BACKGROUND: Women in metropolitan areas have lower employment participation and employment rates than men. Although women face multiple challenges in the labor market, those who have a history of substance use and are abstinent may have a greater disadvantage in obtaining viable employment opportunities due to factors associated with substance use. No research to date has examined employment experiences among women in recovery from substance use.
OBJECTIVE: This study examined employment characteristics and experiences of women who had a history of substance use and lived in sober-living environments in urban areas.
METHOD: Data were collected through telephone interviews to sober living homes that were located in 20 urban areas.
RESULTS: Themes identified through thematic analysis included employment challenges, the importance of work to substance abuse recovery, job satisfaction, employment aspirations, and employment support in the sober living home.
CONCLUSION: Employment is important to women in substance abuse recovery, not only as a means for financial support, but also as a life priority. The results highlight how employer scheduling practices, low-level positions, and lack of employment supports impact recovery. Findings provide insight into the need for employment support services, including employer education and flexible policies for women in recovery.
KallebergAL. Precarious work, insecure workers: Employment relations in transition. American Sociological Review2009;74(1):1–22.
2.
JohnsonE, LaheyJ. The resume: Characteristics determining job interviews for middle-aged women seeking entry-level employment. Journal of Career Development2010:0894845310372772.
3.
FriedlandDS, PriceRH. Underemployment: Consequences for the health and well-being of workers. American Journal of Community Psychology2003;32(1-2):33–45.
4.
JensenL, SlackT. Underemployment in America: Measurement and evidence. American Journal of Community Psychology2003;32(1-2):21–31.
5.
WintersJV. Human capital externalities and employment differences across metropolitan areas of the USA. Journal of Economic Geography2012;13(5):799–822.
6.
KallebergAL, ReskinBF, HudsonK. Bad jobs in America: Standard and nonstandard employment relations and job quality in the United States. American Sociological Review2000;65(2):256.
7.
ClarkeM, LewchukW, de WolffA, KingA. ‘This just isn’t sustainable’: Precarious employment, stress and workers’ health. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry2007;30(4-5):311–26.
8.
SoekerS, MatimbaT, MachinguraL, MsimangoH, MoswaaneB, TomS. The challenges that employees who abuse substances experience when returning to work after completion of employee assistance programme (EAP). Work2016;53(3):569–84.
9.
BraunsteinWB, PowellBJ, McGowanJF, ThoresonRW. Employment factors in outpatient recovery of alcoholics: A multivariate study. Addictive Behaviors1983;8(4):345–51.
10.
LaudetAB, WhiteW. What are your priorities right now? Identifying service needs across recovery stages to inform service development. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment2010;38(1):51–9.
11.
BaldwinML, MarcusSC, De SimoneJ. Job loss discrimination and former substance use disorders. Drug and Alcohol Dependence2010;110(1-2):1–7.
12.
HserY-I, EvansE, HuangY-C. Treatment outcomes among women and men methamphetamine abusers in California. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment2005;28(1):77–85.
13.
Residences NAoR. A primer on recovery residences: Frequently asked questions. 2012.
14.
JasonLA, OlsonBD, FerrariJR, Lo SassoAT. Communal housing settings enhance substance abuse recovery. Am J Public Health2006;96(10):1727–9.
15.
JasonLA, DavisMI, FerrariJR. The need for substance abuse after-care: Longitudinal analysis of Oxford House. Addictive Behaviors2007;32(4):803–18.
16.
Belyaev-GlantsmanO, JasonLA, FerrariJR. The relationship of gender and ethnicity to employment among adults residing in communal-living recovery homes. Journal of Groups in Addiction & Recovery2009;4(1-2):92–9.
17.
Census of Population and Housing, 2010 [United States]: Summary File 1. ICPSR Data Holdings: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR); 2012.
18.
CassirerN, ReskinB. High hopes: Organizational position, employment experiences, and Women’s and Men’s promotion aspirations. Work and Occupations2000;27(4):438–63.
19.
HsiehHF. Three Approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research2005;15(9):1277–88.
LambertSJ. Passing the buck: Labor flexibility practices that transfer risk onto hourly workers. Human Relations2008;61(9):1203–27.
22.
BosmansK, HardonkS, De CuyperN, VanroelenC. Explaining the relation between precarious employment and mental well-being. A qualitative study among temporary agency workers. Work2016;53(2):249–64.
23.
BowdenK, GoodmanD. Barriers to employment for drug dependent postpartum women. Work2015;50(3):425–31.
