Citation
Work-food trade-offs : millennial workers in alternative work arrangements

Material Information

Title:
Work-food trade-offs : millennial workers in alternative work arrangements
Creator:
Hahn, Alexis Marguerite
Place of Publication:
Denver, CO
Publisher:
University of Colorado Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( Master of arts)
Degree Grantor:
University of Colorado Denver
Degree Divisions:
Department of Anthropology, CU Denver
Degree Disciplines:
Anthropology
Committee Chair:
Horton, Sarah B.
Committee Members:
Warrener, Anna G.
Tracer, David P.

Notes

Abstract:
Millennials have now surpassed all other generations as the primary age group in the workforce. This comes in the midst of the rise of alternative work arrangements, defined here as part-time work, underemployment, or self-employment. The interrelationships between work, health, and food choices have been well-demonstrated, yet there is little research on how millennials are impacted by this rising type of employment. This research describes how millennials in alternative work arrangements exercise limited agency over their food choices. Alternative work often results in millennials choosing foods based on factors such as time, ease, and cost. Because food choice is linked to nutrition, productivity and health outcomes, this discussion is important to both the public health and the economic sectors.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
Copyright Alexis Marguerite Hahn. Permission granted to University of Colorado Denver to digitize and display this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
WORK-FOOD TRADE-OFFS:
MILLENNIAL WORKERS IN ALTERNATIVE WORK ARRANGEMENTS
by
ALEXIS MARGUERITE HAHN
B.S., California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, 2016
A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Anthropology Program
2018


©2018
ALEXIS MARGUERITE HAHN
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


This thesis for the Master of Arts degree by Alexis Marguerite Hahn has been approved for the Anthropology Program By
Sarah B. Horton, Chair Anna G. Warrener
David P. Tracer


Hahn, Alexis Marguerite (M.A., Anthropology)
Work-food Trade-offs: Millennial Workers in Alternative Work Arrangements Thesis directed by Sarah B. Horton
ABSTRACT
Millennials have now surpassed all other generations as the primary age group in the workforce. This comes in the midst of the rise of alternative work arrangements, defined here as part-time work, underemployment, or self-employment. The interrelationships between work, health, and food choices have been well-demonstrated, yet there is little research on how millennials are impacted by this rising type of employment. This research describes how millennials in alternative work arrangements exercise limited agency over their food choices. Alternative work often results in millennials choosing foods based on factors such as time, ease, and cost. Because food choice is linked to nutrition, productivity and health outcomes, this discussion is important to both the public health and the economic sectors.
The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication.
Approved: Sarah B. Horton
IV


Table of Contents
I. BACKGROUND...........................................................................1
Introduction............................................................................1
The Changing Nature of Work............................................................62
Agency & Food Choice...................................................................84
Food Choice & Health....................................................................6
Health & Work Productivity..............................................................8
Interrelationships: Food Choice, Health, Productivity & The Economy.....................9
II. WORK FOOD TRADE-OFFS: MILLENNIAL WORKERS IN ALTERNATIVE WORK.......................10
Materials & Methods.................................................................10
Results.............................................................................13
Employment & Food Choice....................................................14
Timing..............................................................15
Cost................................................................16
Ease................................................................17
Timing, Cost, & Ease................................................17
Trends & Preferences........................................................19
Financial Support/Transitional Times........................................21
Food, Trust, & Power........................................................23
Other Factors...............................................................24
Food Choice, Physical Health, And Mental Health.............................24
Healthful?..................................................................26
Limitations.........................................................................27
Conclusion..........................................................................28
Moving Forward......................................................................29
REFERENCES.............................................................................31
APPENDIX
V


A. Interview Guide
35
B. Employment Status of Participants......................................................37
C. Occupational Groups....................................................................38
D. Amount of Support and Important Factors in Work-Food Trade-offs........................39
E. The Top Ten Recurring Words from the Listing Activity..................................40
F. Codebook.............................................................................. 11
G. Summary Table of Participant Information...............................................42


I. BACKGROUND Introduction
The purpose of my Master’s thesis “WORK-FOOD TRADE-OFFS: MILLENNIAL
WORKERS IN ALTERNATIVE WORK ARRANGEMENTS” is to understand the relationship between employment status and food choices among millennials. More specifically, this study focuses on millennials in alternative work arrangements. As employers have shifted to contract work, and a number of millennials themselves are drawn to the independence offered by contract work, the number of workers in alternative work arrangements is growing. Katz and Krueger (2016) define alternative work arrangements as encompassing “temporary help agency workers, on-call workers, contract company workers, and independent contractors or freelancers” (Katz and Krueger, 2016, 2). For this project I am expanding this definition to include those who are either underemployed, self-employed, or employed part time.
As we continue into 2018, a record number of individuals in the workforce are millennials. According to the US Census Bureau (2015), the number of millennials surpassed older generations in the workforce in 2014. “Millennial” is the term given to someone born within the years of 1982 and 2000; collectively the generation is referred to as “the millennials” (US Census Bureau, 2015). As they are the dominant population within the workforce, having knowledge of millennials in regard to work and health is of the utmost importance; it is critical as the link between food choice, health, and work capacity has been well demonstrated (Barkin et al., 2010; Wanjek, 2005). Food choice has an important impact on health; poor health often leads to lower lifetime wages, lower capacity to work, and increased sick days (Barkin et al., 2010; Wanjek, 2005; Martorell et al., 2010).
1


The Changing Nature of Work
Alternative work arrangements rose from 10% of the workforce in the 1990s to 16% of the workforce today (Katz and Krueger, 2017, 392). This is especially interesting as the amount of alternative work was stable between 1995 and 2005 (Katz and Krueger, 2016, 2). An alternative work arrangement can be described as self-employed, freelance or contract work, although the phrase encompasses any type of work that does not follow the traditional work pattern (Katz and Krueger, 2016). Another term that is associated with alternative work arrangements is the “gig economy” (Friedman, 2014), where individuals work gigs instead of a traditional nine to five job. These gigs are associated with shorter term employment, part time work, and self-employed work (Friedman, 2014). Millennials are especially drawn to these types of gig jobs, and are often employed in them (Friedman, 2014, 173). According to a recent report, 26% of millennials and 34% of younger millennials consider themselves to be a part of the gig economy (Bank of America, and Khan Academy, 2018, 6).
There are a few reasons hypothesized for the rise in alternative work. Some include companies avoiding rent-sharing, changes in technology, or a shift in worker demographics (Katz and Krueger, 2017). Changes in technology have allowed for cuts in supervisory costs, also incentivizing this growth (Katz and Krueger, 2017). Katz and Krueger postulate that economic events such as recessions (including the 2007-2008 recession) are a major contributor to this shift (Katz and Krueger, 2017, 388). This type of economic event provides “a weak labor market leaving workers with little bargaining power and few options for traditional employment” (Katz and Krueger, 2017, 388). Many workers may have sought alternative work when traditional employment was not available during the 2007-2008 recession (Katz and Krueger, 2016).
2


