Researchers and policy makers have concentrated their attention on potential barriers to mothers' low-wage employment and supports needed to promote such employment (Bernstein 2002; Berry et al. 2008; Corcoran et al. 2000; Lee and Vinokur 2007; Monroe and Tiller 2001; Taylor 2001; Taylor and Barusch 2004). Although transportation issues are often addressed as a potential barrier to employment for low-wage workers, most of the research available focuses on urban contexts. Less is known about the ways particular rural contexts affect transportation issues for low-income workers and the strategies they employ.

    In contrast to urban areas, many rural areas are characterized by higher poverty rates, lower education levels, lower incomes, and greater traveling distances between home, work, and other services (Weber, Duncan, and Whitener 2002). Few, if any, public transportation options make reliable vehicles, which do not break down frequently, a necessity (Gibbs 2002; Fletcher et al. 2010; Lichter and Jayakody, 2002; Webb 2003; Weber et al. 2002). Yet low wages can make affording and maintaining reliable vehicles a challenge. In her study of single mothers, Nelson touches on some of the complications of relying on personal vehicles in rural areas. "Those who rely on cars for daily transportation know well the vagaries of flat tires, unplowed roads, accidents, and inadequate car heating systems." (2005:35). Although all rural drivers may contend with some of these transportation challenges, low wages can exacerbate such conditions from an inconvenience to a crisis. This paper demonstrates how the contexts and conditions of low-wage work in two rural areas necessitate "backstage" (Goffman 1959) labor, such that getting to work becomes an everyday struggle.

Literature Review

    Proximity to jobs and access to transportation are addressed as potential barriers to employment and challenges in getting to work in both urban and rural contexts. The importance of a spatial mismatch between low-wage jobs found in suburban areas and potential low-wage workers who reside in inner-city areas is frequently addressed and sometimes debated (Blumenberg 2004; Hess 2005; Ong and Miller 2005). In addition to such a geographic dispersion from jobs, research finds owning and/or having access to a reliable car makes a difference in whether low-income mothers are able to maintain low-wage employment (Berry et al. 2008; Cervero, Sandoval, and Landis 2002; Fletcher et al. 2010; Garasky, Fletcher, and Jensen 2006; Hess 2005; Lee and Vinokur 2007; Nam 2005.; Ong and Miller 2005; Schintler and Kaplan 2000). Though there are some exceptions (see Blumenburg and Shiki 2003; Taylor 2001), this discussion focuses primarily on urban areas and their suburban fringes.

    Taking a closer look at what is known about rural areas helps illuminate the particular ways rural contexts uniquely structure transportation issues for workers. Jobs are more dispersed in rural areas, with fewer employers in the local labor market and less variety of jobs than in urban areas (Gibbs 2002). Among predominately female held, low-skilled occupations, the share of jobs that pay well, with average earnings above twelve dollars per hour, is extremely low (2-4%) (Gibbs 2002:70). Although, on average, unemployment rates and the share of employment in low-wage industries tend to be higher in sparsely populated, remote counties than in those closer to cities (Gibbs 2002:64), the problem is not unemployment, but underemployment (Licher and Costanzo 1987, as cited in Lichter and Jayakody 2002:82). Indeed, "underemployment—characterized by… involuntary part-time employment…—is a serious problem in many U.S. rural communities." (Paxton and Sicherman, Findeis and Jensen, as cited in Mathers and Scopilliti 2004). Rates of multiple jobholding are also higher in rural counties than in metropolitan counties. Rural workers and those with less than a high school education are most likely to report they hold a second job for economic reasons (Mather and Scopilliti 2004). Such a dispersion of jobs, services, and amenities, and a higher frequency of multiple jobs helps explain the greater traveling distances of rural poor residents (59% more miles per day) than urban poor residents (Pucher and Renne 2005:170). 

    The lack of public transportation available in rural areas (Lichter and Jayakody 2002; Pucher and Renne 2005; Weber et al. 2002) further complicates employment options, necessitating a reliable personal vehicle. Based on analysis of the 2001 National Household Travel Survey, public transit accounts for only a tenth of one percent of both work and non-work trips in rural areas. The car is the dominant form of transportation to work in rural areas, even for those without cars, accounting for 97% of all journeys to work. Almost 90% of poor rural households own at least one car (Pucher and Renne 2005). Yet, owning a car does not specify the reliability of that vehicle. Research on rural low-income residents finds a reliable form of transportation, one that is not old and frequently in need of repair, to be essential to securing employment (Fletcher et al. 2010).

    Faced with a greater dispersion of viable job options, rural workers are more likely to commute for work than residents of metropolitan areas or small cities. According to the 2000 Census, 30 percent of rural residents commuted more than 30 minutes one way to work, and 4 percent of commuters from these areas traveled more than 90 minutes one way (Nitschke 2004). Analyzing Iowa county commuting patterns using Census Bureau data, Fletcher et al. (2010) found statewide commuters to have higher mean salaries than resident workers. "Although all salaries from nonmetropolitan counties were lower than in metropolitan areas, gains from commuting held across all county classification" (130). Such data suggests that commuting yields financial returns, however, Webb's (2003) study of Black women in rural South Carolina complicates the assumption that higher wages are associated with longer commutes.

These women…work away from their home counties and commute long distances for low income and marginal and contingent employment. Round-trip journeys of two hundred miles or more, with commuting times of four or more hours a day, are common (272).

Webb's (2003) study illustrates the significance of context in shaping decisions about getting to work. Given the opportunity structure available to some populations in impoverished rural areas, individuals may be inclined to commute long distances for little pay. Similarly, migrant workers travel great distances and incur significant costs to work for low wages (Rosenbaum 2002; Runyan 2001).  

A growing body of research illuminates the uniqueness of rural contexts in shaping the lives and survival strategies of low-income families (see Braun et al. 2002; Brown and Lichter 2004; Grengeri 1994; Nelson 2005; Nelson and Smith 1999; Reske and Walker 2006; Sherman 2006; Struthers and Bokemeier 2000; Wells 1999). Although some studies address transportation issues as one of many barriers to employment, in-depth and contextual accounts of the particular transportation issues that plague rural low-income mothers is sparse. The purpose of this paper is to detail the everyday efforts of two groups of rural low-income mothers to get to work in two rural contexts.

Research Methods

    Qualitative research methods lend themselves to an understanding of "the process by which families [and individuals] create, sustain, and discuss their own…realities" (Daly 1992:4). In addition, qualitative analysis provides an avenue for revealing routine aspects of everyday life (Daly 1992). Such an approach proves especially useful for uncovering the everyday efforts necessary to get to work in rural areas.

