in farm wage employment.

The disparity between estimates for OASI farm opera-
tors and estimates for commercial farm operators can be
attributed to the fact that some farm operators had wage
earnings below the minimum level required for social
security coverage and that farm operators with wage earn-
ings of $h,200 or more were excluded from the OASI farm-
operator labor force. Most commercial farm operators
with notable participation in the off-farm labor force
are identified as multiple jobholders by OASI employment
records.

The percentage rate of multiple jobholding among
1957 OASI farm operators ranged from a low of 2h.8 per—
cent in the West North Central states to a high of 35.8
percent in the Pacific states. Regional variations in
the percentage of farm operators with off-farm wage,

employment were less pronounced. The rate of off-farm

320

wage employment ranged from a low of 20.0 percent in the
West North Central states to a highof 25.7 percent in
the Mountain states. Much larger variations were evident
in the percentage of farm operators with nonagricultural
self-employment. The rate of nonagricultural self-
employment varied from a.low of 4.8 percent in the west
North Central states to a high of 14.4 percent in the
Pacific‘states.

Differential Characteristics 2; Multiple Jobholders

 

Multiple jobholding among members of the OASI farm-
operator labor force is selective with respect to certain
characteristics. Particularly significant is the age of
the farm operator. Percentage rates of multiple jobhold-
ing ranged from a low of 16.4 percent for farm operators
65 years of age and over to a.high of 52.9 percent for
farm operators under 25 years of age. The median age of
multiple jobholders was h7.0 years as compared with 5A.2
years for persons without off-farm employment in 1957.

The age differential between multiple jobholders and
single Jobholders was due to wide variations in the rate
of off-farm wage employment. No significant difference
in the rate of nonagricultural self-employment was found
between farm operators under #5 years of age and those
#5 years of age or over. But it is estimated that 31.5
percent of all 1957 OASI farm operators under #5 years.

of age had off-farm wage earnings in 1957 as compared

321

with only 17.2 percent of all farm operators A5 years
of age or over. An outstanding feature of the 1955-57
expansion period was the increase in the rate of off-
farm wage employment from.26.5 percent in 1955 to 50.0
percent in 1957 among 1955-56-57 OASI farm operators
under 25 years of age.

The over-all rate of multiple jobholding was
slightly higher for'non-Negro farm operators than for
Negro farm operators. This difference was due to varia-
tions in the rate of nonagricultural self-employment.
Only 3.0 percent of all Negro farm operators in the 1957
OASI farm-operator labor force reported nonfarm self-
employment earnings in 1957, while 9.7 percent of all
non-Negro farm operators had nonagricultural self-
employment. There was no significant difference in the
rate of off-farm wage employment between Negro and non-
Negro farm operators.

No significant difference was noted in the percent-
age of male and female farm operators with nonagricultural
self-employment; however, the rate of off-farm wage
employment was significantly higher among male members
of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force. Covered
wage earnings were reported by 22.6 percent of all male
farm operators in 1957 and by 13.6 percent of all female

farm operators.

322

Approximately 75.2 percent of the 1957 OASI farm
operators with off-farm employment in 1957 had covered
earnings from off-farm employment in the preceding year,
but a significant characteristic of multiple jobholding
in the farm-operator labor force is the large movement
into and out of the off-farm labor force. About 33 Per-
cent of all persons reporting agricultural self-employment
earnings in both 1956 and 1957 had covered earnings from
off-farm sources in at least one of the two years, but
less than 20 percent were classified as multiple job-
holders in both years. .

The annual rate of’off-farm wage employment was
approximately 20 percent in 1956 and in 1957. It was
estimated that 25.9 percent of the individuals with agri-
cultural self-employment coverage in both 1956 and 1957
were identified with off-farm wage employment during the
two-year period. However, only 53.7 percent of the farm
operators with wage employment in at least one of the
two years had off-farm wage employment in both years.

Sporadic participation in the off-farm labor forces
appears to characterize the OASI farm-operator labor
force. Approximately 29 percent of the members of the
1955-56-57 OASI farm-operator labor force received covered

wage earnings during the period from 1955 through 1957,

323

but only about 9 percent had off-farm wage employment
in each of the three years.

For some farm operators, however, off-farm employ-
ment precedes a shift from farming to full-time employ-
ment in the nonfarm sector. Among 1955 OASI farm
operators who apparently migrated out of farming between
1955 and 1957, approximately 60 percent had off-farm
employment in 1955. In comparison, only 19.3 percent
of all 1955 OASI farm operators were classified as mul-
tiple jobholders in 1955.

The rate of off-farm wage employment was found to
be somewhat higher for OASI farm operators with net earn-
ings from self-employment of less than $2,000. The per-
centage of 1957 OASI farmoperators with off-farm wage
employment was 2h.5 percent for persons with not self-

- employment earnings of less than $2,000 and.l7.5 percent
for those with net earnings of $2,000 or more.
Sources gf Off-Farm Wage Earnings

One of the most striking features of the off-farm
employment of OASI farm operators was that approximately
29 percent of all off-farm wage jobs held by members of
the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force were in the govern-
ment sector. Wholesale and retail trade accounted for
18 percent of all wage jobs; manufacturing,l6 percent;
agriculture, forestry, and fishing,ll percent; and con-

tract construction,10 percent. Jobs in manufacturing

32h

industries were relatively more common in the Northeast
and East North Central states than in the other regions.
This industry group accounted for 25.1 percent of all
off-farm wage jobs in the East North Central states and
21.2 percent in the Northeast states.

Jobs in three major industry groups--manufacturing,
public utilities, and wholesale and retail trade--tended
to be most common among farm operators under 25 years of
age and.to decrease in importance with increasing age.
Conversely, the percentage of jobs in government ranged
from a low of 17.8 percent‘for persons under 25 years of
age to a high of 39.3 percent for persons 65 years of age
and over and clearly tended to increase with increasing
age.

Approximately 71 percent of the off-farm jobs held
by Negro farm operators were in.manufacturing, contract
construction, or agriculture, forestry, and fishing. In
comparison, only 36 percent of the off-farm jobs held by
non-Negro farm operators were in these three major groups.
Government accounted for 30 percent of all jobs held by
non-Negro farm operators and only 5 percent of all Jobs
held by Negro farm operators.

