No description available.

No description available.

The overall objective of the research was to study the job search of Hispanics. This included an assessment of unemployment duration, postunemployment wages, and reported minimum acceptance wages of Hispanics, distinguished by Spanish surname, compared to non-Hispanic whites, referred to as Anglos, to ascertain whether there may be personal or job market characteristics that explain observed differences. The differences that were examined indicate program changes and additional programs to make job search outcomes of Hispanics more like those of Anglos. Three models of job search under conditions of imperfect information were utilized. These models of expected unemployment duration, expected postunemployment wages, and actual minimum acceptance wages were run separately for Hispanics and Anglos and in pooled regressions with an ethnic dummy variable and ethnic interaction variables. Differences in slope and intercept coefficients were tested for statistical significance. The data were collected for the Unemployment Insurance (UI) Benefit Adequacy Study of the Arizona Department of Economic Security. This survey contains information relating to the job search and financial status of 3347 UI beneficiaries in Arizona. This study first focused on 110 Hispanics and 1031 Anglos who found new employment and subsequently on a randomly selected sample of 449 Anglos and 51 Hispanics that included individuals who did not accept reemployment during the survey period as well as those who did. Differences in job search outcomes between Hispanics and Anglos appeared to be caused by personal characteristics, specifically age, education, career choices, and method of coping with necessary and obligated expenses while unemployed. Supplemental programs that enhance the job search effectiveness of Hispanics are in order, including career counseling, programs that keep Hispanics in school longer, educating Hispanics about alternatives for coping with financial burdens while unemployed or programs to ease those burdens, and the adoption by the state of Arizona of a program whereby UI benefits increase with the number of dependents.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The present study examines the assimilation of Mexican Americans in the United States. Their relative non-assimilation into American society was first traced through three historical periods. These periods were Conquest and Conflict, which covered the period between settlement to the 1850's; Partial Accommodation, from the 1850's to the 1930's; and Towards Cultural Pluralism from the 1940's to the present. Although the group relations were very different in each of these periods, Mexican Americans did not Assimilate. In the contemporary period a more detailed analysis was undertaken. Gordon's model of assimilation was tested on a sample of Mexican Americans. This sample was obtained from NC-128 samples in the states of Arizona, California, Colorado, Michigan and Texas. Due to the broad scope of Gordon's model, only four of the many possible hypotheses were tested. These four were: 1) an inverse relationship between Cultural Heterogeneity and Assimilation, 2) a direct relationship between Value Consensus and Assimilation, 3) an inverse relationship between stereotyping and assimilation, and 4) Structural Assimilation is a stronger type of assimilation than in Civic Assimilation. The two dimensions of Cultural Heterogeneity measured here were Spanish and Familism. Both of these were statistically significant in their associations with Structural and Civic Assimilation. The third hypothesis also found some support here, as the two measures of Stereotyping, Possibility of Integration and Perception of Prejudice, were statistically significant in their associations with Structural but not Civic Assimilation. In the fourth hypothesis, Structural Assimilation was also found to be a more significant type of Assimilation than Civic. It had more statistically significant associations with the independent variables than did Civic Assimilation. Also, these associations tended to be of greater strength as determined by the R's. Support could not be found here for the second hypothesis dealing with Value Consensus and either Structural or Civic Assimilation. In a cursory examination of sex differences, Mexican American females were found to be more susceptible to assimilation pressures than were Mexican American males. This was evidenced in the statistically significant differences in the strength of the associations between Structural Assimilation and the independent variables for females.