Time Is on My Side

Abstract

In light of high unemployment and declining volunteer rates, this study examines the complex relationship between time, employment, and volunteering. Are unemployed people more likely to volunteer due to newfound time or to obtain some benefit? Alternatively, are the unemployed less likely to volunteer due to their loss of social ties or feelings of insecurity? A framework tying together four competing theories—opportunity cost, exchange, social ties, and attachment—into positive and negative influences is put forth and tested using pooled U.S. data from 2003 to 2013. The duration of unemployment emerges as a key factor, where volunteering decreases over time. Findings suggest organizations should recruit volunteers from untapped and under-represented groups, especially because the supply of volunteers is not endless. For example, unemployed volunteers devote more time but are less likely to receive an invitation to volunteer. Dedicated individuals may not volunteer simply because no one asks them.

Keywords

volunteering recession employment unemployed volunteer recruitment

Unemployment rates rose significantly during the Great Recession, with many Americans unable to find employment during the jobless recovery period and beyond. Meanwhile, the volunteer rate has been falling in recent years. This juxtaposition leads one to wonder: Can unemployed individuals help reverse the decline in volunteering? Do the unemployed become more engaged in their communities with their newfound time by volunteering? Alternatively, are the unemployed unengaged, or do they disengage from society due to their loss of social capital?

Drawing on four relatively competing theories of volunteering across disciplines, I identify the positive and negative effects of unemployment on volunteering to build a framework for examining this relationship. Based on opportunity costs and exchange theory, unemployment should have a positive influence on volunteering. However, based on social ties and attachment theory, unemployment should have a negative influence on volunteering. Unemployed individuals tend to have the lowest volunteer rate when considering employment status. In 2014, 24% of unemployed individuals volunteered, compared with nearly 32% of part-time employees and more than 26% of full-time employees (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2015). Despite these statistics, research on the influence of unemployment on volunteering is largely mixed. This study examines the relationship between unemployment and volunteering in the United States using repeated cross-sectional data of the September Volunteer Supplement of the Current Population Survey from 2003 to 2013 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2003-2013).

The findings have several major implications for research and practice. First, the study bridges opposing theories on volunteering and civic engagement to help explain the complexity of the decision to volunteer. Four competing theories—opportunity cost, social ties, exchange, and attachment—are integrated into positive and negative influences on volunteering among the unemployed, but may help shed light into voluntary behaviors in other contexts. Second, unemployment duration emerges as a critical factor in examining volunteering among the unemployed, where the positive effects outweigh the negative effects initially, but over time, the chances of volunteering decrease. Yet, volunteering can help unemployed individuals develop skills and build social ties, and may even pave the road to employment. Third, findings illustrate who volunteers, how much they volunteer, and how they become involved. Government and nonprofit managers can use these findings to better target potential volunteers and engage untapped populations in volunteering, such as unemployed individuals, who are less likely to be asked to volunteer, but tend to devote more time to volunteering. These findings have practical implications for public and nonprofit managers in recruiting and retaining dedicated volunteers and raise issues for future research. The “Employment Status and Volunteering: Complexity and Contradiction” section reviews the literature on employment and volunteering, and then details the positive and negative effects. The remaining sections present the hypotheses, data and methods, results, and key findings and implications for research and practice.

Employment Status and Volunteering: Complexity and Contradiction

Although there has been a great deal of research on volunteering and employment, findings on the relationship between unemployment and volunteering are largely mixed. Much research shows employment has a positive impact on volunteering (Musick & Wilson, 2008; Rotolo & Wilson, 2003; D. H. Smith, 1994; Sundeen, Garcia, & Raskoff, 2009; Taniguchi, 2006; Wilson, 2000, 2012; Wilson & Musick, 1997b), where unemployed individuals are the least likely to volunteer. Yet, recent studies have found unemployed individuals are both more likely to volunteer and more likely to devote more hours to volunteering than those working (Kinsbergen, Tolsma, & Ruiter, 2013; van Ingen & Dekker, 2011).

Research is divided on how work hours influence volunteer hours. Freeman (1997) finds those with the lowest and highest amount of work hours devote more time to volunteering. This finding supports the claims that volunteer hours may increase with paid work hours (Wuthnow, 1998), and that unemployed individuals devote a greater amount of time to volunteering (Musick & Wilson, 2008). Some find gender may mediate the influence of employment status on time volunteers devote to volunteering. Unemployment may have a negative impact on volunteering and time devoted for men (Taniguchi, 2006), whereas the lack of paid employment may have a positive influence on volunteering and time devoted to volunteering for women (Rotolo & Wilson, 2007). In examinations of both volunteer status and time devoted to volunteering, scholars have yet to develop an understanding of the complex relationship between time, unemployment, and volunteering.

Four theories are relevant in examining this complex relationship. Unemployment may have a positive effect on volunteering based on opportunity costs and exchange theory. From the opportunity costs (or time squeeze) perspective, paid work hours may reduce the amount of time individuals have to devote to volunteering. Unemployed individuals may be more likely to volunteer because the opportunity cost should be lower due to the additional free time available. Based on exchange theory, unemployed individuals will be more likely to volunteer in exchange for job skills or some other personal benefit.

However, unemployment may have a negative effect on volunteering based on social ties and attachment theory. Unemployed individuals may volunteer less due to loss of the social ties that accompany employment. Based on attachment theory, unemployed individuals will feel too detached and insecure to feel as if they could help others.

The Glass Is Half Full: Time to Give and Benefits to Gain

Time plays an important role in the decision to volunteer and the amount of time people devote to volunteering. Economic theories of the volunteer labor supply suggest the opportunity cost is lower for unemployed and retired individuals (Steinberg, 1990). The opportunity cost approach “measures the value of these inputs in terms of the cost to the volunteer of foregoing some other activity” (Salamon, Sokolowski, & Haddock, 2011, p. 226). Based on this perspective, unemployed individuals would be more likely to volunteer and devote more time in light of the extra free time. This is the story so often reported in the media, such as reports of unemployed people searching for volunteer opportunities during the Great Recession (i.e., Bosman, 2009; Martin, 2009; McCartney, 2009). In March of 2009, the New York Times quoted unemployed volunteers saying, “at least we have something to wake up to in the morning, rather than focusing on getting another job in this very difficult economy” and “I just want something to fill my time” (Bosman, 2009). On the surface, one might expect that unemployed individuals have more free time to devote to volunteering, but the relationship among time, employment, and volunteering is not so simple.