Off-farm Jobs in manufacturing, contract construc-
tion, and mining were relatively more numerous among farm
operators with net earnings from self-employment of less

than $2,000 than among persons in the higher income

325

classes. Conversely, the percentage of jobs in govern-
ment was significantly higher among farm operators in
the higher income classes. Nonclassified government
Jobs accounted for 24 percent of all jobs held by 1957
OASI farm operators with net self-employment earnings

of less than $2,000 and more than 40 percent of all jobs
held by farm operators with net earnings of $2,000 or
more.

The Siggbgistribution of Off-Farm.ngg,Earnings

The aggregate taxable wage earnings of the 1957 OASI
farm-operator labor force were equal to $422.6 million
in 1957. Per capita wage earnings fer farm operators
with off-farm wage and salary employment were approxi-
mately $951.

One of the most significant aspects of the off-farm
wage employment of OASI farm operators was the highly
skewed distribution of off-farm wage earnings. The
median wage earnings of 1957 OASI farm operators with
off-farm employment were only $518. Nearly one-third of
all farm operators who worked off the farm for wages or
salaries had wage earnings of less than $200, and approx-
imately two-thirds had wage earnings of less than $1,000.

Multiple jobholders in the Northeast, East North
Central, Mountain, and Pacific states tended to have
higher off-farm wage earnings than other multiple job-

holders. Median wage earnings in these four regions

326
varied from a low of approximately $606 in the East North
Central states to a high of $905 in the Pacific states.
Median wage earnings in the four remaining regions ranged
from a low of $424 in the East South Central states to a
high of $490 in the West South Central states.

Farm operators who have a record of regular partici-
pation in the off-farm labor force tend to have substan-
tially higher off-farm wage earnings than farm operators
who work off the farm only sporadically. The median wage
earnings of 1957 OASI farm operators who had no covered
off-farm wage employment in the preceding year were ap-
proximately $461 in 1957. .Median wage earnings fer those
with covered wage employment in both 1956 and 1957 were
$711 in 1957.

It is concluded that off-farm employment by farm
operators, particularly those in the younger age groups,
may presage a shift out of agriculture and into full-time
employment in the nonagricultural sector. Among persons
who remain in farming, however, regular participation in
the off-farm labor force characterizes a fairly small pro-
portion of the commercial farm-operator labor fbrce. A
large number of farm operators participate in the off-
farm labor force only sporadically, and a sizable percent-
age of farm.operators with off-farm wage employment do
not depend regularly upon off-farm earnings as a source

of income.

327

Potential Egg; of OASI Farm-Operator 2322

OASI data available for analysis in this study repre-
sented persons reporting agricultural self-employment
earnings for social security coverage in 1955 and/or 1957.
Because of the limited time period covered by these data,
the present study has been primarily concerned with cross-
sectional analysis of multiple jobholding among members
of the 1957 OASI farm-operator labor force. ,

An important characteristic of employment data from
the Continuous Work-History Sample is that it provides
time-series data on the employment and earnings of indi-
vidual members of the agricultural labor force. This
feature of OASI sample data will facilitate detailed
investigation of topics such as the following: (1) shifts
in the employment patterns and.incomes of farm operators
over time; (2) the relationships between the nonfarm
employment of farm operators, off-farm migration, and
cyclicalfluctuations in the general level of business
activity; and (3) the stability of the farm.end nonfarm
earnings of farm operators over time.

Brief examination of the off-farm employment of OASI
farm operators during the period from 1955 through 1957
indicated an increase over the three-year period in the
percentage rate of off-farm wage employment and in the
level of off-farm wage earnings. In addition, a substan-

tial number of farm operators apparently migrated out of

328

agriculture between 1955 and 1957. It is suggested that
both of these phenomena were related to general expansion
in the nonfarm economy during this period. Analysis of
the impact of cyclical fluctuations in the nonfarm sector
upon the rate of off-farm migration and the off-farm
employment of farm operators will be permitted as OASI

data covering a longer time period become available.

APPENDIX I
STANDARD ERROR OF ESTIMATES

The standard error of estimates relating to the
1957 OASI farm-operator labor force was calculated under
the assumption that the sample selected from the 1937-58
Continuous work-History Sample represented a random,
l-percent sample of all persons with covered self-
employment earnings from agricultural sources in 1957.
The standard errors associated with estimates of the 1957
OASI farm-operator labor force are generally indicative
of the standard errors of estimates relating to the OASI
farm-operator labor force of other years.

An unbiased estimate of the variance of the estimated
total number of persons in a specified class of the popu-

lation is1

Np = NLN‘n)
n41 pq

where:
(1) N = number of persons in the population
(2) n = number of persons in the sample

(3) p = proportion of the sample falling into the

specified population class

 

1William G. Cochran, Sam lin Techniques (New York:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1 5 , p. 33.

329

330

(A) q = l-p
An unbiased estimate of the variance of the estimated
proportion of a population falling into a specified

class is2

Since the sampling ratio was only 1 percent, the
finite population correction was negligible. Conse-
quently, it was used in calculating the standard errors
shown in Table I-l of the text but omitted in calculat-
ing the standard error of estimated percentages.

Estimates relating to various subclasses of the
1957 OASI farm-operator labOr force are presented in
the text. The approximate standard error of estimated
percentages for samples of various sizes are given in

Table I-A.

 

2Ibid.

 

331

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

s.0 w m.0 m.0 0.H 0.H m.« .«.m 0.m 0m
s.0 “.0 5.0 0.H 0.H «.« a.m m.s no to an
4.0 m.0 5.0 0.0 s.a 0.« m.« s.s m5 to m«
m.0 s.0 0.0 m.0 m.a m.a 0.« 0.s 0m to 0«
m.0 s.0 0.0 0.0 «.a 0.H m.« 0.m mm to ma
m.0 m.0 m.0 0.0 0.H s.a 5.H 0.m 05 so 0a

«.0 m.0 s.0 m.0 5.0 0.H s.a «.« m5 to a

a.0 «.0 «.0 m.0 m.0 5.0 m.0 s.a mm as «

a.0 a.0 «.0 «.0 4.0 m.0 5.0 0.H 05 to a
00p. 0« b.9043 000 «5 00m. « boom 00m pmmllbpwl mg
. . ., seas oHQEum . oopmldpum

 

 

 

woman uncanm>
Mo madness Mom nomspooouem uspmaapeo no nouns unmueepn epssawohmm<au.<uH mqmde

APPENDIX II

CLASSIFICATION OF STATES BY GEOGRAPHIC REGION

Throughout this study the regional classification

used corresponds with that employed in.the 1955 Survey

of Farmers' Expenditures.