Moreover, alternative workers are cheaper for employers in general, due to the usual lack of benefits (Kalleberg et al., 2000, 263). Creating alternative jobs may also be appealing due to its flexibility for employers; alternative work often allows for employers to screen or cut employees without significant investment, cutting costs (Kalleberg et al., 2000). A push for jobs with greater flexibility for employees may also have augmented this growth (Katz and Krueger, 2017). However, this leads to less job security within alternative work arrangements (Kalleberg et al., 2000). The structure of capitalism influences individuals’ actions by forcing them to remain within, and by the rules of, the structure. This limits the choices that those without control (of the means of production) have over the ways in which they live; those without control must work for wages to live (Roseberry, 1997, 31). This is what initially draws millennials into the workforce.
Among the unemployed, those individuals who find employment a year later are most likely to find it within an alternative work arrangement (Katz and Krueger, 2017, 390). This may suggest alternative work arrangements are an easier entry point into the working economy than traditional jobs. This study focuses on the Denver metropolitan area, which according to Frey (2018) is the third fastest-growing metropolitan area in the United States in its population of young adults. This makes it a useful site in which to examine the relationship between millennials’ food choices and work arrangements. There are varying statistics on alternative work arrangements in America. In 2015, 10.1% of all US workers were self-employed (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2017). More specifically, in 2015, the underemployment rate in Colorado was 7.9% (Webster and Loayza, 2016, 3). Following a peak of involuntary part-time employment of 25% in 2010, the percent of involuntarily part-time workers remained at 15.4 in 2015 for the state of Colorado (Webster and Loayza, 2016, 12). Overall, alternative work
3


arrangements are still on the rise since the turn of the millennium (Katz and Krueger, 2016). Millennials in alternative work arrangements are especially of interest as they are a group that typically has lower income, a lack of benefits, and a lack of control over their work environment (Friedman, 2014; Katz and Krueger, 2016). Lower income, a lack of benefits, and a lack of control over their work environments operate together to lower agency in food choice.
Agency & Food Choice
The United States widely holds individuals responsible for their own status- whether that is in social, economic, or health contexts. This is bound to the “pull yourself up-by-the-bootstraps” mentality that is prolific in American culture (Winne, 2008, xx). The ideal of the American Dream further facilitates this, as America is seen to be the land of opportunity, where individuals can obtain anything they want. This mentality extends into food choice. But these choices ignore the idea of agency, or the “activity of human subject in structured contexts” that are created from the past yet also shape the future (Roseberry, 1988, 172). That means that activities, such as food choice, do not form independently. Individuals exist “within larger historical, political, and economic movements” (Roseberry, 1988, 169). This highlights the “impact of structures of power” (Roseberry, 1988, 169) on people and their actions (such as food choices). Food choice is an action of agency that is then constrained by the structures one finds oneself in.
The main political economic structure in the United States is capitalism. The accumulation of capital—whether economic, cultural, or social—allows for an individual or group to access a greater amount of resources. This access directly affects the agency an individual or group can have, and what actions the individual or group takes. Food almost always requires economic capital, or money. Because of this, food choice is an action of agency that is
4


then dictated within capitalist rules (Pollard et al., 2002).
Food choice is affected by other macro-level contexts, which include “social, cultural, political, economic” conditions that both “facilitate and constrain” (Sobal and Bisogni, 2009, 41) food choices. Work can constrain the hours of eating, place of food, sanitation condition, type of food purchased, and the amount of time taken consuming the food (Devine et al., 2006, 6; Wanjek, 2005). For a working adult, the workplace becomes a significant environmental factor in food choice. Working individuals have to navigate their food choices based on the agency they have within their own constraints.
Devine et al (2006) define food choice for working parents “as the ways that people actively conceptualized and manage[d] food selection in response to the emotional, temporal, or physical strain of conflicting work and family roles” (Devine et al., 2006, 4). This definition succinctly demonstrates the complexity of food choices; they are both personal and social. Yet, this definition does not capture food choice for millennials who have no children and are in alternative work arrangements. Since the rise of alternative work arrangements is relatively new, little literature exists on alternative workers’ food choices. I alter Devine et al.’s (2006) definition of food choice to describe the food choice of millennials. Food choice is constructed by the ways that millennials shift their food selection in response to managing the multiple roles that they hold at the nexus of political, temporal, workplace, and other environmental factors that shape their agency to do so. Political factors include trust of the government and food system, as well as ethical beliefs.
This study examines the food choices of Millennials aged 22-27 living in the Greater Denver area who have been out of college for longer than 6 months and have no children. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to address the main research question:
5


1. How does participation in an alternative work arrangement within a capitalist society influence the food choices of millennials?
This study also addresses the subsequent research questions:
1. What trade-offs between food and work do millennials make?
2. How does the influence of capitalism encourage individuals to forgo adequate nutrition or even contemplate work/food trade-offs? Furthermore, Pollard et al. (2002) claims that factors of food choice for adults can be broken down into two sections- those factors which influence agency and those which influence choice within agency (Pollard et al., 2002, 376). This can be described as the factors that determine “what a person is able to buy and consume” (i.e. availability, purchasing power) and “what a person chooses to buy and consume”, within that ability (i.e. habits, ideology) (Pollard et al., 2002, 376). It is within these two sections that I will explore millennial’s food choices.
Food Choice & Health
Food choice has major influences on one’s health. Children who have poor nutrition growing up tend to have reduced work capacity and lower wages as adults than those children who eat healthily (Martorell et al., 2010). Poor food choices may result in people who are either malnourished, with many nutritional deficiencies (Wanjek, 2005,12) or people who are calorically ‘fed’ but who have a diet high in fat, sugar and salt (Wanjek, 2005,12). The health of these populations is the result of the nutritional quality of their food choices. We cannot forget, however, that vulnerable populations (like those who are unhealthy) are often limited in how much agency they can exercise in their environment (Dover and Lambert, 2016, 4), and are not to blame for their position.
Individuals are both actors and agents in their own health status (Dover and Lambert,
6


2016, 2). The way that people choose foods within their choice constraints may work to further constrain or expand their agency in food choice. For example, food choices that lead to poor health may then decrease the individual’s productivity and therefore purchasing power. As such, individuals must navigate their food choices within their status as workers (Devine et al., 2006, 8). Those in alternative work arrangements are usually paid less than those in traditional jobs, limiting their monetary resources and agency in food choice (Friedman, 2014, 179). Quick meals devoid of nutritional value are the most prominent food choice strategy for those with low income, worsening their overall health (Devine et al., 2006, 10).
Despite socioeconomic status, the millennial generation does value certain food choice ideals. Millennials value ethical eating and sustainable practices (Johnstone and Lindh, 2018). Millennials in general visit the grocery store less when compared to older generations (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017), and spend more of their money devoted to purchasing food on prepared foods (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017). This is reflected in their spending more on foods such as pasta and sugar than any other generation (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017, iii). As income increases, so does spending on food-at home (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017). A recent study by the Economic Research Service (ERS) within the United States Department of Agriculture found specifically that millennials of higher incomes tend towards purchasing unprocessed ingredients, and buy more vegetables. This makes sense as millennials also value less-processed foods (Gerdes,
2017). Again, millennials who do not have the income to purchase these foods of value (i.e. sustainable, ethical, less-processed) instead purchase prepared foods that are often lacking in sufficient nutrition (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017; Devine et al., 2006). Poor nutrition from these choices creates a lower capacity for work, and then creates a feedback loop that may then leave this group of millennial workers especially vulnerable to poor health and low socioeconomic
7


status in the long-term.
Health & Work Productivity
There is a wealth of information on how health influences work productivity. To be a productive worker is to act to produce benefits and or profits for both yourself and the company for which you work. The relationship between health and work productivity is of utmost importance for the government and employers alike, as capitalism is rooted in the productivity of the worker. The environment in which one works has a large influence on how healthy the employees tend to be. A study by Watts et al. (2016) showed that workers’ perceptions of the importance of health in their workplaces significantly predicted fast food intake, fruit/vegetable intake, and obesity (Watts et al., 2016, 70). Perceptions about workplace health included the importance of health to coworkers and the availability of healthy vs. unhealthy food at work (Watts et al., 2016, 69). In environments where health was not a part of the work culture, there were higher instances of being overweight (Watts et al., 2016).
Barkin et al. (2010) found that obesity has an effect on one’s income; income is commonly used as a measurement of economic productivity. An increase of obesity in millennials has been attributed to a shift away from an active lifestyle as well as in a shift to a less healthy diet (Barkin et al., 2010). Over the course of an adult’s life, Barkin et al. (2010) estimated that obese women will earn $956 billion less and obese men $43 billion less than healthy adults in working wages. This is a huge shift in productivity levels both for the employee and a loss for the economy. This statistic also highlights the difference in the importance of health and physical appearance for men and women in the workplace. The statistics reflect both the discrimination that women face in the workplace based on appearances (Adamitis, 2000) as well as the wage-labor gap between men and women in the United States (U.S. Department of
8