Unemployed individuals may experience just as much of a time squeeze as employed individuals during the beginning of their unemployment. The opportunity costs of volunteering may be just as high for unemployed individuals struggling to make ends meet (Putnam, 2000). Free time may also vary by gender. Unemployed women have similar free time to employed women, but unemployed men report less free time than employed men (Mattingly & Bianchi, 2003). Free time available because of not having a paid job is likely to vary by individual, circumstances, and length of unemployment.

However, unemployed individuals may choose to use their extra free time to volunteer in exchange for certain benefits associated with volunteering. The private benefits model and functionalist approach to volunteering illustrate how people may choose to volunteer to obtain skills, contacts, or some other personal benefit (Binder & Freytag, 2013; Hustinx, Cnaan, & Handy, 2010; Meier & Stutzer, 2008; Snyder & Omoto, 2008; Wilson, 2000). Three of the Volunteer Functions Inventory (Clary & Snyder, 1999) items are benefits that may persuade unemployed individuals to volunteer, including understanding to learn or exercise skills, career to gain career-related experience, and protective to reduce negative feelings or address personal problems. Rational-choice theory suggests individuals would weigh the costs and benefits. An individual would only decide to volunteer when it would be advantageous where the benefits outweigh the costs. Volunteering is a social behavior often performed in exchange for personal benefits to the volunteer in line with exchange theory (Homans, 1958). From both economic and sociological perspectives, people may choose to volunteer to obtain private benefits. Unemployed individuals may choose to volunteer to gain a personal benefit such as job skills or networking opportunities.

The Glass Is Half Empty: Loss of Social Ties and Attachment

The relevance of social ties dates back to Durkheim’s (1893/1997) social solidarity. The workplace is a means to bind colleagues together by providing a social resource for employees. Having a job fosters social integration that in turn encourages volunteering. D. H. Smith’s (1994) “dominant status model” highlights employment as a factor for prestige and respect in American society. Individuals with this dominant status—employed, educated, and so on—receive more invitations to volunteer (Freeman, 1997; Musick & Wilson, 2008; Taniguchi, 2006; Wilson & Musick, 1997a). In addition to increasing the chances of being recruited to volunteer, social incentives encourage volunteering, where an individual is more likely to give up his or her time when the person asking has a close relationship with the potential volunteer (Bekkers, 2010).

Social capital may be bonding, ties that people build around homogeneity, or bridging, ties that connect diverse groups (Putnam, 2000). For example, religious involvement creates bonding social capital, where the pressure of religious networks increases the chances of successful volunteer recruitment (Merino, 2013; Paik & Navarre-Jackson, 2011). Although bonding social capital increases successful recruitment, social tie diversity (or bridging social capital) increases volunteering among individuals not asked to volunteer (Paik & Navarre-Jackson, 2011). However, unemployment tends to encourage social isolation (Musick & Wilson, 2008), where unemployed individuals may lose both bridging and bonding social ties.

Unemployed individuals no longer see colleagues at work so may lose touch outside the workplace. Daly and Silver (2008) categorize long-term unemployment as a type of social exclusion due to the low quantities of organizational membership, lack of trust, and comparatively fewer social networks. The lack of social ties may explain why research finds unemployed individuals to have lower civic engagement, including political participation (Berry, 2005; Blanchard & Matthews, 2006; Lim & Sander, 2013) and volunteering (Musick & Wilson, 2008; Wilson, 2000, 2012).

An individual’s social experiences lead to differences in attachment security, the sense that people will be there for you especially in times of need (Bowlby, 1969). Wilson (2012) suggests attachment theory can apply to volunteering, where people will be more likely to volunteer or deal with the needs and suffering of others if they are self-confident. Individuals who are not secure with themselves may feel they are incapable of helping others. Although little research has applied attachment theory to volunteer research (Wilson, 2012), scholars have begun to examine the relationship between attachment security and volunteering, because it provides a foundation for compassion and caregiving (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2005). Attachment avoidance is associated with engaging in fewer volunteer activities, devoting less time, and being less motivated by altruistic values (Gillath et al., 2005), and those with attachment insecurities are less likely to volunteer (Erez, Mikulincer, van Ijzendoorn, & Kroonenberg, 2008).

Attachment theory can help explain the confusing and common finding of low volunteer rates among the unemployed. Although unemployed individuals may have more free time available than their employed counterparts, they may feel attachment insecurity due to their recent social experience of losing a job or facing difficulties obtaining a job. Emotional stability has a positive impact on volunteering (Bekkers, 2005). For the unemployed, they may be weary of reaching out to help others if they are coping with their own troubles of finding a job. Attachment avoidance and insecurity are only more likely to develop for long-term unemployed individuals as feelings of self-assurance may decrease over the job search period.

Hypotheses

This study examines three hypotheses and suggests that the positive and negative effects may depend on length of unemployment. First, this study will examine how the positive effects of unemployment on volunteering—the additional time and search for benefits—compare with the negative effects of unemployment on volunteering—the loss of social ties and attachment. Do the negatives outweigh the positives, where unemployed individuals are less likely to volunteer? Some find employment has a positive impact on volunteering (Musick & Wilson, 2008; Rotolo & Wilson, 2003; D. H. Smith, 1994; Sundeen et al., 2009; Taniguchi, 2006; Wilson, 2000, 2012; Wilson & Musick, 1997b), suggesting unemployed individuals may be less likely to volunteer due to the lack of social ties and attachment. However, others (Kinsbergen et al., 2013; van Ingen & Dekker, 2011) find unemployed individuals tend to volunteer more, suggesting the positive effects may outweigh the negative effects. This study takes the glass half-full perspective to hypothesize:

Hypothesis 1a: Unemployed individuals are more likely to volunteer than full-time employees.