In nearly all cases data from

the Census of Agriculture and other sources have been

adjusted to conform to this classification. Farm opera-

tors located in Alaska, Hawaii, and United States terri-

tories were excluded from the analysis. The states in-

cluded in each of the eight regions are listed telow:

I.

II.

III.

Northeast region

1. Maine 7.
2. New Hampshire 8.
3. Vermont 9.
4. Massachusetts 10.
5. Rhode Island 11.

6. Connecticut
East South Central region

1. Ohio 4.
2. Indiana 5-
3. Illinois "

‘West North Central region
1. Minnesota 5.
2. Iowa 6.

3. Missouri 7.
4. North Dakota

332

New York

New Jersey
Pennsylvania
Delaware
Maryland

Michigan
Wisconsin

South Dakota
Nebraska
Kansas

333

IV. South Atlantic region

1. Florida 5. South Carolina
2. Virginia 6. Georgia

3. West Virginia

4. North Carolina

V. East South Central region

1. Kentucky 3. Alabama
2. Tennessee 4. Mississippi

VI. West South Central region

1. Arkansas 3. Oklahoma
2. Louisiana 4. Texas
VII. Mountain region
1. Montana 5. New Mexico
2. Idaho 6. Arizona
3. Wyoming 7. Utah
4. Colorado 8. Nevada
VIII. Pacific region ,
l. washington 3. California

2. Oregon

APPENDIX III

ADJUSTMENT OF USDA OFF-FARM INCOME ESTIMATES
TO ACCOUNT FOR UNDERENUMERATED FARMS

The universe sampled in the 1955 Survey of Farmers'
Expenditures included only those farms actually enumer-
ated in the 1954 Census of Agriculture. Off-farm income
estimates derived from the survey were not adjusted to
account for farms which were missed in the 1954 census
and, hence, excluded from the universe sampled in 1955.
Estimates of the off-farm income of that segment of the
farm-operator population missed in the census were cal-
culated by the author in the manner described below.

On the basis of a special post-census survey, the
Census Bureau estimated that 419,000 farms were missed
in the 1954 Census of Agriculture: (1) 33,000 farms in
economic classes I, II, and III; (2) 111,000 farms in
classes IV and V; and (3) 275,000 farms in classes VI
and the part-time and residential categories.l Estimates
of the number of underenumerated farms in 1954 and the
number of underenumerated farms operating in 1955, by

economic class of farm, are given in Table III-A. The

 

1U. 3. Bureau of the Census, U. 3. Census _o_i_‘ Agr -
culture: 125 , Vol. II, Table 11, p. xxxiv.

334

335

distribution of underenumerated farms in 1954 by economic
class of farm.was calculated under the assumption that
the underenumerated farms within each economic class
group (listed above) were distributed proportionately
to all farms, within the respective class groups, counted
by the census. For example, of the class I, II, and III
farms enumerated in the census, 10.4 percent were in
class I, 34.8 percent in class II, and 54.8 in class III.2
The Census Bureau estimated that 33,000 underenumerated
farms would have satisfied the gross sales criteria of
economic classes I, II, or III. The number of under-
enumerated farms in classes I, II, and III were calculated
as 10.4 percent, 34.8 percent, and 54.8 percent, respec-
tively, of 33,000. The same procedure was repeated for
the other economic class groups to derive the estimates
shown in column 1 of Table III-A.

The change in the number of underenumerated farms
from 1954 to 1955 was assumed to be equal to one-fifth
of the change, by economic class of farm, in the number
of farms from 1950 to 1954. The estimated change in the
number of underenumerated farms from 1954 to 1955 was
added to the number of underenumerated in 1954 to obtain
estimates for 1955. The estimated number of underenumer-

ated farm-operator families in 1955 is given in Table III-B.

 

2Ibid., Vol. III, Part 9, on. VIII, Table 4, p. 10.

336

These estimates were computed by adding the estimated
number of underenumerated farms in 1955 and the esti-
mated number of extra partnership families. The per-
centage allowances for the number of partnership fam-
ilies were taken from estimates used in expanding data
from the 1955 Survey of Farmers' Expenditures.
Estimates of the off-farm.and nonfarm income of
underenumerated farm-operators families are given in
Table III-C. In calculating these estimates it was
assumed that the average off-farm and nonfarm income of
underenumerated families was equal to the average income
of families in the same economic class as surveyed in
1955. The aggregate off-farm and nonfarm income of
underenumerated farm-operator families is estimated to
have been approximately $769 million and $698 million,
respectively, in 1955. 'These estimates are equal to
9.6 percent of the aggregate off-farm income of farm-
operator families and 10.1 percent of the aggregate
nonfarm income of farm-operator families as estimated

from the 1955 Survey of Farmers' Expenditures.

337

.m menace moan w masaoo a 4 .Hoo .mlmmsaoo woman a masaoo u m .Hoo .0H .m
.a oases .0 .e0 0 seem .HHH .aos ..0apa some enemasoamo - . 00 .0a .m .
sHmma .m .a0 .0 seem ,HHH .He>_sas sauna .a .HH manna .HH .aos . m a “atssasean a
no noncoo .m.= .nomaoo on» mo smousm .m.D Scam webmasoamo I a .Hoo “oohsom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mwmeeos . 7M00.«a- s0.«- 000.mas sense Has
mms.««a 0m5.m- om.«- n««.0«a amassoeanmm
0mm.0m 0m0.a- 00.«- 00m.«m asap-ssmm
0mm.a0 5H5.s- «a.5- m5«.00 H5 annao
m00.«m mm0.a- .m0.ma s«5.mm > unmao
00m.0m 0am . omaa- m5«.5m >H nnmao
550.ma 5 - s0. - sm0.ma HHH annao
mom.aa mos + mm.m+ ems.aa HH nasao
0mm.m 50« + «0.0+ «ms.m H nnmao
E 5 A 8 3
mama mahsh smash Ho owmpmoonom smoa smash Show «0
UODMH gflm .Hmpg Umfldhmgflfl mmeU OHEOCOOW
-naees n 5a . smma .nstmm unseen
o no 0 homes ma ewes