Labor, 2016).
Productivity is not affected by obesity alone; other conditions of poor health adversely affect productivity. Iron deficiency alone can lead to a decrease of 30% in physical work capacity for iron deficient adults (Wanjek, 2005, 13; citing WHO, 2001, p. 30). That translates to a loss of $5 billion in productivity (Wanjek, 2005, 17; citing Ross and Horton, 1998, 38). The World Health Organization found that “adequate nourishment can raise national productivity levels by 20 percent” (Wanjek, 2005; citing WHO, 2003). Furthermore, unhealthy individuals are generally “associated with negative labor market outcomes” as they more frequently miss work (Barkin et al., 2010, 241; citing Baum and Ford 2004; Finkelstein et al., 2005). The impact of good nutrition on health and productivity is well demonstrated, yet its importance needs to be disseminated throughout all economic sectors.
Interrelationships: Food Choice, Health, Productivity, & The Economy
In conclusion, there is a strong web of connectedness among food choices, health, and productivity which influence the economy. Poor food choices can lead to poor health (Barkin et al., 2010), and poor health in turn may lead to loss of productivity and economic instability (Wanjek, 2005). For example, each year, billions of dollars in wages are lost on adult workers with poor health in the United States (Barkin et al., 2010; Wanjek, 2005). This loss is accompanied by increased medical bills. These bills are often paid by employers (Barkin et al., 2010), worsening the net loss. Yet many millennials in alternative work arrangements do not qualify for benefits, thus having to pay out of pocket (Friedman, 2014, 183). This makes them even more vulnerable to the financial stress that constrains their food choices.
The relationship among worker health, productivity, and company profits has become clear for some employers, as some businesses have decided to shift their wellness plans from
9


‘treatment’ to ‘prevention’ (Barkin et al., 2010). In the United States $5.6 billion in direct and indirect costs could be saved annually if only 10% of the adult population aged 35 to 74 engaged in some form of walking (Wanjek, 2005, 17; citing Jones and Eaton, 1994). Overall this interrelationship highlights the fact that “good nutrition is good business and a sound investment” (Wanjek, 2005, 5). The relationship between food choice, health, productivity and the economy is important to understand especially in the new economic context of alternative work and millennial workers.
II. WORK-FOOD TRADE-OFFS: MILLENIAL WORKERS IN ALTERNATIVE WORK
ARRANGEMENTS
This research project aims to understand the influence of specific alternative work arrangements (i.e. underemployment, self-employment, and part-time employment) on millennial workers' food choices. It examines how millennials make food choices while navigating between their political, temporal, work, and other environments. How alternative work arrangements influence millennial health and productivity via food choice has yet to be demonstrated. Millennial workers in these types of alternative work arrangements were interviewed about their experiences with work and healthful eating. The interrelationship between work, food choice, and health is important to describe as more millennials enter the work force, and as more millennials join in alternative work arrangements; this relationship is critical for encouraging health and creating stable networks for healthful choices among millennials.
Materials & Methods
This study provides useful information for future research to encourage both individual health and productivity within alternative workplaces where employees are increasingly of the millennial generation. The study took place in the Denver metropolitan area, this location was
10


appropriate as Denver is the third largest in young adult population growth in the United States (Frey, 2018). Participant recruitment occurred via flyer postings at various locations in the Greater Denver Area that cater to millennials (i.e. grocery stores, popular cafes) as well as on Craigslist. The flyer described the subject population, asking “Are you a Millennial 22-27? Have you held a bachelor’s degree for at least six months? Are you self-employed, working part-time, or under-employed? Are you without kids and living in the Greater Denver Area?” It then asked if they were interested in participating in a semi-structured interview. A contact email was then provided for the interested participants. Participants who completed the interview received a ten-dollar gift card as a thank you for their time.
Methods consisted of one phase of qualitative semi-structured interviews of millennials employed in alternative work arrangements. Semi-structured interviews were used because they offer more flexibility in the interview setting- participants are able to expand on whatever they see fit (Brinkmann, 2018, 579). Without the flexibility in semi-structured interviews, the nuances in the experiences and worldviews of the participants would be difficult to discern. Interviews lasted from 12 to 35 minutes, depending on the will of the participant.
Participant interview audio was recorded using Zoom software; original audio files were de-identified. (They were titled only by generic title of participant, e.g. “participant 1”). All participant contact information was destroyed immediately after the interview as no further contact with research participants was necessary.
The interview was stratified into two sections. The first section addressed the participants’ employment status and background; the second section addressed food choices and healthful eating. The second section also included a free listing activity for the participant to identify the 15 foods they most commonly choose to consume and the 15 foods they would choose under an
11


ideal employment status for an ideal diet. The questions are listed in Appendix A.
The audio files of these interviews were first transcribed via Temi.com; the transcriptions were then reviewed, and edited for accuracy. The transcriptions were coded via the Atlas.ti software, version 1.6.0. The interviews were first analyzed in a cross-case comparative analysis for themes and patterns. Codes were created first a priori from the research questions, and then subsequent emergent codes were devised from the transcribed texts during the coding process. The coding process began with 15 a priori codes. After coding, however, 15 additional emergent codes were added. These emergent codes, listed in Appendix F, captured the prominent themes that recurred in the interviews. Atlas.ti was used mostly for the highlighting and organization of codes and quotations. Meaning was then derived from these patterns and the overall narratives described by participants. These results were then complied into a qualitative account of experiences of work/food trade-offs.
Additionally, the lists of the 15 foods consumed most often and 15 foods believed to be ideal for a healthful diet were compiled into separate documents. The lists were then analyzed for word frequencies within the Atlas.ti software to identify any highly recurring answers among participants. The top ten recurring words in each list were then analyzed independently from Atlas.ti for meaning. They are listed from greater frequency to lower frequency in Appendix E. The study was approved through the Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board, or COMIRB, and classified as posing minimal risk to participants. Atlast.ti, a Qualitative Data Analysis Software (QDAS) was used as a tool yet was not the main factor in analysis. Reporting the use of a QDAS follows the suggestions laid out by Paulus et al (2017) for transparency of methods
12