Contributing to the debate on the amount of time volunteers devote, how do the positive and negative influences of being unemployed influence time devoted to volunteering? The relationship between work and time devoted to volunteering may be U-shaped with those at the extremes devoting the most hours (Freeman, 1997), may vary by gender (Rotolo & Wilson, 2007; Taniguchi, 2006), or may indicate the unemployed devote more time than those working (Kinsbergen et al., 2013; Musick & Wilson, 2008; van Ingen & Dekker, 2011). Once unemployed individuals decide to volunteer, they have more free time available to contribute and may volunteer more in exchange for the benefits of volunteering.

Hypothesis 1b: Unemployed volunteers devote more hours than full-time employees.

Second, I examine the pathways to volunteering to determine whether unemployed individuals are less likely to receive invitations to volunteer, indicating volunteers become involved through social ties. Employment as a source of social ties tends to dominate the literature on explaining the complex relationship between time, volunteering, and unemployment (Musick & Wilson, 2008; Putnam, 2000; D. H. Smith, 1994; Taniguchi, 2006; Wilson & Musick, 1997a). Is this simply because no one asks unemployed individuals to volunteer? If that is the case, could unemployed individuals be a potentially untapped resource for organizations seeking volunteers? In turn, could these individuals become engaged in volunteering to obtain some of the personal benefits that are associated with volunteering?

Hypothesis 2: Unemployed individuals are less likely to be asked than full-time employees.

Last, I examine the decision to volunteer among the unemployed to determine how the length of unemployment influences volunteering. Are the benefits of volunteering more appealing at first, but then the loss of social ties and attachment set in over time? At the beginning of an unemployment period, people will likely have the same social connections they had prior to unemployment that are critical to being asked to volunteer (Musick & Wilson, 2008; D. H. Smith, 1994; Taniguchi, 2006), but may not have much free time as they will be actively searching for a job and potentially dealing with a job loss transition. With length of unemployment, people will likely have more free time for volunteering as they have dealt with the initial implications of job loss or initial hurdles of beginning a job search. Unfortunately, unemployed individuals may lose touch with former co-workers over time. At the beginning of a job search period, unemployed individuals may look to volunteer opportunities to avoid gaps in their work history, remain engaged or socially connected, obtain or use job-relevant skills, or gain some other personal benefit (Clary & Snyder, 1999). However, as the unemployment period lengthens, people may become increasingly frustrated and socially isolated (Daly & Silver, 2008). Based on attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969), the likelihood of volunteering plummets because the long-term unemployed may feel unable to help others in light of their current personal situation.

Hypothesis 3: The odds of volunteering will decrease with the length of unemployment.

Method

Data, Sample, and Employment Status

I use pooled cross-sectional data from 2003 to 2013 of the Current Population Survey (CPS) to test the framework of positive and negative influences on volunteering (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2003-2013). The CPS is a monthly survey using a probability sample of about 60,000 households (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014) and is the main source of U.S. labor force statistics. For 2013, the nonresponse rate was 10.2% for households in the basic CPS and 15.2% for individuals in the Volunteer Supplement (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2013).

The sample consists of 749,627 respondents from the pooled sample of the basic CPS and Volunteer Supplements. Because the key independent variable is employment status, the analyses exclude individuals who are not in the labor force due to a disability or some other reason and individuals under the age of 25. The sample consists of 29,818 unemployed individuals, 171,926 retired individuals, 83,939 part-time employees, and 463,944 full-time employees. The analyses use indicator variables for unemployed, retired, and part-time employees, compared with full-time employees.

Dependent Variables

The analysis utilizes three dependent variables. First, volunteer status is an indicator for whether an individual volunteered through or for a formal organization over the past year. Second, volunteer hours are the annual number of hours volunteers devoted to the main organization for which he or she volunteered. Third, pathway to volunteering is the manner in which volunteers became involved. Respondents answered the inquiry: “Now I’d like to ask you how you first became a volunteer for (the organization most time spent). Did you approach the organization yourself, were you asked by someone, or did you become involved in some other way¹?” Because a majority of volunteers first became a volunteer by either approaching the organization himself or herself or by being asked by someone, this study focuses on these two routes to volunteering, excluding those who became involved some other way. Table 1 shows the distribution of the dependent variables by employment status.

Table 1.

Dependent Variables by Employment Status.

				How first became involved
	Volunteer rate	Sample	Average time volunteers devote	Approached the organization	Was asked	Other way
Unemployed	24.8%	29,818	155 hr	43.3%	42.6%	14.1%
Retired	24.3%	171,926	202 hr	45.6%	41.6%	12.8%
Part-Time	37.7%	83,939	141 hr	42.7%	44.3%	13.0%
Full-Time	29.5%	463,944	115 hr	40.9%	45.8%	13.3%
Total	749,627 (all)		221,318	225,997

Note. t tests indicate differences between unemployed and all other groups are statistically significant at the p < .001.

Independent Variables

The analysis examining the relationship between volunteering and unemployment also includes the duration of unemployment and reason for unemployment. The duration of unemployment is the length of time individuals are unemployed and continuously looking for work, measured in full weeks. This ranges from 1 week to 2½ years with the average length of unemployment being 30 weeks. The reasons for unemployment consist of job leavers, job losers, new job entrants, and job reentrants (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2013).

Because the type of organization may influence a volunteer’s initial involvement with the organization and the amount of time dedicated to volunteering, the analysis on the subsample of volunteers includes indicator variables for the type of organization.² In addition to the independent variables discussed, the analyses include several control variables, detailed below, to isolate the impact of unemployment on volunteering.