    To investigate this topic I rely on qualitative in-depth interview data with two groups of low-income mothers in two different rural county contexts. Low-income mothers with children under twelve are more likely to struggle with transportation problems than those with higher incomes or those without children. Mothers were targeted to provide accounts of family experiences for interviews because of their greater involvement in managing family and work spillover. One group of mothers is Latina, and many of them migrate to perform seasonal agricultural labor. The other group of white mothers is settled (does not migrate) in a county where low-wage work is dominated by the service industry.

    In 2000 I became involved with a longitudinal multi-state project aimed at assessing the well-being of rural low-income families in the context of welfare reform (www.ruralfamiliesspeak.org). As part of this larger research project, 33 Latina mothers, many of whom migrate with their families to perform seasonal agricultural labor, were interviewed in Harvest County Michigan. (I refer to the two counties referenced in this paper with pseudonyms to protect the confidentiality of the respondents.) Latinas involved in agricultural labor with at least one child under twelve and incomes two hundred percent of the poverty level or lower were targeted. Twice the poverty level was used to capture the category of low-income because it is often the amount required for food stamp eligibility, a measure of low-income, but not necessarily poverty. Although mothers were specifically targeted for interviews, they were asked to provide accounts of family experiences, and partners were sometimes present during interviews.

    Most interviews were conducted by two principal interviewers who traveled to labor camps and individuals' homes together. I was able to travel with the interviewers on several occasions and conducted a few of the interviews. Interviewers developed a sample by visiting labor camps, through their connections in their own community work and personal interactions, through the referrals of other community/human service workers, friends, friends of friends, and eventually through friends and acquaintances of those already interviewed. Thirty-three Latina mothers were interviewed in 2000 and again in 2001. Some interviews were conducted at community buildings, such as a local church. The majority of interviews were conducted in respondents' homes. Whether the interview was conducted in Spanish or English was left up to the respondent. One of the principle interviewers was bilingual. Interviews ranged from approximately one hour to three hours in length. The interview instrument contained a range of questions about topics such as health and well-being, parenting, education, use of community and public services, as well as work and family issues, work history, and transportation. Interviews were tape recorded and later transcribed. Those interviews conducted in Spanish were translated and transcribed by a professional translation service.

    During my involvement in this research project, I was impressed by the amount of effort, energy, and resources these families invested just to get to labor-intensive, seasonal jobs. Although interviews were conducted in other states for the larger project, Michigan was the only state in which migrant wokers were interviewed. The experience of interacting with this group of seasonal workers initiated my thinking about the labor necessary to attain and keep low-wage jobs. I decided to investigate these issues further, supplementing the data on Latina mothers by interviewing another sample of low-income mothers in a different rural Michigan county context. I chose a county, referred to as Delta County, which is dominated by the service industry (U.S. Census 2000). This county was also chosen for convenience, since contacts and county information were available from a previous project (see Imig et al. 1997; Wells 1999). The Delta County sample began with the informant list from a previous research project in the studied county, contacts made through a community worker in the county, flyers posted at local businesses, and eventually through friends and acquaintances of other mothers interviewed. In 2002 I interviewed twelve mothers with at least one child and incomes two hundred percent of the poverty line or lower. The interview instrument utilized for these interviews contained a similar range of questions as those addressed in Harvest County, covering topics such as health and well-being, parenting, education, use of community and public services, as well as work and family issues, work history, and transportation. Interviews in both counties ranged in length from one to three hours. Interviews were conducted in respondents' homes. All interviews were tape recorded and transcribed for coding and analysis.

    To process and analyze the interview texts for both groups of respondents, I utilized WinMax (renamed MAXQDA), a data analysis program. Once imported, interview texts were coded, flagging any references to transportation or the process of getting to work. These text portions were then analyzed further to note themes that emerged from the data, such as those addressed in the findings below.

    Mothers interviewed in Harvest County all identified as Latina or Hispanic. Twenty-three mothers (70%) regularly migrated to work in Harvest County. Most considered Texas their home. The majority of women and their partners were employed in agricultural labor in Michigan, and a third of the women were laid off between crops, while 12 percent were unemployed at the time of the first interview. Over three-fourths of the women reported an education of high school or less and over half reported an eighth grade education or less. The women were not asked about their English language skills, but over half chose to conduct the interview in Spanish. Of the 33 women from Harvest County only one (3%) reported no partner or husband. Seventy-nine percent of mothers had more than one child and 20 women (60%) had at least one child age five or under in the household.

    In Delta County, service jobs dominated the low-wage gendered market for women. Delta County women self identified as white. Although all of the women reported previous work experience, half were not employed at the time of the interview. Seventy-five percent reported completing high school. Nine (75%) were living with or married to a partner. Three fourths of the women had more than one child, and over half had at least one child age five or under.

Table 1: Characteristics of Delta and Harvest County Respondents

Theoretical Frame:
Working at Getting to Work

     The data discussed in this paper draws from a larger research project focused on the invisible and taken for granted work necessary for these two groups of mothers to attain and sustain low-wage employment (Kelly 2004). My initial interaction with migrant workers in Harvest County sparked my thinking about all of the efforts that low-wage workers go through so that they can get and keep employment. The work of getting to work is epitomized in the efforts of migrant workers to move their families from one state to another. Yet such insights may not be apparent without a focus on the lived experiences of the migrant workers themselves.
 
    Feminist standpoint theorists address the value of focusing on multiple standpoints, particularly on the standpoints of those with less power. Such a refocusing uncovers new insights about social life (Haraway 1998; Smith 1990; Collins 1990). Researchers have directly or indirectly adopted such a perspective in their focus on the lived experience of low-income mothers (see Hays 2003; Edin and Lein 1997; Nelson 2005), revealing survival strategies needed to address poverty, welfare, and/or low-wage employment. To further conceptualize labors and lives previously overlooked and left in the background, I draw on Erving Goffman's (1959) distinction between "backstage" and "frontstage" behaviors. Goffman differentiates between the more public "presentations of self" and the unseen behaviors that take place "backstage." In a similar manner, the "backstage labors" necessary to get to work are often taken for granted or go unnoticed.   