Results
When first interviewing participants, it was clear that many had never discussed food choice nor healthfulness; these terms took some adjusting to for many participants. Perhaps this was a reaction to their status as young adults, many of whom are just beginning to forge their own food choices independently of their family or University dorms. The listing activity solicited vocal reactions from participants. These ranged from “This makes me look healthy actually ” to “Jeez this list is sort of sad...”. Some found the lists difficult- or even embarrassing to recall. The intentionality of food choice ranged between a conscious effort to eat healthfully to ‘shock’ about what the participant consumed on a weekly basis. As one participant put it: “Wow this is giving me a lot to go home and think about.”
There were a total of 17 study participants. The majority of participants (15) were female with the average age being slightly over 24 years old. The majority of participants (12) were also employed part time; only a few were underemployed or self-employed. Four participants had two or more jobs; those with more than one job often described their employment as two categories (i.e. self-employed and underemployed). Participants’ employment status is reflected in Appendix B. The United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (2018) recognizes 23 major occupational groups. In this study, 12 out of these 23 occupational groups are represented. Appendix C displays the occupational groups in which millennials in this study worked.
Although the total number of participants is 17, Appendix C shows 21 different occupational groups. This is due to several participants holding more than one job at a time. Many participants had schedules that were not stable, and therefore were unable to quantify the exact hours they worked. However, working hour averages range from less than ten hours a week to up to 60; with the average hours worked falling just over 26 hours per week.
13


On average, participants made $440 dollars a week; this was calculated with the exception of a self-employed participant who received sporadic sums of money and could not provide an average. Data is listed in Appendix G. This average is over $8,000 dollars less than the sufficient annual income for one-person living in Denver in 2015 according to Cooper and Gould (2015). This is especially troubling as prices in Denver have climbed substantially since 2015, without wage adjustment (Bell Policy Institute, 2017).
The key factors discussed by Pollard et al. (2002) in adult food choices (availability and monetary cost, time constraints, sensory appeal, familiarity, social interactions, personal ideology, media, and health) (Pollard et al., 2002, 376), were all consistent with the findings of this study. Yet millennials in alternative work arrangements have limited agency in being able to make food choices based on all of these factors. The main influences of employment on food choice for millennials in alternative work arrangements (Appendix D) were split into the following categories: “TIMING”, “EASE”, “COST”, and “EATING LESS.” “TIMING” denotes that the hours that the participant worked shaped their food choices. “EASE” denotes that the participant’s job made them seek ‘easy’ foods which were convenient or required little to no skill or time to make. “COST” denotes that the participant’s employment constrained their food choice on a basis of how much food costs. “EATING LESS” is a unique finding where one participant said that her employment status made her depressed and less likely to eat. Work “TIMING” was the most commonly discussed factor in food choice for millennials (11 out of 17). The summary of participant results can be found in Appendix G.
Employment & Food Choice
Millennials were asked to self-identify as either self-employed, underemployed, or employed part-time. Among the participants, 12 reported being part time, two underemployed,
14


one self-employed, and two in a combination of these employment statuses (Appendix B). As Devine et al. (2006) suggest, the working context of an individual becomes a large factor in food choice. Several food coping strategies exist in relation to workplace or economic pressures, including managing emotions from stress, reducing time/effort in obtaining food, reducing expectations of food, prioritizing and making trade-offs (Devine et al., 2006, 8). The trade-offs discussed most often by millennials in alternative work were in relation to time, ease, and cost. Amount of food was a trade-off also discussed significantly by one participant. Interviewees reported that the most common way that employment interfered with healthful eating was due to their work hours or lack of breaks. Only three participants initially reported that their food choices were not affected by their employment; they however noted later in their interviews that work timing indeed affected their food choices. More than the lack of income to purchase healthful foods, millennials often found that their work schedules- early morning, late nights, no breaks- encouraged trade-offs. Even those millennials who had significant savings or financial support from others also reported that the hours of their jobs interfered with their abilities to eat healthfully.
Timing
Millennials reported that due to their alternative work arrangements, they were unable to take breaks or eat at regular meal times. This would often result in participants eating in their cars on the way to or from work, or even between jobs. They then chose on-the-go foods like granola bars. Some even mentioned early morning or overnight shifts which would significantly affect their eating patterns throughout the day. Often these individuals had jobs in the “Healthcare Support” or “Food Preparation and Serving Related” occupational groups, in positions such as early morning baristas. One participant explained,
15


I work so early- like the opening shift... so I’m always up at like 5am. So I take lunch at nine. And then I eat like a second lunch at two. Then I eat dinner. I probably eat more because I’m awake... just because I’m moving and doing things.
Another participant worked as a medical scribe and had to work many overnight shifts. Because of this she had to eat before and after work and sleep during the day; this was a significant alteration to her normal mealtimes. She would often grab a bagel from “Einstein’s” bagels as well, as it was a food that was quick and close to her job.
Cost
Healthier foods are on average more expensive than less-healthy ones (Rao et al., 2013). Not being able to eat as much fresh produce as one desired was a common theme among participants. As one participant put it: “I can't eat as much fresh produce as I'd like because of my pay grade.” This sentiment is represented in the results of the listing activity. “Frozen” fell into the top ten most frequently used words in the 15 Most Commonly Consumed list; while “fresh” was a word that was in the top ten most frequently used words from the 15 Most Healthful list (Appendix E). “Fresh” was associated with higher costs. When asked about why pasta was on her Top 15 Most Commonly Consumed list, a participant exclaimed, “Pasta is just so cheap!”
Choosing cheap and quick foods was a common thread within the interview dialogue. This is similar to the findings of Devine et al. (2006), who found that low income work encouraged a cost-based trade-off towards a less healthful diet; because of this, foods like macaroni and cheese, which is inexpensive, were favored. As one worker who was self-employed said: “I'm confined to some... certain menu items... or whether that be at a grocery store or at a restaurant. I don't necessarily want to buy a $20 salad at a restaurant versus going home and eating one.”
16


Some participants—especially those in service occupations including waitressing and being a barista—mentioned that they worked directly with food. Each participant who worked with food reported that it was detrimental to their health. Often free or discounted food was offered to participants in the work environment, prompting employees to eat at work. Eating at work occurred despite the belief that it was unhealthy—due to convenience or cost effectiveness. This supports the idea that those in alternative work arrangements have less agency in food choice due to their lower incomes (Friedman, 2014, 179).
Ease
Millennials often chose foods that were perceived as “EASY.” This was a response to a lack of time, lack of energy, lack of income, and even lack of skill. Snack foods were often utilized by millennials because they require little to no preparation, and therefore were seen as “EASY.” Other easy foods included those that required no work (pre-packaged snacks like chips, hummus, pretzels, fruit, or granola bars) or only required simple preparation, like pasta. Easy foods most often did not necessitate cooking skill or the ownership of appliances. Participants listed “frozen foods” in the 15 Most Commonly Consumed and the opposite category, “fresh foods” in the 15 Most Healthful food lists, respectively (Appendix E). “Frozen food” was associated with a lower cost, easier preparation, and less time; “fresh food” was perceived as more expensive, harder to prepare, and more time consuming. Easy foods were also seen as the solution for those who did not have time nor did not know how to cook.
Timing, Cost, & Ease
A concern with timing, cost, and ease led many millennials not to cook. Several participants mentioned that they were not confident in their cooking skills, which were often believed to be a necessary factor in healthful eating. Cooking was seen as something that takes
17


time and effort to learn. Many said that their commute times or oddly scheduled shifts did make cooking meals more difficult or unappealing. Devine et al. found that the most common food choice/work coping strategy for those with lower-income was found to be eating “quick meals” which were almost always of poor nutritional value (Devine et al., 2006, 10), this aligns with millennials wanting to make trade-offs based on time, cost, and ease. As one interviewee put it: “I do eat a lot of fish because I get frozen fish. Probably not the most-healthy food but it’s easy to cook.” A long day often meets a lack of extra income to buy healthier convenience meals or creates a lack of will to spend time and energy cooking.
Some participants who were trying to take control of their eating habits had mentioned practicing their cooking skills or using cooking home delivery services such as “Home Chef.” These home delivery services usually involve a monthly or weekly subscription which delivers ingredients and a recipe to a preferred address; different services are available that cater to different budgets and dietary preferences. Many of these services also allow several free meals or a trial week, making them temporarily accessible to those who find they are constrained by costs. In the case of this participant, the delivery service helped cushion some of the time-consuming aspects of cooking a meal. Cooking delivery services are a way that millennials are using their agency to improve their cooking knowledge in their new adult lives.
The emphasis on time, cost, and ease also often resulted in fast food consumption for the participants. As one put it:
I have to buy the inexpensive things that I can afford. And the hours that I work,
I don’t get home until six thirty... seven o'clock. So by the time I get back I’m like WELL I don't really want to cook anything at all like so I’ll go through a drive through or something super quick and easy.
18


