M UCH research has been done in recent years examining the differentials in earnings of men and women in particular occupations.' While these studies have contributed considerably to our understanding of this earnings gap, they tend to accept the occupations as given and do not examine the extent to which men and women have a different occupational distribution or question the reasons for it. In some types of jobs this question does not arise at the time the person enters the labor market. For example, when highly specialized skills are required, as is the case for most professions and crafts, only those trained in relevant skills are recruited. But there are many other positions at the entry level for which only general requirements, such as intelligence, literacy, motivation, or, in some cases, physical strength are needed. Theie are also many higher level positions that are filled through upgrading and promotion from the lower levels. In such labor markets employers, and perhaps employees, are likely to have considerable discretion with respect to placement of particular individuals into either a ladder-type or a dead-end job. If gender plays a significant role in this decision, any measure of achievement and rewards that is restricted to initial placement differences within job categories may seriously underestimate the effect of sex-discrimination on subsequent promotions and earnings. A number of investigations have found segmented markets for labor, each marked by differences in wages and career progression.' One study of male workers specifically noted that onthe-job training and type of starting position are crucial because they are the beginning of a dynamic process which continually affects the employee's earnings. The same study showed that starting in the high and middle skill sectors is consistently associated with higher earnings later on.3 In this paper we shall focus on the extent to which men and women are found in different entry jobs and how this affects their later earnings.4 Finding women in entry jobs which do not lead to high earnings in the long run need not be to their disadvantage if their labor force participation tends to be intermittent. It has been argued (e.g., Johnson and Stafford, 1974; Polachek, 1979) that women take jobs that pay relatively well initially but do not provide valuable training leading to great increases in earnings because they expect to drop out of the labor market in any case. This hypothesis would be supported by findings that women are paid more than men with comparable qualifications initially, and hence earn more for the limited period they expect to remain in the labor market, even though other jobs pay better later on. If, on the other hand, men earn as much or more to begin with, we cannot ascribe their higher earnings in later years to their greater willingness to invest in their own training on the job.

Numerous studies have established that part of the very substantial male-female earnings gap is explained by differences in the amount of human capital workers have accumulated. (See, for example, Jacob Mincer and Haim Ofek, 1983.) Institutional factors have also been found to play a role in determining wages (David Gordon et al., 1982). Occupation further helped to explain the remaining gap, but several researchers have shown that introducing dimensions of work authority by taking into account the individual's position in the work hierarchy explains more of the variation in earnings than does occupation (Martha Hill, 1980). Last, two recent studies (Ferber and Spaeth, 1984; Spaeth, 1985) also included control over monetary resources. This variable added substantially to the explanatory power of earnings regressions, even after human capital variables, institutional factors, and several other measures of work authority had been entered. Like the other studies, Ferber and Spaeth also found that reward structures for men and women are quite different, suggesting the possible existence of discrimination. The question whether women may also be at a disadvantage in achieving control over monetary resources was not investigated. When Hill examined the process of achievement of work authority, she found substantial differences between male and female workers. In this paper we examine whether the same is true for attaining financial control. I. Data and Analysis

By estimating the parameters of a production function whose inputs consist of family time and market goods, the authors offer some new microeconomic estimates of the value of production that takes place in the home and also examine the concept of joint production-that is, the degree to which time devoted to home production simultaneously serves as leisure. They find evidence of substantial jointness between home production time and leisure, the degree of which is greater for wives than for husbands; and that both husband and wife possess human capital skills more productive in market work than in home work.