    As addressed previously, when one examines the lived experiences of migrant workers, the work they invest to get to work becomes apparent. Do other low-wage workers go through less blatant and obvious, yet noteworthy, efforts to get to their jobs? It is rather obvious that potential workers need some form of transportation to get a job. However, after attaining paid employment, they require a reliable and consistent means of getting to work to sustain that employment. Previous research demonstrates the importance of having a reliable form of transportation, such as a bus that runs on time or a car that does not break down frequently. If reliable transportation is not available, presumably one must constantly renegotiate a means of transport to sustain employment. Furthermore, the literature suggests that in a rural context being physically available for potential paid work may involve commuting long distances or moving. As illustrated by previous studies of the lived experience of low-income mothers, negotiating the journey to work likely also entails coordinating and managing multiple demands, such as transportation, child care, relationships with bosses and co-workers, managing poor working conditions and/or multiple jobs, within the context of one's life on an everyday basis. Although I focus on the work of getting to work in this paper, I rely on a broader conceptual frame of negotiating work, or the work needed to get and keep low-wage work. Feminist standpoint theory and Goffman's concept of "backstage" labor help provide a framework for examining and revealing the efforts of rural low-income mothers to get to work.

Findings

    Analysis of in-depth interview data with mothers in Delta and Harvest County revealed common themes in the backstage labor employed to get to work, despite differences between the two groups. Nevertheless, each group navigated within a particular rural context. In the following sections, I provide an overview of the employment context that shaped each group's employment prospects. Then I address two primary strategies for negotiating employment: the planning of migration to Harvest County and commuting for better employment prospects in Delta County. Both migrating and commuting require effort and planning. The low wages and often inflexible working conditions available in both counties require mothers and their partners to tend to unreliable forms of transportation, such as older cars that frequently required repairs, necessitating work. Mothers and their partners "scrambled" to manage fluctuating and unreliable transportation options, relied on friends and family members for assistance, negotiated with employers, coordinated their journey to work with those of their partners and the needs of other family members, and took risks to get to work. Each of these strategies for managing getting to work are addressed with a focus on how such strategies necessitate often invisible and taken for granted "backstage" (Goffman 1959) labor.

    The 2003 Rural-urban Continuum Classification Coding system designates Harvest County as a non-metro county that is completely rural or with less than a 2,500 urban population, adjacent to a metro area (USDA, ERS "Rural-urban Continuum Codes). In comparison to the U.S., private sector employment in Harvest County is more strongly oriented toward manufacturing (27.3% versus 14.1% U.S.) and agriculture (6.7% versus 1.9% U.S.), with only 57.8 percent (compared to 77.3% for the nation) of jobs in services (U.S. Census 2000). Michigan ranks ninth in the nation in terms of the total number of workers employed in the food and fiber system and is the nation's fourth largest employer of transient migrant workers (Roeder and Millard 2000). Harvest County is one of ten counties in Michigan that account for 80 percent of all migrant agricultural workers in the state (Rosenbaum 2002).

    Approximately 70% of Harvest County informants migrated annually to Harvest County to work as farm laborers. To understand the context that shapes their journey to get to work, it is necessary to begin in their home counties, most often in southern Texas. As part of Latino migration trends documented by Saenz and Cready (1997), families are pushed out by "bad [local] economies" in Texas (Cantú 1995:2), and migrate elsewhere to seek employment. As Acacia explained, "In Texas if you do not have a degree, what kind of job are you going to work? There is not [physical] labor work." Afra's explanation of her migration is typical. "Well, I couldn't find a job over there in Texas. That's the reason I have to come all the way up here." Other mothers migrated to Harvest County for the same reason, but decided to "settle out" and remain there permanently. Many mothers spoke positively of the local work context in Harvest County because work was available. They also acknowledged, however, the limitations of the work available, as Bonita's discussion of her working conditions illustrates.

A little while ago…I needed to change my shoes, so you would not be able to see how soiled I was. That is the kind of work I am doing. Doing celery with an apron, and it is not a good paying job but it is a difficult job to throw celery in a machine all day long.

    According to the 2003 Rural-urban Continuum Classification Coding system, Delta County is a non-metro county with an urban population of 2,500-19,999, adjacent to a metro area (USDA, ERS 2003). Private sector employment in Delta County is strongly oriented toward the service sector (74.2%) with the vast majority of service employment in "accommodation and food services" (U.S. Census, 2000 [Delta] County Business Patterns). While the work histories of most of the women interviewed were concentrated in such low-paying service jobs, in contrast, male partners typically held better paying jobs in industries such as construction, car maintenance, and factory work. Many of the jobs available to mothers and their partners were seasonal or part-time with hours and schedules that varied. During the course of interviews, all but one mother spontaneously described the limitations of the local market as Tracey summed up, "There really isn't a whole lot of jobs in this area. I think there is if you want to work at McDonald's or Burger King or something like that." Given such a local job context, some county residents commuted to a nearby city to make better wages. Liz summed up the opportunity structure of the county by noting that "If you don't want to commute, you put up with the bad wages."

    Though difficult to attain, reliable vehicles that run smoothly without frequent repairs become increasingly important when public transportation is not available, particularly for those considering commuting. The cost of gasoline was also a significant work-related expense and potential obstacle for families in both counties, an issue compounded in rural areas where great traveling distances may be necessary for something as simple as filling a gas tank. For example, Liz had to drive to a neighboring town to get gasoline because the station in her town had closed, thereby causing her to "…spend all the gas to go get the gas." Though the need for reliable transportation and the cost of gasoline affect all members of this rural community, those financial strains are felt more greatly by those with limited financial resources.

    Driving to nearby cities where work is better paying and more plentiful was a common strategy for negotiating better work or any work at all for Delta County mothers and their partners, resembling national trends for rural residents (Nitschke 2004). About half (52.4%) of Delta County mothers and their partners commuted at some time during their working history. I defined a commute as a drive 20 minutes or greater, but mothers reported driving as much as an hour, on a daily basis, to work. The most common destination was, Pleasantville, a city located about an hour's drive away, though distance varied depending on where a person lived in Delta County.

    Mothers and their partners make decisions about whether to commute and how far to commute based on the work available in the county and the surrounding area and the particular conditions of their lives. Although an individual could increase her or his earnings by commuting, the returns in the form of increased wages did not necessarily merit the potential "costs" such as the cost of gasoline and vehicle maintenance, having to deal with mid-west winter weather conditions, and the time away from family that commuting consumes. Though all potential commuters make such calculations, for those with low-incomes, the thresholds are lower. Migrant families and those who lived and worked in Harvest County year-round intentionally settled close to their work to avoid the expense and hassle of commuting. Zolia and her family, for example, refused offers to work another crop far away, "We'd rather stay here close by…because you are going to spend that gas going down there." Several Delta County mothers, such as Clara, decided not to commute because they wanted to be close to their children in case of an emergency.