One notable exception to this pattern was a woman who worked from home, in the “Sales and Related Occupations” occupational sector. Contrary to others, she said that her job allowed her to spend more time cooking and preparing meals. This was a benefit she found to having an alternative work arrangement that increased her ability to eat healthfully.
Trends & Preferences
Many participants commented on the popularity and moral dilemmas surrounding “ethical eating.” These practices were connected to the “vegan” trend, “organics”, and “eating less animal products.” One participant noted that she had been:
.. .very conflicted lately with the whole vegan wave... what's right what's not. Who knows? So that's why I put the first two. I don't know. I think I've come to the conclusion to eat more ethically... than cutting out a complete column from the food pyramid.
Meats were specifically subject to lower consumption. Several reasons were given for the reduction, the first being that eating less meat was an ethical action. Participants who felt this way also believed that eating less meat was more sustainable and eco-friendly. This is consistent with the findings by Johnstone and Lindh, (2018), who noted that many millennials feel that eating sustainably or ethically empowers them (Johnstone and Lindh, 2018, 135) in a structure that otherwise leaves them little true choice. This may be a reason why several participants had contemplated eating less meat or becoming vegan, as meat consumption is often viewed as less ethical than a plant-based diet. The next reason for buying less meat was that meat was often more expensive than other foods. As a way to avoid spending more, millennials chose to eat less meat. Finally, there was a common belief that meat was a food that required higher quality and therefore was restricted to those who had the income to purchase it. Participants mentioned the importance of “antibiotic-free”, “organic”, and “higher grade” meats; many who wanted to buy
19


meat of higher quality mentioned that they would have more meat in their diets if they had a higher income.
Other trends that became apparent during the study was the desire for avocados, kombucha, and alcoholic beverages. Millennials commented on their preference for avocados, six participants included avocados on their 15 Most Healthful foods list. Millennials would often report that they could not bring themselves to buy avocados often. This was due to the high price of avocados; avocados were then consumed as a novelty item. Kombucha was mentioned in four of the interviews. Kombucha, a fermented probiotic tea, was consumed for multiple reasons, the first being that it was what other healthy people “seemed to be” eating. The second reason was for probiotics. Finally, participants enjoyed the taste of Kombucha. Alcoholic beverages such as beer, wine, and liquor were also chosen for several reasons. These included alcohol use for socializing, for relaxation or mental health, and for digestion. One woman stated, “I just feel like it that helps my digestion, to be honest. It’s like there's probiotics in it. It's good.. .1 staunchly believe it's good for you.”
Another trend among millennials in alternative work arrangements was that they would shift the location where they shopped if they had a higher income. Many mentioned moving away from relatively less expensive stores and starting to shop at Whole Foods. Additionally, they would expand their food choices to encompass more expensive produce and products that were not on sale.
Foods were also chosen due to personal preferences. Interestingly, cheese was the most commonly consumed item among the participants. This may be a reflection of the over-arching per-capita trend of cheese consumption in the United States. According to the USDA: Economic
20


Research Service (2018), cheese consumption per capita has more than doubled between 1975 and 2016.
The study results from the Economic Research Service (ERS) within the United States Department of Agriculture is consistent with the desires of the millennials in this study when asked how their food choices would change with a higher income. That is, millennials of higher incomes tend towards purchasing unprocessed ingredients, are less likely to buy pasta, and buy more vegetables (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017). Another finding consistent with the current study is that millennials buy fewer grains, white meat, and red meat than other generations (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017, iii). Millennials spend more on prepared foods, pasta, and sugar than any other generation (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017, iii). These food choices align with the trade-offs millennials in alternative work are making in regards to quicker, cheaper, and easier foods. The study by the ERS also found that millennials spend an average of 12 minutes less eating and drinking than traditionalists (retirees) and spend “significantly less time on food preparation, presentation, and cleanup” than members of Generation X (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017, iii). Both of these data points reflect the on-the go nature of the majority of millennials’ lives and their lack of confidence in preparing their own foods.
Financial Support/Transitional Times
Many participants had financial support from family or savings. Only five millennials reported that they had no support, four described their reliance on savings, and the remaining eight participants received some financial support (Appendix D). Four millennials were supported over 50% by their parents or lived at home. The four millennials in this study who were supported over 50% did not find cost to be a primary factor in their food choices; this
21


makes sense as they did not need to devote as much of their earned money towards non-food items (i.e. rent, car payments).
Millennials living at home aligns with the extended childhood often attributed to young adults in the United States today (Twenge and Park, 2017). This extended childhood is characterized by the initiation of adult activities at a later age when compared to older generations (Twenge and Park, 2017, 2). This pattern of extended childhood extends across racial, socioeconomic, regional, and gender categories (Twenge and Park, 2017, 6).
Extended childhood may in part be due to the phenomena of “boomeranging.” This is defined as leaving one’s parents’ home, only to return later (Houle and Warner, 2017; citing Goldscheider and Goldscheider, 1999). Student debt has commonly been pointed to as a reason for this return home. However, when investigated by Houle and Warner, debt was found to play a small role in this return home; boomeranging is more accurately predicted by labor market weakness, with higher rates of boomeranging in poorer labor market conditions (Houle and Warner, 2017, 104). This aligns with Katz and Krueger’s (2017) discussion of why millennials enter alternative work arrangements in the first place- a weak labor market.
Most individuals in this study who were heavily supported were in a period of transition towards their next economic or educational goal—whether that is saving money or applying for another degree. Seven of the participants were enrolled in some type of class, and one was applying for her next degree; this highlights the period of transition they found themselves in.
The number of millennials pursuing another academic degree may be a reflection of a weak labor market, which would make the competition for jobs more intense. The participants enrolled in classes listed their status as a student as one of the reasons they found themselves in an alternative work arrangement.
22


Food, Trust, & Power
Participants stated that the confusion created by the inundation of social media and marketing led them to distrust food systems. This is consistent with millennials being skeptical of big institutions in general (Diggles, 2014, 7); this includes the government and government regulated programs. One participant who stated their desire to eat organically even doubted the validity of the claim organic: “.. .the food companies-are they really organic?” Yet, many give these companies and labels the benefit of the doubt due to popular media, or blindly trust them in self-acknowledged ignorance. This illustrates that people are often limited in how they can exercise agency in their environment-in particular, over food choice (Dover and Lambert, 2016, 4). When asked where she got her information on healthful food, one participant said in jest, “I don’t know... popular media? What healthy people get. Sure. What’s in Whole Foods. If it’s in Whole Foods, it has to be healthy right?”
Some participants mentioned that they do not have the time to do their own food research- they must rely on the pre-vetting they assume is done by grocery stores and markets. Millennials trust that the organic section of the grocery store is organic, and that a product in the “health food aisle” is healthy due to their limited agency (Dover and Lambert, 2016; Pollard et al. 2002). This works well for capitalist markets that rely on the trust of their consumer in order to make a profit (Morgan and Hunt, 1994). The demographic of millennials in alternative work arrangements is especially helpful to these market goals, as these individuals are particularly limited in their agency to distrust food systems. Johnstone and Lindh (2018) found that millennials either wanted greater transparency from their food choices or were indifferent (Johnstone and Lindh, 2018, 134). Their indifference was often due to feeling that despite the information they received, the choice would be “out of their control” (Johnstone and Lindh,
23