 

mama 0am smma .nesspm topaz:
nso:HEhop:oo on» new .mspem oopmhoascohocms mo nonasz|u.¢aHHH mqmde

338

.auHHH oases no 4 sasaeo nsaa « essaeo - m .Hoo .auHHH cases
no 4 cESHoo mesa» H mesHoo u N .Hoo .noasuavoomwm amneauam Ho hebnsm mmmH
on» menu some mchcsmxo :H can: nonmaHpmo omnnHHnsmss n H .Hoo “condom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

wmoqm0mv «0Hw« w--- naaaaase Has
smmammH new. «.0 HoHpcouaoom
«a0.am «0a «.0 «saturate
050.H0 m«a «.0 H5 ansao
mas.«a sea _ 5.0 s amass
mm5.0m , mom 5.0 5H nnmao
so«.ma 5«H 5.0 HHH nnmao
s0s.«a H5“ m.s HH nnmao
sam.m m5a m.s H means
any ueHHHaonAmw momssz owophwwnom Show Ho
mmmH auoHHHssm monogamouansm omsHo 0H80coom
oepohoasmonovms no monasz mmmH .moHHHaom mHnmnospmmm mupxm

 

 

mmmH .mopspm oeaHma msocHshoucoo
on» mom .moHHHssH nopmuomouamsu venomoascohoccs Ho noossznu.maHHH mamas

339

.mIHHH oHosa Ho m ossHoo nosHp
m casHoo I s .Hoo .H cssHoo om seem I m .Hoo .mIHHH oHoea «wwwlcssHop
n.QMMIIWI§ 'HIDIIIH ..Hmb .Om .a .oH oHoea HH atom HHH .Ho5 uous»

HsoHH H no eonceo .m .a awesome on» no seemsm .m. D I H .Hoo “season

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

seaa5ae,. mae.H. _ «H5Ime5 «as.H ..HHHase HHs
s5«+05« Hn«.« «HH.«5« «mm.« HmeaeeHnem
0«H.00« 00m.« mmH.H«« 0m5.« asHsIsnsa
«m0.ms was oss.Hn smm H5 aneHo
msm.55 05¢.H was.5m m00.H 5 nano
«m«.0m ss0.H _ m0©.0m m««.H 5H nano
«00.0H «H0 HHH.H« H0H.H HHH nano
445.0H «0m «mm.sH mmH.H HH nasHo
~55.“ H5H.H 50m.0H 055.« H namHo
are any H«H HHV
AeHsHHon Ho AuHsHHon no spam Ho
emceesosav AuHMHHonV mossesonav AuHmHHoav nmsHo OHBomoom
Hmpmr. owmeokm Hmpwfix ewmnoew
OEOOQH g G02 $80065” aha .1 .0

mmaH .oepepm copHsD msoaHsHopmoo on» Hon anoHHHssH
HopsHoQOIshom venomossaoneoms Ho osoomH shoHIHmo spewenwdeI.oIHHH mumda

APPENDIX IV
EXPANSION OF OASI SAMPLE DATA

It has been assumed throughout the present study
that the Continuous WOrk-History Sample represents a
random, l-percent sample of persons reported agricul-
tural self-employment earnings for social security
coverage. There is some evidence to indicate,however,
that the actual sampling ratio is slightly less than
1 percent. ‘

It is reasonable to expect, because of the time
interval between the years being compared and the fixed
cut-off date of the sample, that the Continuous WOrk-
History Sample accounts fer a higher percentage of the
OASI farm-operator labor force in the early years of
the program.

As compared with official estimates of the total
number of self-employment farm operators participating
in the social security program, estimates based on the
assumption of a l-percent sampling ratio in the 1937-59
Continuous Work-History Sample accounted for only 93
percent of all OASI farm operators in 1955, 96 percent
in 1956, and 92 percent in both 1957 and 1958.

340

341

The Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance has
estimated that approximately 2,350,000 persons within
the United States received agricultural self-employment
coverage in 1955. This official estimate exceeds the
number of 1955 OASI farm operators as estimated from the
1937-59 Continuous Work-History Sample by more than
150,000 persons. Since nearly all late reports for the
year 1955 should have been processed before the cut-off
date of the 1937-59 Continuous Work-History Sample, it
is suggested that the actual sampling ratio for OASI
farm operators included in the Continuous WOrk-History
Sample is somewhat less than 1 percent.

Official estimates of the number of persons report-
ing agricultural self-employment earnings for social
security coverage are based, in general, upon a complete
tabulation of individuals filing Schedule F of Internal
Revenue Service Form 1040 plus estimates from sample data
for persons reporting agricultural self-employment earnings
on Schedule C. In addition, an allowance is made for
late returns not yet received. Since approximately 90
percent of all farm operators report farm earnings on
Schedule F, only about 10 percent of the aggregate esti-
mate is based upon sample data. Therefore, while official
estimates of the size of the OASI farm—operator labor

force are subject to sampling variability, the size of

342

the sampling error is relatively small.1 If errors
exist in the officialestimates, they would seem most
likely to be associated with the allowance which is made
for late reports.

In contrast with the method by which official esti-
mates are derived, this study has relied entirely upon
sample data in estimating the number and characteristics
of OASI farm operators. These estimates have been based
on the assumption that the Continuous Work-History Sample
represents a 1-percent sample of all persons with covered
earnings from agricultural self-employment. Since the
sampling ratio may not be exactly 1 percent fer any given
class of workers, estimates of the size of the OASI farm-
operator labor force which are based on the Continuous
Werk-History Sample are also subject to sampling varia-
bility. Thus, estimates of the size of OASI farm-operator
labor force based on sample data are liable to both sam-
pling errors and errors resulting from the cut—off date
of the Continuous Work-History Sample, which precludes
the inclusion of some individuals filing late reports.

The disparity between official estimates and the
size of the 1955 OASI farm-operator labor force as esti-

mated from the 1937-59 Continuous Work-History Sample is

 

lCf. U. 8. Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance,
Farm Coverage Statistics: 1256, December, 1959, pp. 36-37.

343

larger than one would have expected solely because of
sampling variability.2 Although it is possible that
official estimates may have included an excessive allow-
ance for late reports, this does not seem to be the case.
Through February 22, 1957, a total of 1,885,463 farm
operators reporting on Schedule F for 1955 had been
processed for the conterminous United States.3 Assuming
that 10 percent of all farm operators whose reports had
been processed by February 22, 1957, reported on Sched-
ule C, it is estimated that approximately 2,095,000 farm
operators within the conterminous United States had re-
ported agricultural self—employment earnings for social
security credits in 1955 within the first year after 1955
tax returns were due.