The accounts of Delta County respondents who chose to commute further illustrate some of the "costs" associated with this strategy for negotiating employment. Tracy, for example, commuted about 45 minutes to an hour each way, five days a week, to work in food service at a nearby college. "I mean when you go there, it's quick. You're there quick. It doesn't seem like a 45 minute, hour drive. It's the way home, you know. You get there and it's getting dark out, and you're like, I just want to get home. It seems forever."

    In addition to the cost of gasoline, commuting involved other expenses. While Ellie's partner, for example, drove a truck, he had to pay for room and board and laundry along the way. Laurel's husband traveled extensively and he occasionally had to pay for overnight lodging. His long hours, however, also brought in a higher salary, which justified the commuting and travel costs for him and for Laurel. In Ellie's case, however, she was frustrated with her partner's commute.

The kids' dad [commuted to Pleasantville] when we first moved up here. He was driving sixty-five, almost seventy miles a day back and forth to work, and the gas prices were just…horrendous. So, what he was making and what we were shelling out for sitters' cost, because I was working at the time. It just, it wasn't giving us anything of an edge at all. So, it just kind of, really wasn't worth it. (Ellie)

    Partners and children's schedules often weighed heavily in the complex and shifting calculus of the journey to work. For example, Tracy's decision to commute to a better paying job was related to her position as the family breadwinner because of her husband's severe health problems. In her case, the increased pay (she said she believed she made $3 more per hour than she could without the commute) and the job benefits she received outweighed the potential costs of commuting. On the other hand, for Ellie and her family the costs of gasoline, day care, and separation from family outweighed the potential benefit of commuting. They decided to move in order to decrease the costs of a commute to his co-worker with whom he drove a truck during the day. However, moving one's family for work also requires much effort. Though the variables mothers and their partners weigh in making decisions about commuting, such as health, family needs, and pay, may resemble those of other rural residents, they make such assessments with lower returns for lower wage work with which to purchase and maintain transportation, creating additional labor.

The Planning and Expense of Migration

    The accounts of migrant workers illustrate the incredible amount of backstage labor behind their journeys to work. Approximately 70 percent of mothers who worked and/or whose partners worked in Harvest County migrated annually to seek jobs. Relocating a family at least twice each year requires planning, great investments of time and resources, and a gamble for some families.

For example, Calandra reported.
When it gets to begin the new year…then I start with everything. I start thinking about my bills, send them up there [to Harvest County] and then…as soon as our income comes, we save the money for our trip, for the gas and all that. …The food that we need to go on the trip. And…then I start preparing the school for the kids. I start telling them we are going to be leaving such and such. …So, I start kind of early. I like the school to have everything ready because there are four kids. …So, I begin with a school and then I begin with our money, the income. And then I tell [my husband], start preparing the vehicles, the change of oil and make sure everything is running well. …And that is something we do every year. …So once January is here, it would be time for us to start preparing.

The labor involved in planning begins before the trip itself, and involves days of travel, time, money, and often complications, as Tomasa explained.

This year, I spent $400 just to get here [to Harvest County]…. Gas, food, things that we needed to drive like changing the oil on the truck and, well,…if I actually add up all that I have to do to come over here this year, I paid more than $400. …We had to put tires because the old tires were worn out. The brakes had to be fixed before we came because they were awful. They hadn't been changed for five years,…and since we were gonna come all the way over here, it's just like 1500 miles, we had to have them fixed. We didn't want to have an accident on the way over here. So,…I just count, you know, like the gas when we come, the hotel where we stopped to rest for a while, to take a bath 'cause we were tired and everything, and then when we stopped for breakfast and lunch, dinner. So it's a lot of money you spend coming [up] here.

    Migration often involved such deliberated planning and accounting. Nonetheless, unanticipated transportation problems along the way were not uncommon. The frequency with which transportation problems occurred and the difficulties such problems created led some families to invest a significant portion of their resources in a reliable vehicle. Mothers, such as Rafaela, rightly pointed out the importance of a reliable vehicle that could make the journey without breaking down. In the following excerpt, Rafaela defends her and her partner's decision to purchase a second car that was in better condition than the one they left in Texas to make the trip to Harvest County.

I told [the social worker], "Excuse me, but I will give [my old truck] to you. …And you will go with a truck like the one we have, an old one, to Texas. Then you will look for a house to rent, look for a job, with family."

Like six other Harvest County mothers who found it necessary to have two vehicles, Rafaela and her partner experienced difficulty qualifying for assistance, e.g., food stamps, now known as the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP), because they owned two vehicles. Federal food stamp policies allow households to own multiple vehicles, if they are valued very low. State policies vary in whether they exclude or consider the value of vehicles in assessing eligibility for food stamp and cash assistance programs. Though most states are more generous than the federal policy, exempting all vehicles, Texas is one of four states that have not exempted any vehicles. Texas excludes the fair market value of one vehicle up to $15,000; additional vehicles are subject to federal food stamp policies, which means they are only excluded if the fair market value is below $5,000. (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities 2008). Calandra expresses her frustration with such policies.

Migrants are allowed only one vehicle. …But…if I do not have that second vehicle, how does my husband go out to look for work, and how do I go pick up the kids from school? …There is no bus transportation…where I'm at…so I need two vehicles. There is no way I can make it with only one.

Thus, even when families manage to purchase reliable vehicles to make the journey to Harvest County, they encounter obstacles that require additional negotiation to get by.

    The context of both counties described above (their lack of and dispersion of jobs) often necessitates commuting, migration, or moving to secure employment. Though all rural workers are faced with dispersed jobs and potential commutes, income generated from available low-wage jobs often does not afford reliable transportation options. As a result, low-income mothers often find themselves with cars that are older and break down frequently, what one Delta County informant termed throw away cars,  as well as jobs that are far away. Such a combination further compounds the amount of work needed to get to a job.

    The low-paying job context in each of the two counties made affording and maintaining a reliable vehicle a challenge, as Liz's account of her circumstances illustrate.

I was having a lot of car trouble. …And it was a constant. My paychecks were going into my car constantly…because I was commuting [about a half an hour away] and my car wouldn't hold up. I didn't make enough money to keep my car running. I couldn't afford a car payment because I was paying child care (Liz, Delta County).

Liz's circumstance illustrates the relationship between the conditions of low-wage, inflexible work and the difficulties employees face in getting themselves to those jobs.
 