2018, 134). After all, “food means power, and power means food” (Belasco and Scranton, 2014, 4).
Other Factors
When asked where participants received their healthful food knowledge, they either cited media or marketing, recommendations, or their mothers. Some of the media or marketing sources that stood out were magazines, the “health section” in the grocery store, or the internet in general. The recommendations came from family, government recommendations like “My Plate” (the current dietary guide for the United States), and doctors. Regarding mothers, multiple participants referenced their mothers teaching them how to eat or cooking for them during childhood as sources of their ideas of ideal healthful diets. This highlights the connectivity of adult food choices to childhood eating behaviors and environment.
One participant described enacting her agency to avoid unhealthy foods in spite of the pressures of timing, cost, and ease. She noted that her workplace was mostly female; these females often discussed health and attempted to eat more healthfully. They would do this as a group. She said that this subculture within the workplace helped her resist the unhealthy snacks in the breakroom that were “always tempting.” The women worked together to help resist what they believed to be unhealthy albeit convenient, cost-effective (free) foods. The impact of income and costs on food choices led millennials with financial support to experience work and food choice in a different way.
Food Choice, Physical Health & Mental Health Food choice is the result of complex relationships and personal calculations (Sobal and Bisogni, 2009); if the American public had greater knowledge about the foods they were consuming, they might change their food choices. In the United States alone, 60 to 70 million
24


people are affected by digestive disease (National Institutes of Health, 2009; National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 2014). This makes the human gut a focus of current research in health.
De Fillipo et al. emphasize that “diet has a dominant role over other possible variables such as ethnicity, sanitation, hygiene, geography, and climate, in shaping the gut microbiota” (De Fillipo et al., 2010, 14695). This is important as the human gut has many roles. It promotes “immunity, digestion, assimilation, synthesis, metabolism of varied compounds, storage of fats, and prevention of growth of pathogenic bacteria, thus ensuring wellbeing of the host” (Chatterjee et al., 2017, 468). It has been found that gut microbiota has a profound effect on diabetes, and can be a barrier for the body against pathogenic bacteria (Chatterjee et al., 2017, 471-2). This in turn helps illustrate the relationship between productivity, poor health, and obesity (Barkin et al., 2010; Wanjek, 2005). Poor health and obesity, which have roots in gut health and food choice, have both been shown to decrease the work capacity of a working adult (Martorell et al., 2010; Wanjek, 2005).
Understanding the relationship between work capacity and food choice- which can support or discourage a healthy gut- is important for those who are struggling with gut health. Individuals may be able to make small shifts in food choice that lead to better health outcomes and greater work capacity. Yet their ability to shift behaviors while in alternative work arrangements may be inhibited by the constraints on millennials’ income, work hours, work environment, and cooking ability. Additionally, recent studies have shown a linkage between gut health and mental health. This includes a bi-directional communication that is mediated through the autonomic nervous system, enteric nervous system, neuroendocrine system, and immune system (Foster and Neufeld, 2013). This axis could have implications for understanding
25


depression (Foster and Neufeld, 2013), which is one of the most common mental disorders in the United States (National Institute of Mental Health, 2017).
One participant who was not satisfied with her extremely part-time employment status (less than ten hours a week) mentioned her employment status as something that affected both her mental health and food choices. She said: “I feel like just being bored and depressed and not working... I have way less of an appetite just in general as well.” She also described her minimal employment as not requiring much energy- she found no reason to need fuel in the form of food. She said: “I am way less inclined to even go get anything to eat.” The participant also noted “ice chips” as one of her most frequently consumed foods, further detailing her lack of appetite. She shifted her food choices to eating less food (Appendix D). This demonstrates the importance of these linkages in addressing both public health and health policies within work environments, as these positive feedback loops may exacerbate problems with employment status, poor food choice, and health.
Healthful?
What is healthful for these millennials in alternative work arrangements? The majority of participants said that eating healthy foods was important, but was not the only factor in a healthful life. Most mentioned either happiness, exercise, or mental health in addition to making good food choices. This was well summarized by one participant:
I think it extends more to me more than just diet. I think it has to do with everything in the whole body. I'm a firm believer that your mind dictates how you feel what you do, if you have a healthy mind set, and are happy and healthy with your diet and your lifestyle, then you will be healthy overall.
26


Most participants found that a healthful lifestyle required both conscious thought and balance. According to these millennials one can’t focus on only one area of wellbeing and still be considered to lead a healthful life. In healthful food choices one needs to pay attention to what will fuel you (energy). Participants believed that diets should include indulgence in moderation for a healthful life.
Although participants did not describe food choice as the determining factor of a healthful life, non-processed, plain, and “from the Earth” foods were described as ideal for being healthful. This is consistent with Sharon Gerdes’ findings; she is a food scientist who has found that a “clean label and unprocessed have become synonymous with healthy” for millennials (Gerdes, 2017, 22). Being healthful for millennials was overwhelmingly found to be the result of balance in one’s life between diet, exercise, and mental health or mindset.
Limitations
There are several limitations to this study. One is that recruitment was done randomly, resulting in the participants being primarily female. Another limitation is understanding the financial stability or food choices of the participants’ families of birth and how they may have affected participants’ food choices. This may have provided useful background on the participants’ food choices and prioritization of factors influencing work-food trade-offs. The work-food trade-offs of millennial workers in alternative work arrangements are not unlike other groups of low-wage workers. For example, low-income working parents also make work-food trade-offs in reducing their allocation of time and effort to food (Devine et al., 2006). Yet millennials in alternative work do so in alignment with millennial trends, represented in an aversion to cooking and desire to make ethical or sustainable food choices. The aversion to cooking highlights these millennials’ life-stage as early adults; the aversion may also be an
27


emulation of past generations’ desire for less time spent on preparing food. Finally, millennials in alternative work show a desire to make ethical or sustainable food choices, and have found unique ways to attempt these choices while staying within their means. Additionally, it's difficult to generalize the results from the sample to all millennials as a group, as the sample may not represent all millennials.
Conclusion
Most millennials in alternative work arrangements find themselves making food choices to accommodate work schedules and lower salaries that they describe as less than ideal. These work-food tradeoffs are mainly made due to a concern with timing, ease, and cost; millennials in alternative work arrangements reported that timing was their most significant work-food tradeoff. Millennials with significant savings or financial support also found their tradeoffs centered around the timing of work. Those who are in alternative work arrangements still value millennial food ideals, yet are constrained in their ability to always act accordingly. Quick, convenient meals were a common choice for millennials who felt that their food choices were altered by their employment in an alternative work arrangement, despite their feelings that these meals weren’t the healthiest choice to make. This is similar to the findings by Devine et al., (2006, 10), where quicker ‘convenience’ meals were a key work-life-food strategy. Millennials in alternative work arrangements often acknowledge the importance of healthy eating for a healthful life, but do not think this occurs in isolation. Participants often mentioned the importance of balance in one’s life; balance with one’s mental health and physical health were all reported to be necessary for a healthful life.
28