Gender

Women tend to volunteer more (Musick & Wilson, 2008; Wilson & Musick, 1997b) and devote more time to volunteering than men (Taniguchi, 2006). Women may feel a greater obligation to help others (Musick & Wilson, 2008), whereas men may see volunteering as secondary to their work in paid employment because of “the gender norm that men should go out to work for pay” (Taniguchi, 2006, p. 97). An indicator variable for females with males as the comparison group is included for gender.

Age

Age is measured in years, including a squared term, because most studies on volunteering find a curvilinear inverted “U-shaped” relationship between age and volunteering (Musick & Wilson, 2008). Younger people, burdened by school, work, and family obligations, and the elderly, who may lose social ties of employment in retirement, tend to have more barriers to volunteering and community involvement than those in middle age (Torgerson & Edwards, 2013; Wilson, 2000). Among young people, the unemployed may volunteer more than the employed (Apinunmahakul, Barham, & Devlin, 2009), which may be due to fewer obligations and more free time.

Marital status

Married people are more likely to volunteer (Musick & Wilson, 2008; Sundeen, 1990). A spouse is more likely to volunteer if his or her partner does (Freeman, 1997). An indicator variable for individuals who are married with their spouse present, compared with those whose spouse is absent or who are single, is included for marital status.

Presence of children

Parents are more likely to volunteer if they have a child or children in their home (Musick & Wilson, 2008; Wuthnow, 1998). The presence of children tend to increase volunteering among the employed, but this may not be the case for the unemployed (Apinunmahakul et al., 2009). The analyses include an indicator for whether the respondent’s own children under the age of 18 are present in the household.

Race/ethnicity

Some studies find racial and ethnic minorities are less likely to volunteer through or for formal organizations (Foster-Bay, 2008; Sundeen, 1992; Wilson & Musick, 1997b). However, this may be due to other factors in line with human capital theory (Wilson, 2000) and the dominant status model (Lemon, Palisi, & Jacobson, 1972; D. H. Smith, 1994), as race is also found to have no influence on volunteering when taking other factors into account (Taniguchi, 2012). Studies have also found relationships between race and volunteering for the amount of time devoted to volunteering (Musick & Wilson, 2008) and for informal volunteering (Piatak, 2015; Williams, 2004). For example, African Americans tend to be less likely to formally volunteer, but may devote more time to formal volunteering (Musick & Wilson, 2008; Piatak, 2015). Indicator variables for White, Black, Asian, and Hispanic are included, compared with multi-racial and Other.³

Education

Education may be the “most important ‘asset’ as far as volunteering is concerned” (Wilson, 2012, p. 185). Those with lower levels of education tend to volunteer less (Gesthuizen & Scheepers, 2012; D. H. Smith, 1994; Wilson, 2000). College graduates are less likely to perceive barriers to involvement, whereas high school graduates are more likely to report barriers, such as transportation (Torgerson & Edwards, 2013). Resources such as education and income matter. For example, Rotolo, Wilson, and Dietz (2015) find those affected by economic crisis respond pro-socially among those most affected, but only for those with the resources and stake to do so—homeowners. The analyses include the following indicator variables for level of education: high school graduate, some college or associates degree, college graduate, and graduate or advanced degree, compared with those with less than a high school education.

State

State fixed effects are included in the analyses to control for any location differences in volunteering. States with more homogeneous populations tend to have higher rates of volunteering (Lipford & Yandle, 2009; Rotolo & Wilson, 2012), as do those with higher concentrations of nonprofit and religious organizations (Rotolo & Wilson, 2012).

Year

Because the data are pooled cross-sections to take into account changes over time, the analyses include indicators for each survey year, ranging from 2003 to 2013.

Models

The analyses use four models to test the hypotheses, each weighted to reflect the U.S. population. First, a logistic regression model examines how employment influences whether individuals decide to volunteer. Second, a negative binomial regression model examines how employment influences the amount of time volunteers dedicate to volunteering because it is the count number of hours volunteers devoted to volunteering over the past year.⁴ The purpose of this model is to examine how time devoted to volunteering varies among volunteers after they have made the decision to volunteer. Third, a logistic regression model examines whether volunteers engaged by their own initiative, approaching the organization himself or herself, or through social ties, receiving an invitation to volunteer from someone. Last, a logistic regression model examines the decision to volunteer among unemployed individuals to see how length of unemployment influences volunteering.

Findings

Table 1 shows the average volunteer rate, the average time volunteers devote to volunteering, and the ways volunteers first became involved by employment status. Part-time employees have the highest volunteer rate, followed by full-time employees, unemployed individuals, and retired individuals. Interestingly, employment status has nearly the opposite relationship with the amount of time volunteers devote to volunteering. Retired individuals devote the most time, followed by unemployed individuals, part-time employees, and full-time employees. In terms of how volunteers first engaged with the organization, full-time employees have the highest rate of receiving an invitation to volunteer from someone and retired individuals have the highest rate of approaching the organization themselves.

Figure 1 above illustrates volunteer rates by employment status from 2003 to 2013. As the graph shows, part-time employees have the highest volunteer rates followed by full-time employees across the time span of the pooled sample. The figure also illustrates how volunteering has decreased over time, where the volunteer rate for the entire sample was highest in 2005 at 26.7% and lowest in 2013 at 23.6%.

Figure 1.

Volunteer rates by employment status.

Trends over time are especially relevant in light of the Great Recession, where the United States saw mass layoffs and high levels of unemployment with the unemployment rate peaking at 10% in October 2009 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2012). Although government sources reported the end of the recession in June 2009 (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2010), the labor market remains in a recovery period. In September 2013, the month of the most recent Volunteer Supplement of the CPS, the unemployment rate was 7.2% (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2013). At the same time, the United States had the lowest volunteer rate since the Bureau of Labor Statistics began collecting the data in 2002 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2015). Figure 2 shows trends in volunteering and unemployment from 2003 to 2013.

Figure 2.

Trends in volunteering and unemployment, 2003-2013.