    Without better pay workers must deal with erratic problems and unreliable and sometimes, unsafe transportation. For example, when asked if her car had broken down in the last year, Yesenia, a mother whose family lives in Harvest County year-round responded, "All the time." Stories about problems with vehicles breaking down before or along the way to make the journey from their hometowns to Harvest County were common among migrant workers. When asked if anything has made it difficult for her to work, Gail, a Delta County mother, responded, "Yeah, like my car breaking down every other time I turn around."  Some Delta County families had multiple cars, but only one (or none) was in working order. As Abby remarked, "we go through a lot of vehicles."  One Delta County informant talked about the commonality of "throw away cars," cars purchased for little money that inevitably did not last for very long, leaving transportation constantly in flux and in need of attention.

    Brandy's detailed description of her available transportation illustrates the amount of effort involved in dealing with unreliable vehicles.

Well, I think like the biggest thing that holds me back [from getting a job] right now is transportation issues. … It's hard. I've got a big junker piece of truck out there that I'm borrowing from my mother and I do not have a license. …[The truck] is pathetic. Pathetic! …The air won't come out, so it won't let the gas go down, so I can't just pull up at a gas station and get gas. I have to fill a can up. The can only holds four dollars. I have to park somewhere where the car will be tilted enough so that the air will go out, to put [in] the four dollars in gas…which…doesn't go very far in a big older truck. …I've run out [of gas] quite a bit. (Brandy, Delta County)

Attempting to get to work with such a vehicle requires a lot of energy and effort. In such circumstances, mothers "scramble," to get a ride or miss work when faced with inadequate transportation and circumstances that are constantly in flux.

Oh, well. [My car is] reliable for the moment, for as long as it lasts, you know. Yeah. I've had problems with vehicles, you know, where I've had to get rides back and forth to work sometimes or, you know, scramble to find something that I can drive because it died or whatever. You know, I had a car that I bought, and within a month after I bought it the transmission went out. …At that time I was married and my husband was able to bring me back and forth. …But if it was to happen now, I don't know what I would do. [laughs] You know. (Jenna, Delta County)

As a single mother, Jenna was unsure to whom she might turn for a ride or back-up transportation. Like other mothers, she was forced to deal with "the moment," "as long as it lasts."

    Migrant workers also "scrambled" to try to deal with unreliable transportation and complete their journey to Harvest County for work. Problems with cars breaking down along the way or before the trip were not an uncommon occurrence, sometimes forcing families to borrow money to make the trip. Rafaela and her partner, for example, borrowed $1,000 to make the trip to Harvest County because their transmission broke down. Gemma and her partner left their car in Texas because it broke down. They had to borrow her mother's van. Tomasa explained, "We have repaired [our] truck so many times. I think we have spent like close to…$5,000 [about half the cost of the vehicle]."

    As illustrated in some of the examples above, mothers in both county contexts turned to family and friends in their efforts to "scramble" to get to work. When cars, trucks, or vans broke down along the way to Harvest County, migrant workers often turned to a family member or friend for help with a loan or assistance in repairing the vehicle. Yesenia, for example, explained that her husband and his brother had to repair their vehicle when it broke down because they could not afford a mechanic. In some cases, such as Gemma's, addressed above, a vehicle was borrowed from a family member. Bonita and her family borrowed money from her son-in-law. "We came and worked, and we sent it back because it was a loan." Once in Harvest County, family often provided rides to work and elsewhere, and carpooling to work was not uncommon.   
 
    Mothers in Delta County also relied on family and friends when faced with transportation problems. Jenna's parents bought her a car, "and I'm supposed to be paying them back and haven't quite got them paid off for it yet." Abby explained, "I can always always depend on my mother-in-law to get a ride. She'd drop anything to help out her kids." Brandy's "big junker piece of truck" (addressed earlier) was on loan from her mother. Unlike Harvest County families who relied almost entirely on assistance from family, Delta County mothers also mentioned assistance from friends. For example, when Brandy's car broke down, she called two of her friends for a ride, and both of them showed up. Erin borrowed money from a friend for car repair that she was still paying back.

    As illustrated by the examples above, family and friends served as an essential resource to mothers as they "scrambled" to deal with unreliable transportation. However, such assistance was often unreliable and/or came with limitations and/or obligations. For example, after "the breaks went totally out of [Nancy's] car" and she "almost got hit," she had to miss work because her mother would have brought her to work but would not pick her up (Delta County mother). In the case of resource poor networks, reliance on family and friends often obligates one to others who are also likely to be in need (Oliker 2000) as illustrated in some of the examples in the following section. Such obligations can be costly and further complicate mothers' efforts to negotiate their journeys to work. Mothers often found themselves coordinating their own transportation needs with those of partners, family, and friends.

    A mother's efforts to get to work often included consideration of schedules and conditions beyond her own. For financial reasons, many mothers with partners had to find ways to negotiate both of their journeys to work with only one working vehicle. In some cases this scenario generated problems for one or more partner's employment. Gail (Delta County) recalled having to drive her ex-husband to all of his work sites when he was working as a handyman because he had a suspended license. She had to take their toddler with them. This arrangement made it virtually impossible for Gail to negotiate employment for herself. Similarly, the fact that Ines's husband (Harvest County) used their only vehicle to commute to a neighboring state and stayed there to work for a week at a time complicated her ability to find employment. Jenna (Delta County) faced a similar circumstance with her ex-husband while she was working a full-time job herself.

There was a time frame when he first moved up here, …I drove him [a half an hour one way] every morning to work before I would come to work. …Then I had to go pick him up too, after I'd [finished my work day]. That was before we had the youngest [child]. …My kids luckily were old enough to get on the bus by themselves.

Not only does the transportation of partners have to be arranged, but this often needs to be coordinated around child care arrangements. Nancy (Delta County) dropped her husband off at a designated area from which he would get a ride to the construction site where he worked. Then she took her daughter to her mother's and began her half hour commute to work.

    Other mothers worked out more complex transportation plans that involved family members and friends.

At my second job, [my husband] would drop me off…. Well, his mom would bring me there, but he'd get out of work around six… and by the time he got out, he'd want the vehicle. And we only had one vehicle, so I couldn't drive it to work, …so he had to come and pick me up. But it was nice, because when I closed, he'd come in and vacuum the floors for me, so I could get out of there sooner. …Oh, God. We go through a lot of vehicles (Abby, Delta County).

Although Abby describes this arrangement as beneficial in some ways, the backstage labors of getting to work in such a scenario become most apparent when we consider the extent to which that scenario changes. For example, jobs as well as shifts of work at a job may change for one or both partners from time to time, as Erin explained.