The 1937-56 Continuous Work-History Sample included
earnings posted through May 1957; therefore this sample
should have accounted for around 2.1 million farm opera-
tors. Based upon the assumption of a l-percent sampling
ratio, however, the 1937-56 Continuous Work-History.Sam-
ple represented a total of 1,876,100 persons with agri-
cultural self—employment earnings in the year 1955.“
Consequently, it is concluded that the Continuous Work-

History Sample tends to include slightly less than 1 per-

 

2

H

bi

3Ibid., Table 12, p. 25.

“Uel Blank, "OASI Data of the Farm Labor Force"
(unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Department of Agricultural
Economics, Michigan State University, 1960 , p. 83.

Q.

344

cent of the total OASI farm-operator labor force. Esti-
mates of the total number of OASI farm operators working
off the farm which are based on the assumption of a
l-percent sampling ratio may therefore tend to be biased
downward in excess of the number of late reports processed
after the Cut-off date of the Continuous Work-History

Sample.

APPENDIX V

ESTIMATES OF MULTIPLE JOBHOLDING BY OASI FARM OPERATORS

IN 1957

Table

V-A

V—B

V-C

V-D

1957 OASI farm operators with and without
off-farm earnings in 1957, by geographic
region, for the conterminous United States

Estimated rate of multiple jobholding in 1957
for 1957 OASI farm operators, by geographic
region, for the conterminous United States

1957 OASI farm operators with and without
off-farm earnings in 1957, by age, for the
conterminous United States

Estimated rate of multiple jobholding in 1957
for 1957 OASI farm operators, by age, for
the conterminous United States

1957 OASI farm operators with and without off-
farm earnings in 1957, by net earnings from
self-employment in 1957, for the conterminous
United States

Estimated rate of multiple jobholding in 1957
for 1957 OASI farm operators, by not earn-
ings from self employment in 1957, for the
conterminous United States

1957 OASI farm operators with and without off-
farm wage employment in 1957, by geographic
region, for the conterminous United States

Estimated rate of off-farm wage employment in
1957 for 1957 OASI farm operators, by geo-
graphic region, for the conterminous United
States

345

Page

347
348
349
350
351
352

353

354

346
Table

V-I 1957 OASI farm operators with and without off-
farm wage employment in 1957, by age, for the
conterminous United States

V-J Estimated rate of off-farm wage employment in
1957 for 1957 OASI farm operators, by age,
for the conterminous United States

V-K 1957 OASI farm operators with and without off-
farm wage employment in 1957, by net earnings
from self-employment in 1957, for the con-
terminous United States

V-L Estimated rate of off-farm wage employment in
1957 for 1957 OASI farm operators, by net
earnings from self-employment in_1957, for
the conterminous United States

Page

355

356

357

358

347

oQHQENm bopmfimlxhog ”nod—Cfipcoo ”MIFMGH

”oohsom

.bmoH :H show Ho :OHpooOH wchHomoH no: meow

 

 

 

 

 

Iuom mom aqueous op communes poz .mpmu onsmn scam oopoaHpom "opoz
0.00H 00m45H0 0.00H 00H.00¢.H naoamom HHH

1w.0 00m.0m 0.s 00s.«5 . oHHHoom

H.o 00s.5m 5.s 000.5o assesses

0.HH 005.50 0.m 00m.o«H Hotness bosom poo:

H.o 000.mm 0.0 00«.HmH Hespnoo arson some

0.HH 00m.5o «.5 005.5mH oHoasHsa bosom

5.H« 000.00H «.mm 00H.5ms Homoeoo apnoz ones

5.H« 000.smH_ 0.m« 00«.mmm Hsnpeoo eohoz some

5.m 000.«m «.5 000.m0H pnmonphoz
Illlllummpcoohom noneszI omwpcoonom nonasz. mOHmom

 

mwdHchm EHMHIHHO
guH3_nhopmpom.

 

 

mwcHGHmm EHmHIHHo

osoepa

mHopoHom.

 

nopmpm vopHcs msomHsHopmoo on» new .conon oHnmmHmoow he .mmoH
:H nwchumo aHoHIHHo psonuH3.0am anz maepmpomo anew Hmdo meHII.<I> mHmde

'

348

onsom HuopmHmeHoz moossHpcoo wmImeH ”oomsom

.bmoH GH Show me :OHumooH mmeaoaoH poo mcoouom moUsHoxm "opoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

m.o m0m.o~ 0.m« ocoamoo HHH
s.H 5«H.H 0.HH oHHHooa
H .H 00; «am assesses
H.H 35. H 5:: H228 bosom to:
H.H HnmsH a.mm Homoeoo npsom poem
H.H m50.« 5.«H oHoamea spoon
0.0 054.0 ,0.s« Homoeoo apnea some
5.0 ««5.0 0.0« Hmsoeoo aphoz poem
«.H «5m.H 5.Hm pnooaoaoz
opsaapnm one enoHseetonboxmeHeHoeboe oHoHpHsz soHMom
Ho Ho Honesz Ho
Imoanm oaaeasom ”AMI oboe sooemHonm IIIr

 

 

 

 

mopmpm oopHoo
usomHahopaoo on» mom .monoH oHnmomwoew 59 .mqusHomo show

H000 5m0H sou 5m0H pH maHoHoapoH oHoHpHss Ho_opoa eopeernm--.mI5 mamas

.onawm 5HopmHmeH03 nsoanpcoo wthmmH “season

.ows wanhomoa
pom scooped 50% Ho nmmH :H sham Ho :oHpsooH mchnomoH pom enomuom
Hon pnsooos op ooposnme poz .mpmv oHaaso scam voumsHpum “ouoz

 

 

0.00H 00m.5H0 0.00H 000.00s.H Hoooa

 

349

 

 

 

 

0.HH 000e50 0.m« 00H.5swn note one 00
0.0« 000.0«H m.m« 00H.05H 40 I an
H.s« 00s.5sH s.H« 005.aHm an . as
a.m« 005.0sH 5.0H 00a.as« as I am
0.HH 00s.55 0.0H 000.00H an I m«
s.s 00H.5« 0.H 00H.s« m« some:

Illllmmwueoouom, panama ewmwmooaom. I1 Hoossz anmmqull

.IIIIIIummHmmmm anomueeo escapees saomuHeo owe

mpHB ohoumnomo psompH3.mHopsaomo

 

 

 

 

nopmpm uopHcs msocHshepooo on» new .ewo 5b .bmoH aH

mwchmmo aasHIHmo psoans one 29H: uneconomo whom Hmdo hmmHII.oI> mHmda

350

.onamm mnoumHmeHoz nooschcoo mmnhmaH

“season

.ows wchHoQoH poo ecoonom
0am meH :H snow H0 mOHpoooH wsHpHomoH no: accused moosHowm "opoz

 

 

 

 

m.0 e00.0« 0.m« moonstone HHH
0.0 OmHme H.0H uo5o one 00
0.0 H50.a s.a« s0 I an
5.0 Hm0.s H.«m am I as
0.0 ««o.m s.5m as I an
0.H 050.« 0.50 an I m«
«.« «Hm 0.«m H« hoses

oossaonm or» nsoaooesonoo maHeHoaooe .HoHoHsz HammMWHII
no mo Honasz Ho ow<

Hogan unowsspm

 

 

snowiwopmmwpum

 

 

 

eopmpm uopHsD msoeHaHouzoo on» you .ows ho .nHOponomo Show
Hmao 5HOH toe 500H ea wsHsHoaooH oHHHpHss Ho_ooon oopmaaonmII.0I5 mHmHH

351

snowmen mom unmoved op pennants poz

.onasm mhopmHmeHoz moosmecoo mqumaH “oohsom

.bmoH aH pooahonsoImHom Scum monnhmo
no: mepuomoH pom nsompom How to bmoH mH sham no cOHpmooH mmeHomoH poo

.spou onson EoHH oopmaHpmm nepoz

 

 

 

 

 

0.00H 00HI5H0 0.00H 005.00aIH Hosea
0.« 00H.5H 5.H 005.H« I ones so 000.0H
H.H 000.5 0.H 00s.sH 555.5 I 000.0
s.« 005.sH 5.« 005.s5 555.5 I 000.0
m.0 005.Hs 5.5 004.0HH 555.5 I 000..
0.«« 005.55H H.5« 005.555 555.5 I 000.«
5.s0 000.555 0.e0 00m.ms5 000.« seat .5.H
Ilwmmwaoohom noemsz ommnsoohom no as .oHsHHoa

 

umchhom aammIHHo
anz unopenemo

I‘ F

mopspm mouHcs nsomHahepnoo

 

uMdchom ahomIHHo
amonuH3_nnopohomo

 

 

p: oHaamIHHom‘
moan edecnom pox

 

 

 

on» mom .bmmH oH psoahonaoIHHom scam nwchhoe no: 5n .bmmH
nH emsHono sthIHHo prompH3_0:m :pHs eaoponomo seem Hmdo bmoHII.mI> mHm<e

352

.mmmH :H Emma Ho :oHpmooH mchHomoH no: mcomhom nousHoxm

.eHmaom haovamIMHoz msosaHpcoo mmIbmoH

“oonsom

“opoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.0 050.0« 0.5« moonstone HHH
0.« 005. a.ms oboe so 000.0H
«.5 sH« 5.«5 555.5 I 000.0
H.« H5s H.05 555.5 I 000.0
«.H H«5.H s.5« 555.5 I 000..
5.0 005.s H.5« 555.5 I 000.«
s.0 05s.5H 5.5« 000.« more anoH
ovoaHpmm one nooHpo5wompo deoHomoow onHpHaz NnHmHHonq
Ho Ho Ho newshoHQEMIHHem
Hogan ohmccopm Honasz LII spam oopmaHpnm scum nwchHmm poz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

nopspm oeuHaa nsocHshepsoo on»

How .mmmH :H panamoHaaoIHHem scum nonmHmo no: mo .muopmnomo
aamH Hmao 555H noH 555H pH maHsHorooH oHoHoHss Ho open oooaaaoomII.5I5 mummy

 

353

neooaom How pmsoooo op uopmsfivo poz

.onssm muoanmeHoz usosaszoo mmIbmoH "common

.mmmH sH show no mOHpmooH wchHomoH pom

..spmv onasm Bonn oopmsHpom “opoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.00H oomqwnm 0.00H 005.5«oeH HsooH
05w 00H.s« 70.5I 000500 . oHHHoom
5.5 005.5« 5.0 00H.55 aHoossoz
0.0H 005.00 0.0 005.50H Honpaoo arrow poo:
5.5 005.«s 5.0. 000.00H Hoapooo arson some
5.0H 00«.50 0.5 00H.00H oHpaoHo< bosom
5.0« 005.5«H 0.H5 00«.0H5 Hmtoeoo mono: one:
H.«« 000.H0H 0.«« 000.055 Henseoo apnoz poem
«.0 000.55 5.5 000.H«H snooroaoz
lummM:ooHom Honsrzy Immmmmoouom Homasz _ moHMMMIIII
newshonam o 03.

psoaNOHmam owe;

snaHIHH0 o055.nnopmtooo

 

 

ammhImHo psompH3.mHopopoao

HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

 

 

 

nepmpm oopHcs moomHahopmoo on» new .:0Hwou oHnamHmoow hp .hmoH :H
useahonao owe: sthIHHo psomsz 0:0.an3 whopmaomo sham Hmdo hmmHII.cI> mumda

354

.onasm 5mopmHzIxm63 moosmHmmoo mmIbmaH “oomsom

.mmmH mH amen Ho :OHpmooH wchmomem no: assumed nousHowm “opoz

 

 

 

5.0 000.0« 0.«« .aoauma HHH
WwH hNHfiH ¢.HN OHMHomm
¢.H 400.H b.m~ :Hsp::oz
0.H 0e5.H H.5« Honpsoo 05000 0005
0.H H50.H 5.«« Honpaoo 00000 poem
0.H 550.« 0.«« oasesHpa broom
5.0 550.0 0.0« Hampeou rpaoz one;
0.0 mmb.4 m.HN Hmmpsoo npmoz poem
H.H «55.H 5.5« puooapmoz
evmsHpem on» no u:0Hps>momno memshonam «may amen mOHMMMIIII
momma omovcopm Ho moossz