Decision to Volunteer and Time Volunteers Devote

The logistic regression results, shown in Model 1 in Table 2, examine the relationship between employment status and the decision to volunteer. Before adding any control variables, unemployed individuals are significantly less likely to volunteer, but after controlling for year, state, and sociodemographics, unemployed individuals are more likely to volunteer than full-time employees.⁵ Because this finding may not be substantively significant due to the small effect size, future research should examine factors that mediate the relationship between unemployment and the decision to volunteer. In line with the hypothesized relationship, unemployed individuals appear more likely to volunteer than full-time employees, but the relationship between unemployment status and volunteering is much more complex and worthy of further exploration. In support of prior research, part-time employees are more likely to volunteer than full-time employees. The negative binomial results in Model 2 examine the relationship between employment status and the amount of time volunteers devote to volunteering. As hypothesized, unemployed volunteers devote more time to volunteering than full-time employees, as do part-time and retired employees.

Table 2.

Decision to Volunteer and Time Volunteers Devote by Employment Status.

	Model 1: Volunteer status				Model 2: Volunteer hours
	Odds ratio	Robust SE	Odds ratio	Robust SE	Incidence rate ratio	Robust SE
Employment status
Unemployed	0.788***	.012	1.06***	.017	1.39***	.037
Retired	0.770***	.006	1.00	.012	1.54***	.026
Part-time Employee	1.44***	.013	1.39***	.014	1.26***	.018
Sociodemographics
Female			1.46***	.009	0.89***	.009
Age			1.07***	.002	1.02***	.002
Age²			0.99***	.000	0.99***	.000
Child present			1.70***	.013	1.00	.012
Hispanic			0.50***	.007	1.02	.022
White			1.04	.023	0.96	.030
Black			0.82***	.020	1.17***	.042
Asian			0.40***	.011	0.78***	.035
Married			1.37***	.010	1.02	.011
High school graduate			1.04**	.011	0.97	.018
Some college/associates			1.78***	.020	1.02	.018
College graduate			2.88***	.032	1.03	.018
Graduate degree			3.96***	.049	1.11***	.020
Year indicators	Not included		Included		Included
State fixed effects	Not included		Included		Included
Type of organization	Not included		Not included		Included
Number of observations	749,627 (All)		749,627 (All)		221,318 (Volunteers)

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

The sociodemographic variables have similar results to prior research concerning the decision to volunteer. Women are more likely to volunteer than men. Age has a curvilinear relationship to volunteering that resembles an inverse “U” shape where people are least likely to volunteer in mid-life. Married individuals and those with children are more likely to volunteer. Less likely to volunteer were Hispanic Americans, African Americans, and Asian Americans. Education, often touted as the most important resource for volunteering, has a significant influence on whether individuals volunteer. People with advanced degrees have nearly 4 times higher the odds of volunteering than people with less than a high school diploma.

Model 2 illustrates how factors that influence the decision to volunteer are quite different from the factors that influence amount of time volunteers devote. Interestingly, female volunteers devote fewer hours to volunteering than male volunteers although women consistently volunteer at higher rates than men. Similarly, African American volunteers devote more time to volunteering despite the tendency to have lower formal volunteering rates. Education still seems to be an important resource, but only those with a graduate degree or higher dedicate significantly more time to volunteering than those with less than a high school education. These results suggest that some groups, such as men and African Americans, are dedicated volunteers, willing to contribute a significant amount of time, but may require a different recruitment mechanism. Some groups, such as females, may be more likely to accede to social pressures to volunteer and so may commit to volunteering initially, but may not return or devote much time.

These findings favor the positive effects of unemployment on volunteering. The potential benefits and lower opportunity costs of volunteering matter, at least for unemployed individuals as the findings show they are both more likely to volunteer and to devote more hours compared with full-time employees.

Pathways to Volunteering: Importance of Being Asked

Although the findings above suggest time is an important factor in the decision to volunteer and the amount of time volunteers may devote, the analysis examining pathways to volunteering tests the influence of social ties. How do volunteers first become involved in volunteering? The logistic regression results in Table 3 below show the odds of receiving an invitation to volunteer compared with individuals approaching the organization themselves among the subsample of volunteers.

Table 3.

First Became a Volunteer Because He or She Was Asked Compared with Approaching the Organization Himself or Herself.

	Odds ratio	Robust SE
Employment status
Unemployed	0.90***	.038
Retired	0.81***	.030
Part-time employee	0.93***	.023
Sociodemographics
Female	0.96**	.015
Age	0.99	.004
Age²	1.00*	.000
Child present	1.13	.023
Hispanic	0.92**	.036
White	0.91*	.061
Black	0.85**	.061
Asian	0.79***	.072
Married	1.05***	.020
High school graduate	1.05*	.030
Some college/associates	1.01	.030
College graduate	0.98	.031
Graduate degree	0.96*	.032
Year indicators	Included
State fixed effects	Included
Type of organization	Included
Number of observations	195,580

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Unemployed individuals are less likely to be asked to volunteer than individuals who are employed full-time. Retired and part-time employees are also less likely to receive an invitation to volunteer compared with becoming involved by approaching the organization. Part-time employees, retired individuals, and unemployed individuals may take a more proactive route to volunteering than full-time employees. Conversely, full-time employees may just receive invitations to volunteer more often.

In terms of the sociodemographic variables, female volunteers are less likely to become involved in volunteering by being asked compared with approaching the organization. Hispanic, White, Black, and Asian Americans are less likely to receive an invitation to volunteer than to approach the organization to become involved. For education, high school graduates are more likely to receive an invitation to volunteer, whereas individuals with a graduate degree are more likely to approach the organization. Examining how volunteers first became involved helps shed light on the volunteer rates and time devoted by certain groups. Learning how various groups tend to become engaged in volunteering, coupled with their tendency to volunteer and time they devote, also gives government and nonprofit organizations insights into potentially untapped resources of volunteers.

When Do Unemployed Individuals Volunteer?