I went in there and my cousin worked there. …And she says, "Hey Erin, why don't you get in here and work with us in the deli? If you need to I'll transport you." ..And her and I never worked the same shift. Never. She'd be getting out of work, when I'd go in or I'd be getting off of work, and she'd be going in. So, it never really worked out like we wanted.

Since Erin had transportation difficulties, not being able to work the same shift as her cousin made it difficult for her to get to work. Even when mothers, partners, and family members devise creative—and sometimes time consuming—strategies for coordinating their journeys to work, the irregularity of their work schedules and other life circumstances can put such plans in jeopardy.

    Mothers in both counties negotiated with employers as part of the work of getting to work, whether "scrambling" when dealing with unexpected problems or carefully planning a migration with family. Because of the seasonal nature of agricultural labor, maintaining relationships with farmers was crucial for migrants who need to know when to come for the next crop. Aunts, uncles, parents, and grandparents often secured work for other family members, and families regularly migrated and worked together. Several Harvest County migrant families borrowed money from their employers in Harvest County to fund their migration. These loans were usually in the form of an advance, and families would arrive in Harvest County indebted to their employer before beginning work. For example, Afra explained that the first thing she did every year to get ready to migrate to Harvest County "…is call [her employer and]…ask him for some money for the trip." Sometimes calls were made when transportation broke down at the last minute, and the request for an advance was part of the "scramble" to repair a car and make the migration for work. Such arrangements necessitated a pre-established relationship between workers and employers.

    Negotiations with employers as part of the journey to work were less common for Delta County mothers. Erin's partner's employer picked him up at his home to bring him to work when his car was broken down. According to Erin, "They don't mind picking him up and taking him home. They don't mind it a bit." Most mothers and their partners did not find their employers to be so hospitable. Laurel, a Delta County mother, devised a creative strategy to deal with employers' complaints when she could not make it to work because of icy road conditions. She had to drive up a very steep unpaved hill to get from her home to the road that she took to work.

I don't like to get out on bad roads. …You know, a lot of employers don't understand that, but that was a problem sometimes for work…. I try to drag my bosses out here, and let them know where I live, that way they can understand. [laughs]. …In fact, …a few times [when I was working at the discount chain]…I had to call in and the boss would give me a hard time on the phone and, you know, I would just say, "Well, you know, I would be more than willing to come to work if you wanted to come out here and get me. …So, then they were like, no, we'll let it slide."

    In various ways mothers in both counties took risks in their attempts to get to work. Dealing with unpaved roads and icy winter weather conditions presented problems. Attempting to operate unreliable and, sometimes, unsafe vehicles placed mothers in potential danger. Keeping cars and drivers registered and insured was also a challenge. Often mothers, partners, and/or cars were unlicensed because of inadequate funds. However, in some cases a partner had a suspended license because of drunk driving. Mothers and their partners took risks in driving without a license and/or driving cars that were not properly insured or licensed.

    In rural areas in which the clearing of ice and snow from roads is often patchy, the drive to work can become challenging. Several mothers addressed difficulties getting out of their driveways as Sue, a Delta County mother, explained. "I just put it in neutral going down the hill…unless it's icy. Then putting it in neutral ain't going to make that much of a difference." Ice-related accidents were also reported in interviews with mothers from both counties (see discussion of Serafina's accident below). Such driving conditions made getting to work a risky proposition and often resulted in the need to negotiate with employers or with friends or family for a ride.

    On a low-income, keeping cars and drivers registered and insured can be a challenge. Respondents from both counties addressed uninsured individuals, uninsured vehicles, and/or improperly registered vehicles. Such circumstances presented a dilemma. For example, Clara, a Delta County mother who could not afford to insure her car, was "so afraid to drive [her] car into town…and get pulled over for something stupid." Taking a risk in driving such vehicles did lead to bigger problems for several mothers and their families. For example, Serafina and her husband, who recently had "settled out," i.e., remaining in Harvest County year-round, struggled after two ice-related car accidents during the winter. Only one of their vehicles was insured, placing a great financial strain on the family and making getting to work a challenge. They had to pay to rent a vehicle and rely on friends for rides. Similarly, Nancy (Delta County) was hit by another vehicle. Because her car was uninsured, she could not make a claim.

    Several mothers in both counties were without a valid driver's license for various reasons, limiting their mobility and/or making driving risky. In some cases, mothers or their partners did not have a valid driver's license due to suspension or not passing the driver's test. Brandy and Clara (Delta County) thought they could pass the test, but they could not afford to retake it. Several Harvest County mothers became stranded because they had never learned how to drive. Antonia, a mother who lives in Harvest County with her family year-round, explained, "Like mom says, 'If you don't know how to drive [in Harvest County], we stay…all closed up.' …I can't move around….If there's a car you move, if not, no." Such predicaments certainly present challenges in getting to work. Several mothers worked to learn how to drive and acquire their driver's license. Having recently earned her driver's license, Tomasa reported with pride, "Now I can go anywhere without having to ask somebody to take me somewhere."

Conclusions

    Standpoint theorists propose that starting from the positions of those with less power leads to new insights. The prevalence of car ownership among poor rural residents (almost 90%) may lead one to believe that getting to work is not a problem for low-income rural residents, despite the lack of public transportation options available (Pucher and Renne 2005). Beginning with the standpoints and everyday lives of these two groups of mothers complicates such an assumption by illuminating the need for reliable transportation and the backstage (Goffman 1959) labor created by unreliable cars and low-paying and inflexible working conditions. Without reliable transportation, getting to work often becomes a struggle on an everyday basis, and scrambling becomes necessary. For migrant workers, the journey to work requires much planning, coordination, effort, and costs. Commuting is a strategy for acquiring better employment, which comes at a cost in time, gasoline, and vehicle maintenance. Regardless of whether one commutes or migrates, the efforts involved in getting to work are affected by many other life circumstances, such as the schedules and needs of partners and children.

    This paper details the process by which two groups of low-income rural residents labor to get to work. These mothers' experiences and strategies are not representative of all rural residents or even all low-income rural residents. Additional research is needed to assess patterns and variation among different populations and within diverse rural contexts. All rural workers likely engage in backstage labor, adopting some of the same basic strategies employed by the low-income mothers addressed above. Indeed, all workers may contend with occasional transportation problems and coordinate schedules and needs of family members. Yet, these mothers' accounts suggest that the conditions of low-wage work and limited economic resources further complicate access to reliable transportation, creating additional labor in getting to work. What may be an occasional inconvenience of an icy road or a car breaking down for a middle-class rural worker becomes an everyday crisis for a low-wage worker with an older car that breaks down frequently. Rural contexts combine with the material conditions of social class to shape these mothers' experiences.
  