Moving Forward
Every day, more millennials enter into the workforce. As the economy is growing to foster the employment of individuals in alternative work arrangements, more and more millennial workers will find themselves in an alternative work arrangement in the coming years. In contrast to traditional full-time jobs, individuals in alternative work arrangements are not granted as many benefits or protections under law. As seen in this study, millennials in alternative work arrangements report limited agency in their food choices due to the tradeoffs they make with work. These food choices have serious possible implications for their physical and mental health. These health risks highlight how those in alternative work arrangements find themselves face to face with new occupational health and safety risks (Howard, 2017, 7). Since alternative work is not going away, we cannot wait to address this until the millennial work force gets sick.
Without the benefits of a full time job, millennial workers in alternative work arrangements may be especially vulnerable to negative health outcomes related to their food choices. They may also be saddled with debt from covering their own health care costs. To help cushion this double blow, more research on work and food choice should be done. This may lead to health plans or the creation of benefits for those employed in alternative work arrangements. This will save companies on health care costs, on training costs (due to reduced turnover of sick workers) (Wanjek, 2005), and will provide many millennials with a better foundation for health as they age. Again, as Wanjek suggests, “good nutrition is good business and a sound investment” (Wanjek, 2005, 5).
As the number of both millennials in the workforce and in alternative work arrangements continues to grow, we must expand the discourse of public health to include millennials in alternative work arrangements. These workers are an important part of the American economy
29


and cannot be left behind. Perhaps alternative workplaces can begin following the companies who have shifted to preventative healthcare, as workplace environment can “maximize health” (Barkin et al., 2010, 242). Further discussions should be held on how healthful eating practices can be encouraged in these alternative work arrangements; changes are necessary to ensure the health and productivity of both the individuals and companies at large.
30


References
Adamitis, Elizabeth M. "Appearance matters: A proposal to prohibit appearance discrimination in employment." Wash. L. Rev. 75 (2000): 195.
Bank of America, and Khan Academy. 2018 Better Money Habits Millennial Report. Report. Bank of America. Winter ed. 2018.
Barkin, Shari L., William J. Heerman, Michael D. Warren, and Christina Rennhoff "Millennials and the World of Work: The Impact of Obesity on Health and Productivity." Journal of Business and Psychology 25, no. 2 (2010): 239-245.
Baum, C. L., 2nd, & Ford, W. F. The wage effects of obesity:
A longitudinal study. Health Economics, (2004) 13(9), 885-899.
Bell Policy Institute. Economic Mobility in Colorado. Bell Policy Institute, 2017, www.bellpolicy.org.Accessed 22 Mar. 2018.
Brinkmann, S. 2018. The Interview. In Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. eds., The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, 5th Edition, Sage: Thousand Oaks, California pp.576-599Preview the document
Cooper, David, and Elise Gould. “EPI's Family Budgets and Income Sufficiency in Denver.”
Economic Policy Institute, 19 May 2015, www.epi.org/publication/epis-family-budgets-and-income-sufficiency-in-Denver/.
De Fillipo, Carlotta, Duccio Cavalieri, Monica Di Paola, Matteo Ramazzotti, Jean Baptiste Poullet, Sebastien Massart, Silvia Collini, Giuseppe Pieraccini, and Paolo Lionetti. "Impact of diet in shaping gut microbiota revealed by a comparative study in children from Europe and rural Africa." PNAS 107, no. 33 (August 17, 2010): 14691-4696. http ://www. pnas. org/content/107/33/14691. full .pdf.
Devine CM, Jastran M, Jabs J, Wethington E, Farrell TJ, Bisogni CA. "A lot of sacrifices": Work-family spillover and the food choice coping strategies of low-wage employed parents. Social Science and Medicine. 2006;63(10):2591-2603.
Diggles, Michelle. "Millennials-Political Explorers." Washington, DC: Third Way (2014).
Dover, Robert VH, and Estelle V. Lambert. "“Choice Set” for health behavior in choice-
constrained settings to frame research and inform policy: examples of food consumption, obesity and food security." International journal for equity in health 15, no. 1 (2016): 1.
Finkelstein, E., Fiebelkom, C., & Wang, G. (2005). The costs of obesity among full-time employees. American Journal of Health Promotion, 20(1), 45-51.
Foster, Jane A. and Karen-Anne McVey Neufeld. "Gut-Brain Axis: How the Microbiome
31


Influences Anxiety and Depression." Trends in Neurosciences 36, no. 5 (2013): 305-312.
Frey, William H. "The Millennial Generation: A Demographic Bridge to America's Diverse Future." Brookings. February 20, 2018. Accessed April 16, 2018. https://www.brookings.edu/research/millennials/.
Friedman, Gerald. "Workers without employers: shadow corporations and the rise of the gig economy." Review of Keynesian Economics 2, no. 2 (2014): 171-188.
Gerdes, Sharon. "Millennials Redefine 'Healthy'." Dairy Foods 118, no. 4 (2017): 22
Goldscheider, Frances K., Calvin Goldscheider, and ProQuest (Firm). The Changing Transition to Adulthood: Leaving and Returning Home. Vol. 17. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications, 1999.
Houle, Jason N., and Cody Warner. "Into the red and back to the nest? Student debt, college completion, and returning to the parental home among young adults." Sociology of education 90, no. 1 (2017): 89-108.
Howard, John. "Nonstandard work arrangements and worker health and safety." American journal of industrial medicine 60, no. 1 (2017): 1-10.
Johnstone, Leanne, and Cecilia Lindh. "The sustainability-age dilemma: A theory of (un)
planned behaviour via influencers." .Journal of Consumer Behaviour 17, no. 1 (2018).
Jones, T.; Eaton, C. “Cost-benefit analysis of walking to prevent coronary heart disease”, Archives of Family Medicine. 1994. Vol. 3, No. 8, pp. 703-710.
Kalleberg, Arne L., Barbara F. Reskin, and Ken Hudson. "Bad Jobs in America: Standard and Nonstandard Employment Relations and Job Quality in the United States." American Sociological Review 65, no. 2 (2000): 256. doi: 10.2307/2657440.
Katz, Lawrence F., and Alan B. Krueger. The rise and nature of alternative work arrangements in the United States, 1995-2015. No. w22667. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2016.
Katz, Lawrence F., and Alan B. Krueger. "The Role of Unemployment in the Rise in Alternative Work Arrangements." American Economic Review 107, no. 5 (2017): 388-92. doi:10.1257/aer.p20171092.
Kuhns, Annemarie, and Michelle Saksena. "Food Purchase Decisions of Millennial Households Compared to Other Generations." (2017).
Martorell, Reynaldo, Paul Melgar, John A. Maluccio, Aryeh D. Stein, and Juan A. Rivera. "The Nutrition Intervention Improved Adult Human Capital and Economic Productivity." The Journal of Nutrition 140, no. 2 (2010): 411-414.
32