So far, unemployed individuals are more likely to volunteer and devote a greater amount of time to volunteering than full-time employees, but are less likely to be asked. This leads to the following question: What factors influence volunteering behavior among unemployed individuals? This model examines when unemployed individuals volunteer. Table 4 shows the logistic regression results of the relationship between duration of unemployment and volunteering among a subsample of unemployed individuals.

Table 4.

Decision to Volunteer Among Unemployed Individuals.

	Volunteer status
	Odds ratio	Robust SE
Length of unemployment
Unemployment duration	0.99**	.002
Unemployment duration²	1.00**	.000
Type of unemployment
Job loser	0.93	.036
Job reentrant	0.95	.057
Job leaver	0.87*	.051
Sociodemographics
Female	1.75***	.058
Age	1.03***	.009
Age²	0.99	.000
Child present	1.96***	.073
Hispanic	0.64***	.035
White	0.88	.078
Black	0.80*	.078
Asian	0.41***	.053
Married	1.27***	.044
High school graduate	1.07	.054
Some college/associates	2.06***	.105
College graduate	3.40***	.189
Graduate degree	3.97***	.279
Year indicators	Included
State fixed effects	Included
Number of observations	29,818 (Unemployed)

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

The predicted probabilities shown in Table 5 illustrate that the chances of volunteering decrease with the length of unemployment, as hypothesized. Individuals who are unemployed for a short amount of time, such as a week or month, may be more likely to volunteer to avoid gaps in their work history, to obtain skills, or to network, illustrating support for exchange theory. Those with shorter unemployment durations may also volunteer to make the best use of their newfound free time. Once individuals have been unemployed for a while, they become less likely to volunteer as they may start to feel as if they have little to contribute to others, in line with attachment theory, or they may begin to lose social ties. Unemployed individuals may also become more selective over time, both in weighing the costs and benefits of volunteering and choosing volunteer opportunities.

Table 5.

Predicted Probability of Volunteering by Unemployment Duration.

Unemployment duration	Predicted probability (SE)
1 week	.251 (.010)***
4 weeks (1 month)	.248 (.009)***
24 weeks (6 months)	.228 (.004)***
48 weeks (1 year)	.205 (.006)***
72 weeks (1.5 years)	.184 (.011)***
96 weeks (2 years)	.164 (.015)***
120 weeks (2.5 years)	.147 (.019)***

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Job leavers are less likely to volunteer than new entrants, individuals who are unemployed because they just recently began looking for full-time employment. People who voluntarily leave their jobs are likely in a transition period with little time to devote to volunteering. As for the control variables, volunteering patterns for the population at large mirror those for the unemployed subsample, where being female, having a child, having a spouse, and having higher levels of education have a positive impact on the odds an individual will volunteer.

Recently, unemployed individuals are more likely to volunteer, perhaps to receive some personal benefit or people who volunteer may re-enter the workforce more quickly. However, people may become detached and less likely to volunteer with the length of unemployment.

Discussion and Implications

Although employment tends to be an important factor for volunteering, unemployed individuals were more likely both to volunteer and to devote more hours to volunteering than full-time employees. These findings support opportunity costs and exchange theory where people without paid employment may have more time to contribute or may volunteer in exchange for personal benefits. Unemployed individuals have lower or no economic costs for time devoted to volunteering besides giving up some of their free time. In addition, unemployed volunteers tend to devote more hours than full-time employees, perhaps reflecting the unemployed having more free time and/or searching for opportunities to help others, build skills, or gain experience.

However, social ties are an important factor for volunteering. Unemployed individuals are significantly less likely to receive invitations to volunteer. In examining patterns of volunteering for those who are unemployed, duration of unemployment emerges as a key factor influencing decisions to volunteer. The chances of unemployed individuals volunteering decrease with length of unemployment, which indicates support for the dark side of unemployment—loss of social ties and attachment insecurity—that seems to become more predominate over time.

A conceptual framework to examine the relationship between unemployment and volunteering, combining four theories of volunteering—opportunity cost, exchange, social ties, and attachment—into positive and negative perspectives is put forth and tested. Length of unemployment emerges as a critical factor in influencing volunteering among unemployed individuals. In support of exchange theory (Homans, 1958) and volunteer research on the personal benefits of volunteering (Binder & Freytag, 2013; Clary & Snyder, 1999; Hustinx et al., 2010; Meier & Stutzer, 2008; Snyder & Omoto, 2008; Wilson, 2000), newly unemployed individuals likely volunteer for benefits, such as job skills or contacts. In support of attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969) and research on the importance of emotional security and stability for volunteering (Bekkers, 2005; Erez et al., 2008; Gillath et al., 2005; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2005), people who have been jobless for a while may not volunteer if they begin to feel insecure and feel unable to help others.

Future research may find this framework helpful in taking a closer look at the voluntary behavior of other groups of individuals. Research on volunteering is interdisciplinary, drawing on theories from psychology, sociology, political science, and economics. In such interdisciplinary fields of study, there is a need for theory building, testing, and bridging. I hope that researchers find the framework presented here useful in future work to connect theories from different disciplines to examine volunteering. In addition, the framework may help to bridge the competing theories on volunteering—opportunity cost, exchange, social ties, and attachment—for other subgroups and in other settings.

Volunteering is helpful for recently displaced workers and recent graduates seeking opportunities to obtain, practice, or donate their skills, and to fill gaps in their resumes while seeking paid employment. Civic activities, such as volunteering, can help compensate for the loss of individual resources (Stadelmann-Steffen, 2011). These social ties are valuable for the unemployed, where the probability of re-employment increases with social capital (Winkelmann, 2006). Although volunteering may be a means for the long-term unemployed to re-engage with the community, build social ties, and regain self-confidence, this study finds that volunteering becomes more difficult with length of unemployment or people who do not volunteer may face longer periods of unemployment. Regardless, volunteering can be a resource to the unemployed.

Can Volunteering Be a Road to Employment?