    The conditions of local employment options, characterized by low wages, inconsistent schedules, and inflexibility, further complicate the journey to work. Low-wages fail to support the need for reliable and/or safe transportation, affecting one's ability to get to work and colliding with other life circumstances and needs, such as child care and partners' schedules and transportation needs. In addition, low-wage work is often characterized by inconsistent hours and inflexibility to the needs of parents, further complicating one's ability to strategize and plan a viable journey to work. Because of their lack of resources and fluctuating circumstances, mothers find themselves scrambling over and over again, attempting to piece together a constantly unraveling thread. Such circumstances make maintaining such low-wage employment a particular challenge (see Kelly 2005).

    Though research which examines class differences in efforts to get to work is needed, other research on families and social class provides some insights. Low-income families are more reliant on a larger kin network for social support than other social class groups (Rank 2000). Those networks are also more often resource poor (Oliker 2000) Though all workers may rely on family and friends and coordinate transportation schedules with family and friends, greater reliance on others who, for example, have one older car that frequently breaks down, creates additional labors and burdens by social class.

    This research illuminates some potential directions for programs and policies aimed at decreasing the backstage labor necessary for low-wage workers in rural areas to get to work. These mothers' accounts support previous findings on the importance of reliable transportation to securing and maintaining employment and the prevalence of commuting as a strategy for securing employment. In rural areas where public transportation is unavailable or sparsely available, the need for reliable personal transportation is crucial to sustaining employment. In contrast to workers with higher wages, for low-wage workers, the conditions of work and pay make it challenging to maintain a reliable vehicle. Programs and policies that assist low-income residents in securing and maintaining driver's licenses, valid plates, auto insurance, and driving skills could further enhance employability. Accounts of migrant and settled agricultural workers suggest that state policies that do not exempt all vehicles in assessments of eligibility for receiving public assistance, such as food stamps (SNAP), should be reconsidered.

    The conditions of the work typically held by these mothers, such as low pay, inconsistent hours, and inflexibility, compound the amount of effort needed to get to work by making reliable transportation financially out of reach and complicating negotiations related to getting to work. Policies that improve the conditions of work and support low-wage workers, such as increasing the minimum wage, greater notice and regularity in hours and scheduling, and greater flexibility in hours and scheduling, could ultimately decrease the amount of backstage labor necessary to get to work, decreasing absenteeism and turnover.

    As previous research on low-income families found, families and friends served as support networks but also complicated journeys to work in various ways. The accounts of these mothers' everyday lives illustrate the complex interplay between transportation, child care, and working conditions. Managing child care arrangements, family health issues, and the schedule of family members around various work schedules complicates efforts to get to work. Supports for child care and other family friendly policies, such as family leave, shift swapping, and flexibility in scheduling, would further assist low-wage workers in getting to work, potentially decreasing absenteeism and turnover.

*Footnote

References

Bernstein, Jared. 2002. "Welfare Reform and the Low-Wage Labor Market." Pp. 115-128. Work, Welfare, and Politics: Confronting Poverty in the Wake of Welfare Reform. Frances Fox Piven, Joan Acker, Margaret Hallock, and Sandra Morgen, editors. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon Press.

Berry, Ann A., Mary Jo Katras, Yoshi Sano, Jaerim Lee, and Jean W. Bauer. 2008. "Job Volatility of Rural, Low-Income Mothers: A Mixed Methods Approach." Journal of Family and Economic Issues 29(1):5-22.

Blumenberg, Evelyn. 2004. "En-gendering Effective Planning: Spatial Mismatch, Low-Income Women, and Transportation Policy." Journal of the American Planning Association 70(3):269-281.

Blumenberg, Evelyn and K. Shiki. 2003. "How Welfare Recipients Travel on Public Transit, and their Accessibility to Employment Outside Large Urban Centers." Transportation Quarterly 57(2):25-37.

Braun, Bonnie, Frances C. Lawrence, Patricia H. Dyk, and Maria Vandergriff-Avery. 2002. "Southern Rural Family Economic Well-Being in the Context of Public Assistance." Southern Rural Sociology 18(1):259-293.

Brown, J. Brian and Daniel T. Lichter. 2004. "Poverty, Welfare, and the Livelihood Strategies of Nonmetropolitan Single Mothers." Rural Sociology 69(2):282-301.

Butler, Margaret A. 1990. Rural-Urban Continuum Codes for Metro and Non-metro Counties. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Agriculture and Rural Economy Division.

Cantú, Lionel. 1995. "The Peripheralization of Rural America: A Case Study of Latino Migrants in America's Heartland" Sociological Perspectives 38(3):399-414.

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 2008. "States' Vehicle Asset Policies in the Food Stamp Program." Accessed in 2013: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=554.

Cervero, Robert, Onésimo Sandoval, and John Landis. 2002. "Transportation as a Stimulus of Welfare-to-Work: Private Versus Public Mobility." Journal of Planning Education and Research 22(1):50-63.

Collins, Patricia Hill 1990. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. New York and London: Routledge.

Corcoran, Mary, Sandra K. Danziger, Ariel Kalil, and Kristin S. Seefeldt. 2000. "How Welfare Reform Is Affecting Women's Work" Annual Review of Sociology 26:241-269.

Daly, Kerry. 1992. "The Fit Between Qualitative Research and Characteristics of Families." Pp. 3-11 Qualitative Methods in Family Research. Jane F. Gilgun, Kerry Daly, and Gerald Handel, editors. Sage Publications.

Edin, Kathryn and Laura Lein. 1997. Making Ends Meet: How Single Mothers Survive Welfare and Low-Wage Work. Newbury Park, CA: Russell Sage Foundation.

Fletcher, Cynthia Needles, Steven B. Garasky, Helen H. Jensen, and Robert B. Neilsen. 2010. "Transportation Access: A Key Employment Barrier for Rural Low-income Families." Journal of Poverty 14(2):123-144.

Friedman, Pamela. 2004. "Transportation Needs in Rural Communities." Rural Assistance Center 2(1). Retrieved 2008 (http://www.financeproject.org)

Garasky, Steven, Cynthia N. Fletcher, and Helen H. Jensen. 2006. "Transitioning to Work: The Role of Private Transportation for Low-Income Households." The Journal of Consumer Affairs 40(1):64-89.

Gibbs, Robert M. 2002. "Rural Labor Markets in an Era of Welfare Reform." Pp. 51-76 Rural Dimensions of Welfare Reform. Bruce A. Weber, Greg J. Duncan, and Leslie A. Whitener, editors. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.