 

 

IMHO Ho oudm vmumEHpum

 

$$

nopopm eopHcm
usomHamopmoo one mom .:0Hwom 0Hmmomwoow 5n .mopomomo smsm

Hmdo bmmH mom bmmH :H pmoahonae ems: smmHImHo Ho opom commaHpnmII.mI> mumde

355

.onasm hmopmHmemos moossHpmoc mmubmoH “oomsom

.ows moHpmomom pom mnommom mom mo bmoH sH amen Ho :oHpoooH wchmomom no:
accomom mom aqueous op oopnsnuw 902 .0900 onmee 80mm commaHpem “epoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.00H 005.050. 0.00H 005I5«0«H H0005
0.0 03.0.. 0.50. 0003.55. not so 50
0.5H 00«.50 5.5« 005.5Hs . 00 I 55
0.5« 005.00H 0.H« 000.055 05 I 50
5.0« 00«.0HH H.5H . 000.05« as I 55
0.5H 005.H0 0.0H 005.05H 05 I 5«
5.5 005.5« 0.H 005.5« 5« noes:
Immmwmwmmwwmwm emmm as omwpommmmmmwmam ”moms Howwmwv
stomImmo 0055 28330 505 H50 000035 20.52000

nopspm uopHop usosHsmopmoo on» men .ewo 59 .mmmH :H
panamonse owes amsmImHo psompHs was ans emopemomo amen Hm<o bmmHII.HI> mHmde

356

.onamm 5moumHmem63_msosmHuooo mmubmmH

“oomsom

.omo wchmomom mo: noonmom
0mm meH :H smsH Ho :OHpmooH mmemomom poo snowmen noosHoxw .0902

 

 

 

 

5.0 H005m~ 0.00 amopemomo HHH
5.0 05H.0 5.5 aoeo one 50
0.0 H50.5 0.5H 00 I 55
5.0 H50.0 0.5« 05 I 50
0.0 ««5.5 H.5« 00 I 55
0.H 055.«. 0.H5 05 I 5«
5.« «H5. 0.50 5« 50005
omsaHpnm one omoHpsmmoebo pmoamonam emsz smmm Hemmowv
mo totem 05000000 Ho monssz Immo 00 0000 ooomsasnm 00«

 

 

 

 

W "

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

meadow uepHsD nsomHsmemcoo on» mom .owo 5n .nmopsmomo amen
H000 555H tom 555H 0H paoaHoHoao own: saoHIHHo me open eooeampamII.0I5 0H00H

357

.onemm 5moumHmem63 nsomchooo mmImeH "eommom

.bmaH nH pcoEMOHQEoI Hem 80mm
owchmeo no: wsHpmomom no: osommom mom mo 500H :H amen Ho cOHpmoOH chmomom
pom snowmen mom pasooom op oopmmnvm poz .opso onsun 30mm ooposHpnm ”opoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.00H 005.050 0.00H 00H.5«05H HopoH
H.H 00H.5 H.« 005.55. odes to 000.0H
0.0 000.« «.H 000.0H 555.5 I 000.0
0.H 00«.5 0.« 005.H0 555.5 I 000.0
5.0 005.5H H.0 00«.«5H 555.5 I 000.0
0.0« 000.05 0.5« 00«.005 555.5 I 000.«
0.H5 005.5«5 0.«0 005.0H0.H 000.« more anoH
ammofifimwasm .11“ as oesaemmmmmfiosm 505M000: oaommmwmfi

aueHIHmo 0053 utopnhooo

 

amomIHHo psomsz emopmmogo

0090mm 0095:: msomHsmopsoe
on» mom .500H :H pcosmonsoIHHom 80mm mmeHmmoo use 59 .505H :H
pcoEHonao ems: smsHImmo pooson 0:0 :sz emopomomo amen Hmdo bmmHII.HI> mHmHa

 

aomH mwchmmm poz

358

msommom 0mm .meH :H smom Ho :oHpmooH mepmomom pom nmommom mocsHoMm

.oHQamm hmOpmHmemOB mfiomchcoo mmIbmmH

“eomsom

.meH 2H psoemonaoImHou aomH nmemmmo no: mchmomom.pom

.0502

 

 

 

5.0 050.0« 0.«« moonstone HHO
0.H 005« «.5H ones so 000.0H
5.« H0« H.«H 555.5 I 000.0
0.H H50 5.0H 555.5 I 000.0
5.0 H«5.H H.5H 555.5 I 000.0
0.0 005.0 0.5H 555.5 I 000.«
0.0 050.5H 5.0« 000.« seen naoH
oasaHmmm on» we 0:0H505m00no pnos50Hmsm owes amok pnowmmmwwmmWHom
momma emacsopm Ho monesz IMHO Ho spam oomeHpmm aomm monnmmm poz

 

 

 

 

nopmpm oopHcs msocHsmopeoo
one mom .500H nH pooahoHaaoIMHom aomm mwsHmmoo no: mo .mmopomomo
atom H000 555H 505 555H 0H neoamoHaeo owe: athIHHo Ho open oopmsmpnmII.HI5 0H005

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bancroft, Gertrude. Multiple Jobholders in December 1222.
U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,_S ecial Labor
Force Repgrts, No. 9, (October 1960;.

Blank, Uel. "OASI Data of the Farm Labor Force." Unpub-
lished Ph.D. thesis, Department of Agricultural
Economics, Michigan State University, 1960.

Cochran William G. Sam lin Techniques. New Yerk:
’John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1953. .

Cummins, William H. "Old-Age and.Survivors Insurance
Records: Derivation of Byproduct Data," Social
Security Bulletin, Vol. 15, No. 7 (July, I952),
pp._IO:14. ‘

Ducoff, Louis J. "Classification of the Agricultural
Population of the United States " Journal of Farm
Economics, Vol. XXXVII, No. 3, August, I955)

pp. ;II-;23e

 

Ellickson, John 0. "Distribution of Farm Incomes,"‘

Agricultural Finance Review, Vol. 23 (April, 1962),
PP- ‘ .

Grove, Ernest W. "Per Capita Income by Economic Class of
Farm, 1949," Agricultural Economics ResearCh,
VOle VIII, NO. 2 (ApriI, lgg6y, ppe SI-;ge

Grove, Ernest W. "Sources and Methods: Income of the'
Farm Population from Nonfarm Sources," March 4,
1955. (Typewritten.)

