Which First Job?The whole purpose o

Which First Job?
The whole purpose of the Shavit & Muller (1998) volume, as well as many earlier studies, is
to examine the process by which young people leave school and enter their first jobs. Yet, it is
apparent that those who study this process do not always agree about which job is the first job.
One question that is rather easily dealt with is the question of what constitutes a "job."
Most analysts agree that it should be an activity for which one is paid, that it should be "fulltime"
(say, 30+ hours a week), that it should be held for at least some period of time (say, 3
months), and that it should not be held only during school vacations. The question of what
qualifies as a first job is a more difficult one.
The case of the German apprentices (Allmendinger, 1989a; Muller et al., 1998) has received
the most attention in this regard. Although an apprenticeship might be thought of as a
first job, most scholars view that period of a young person's life as part of his or her education.
So, the first job in most studies of Germany is the first job after completing an apprenticeship.
Assuming that this is a reasonable resolution in the case of Germany, how does one
handle other parallel cases that are not exactly the same? Many young Britons enter first jobs
that make it possible for the employee to take part-time courses at a college of further education
facilitated by released time and even by payment of any costs by the employer. (The
employer may even require the employee to take such courses.) These courses often lead to
increased educational credentials which, in turn, can facilitate promotions.*
In such cases, should the "first job" be the one taken initially or the one made possible by
the higher educational credential? Additionally, if the worker-employer arrangement continues
for several years, at what point does one say the worker entered a first job? Most studies of
Great Britain define the initial job as the "first job." It is apparent, however, that the very
different definitions of the first job in Germany and in Great Britain are one reason scholars
have reported a much stronger association between educational credentials and the occupational
level of the first job in Germany than in Great Britain.
Multiple entries into the labor force, interspersed with periods in school, also occur in
Britain, but they are more common in the United States (Arum & Hout, 1998). In such cases,
should the "first job" be the job obtained on the initial entry into the labor force or the one
obtained after all spells of full-time education have been completed?
If the first full-time job obtained on the initial entry into the American labor force is the
reference point, the credential-occupation association is bound to be much weaker than if the
reference point is the job obtained after the last spell of full-time schooling. Arum & Hout
(1998) used the latter definition of first job. This has the merit of using a single definition for
all cases, but it ignores the possible effects of multiple labor-force entries in some cases.
Although it is possible to criticize any of these ways of defining the first job, they all have
the significant advantage of being clear and precise. That advantage often flows from the
nature of the data sets used in the studies. Detailed longitudinal data sets provide full reports

結果 (繁體中文) 1:

其中第一份工作嗎?整個的 Shavit & 穆勒 (1998) 卷，以及許多早期的研究，目的是要檢查年輕人離開學校，進入他們的第一份工作的過程。然而，它是顯然，那些研究這一過程並不總是同意說哪些工作是第一份工作。是比較容易處理的一個問題是什麼構成的"工作"。多數分析師同意它應該是一個付費的它應該是"全職"活動(比如，30 + 小時一周)，認為它應為至少一段時間 (比如說 3幾個月)，而不應只在學校假期期間舉行。什麼的問題有資格作為第一份工作是一種更加困難。此案的德國學徒 (丁格爾，1989a;收到了穆勒 et al.，1998年)在這方面最關注。雖然學徒可能被認為是第一份工作，大多數學者查看那期的年輕人的生活作為他或她的教育的一部分。所以，在大多數的德國研究的第一份工作是完成學徒訓練後第一份工作。假定這是一項合理的決議，在德國的情況下，一個人如何處理其他並行的情況下，是不完全相同?英國很多年輕人進入第一份工作這使雇員採取兼職課程進修學院發佈時間以及甚至所須繳付的任何費用由雇主促進。(雇主可能甚至需要員工採取這種課程。)這些課程往往會導致增加教育的憑據，這反過來，可以促進 promotions.*在這種情況下，"第一份工作"應採取最初的一個，還是使成為可能的呢更高的教育憑據?此外，如果工人和雇主安排繼續幾年來，什麼時候說工人進入了第一份工作?大多數的研究英國定義的初始工作作為"第一份工作"。很明顯，然而，這很不同的定義，第一份工作在德國和英國等地的一個原因學者有報導學歷和職業之間非常強的聯繫在德國比在英國的第一份工作的水準。多個條目到工作力，穿插期間在學校裡，也發生在英國，但他們是在美國 (阿魯姆 & 豪特，1998年) 較常見。在這種情況下，"第一份工作"應該得到的初始進入工作力市場或一個工作嗎獲得在完成後所有法術的全日制教育嗎?如果初始進入到美國工作力市場上獲得的第一份全職工作是參考點，憑據職業協會必然要比如果弱參考點是全日制學校教育最後一段時間後得到這份工作。阿魯姆 & 豪特(1998 年) 用後者的第一份工作定義。這的優點，使用單一的定義為所有的情況下，但它忽略了多個工作力條目在某些情況下可能會產生影響。雖然它也可以批評任何這些方式的定義第一份工作，他們都有清晰和精確的顯著優勢。優勢往往源于在研究中使用的資料集的性質。詳細的縱向資料集提供完整的報告

結果 (繁體中文) 3:

哪第一份工作？
的維特&穆勒的目的（1998）體積，以及許多早期的研究，是
檢查的年輕人離開學校，進入他們的第一份工作的過程。然而，研究這一過程的人並不總是同意哪一項工作是第一份工作，這是一個很容易處理的問題，這是一個“工作”的問題。多數分析師認為，這應該是一個活動，一個是付費的，它應該是“全職”
（說，一周30小時），它至少要保持一段時間（比如3個月，
），它不應該只在學校假期舉行。什麼
資格作為第一份工作的問題是一個更難的一個。
的德國學徒的案例（阿爾門丁格，1989；Muller et al.，1998）在這方面已收到
最受關注。雖然一個學徒制可能被認為是第一份工作，大多數學者認為，一個年輕人的生活，作為他或她的教育的一部分，所以，在大多數研究中的第一份工作完成後，德國的第一份工作，