Goffman, Irving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York, NY: Doubleday.

Gringeri, Christina E. 1994. Getting By: Women Homeworkers & Rural Economic Development. Lawrence, KA: University Press of Kansas.

Haraway, Donna. 1988. "Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective." Feminist Studies. 14(3):575-600.

Hays, Sharon. 2003. Flat Broke with Children: Women in the Age of Welfare Reform. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Hess, Daniel B. 2005. "Access to Employment for Adults in Poverty in the Buffalo-Niagara Region." Urban Studies 42(7):1177-1200.

Imig, David R., Janet K. Bokemeier, Dennis Keefe, Cynthia Struthers, and Gail L. Imig. 1997. "The Context of Rural Economic Stress in Families with Children" Michigan Family Review 2(2):69-82.

Kelly, E. Brooke.  2004.  Working for Work in Rural Michigan:  A Study of How Low-Income Mothers Negotiate Paid Work.  Michigan State University, Ph.D. Dissertation, Volumes 1 & 2.

Kelly, E. Brooke.  2005.  "Leaving and Losing Jobs:  Resistance of Rural Low-Income Mothers." Journal of Poverty: Innovations on Social, Political, and Economic Inequalities 9 (1):  83-103.  

Lee, Shawna J. and Amiram D. Vinokur. 2007. "Work Barriers in the Context of Pathways to Employment of Welfare to Work Clients." American Journal of Community Psychology 40:301-312.

Lichter, Daniel T. and Rukamalie Jayakody. 2002. "Welfare Reform: How Do We Measure Success?" Annual Review of Sociology 28:117-141.

Mather, Mark and M. Scopilliti. 2004. "Multiple Jobholding Rates Higher in Rural America." Rural Families Data Center, Population Reference Bureau. Retrieved on June 23, 2008 (www.prb.org/rfdcenter
/MultiplJobholdingRates.htm).

Monroe, Pamela A. and Vicky V. Tiller. 2001. "Commitment to Work Among Welfare-Reliant Women." Journal of Marriage and Family 63(3):816-828.

Nam, Yunju. 2005. "The Roles of Employment Barriers in Welfare Exits and Reentries After Welfare Reform: Event History Analysis." Social Service Review 79(2):268-293.

Nelson, Margaret K. 2005. The Social Economy of Single Motherhood. New York, NY: Routledge.

Nelson, Margaret K. and Joan Smith. 1999. Working Hard and Making Do: Surviving in Small Town America. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Nitschke, Lori 2004. "The Toll on Rural Commuters in the U.S." Population Reference Bureau. Accessed in 2011: www.prb.org/Articles/2004/TheTollonRuralCommutersintheUS.aspx.

Oliker, Stacey. 2000. "Challenges for Studying Care After AFDC," Paper presented at the first annual Conference on Carework, August 11, Washington D.C.

Ong, Paul M. and Douglas Miller. 2005. "Spatial and Transportation Mismatch in Los Angeles." Journal of Planning Education and Research 25(1):43-56.

Pucher, John and John Renne. 2005. "Rural Mobility and Mode Choice: Evidence from the 2001 National Household Travel Survey." Transportation 32:165-186.

Rank, Mark R. 2000. "Poverty and Economic Hardship in Families." Pp. 293-315 Handbook on Family Diversity. David H. Demo, Katherine R. Allen, and Mark A. Find, editors. New York: Oxford University Press.

Reschke, Kathy L. and Susan K. Walker. 2006. "Mothers' Child Caregiving and Employment Commitments and Choices in the Context of Rural Poverty." Affilia: The Journal of Women and Social Work 21(3):306-319.

Roeder, Vivian .D. and Ann V. Millard. 2000. "Gender and Employment Among Latino Migrant Farmworkers in Michigan" Julian Samora Research Institute, Michigan State University. Working Paper No. 52.

Rosenbaum, René R. 2002. "Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers in Michigan: From Dialogue to Action." JSRI Working Paper #39, The Julian Samora Research Institute, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.

Runyan, Jack L. 2001. "The Number of Hired Farmworkers Increased in 2000 and Most Now Come from Minority Groups." Rural America 16 (3): 44-50.

Saenz, Rogelio and Cynthia Cready. 1997. "The Southwest-Midwest Mexican American Migration Flows, 1985-1990." JSRI Research Report #20. The Julian Samora Research Institute, Michigan State University.

Schintler, Laura A. and Tanya Kaplan. 2000. "Welfare Reform and the Spatial Divide; A Study in Transporting Recipients to Jobs." Transportation Planning and Technology 23(4):283-301.

Sherman, Jennifer. 2006. "Coping with Rural Poverty: Economic Survival and Moral Capital in Rural America." Social Forces 85(2):891-913.

Smith, Dorothy E. 1990. The Conceptual Practices of Power: A Feminist Sociology of Knowledge. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.

Struthers, Cynthia B. and Janet L. Bokemeier. 2000. "Myths and Realities of Raising Children and Creating Family Life in a Rural County." Journal of Family Issues 21(1):17-46.

Taylor, Mary J. and Amanda S. Barusch. 2004. "Personal, Family, and Multiple Barriers of Long-Term Welfare Recipients." Social Work 49(2):175-184.

Taylor, Lorraine C. 2001. "Work Attitudes, Employment Barriers, and Mental Health Symptoms in a Sample of Rural Welfare Recipients." American Journal of Community Psychology 29(3):443-463.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. "2000 County Business Patterns, North American Classification System (NAICS)." Retrieved June 22, 2012 (http://censtats.census.gov/cbpnaic/cbpnaic.shtml)

U.S. Bureau of the Census. "Table DP-3. Profile of Selected Economic Characteristics (U.S.): 2000," Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2000.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Economic Research Service (ERS). "Rural-urban Continuum Codes." Retrieved June 22, 2012 (www.ers.usda.gov/data/ruralurbancontinuumcodes)

Webb, Susan E. 2003. "The Bus from Hell Hole Swamp: Black Women in the Hospitality Industry." Pp. 267-290 Communities of Work: Rural Restructuring in Local and Global Contexts. William W. Falk, Michael D. Schulman, and Ann R. Tickamyer, editors. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.

Weber, Bruce A., Greg .J. Duncan, and Leslie A. Whitener. 2002. Rural Dimensions of Welfare Reform. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.

Wells, Barbara. 1999. "Family Continuity and Change in a Restructured Economy: A Case Study from Rural Michigan." PhD dissertation, Department of Sociology, Michigan State University, Volumes 1 & 2.