Halcrow, Harold G. "Opportunities for Off-Farm Employment,"
in Policy £33 Commercial A riculture: Its Rela-
tion to Economic Growth ang StaEiIIt (Pipers sub-
mItteaIby PaneIists AppeEFIng Before the Sub-
committee on Agricultural Policy, Joint Economic
Committee, 85th Congress, lst Session). Washington:
U. 3. Government Printing Office, 1957, pp. 389-401.

 

Halcrow, H. G. "ParteTime Farming," Ch. 8 of U.S. Bureau
of the Census, U.S. Census of Agriculture: 1954,
Vol. III, Part 9.

359

360

Koffsky, Nathan M., and Grove, Ernest W. ”The Current
Income Position of Commercial Farms," in Policy
for Commercial Agriculture: Its Relation to
Economic Gronmh apg_3tabilityx (Papers Submitted
by Panelists Appearing BETore the Subcommittee on
Agricultural Policy, Joint Economic Committee,
85th Congress, lst Session). Washington: U. S.
Government Printing Office, 1957, pp. 79-90.

 

 

Koffsky, Nathan M., and Lear, Jeanne E. The Size Distri-
bution of Farm Operator's Income £3 1§§§. . .
Bureau 3? AgriCulturaIEconomics, September, 1950.

Mandel, B. J. "Development of the Continuous Work-History
Sample in Old-Age and Survivors Insurance "
Social Securipy Bulletin, Vol. 20, No. 3 (March,
, pp. g-Ij and p. 270

Mandel, B. J. "OASI Earnings Statistics and Their Uses,"
Monthlf Labor Review, Vol. 70, No. A (April, 1950),
PPo ‘32;-

Mandel, B. J. "Sampling the Federal Old-Age and Survivors
Records," Journal of the American Statistical

Association, VoI. E3, No. 263 (September,l953),
pp. E62“:; 50

"Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance: Development
of Agricultural Coverage," Social Security Bulletin,
Vol. 21, No. 6 (June, 1958), pp. 3-6. .

Perlman, Jacob. "The Continuous Work-History Sample:' The
First Twelve Years," Social Security Bulletin,

Vol. 12, No. A (April, I95I), pp. 3:10.

Perlman, Jacob, and Mandel, Benjamin. "The Continuous
Work-History Sample Under Old-Age and Survivors
Insurance," Social Security Bulletin, Vol. 7,
No. 2 (February, I9EE), pp. 12-22.

Schiffman, Jacob. Multiple Jobholders i2 December 1960.
U. S. Bureau 0 La or Statistics, Special Labor
Force Reports, No. 18 (October, 196I).

Soth, Lauren K. "Farm Policy for the Sixties," ch. 9 of
Goals for Americans. ‘Administered by The American
Assembly. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
1960, pp. 207-222.

U. S. Agricultural Marketing Service. The Farm Income
Situation. FIS 179 (July, 1960) and FIS
(February, 1961).

 

361

Agricultural Marketing Service. Farm Population:

Egg%mates for 1950-59. AMS- 80 (I9 39), February,

 

Bureau of Old- Age and Survivors Insurance. Farm
Coverage Statistics: 1956. Baltimore: U. S.
Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance,
December, 1959.

Bureau of Old- -Age and Survivors Insurance. Hand-
book of Old-A e andw Survivors Insurance Statis-
tIcs: _IEmponment, Wages, and Insurance Status
of Workers in Covered Employment, 1 . BaItI-
more: U. S. Bureau of Old-Age and wvivors
Insurance, 1961.

Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance. Social
Securit Farm Statistics, lggg-lggg. Baltimore:
U. S. Bureau of_Dld-Age an Surv1vors Insurance,
August, 1961.

 

Bureau of Old-Age and Survivors Insurance. Social
Security Handbook pp Old-Age, Survivors, and
Disabilipy Insurance. Washington: U. S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1960.

Bureau of the Census. Current Po ulation Reports.
Series P- 20, No. 9A (August 2 5 .

Bureau of the Census. Current Population Reports.
Series P-23, No. 5 (May 9, 1958).

Bureau of the Census. Current Po ulation Repom .
Series P- -27, No. 24 (October ,

Bureau of the Census. (Current Po ulation Re on .
Series P- 50, No. 30( arch 3, I95 I) No. 3%
(April, 1957), No. 80 (February, 195s) , No.
(June, 1958), and No. 88 (April, 1959).

Bureau of the Census. Current Po ulation Repom .
Series P- -57, No. 181 (Aug

Bureau of the Census. Current Po ulationo Re orts.
Series P- 60, No. 30 (December, I95 8), E5

(January 5, 1961), and No. 37 (JanuaryN 17, 1962).

Bureau of the Census. Farms and Farm People:
Population, Income, and Housing Characteristics
EifEconomic Class of Farm. Washington: U. 3.
Government Printing —Office, 1952.

 

U.

S.

362

Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract pf the
United States: I961. 82nd ed. Washington:
U. S. Government Printing Office, 1961.

Bureau of the Census. U. 3. Census pf Agriculture:

1251.

. Bureau of the Census. U. S. Census pf ggriculture:

1222-

Bureau of the Census. U. S. Census ppropulation:
1950, Vol. II.

Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Statistics:
1960. Washington: U. S. CovernmentIPrifiting
Office, 1961.

Department of Agriculture. Farm.Po ulation, Employ-

ment and Levels pf Living. Vo . of Major
StatisticaI Series p_ t e U. S. Department of
Agriculture: How The Are Constructed and Used.
Agricultural Handboo No. 118,PSeptemBer, 1957.

 

Department of Agriculture. Gross and Net Farm
Income. Vol. 3 of Major StatIstIEEl-Series 9;
Egg U. S. Department pf Agriculture: How The
Are Constructed and Used. AgricuIturaI_Ban ook
No. II8, DecemBer, 1937.

Economic Research Service. The Farm Incdme Situa-
tion. FIS 187 (July, 1962).

U. S. Internal Revenue Service. Farmer's Tax Guide.

Wolfenden, Hugh H. Population Statistics and Their

Compilation. Rev. ed. Chicago: The University
3? Chicago Press, 195A.

A?“ ’3’
.r. 2322-1
.

r4

Jinx, f
,1.
. .

 

we‘
. . u~"