In light of all the benefits of volunteering, can it be a road to employment? Volunteering may “serve as bridge positions to paid employment, either in the organizations in which they volunteer—in which case their tenure as an unpaid volunteer amounts to a probationary period—or in other work settings” (V. Smith, 2010, p. 292). Among the unemployed, Spera, Ghertner, Nerino, and DiThommaso (2013) find volunteers are more likely to find employment the following year. Individuals who are unemployed but volunteer may be more marketable, especially if volunteering focuses on job skills (Kamerāde & Paine, 2014). An experiment where employers judged resumes showed that candidates who volunteered would be more likely to be interviewed and hired than those without volunteer experience, regardless of whether the volunteer work was career-related (Shore & Tashchian, 2013). Therefore, recent research in the United States shows that volunteering may improve employability and improve the odds of individuals finding employment.

Volunteer Recruitment and Retention

Because being asked is the most popular means to become engaged in volunteering, perhaps organizations need to reach out to groups often excluded from invitations to volunteer. This would address the social equity critique of volunteering, which, drawing on the dominant status model, suggests volunteering may perpetuate power imbalances (Hustinx et al., 2010). For example, African American volunteers tend to devote more time to organizations and become involved proactively, approaching the organization themselves, but have lower volunteer rates overall. Especially in light of the trend toward episodic volunteering (Brudney & Gazley, 2006) and calls to shift the conversation from recruitment to retention (Brudney & Meijs, 2009), government and nonprofit organizations should consider targeting non-volunteers simply because no one asks them to volunteer. Potentially untapped groups, based on the amount of time current volunteers donate, include unemployed individuals, retired individuals, part-time employees, males, African Americans, and those with an advanced education. All of these groups tend to devote more hours to volunteering, but are less likely to receive invitations to volunteer. Because there is not an endless supply of volunteers, managers may want to reach out to groups of people who tend to devote more time to volunteering once they become involved but may be less likely to be asked. These untapped volunteers could end up being some of the most dedicated. Public and nonprofit organizations can even test out jobless volunteers as potential employees.

These findings suggest that the 7.9 million unemployed Americans (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016) use their time to become more engaged in their communities by volunteering, as opposed to disengaging due to the loss of social capital. These results should encourage the growing number of unemployed Americans to utilize their time in between jobs to volunteer. Volunteering not only helps those in need and nonprofit organizations that are struggling following the Great Recession but also benefits the volunteers by building skills, offering resume-building experience, creating networking opportunities, and boosting confidence that could be advantageous in their job search.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author Biography

Jaclyn S. Piatak is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science and Public Administration at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Her research focuses on nonprofit and public management and has appeared in Administration & Society, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, and her co-authored book, Occupational Labor Shortages: Concepts, Causes, Consequences, and Cures.

References

Apinunmahakul

Barham

Devlin

R. A.

(2009). Charitable giving, volunteering, and the paid labor market. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38, 77-94.

Bekkers

(2005). Participation in voluntary associations: Resources, personality, or both? Political Psychology, 26, 439-454.

Bekkers

(2010). Who gives what and when? A scenario study of intentions to give time and money. Social Science Research, 39, 369-381.

Berry

J. M.

(2005). Nonprofits and civic engagement. Public Administration Review, 65, 568-578.

Binder

Freytag

(2013). Volunteering, subjective well-being and public policy. Journal of Economic Psychology, 34, 97-119.

Blanchard

Matthews

T. L.

(2006). The configuration of local economic power and civic participation in the global economy. Social Forces, 84, 2241-2257.

Bosman

(2009, March 15). From ranks of jobless, a flood of volunteers. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/16/nyregion/16volunteers.html?pagewanted=all

Bowlby

(1969). Attachment and loss (Vol. 1). New York, NY: Basic Books.

Brudney

J. L.

Gazley

(2006). Moving ahead or falling behind? Volunteer promotion and data gathering. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 16, 259-276.

10.

Brudney

J. L.

Meijs

L. C. P. M.

(2009). It ain’t natural: Toward a new (natural) resource conceptualization for volunteer management. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38, 564-581.

11.

Clary

E. G.

Snyder

(1999). The motivations to volunteer: Theoretical and practical considerations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 156-159.

12.

Daly

Silver

(2008). Social exclusion and social capital: A comparison and critique. Theory and Society, 37(6), 537-566.

13.

Durkheim

(1997). The division of labor in society. New York, NY: Free Press. (Original work published 1893)

14.

Erez

Mikulincer

van Ijzendoorn

M. H.

Kroonenberg

P. M.

(2008). Attachment, personality, and volunteering: Placing volunteerism in an attachment-theoretical framework. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 64-74.

15.

Foster-Bay

(2008, December). Do race, ethnicity, citizenship and socio-economic status determine civic engagement? (CIRCLE Working Paper, 62). Retreived from http://www.civicyouth.org/PopUps/WorkingPapers/WP62_Foster.Bey.pdf

16.

Freeman

R. B.

(1997). Working for nothing: The supply of volunteer labor. Journal of Labor Economics, 15, S140-S166.

17.

Gesthuizen

Scheepers

(2012). Educational differences in volunteering in cross-national perspective: Individual and contextual explanations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41, 58-81.

18.

Gillath

Shaver

P. R.

Mikulincer

Nitzberg

R. E.

Erez

Van Ijzendoorn

M. H.

(2005). Attachment, caregiving, and volunteering: Placing volunteerism in an attachment-theoretical framework. Personal Relationships, 12, 425-446.

19.

Homans

G. C.

(1958). Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63, 597-606.

20.

Hustinx

Cnaan

R. A.

Handy

(2010). Navigating theories of volunteering: A hybrid map for a complex phenomenon. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 40, 410-434.

21.

Kamerāde

Paine

A. E.

(2014). Volunteering and employability: Implications for policy and practice. Voluntary Sector Review, 5, 259-273.

22.

Kinsbergen

Tolsma

Ruiter

(2013). Bringing the beneficiary closer: Explanations for volunteering time in Dutch private development initiatives. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42, 59-83.

23.

Lemon

Palisi

B. J.

Jacobson

P. E.

Jr. (1972). Dominant statuses and involvement in formal voluntary associations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 1, 30-42.

24.

Lim

Sander

(2013). Does misery love company? Civic engagement in economic hard times. Social Science Research, 42, 14-30.

25.

Lipford

J. W.

Yandle

(2009). The determinants of purposeful voluntarism. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 38, 72-79.

26.

Martin

(2009, November 1). S.D. man uses unemployment to raise food for charities. USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-11-01-south-dakota-gardener_N.htm

27.

Mattingly

M. J.

Bianchi

S. M.

(2003). Gender differences in the quantity and quality of free time: The U.S. experience. Social Forces, 81, 999-1030.

28.

McCartney

(2009, November 22). Surge of new volunteers eases nonprofits’ load. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/21/AR2009112101760.html

29.

Meier

Stutzer

(2008). Is volunteering rewarding in itself? Economica, 75, 39-59.

30.

Merino

S. M.

(2013). Religious social networks and volunteering: Examining recruitment via close ties. Review of Religious Research, 55, 509-527.

31.

Mikulincer

Shaver

P. R.

(2005). Attachment security, compassion, and altruism. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 34-38.

32.

Musick

Wilson

(2008). Volunteers: A social profile. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

33.

National Bureau of Economic Research. (2010). Business Cycle Dating Committee. Washington, DC: Author.

34.

Paik

Navarre-Jackson

(2011). Social networks, recruitment, and volunteering: Are social capital effects conditional on recruitment? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40, 476-496.

35.

Piatak

J. S.

(2015). Altruism by job sector: Can public sector employees lead the way in rebuilding social capital? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25, 877-900.

36.

Putnam

R. D.

(2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

37.

Rotolo

Wilson

(2003). Work histories and voluntary association memberships. Sociological Forum, 18, 603-619.

38.

Rotolo

Wilson

(2007). The effects of children and employment status on the volunteer work of American women. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36, 487-503.

39.

Rotolo

Wilson

(2012). State-level differences in volunteerism in the United States: Research based on demographic, institutional, and cultural macrolevel theories. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41, 452-473.

40.

Rotolo

Wilson

Dietz

(2015). Volunteering in the United States in the aftermath of the foreclosure crisis. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 44, 924-944.

41.

Salamon

L. M.

Sokolowski

S. W.

Haddock

M. A.

(2011). Measuring the economic value of volunteer work globally: Concepts, estimates, and a roadmap to the future. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 82, 217-252.

42.

Shore

T. H.

Tashchian

(2013). Perceptions of unemployed workers: Unemployment duration, volunteerism, and age. The Journal of Applied Business Research, 29, 983-990.

43.

Smith

D. H.

(1994). Determinants of voluntary association participation and volunteering: A literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 23, 243-263.

44.

Smith

(2010). Enhancing employability: Human, cultural, and social capital in an era of turbulent unpredictability. Human Relations, 63, 279-303.

45.

Snyder

Omoto

A. M.

(2008). Volunteerism: Social issues perspectives and social policy implications. Social Issues and Policy Review, 2(1), 1-36.

46.

Spera

Ghertner

Nerino

DiThommaso

(2013). Volunteering as a pathway to employment: Does volunteering increase odds of finding a job for the out of work? Washington, DC: Corporation for National & Community Service, Office of Research and Evaluation.

47.

Stadelmann-Steffen

(2011). Social volunteering in welfare states: Where crowding out should occur. Political Studies, 59, 135-155.

48.

Steinberg

(1990). Labor economics and the nonprofit sector: A literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 19, 151-169.

49.

Sundeen

R. A.

(1990). Family life course status and volunteer behavior: Implications for the single parent. Sociological Perspectives, 33(4), 483-500.

50.

Sundeen

R. A.

(1992). Differences in personal goals and attitudes among volunteers. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 21, 271-291.

51.

Sundeen

R. A.

Garcia

Raskoff

S. A.

(2009). Ethnicity, acculturation, and volunteering to organizations: A comparison of African Americans, Asians, Hispanics, and Whites. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38, 929-955.

52.

Taniguchi

(2006). Men’s and women’s volunteering: Gender differences in the effects of employment and family characteristics. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35, 83-101.

53.

Taniguchi

(2012). The determinants of formal and informal volunteering: Evidence from the American Time Use Survey. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23, 920-939.

54.

Torgerson

Edwards

M. E.

(2013). Demographic determinants of perceived barriers to community involvement: Examining rural/urban differences. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42, 371-390.

55.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2003-2013). Volunteer supplement, Current Population Survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

56.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2012). The recession of 2007-2009 (BLS Spotlight in Statistics). Washington, DC: Author.

57.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2013). Volunteer supplement, Current Population Survey (Technical Documentation). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

58.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2016). The Employment Situtuation - December 2015. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.

59.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2015). Volunteering in the United States - 2014. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.

60.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2013). The Employment Situtuation - September 2013. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.

61.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2014). Current Population Survey: Methodology. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/technical-documentation/methodology.html

62.

van Ingen

Dekker

(2011). Changes in the determinants of volunteering: Participation and time investment between 1975 and 2005 in the Netherlands. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40, 682-702.

63.

Williams

C. C.

(2004). Informal volunteering: Some lessons from the United Kingdom. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23, 613-616.

64.

Wilson

(2000). Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 215-240.

65.

Wilson

(2012). Volunteerism research: A review essay. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41, 176-212.

66.

Wilson

Musick

M. A.

(1997a). Who cares? Toward an integrated theory of volunteer work. American Sociological Review, 62, 694-713.

67.

Wilson

Musick

M. A.

(1997b). Work and volunteering: The long arm of the job. Social Forces, 76, 251-272.

68.

Winkelmann

(2006). Unemployment, social capital, and subjective well-being (IZA DP No. 2346). Bonn, Germany: Institute for the Study of Labor.

69.

Wuthnow

(1998). Loose connections: Joining together in America’s fragmented communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.