Morgan, Robert M., and Shelby D. Hunt. "The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing." The journal of marketing (1994): 20-38.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. “Digestive Diseases Statistics for the United States." November 01, 2014. Accessed September 28, 2017. https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statistics/digestive-diseases.
National Institute of Mental Health. "Major Depression Among Adults." Accessed December 1, 2017. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/prevalence/major-depression-amongadults.shtml.
National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Opportunities and Challenges in Digestive Diseases Research: Recommendations of the National Commission on Digestive Diseases. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; (2009). NIH Publication 08-6514.
Paulus, P., Woods, M., Atkins, D., Macklin, R. 2017. The discourse of QDAS: reporting
practices of ATLAS.ti and NVivo users with implications for best practices, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20:1, pp. 35-47
Pollard, J., SF L. Kirk, and J. E. Cade. "Factors affecting food choice in relation to fruit and vegetable intake: a review." Nutrition research reviews 15, no. 2 (2002): 373-387.
Rao, Mayuree, Ashkan Afshin, Gitanjali Singh, and Dariush Mozaffarian. "Do healthier foods and diet patterns cost more than less healthy options? A systematic review and metaanalysis." BMJopen 3, no. 12 (2013): e004277.
Roseberry, William. 1997. Marx and Anthropology. Annual Review of Anthropology 26: 25-46.
Roseberry, William. 1988. Political Economy. Annual Review of Anthropology 17: 161-185
Ross, J.; Horton, S. 1998. Economic consequences of iron deficiency (Ottawa, The Micronutrient Initiative).
Sobal, Jeffery, and Carole A. Bisogni. "Constructing food choice decisions." Annals of Behavioral Medicine 38, no. 1 (2009): 37-46.
Twenge, Jean M., and Heejung Park. "The Decline in Adult Activities Among US Adolescents, 1976-2016." Child development (2017).
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. "15 million people were self-employed in 2015, or 10.1 percent of all U.S. workers." U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Accessed June 29, 2017. https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2016/self-employment-in-the-united-states/home.htm.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2018 Standard Occupational Classification System. November
33


30, 2017. Accessed March 21, 2018. https://www.bls.gOv/soc/2018/major_groups.htm#13-0000.
US Census Bureau. "Millennials Outnumber Baby Boomers and Are Far More Diverse." The United States Census Bureau. 2015. Accessed December 01, 2016. http://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2015/cbl5-113.html
U.S. Department of Labor. Women's Bureau. 2016. Women’s Earnings and the Wage Gap. https://www.dol.gov/wb/resources/Womens_Eamings_and_the_Wage_Gap_17.pdf.
USDA: Economic Research Service. Dairy products: Per capita consumption, United States (Annual). February 9, 2018. Raw data. United States.
Wanjek, Christopher. Food at Work: Workplace solutions for malnutrition, obesity and chronic diseases. International Labour Organization, 2005.
Watts, Allison W., Melissa N. Laska, Nicole I. Larson, and Dianne R. Neumark-Sztainer.
"Millennials at Work: Workplace Environments of Young Adults and Associations with Weight-Related Health." Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 70, no. 1 (2016): 65-71.
Webster, Michelle, and Loayza, Jesus. State of Working Colorado. Report. 2016 ed. Denver, CO: Colorado Center on Law & Policy, 2016. 1-55.
Winne, Mark. Closing the food gap: Resetting the table in the land ofplenty. Beacon Press,
2008.
World Health Organization (WHO). 2001.
World Health Organization (WHO). 2003a. Battling iron deficiency anaemia, available online: http://www.who.int/ nut/ida.htm [Nov. 2004],
34


A: Interview Guide
Appendix
I. Employment Status and Background
1. What is your age, level of education, year, and gender?
2. Since this study is with millennials in alternative work arrangements, could you tell me your employment status?
a. So would you describe your employment status as____[self-employed,
underemployed, or employed part time]?
i. [If employed part-time]: How many hours a week do you typically
work?
b. How long have you been_____[self-employed, underemployed, or employed
part time]?
3. Are you satisfied with your current employment status?
4. Approximately how much money do you earn a week?
5. Do you have any financial support from family or family savings, or any other financial assets that augment your budget?
II. Food choice and healthful eating
1. How do you think your employment affects your food choices if at all?
a. can you give me at least one concrete example?
2. Do you think your job interferes with your ability to eat healthfully? And how so?
a. can you give me at least one concrete example?
3. How do you think a higher income or steadier job would change your food choices?
4. Please list the 15 foods you consume most often.
5. Please list ideal 15 ideal foods for a healthful diet.
35


6. Please describe why you consume the foods listed in #4 the most often.
7. Please describe why the foods listed in #5 are ideal for a healthful diet.
8. What does “healthful” mean to you?
36


B: Employment Status of Participants
Participant Underemployed Self Employed Part-Time
1 X
2 X
3 X
4 X
5 X
6 X
7 X
8 X
9 X X
10 X X X
11 X
12 X
13 X
14 X
15 X
16 X
17 X
37


C: Occupational Groups
Occupational Groups Represented Number of Jobs in Study
Educational Instruction and Library Occupations 3
Office and Administrative Support Occupations 2
Sales and Related Occupations 4
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations 1
Legal Occupations 1
Healthcare Support Occupations 1
Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations 2
Transportation and Material Moving Occupations 1
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media Occupations 1
Personal Care and Service Occupations 2
Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations 1
Business and Financial Operations Occupations 2
This table represents the occupational groups that millennials in this study worked in. Although the total number of participants is 17, this table shows 21 different jobs. This is due to several participants holding more than one job at a time. Occupational groups from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2018).
38


D: Amount of Support and Important Factors in Work-Food Trade-Offs
PARTICIPANT SUPPORT LEVEL TIMING EASE COST EATING LESS
1 NO X
2 SAVINGS X
3 NO X X
4 LESS THAN 50% X
5 SAVINGS X X
6 OCCASIONAL HELP X X
7 OVER 50% X X
8 OCCASIONAL HELP X
9 OVER 50% X
10 NO X X X
11 NO X X X
12 SAVINGS X
13 OVER 50% X
14 OVER 50% X
15 SAVINGS X X
16 LESS THAN 50% X
17 NO X
TOTALS 11 7 7 1
This table describes the level of financial support millennials had, and the key influences that their employment status’ had on their food choices. “TIMING” denotes that the hours that the participant worked shaped their food choices. “EASE” denotes that the participant’s job made them seek ‘easy’ foods which were convenient or required little to no skill or time to make. “COST” denotes that the participant’s employment constrained their food choice on a basis of how much food costs. “EATING LESS” is a unique finding where one participant said that her employment status made her depressed and less likely to eat.
39


E: The Top Ten Recurring Words from the Listing Activity
15 Most Commonly Consumed 15 Most Healthful Top 10 Items Overall
Cheese Fish Cheese
Chicken Chicken Chicken
Coffee Milk Yogurt
Yogurt Spinach Apples
Eggs Apples Fish
Rice Fresh Rice
Apples Yogurt Milk
Carrots Bananas Spinach
Chocolate Rice Bananas
Frozen Water Eggs
40


F: Codebook CODEBOOK
A PRIORI CODES EXPLANATION EMERGENT CODES EXPLANATION
Employment Status Either part time, underemployed, or self-employed, to the discretion of participant. Over 50% supported Is supported over 50% financially
Age 22-27 Mental Health Mental health is mentioned
Gender Male or female or other Physical health Physical health is mentioned
Hrs worked How many hours are worked Convenience Convenience/speed of foods is mentioned
Satisfaction Satisfied with current employment status? Cooking skill Cooking skill is mentioned
Wage/Salary How much money is made Healthful info source What influenced the 15 most healthful list?
Support or Savings Yes/no financial support or personal savings Above a BA Achieved higher than a BA in education
E&FC Does their employment affect food choices? Balance Mentions balance
E&HE Does their job interfere with their ability to eat healthfully? Cheap Mentions cheap
HI/SJ & Food choice How would a higher income or steadier job change your food choices? Organics Mentions organics
15 most often 15 foods consumed most often Preferences Preference is mentioned or described
15 healthful 15 foods ideal for a healthful diet Tradeoff Tradeoffs are mentioned
Reasons most often Reasons behind the most commonly consumed foods Trend Apparent trend
Reasons healthful Reasons behind the most healthful foods Trust Trust
Healthful What does healthful mean? Social Social Activity
Emergent codes that were not anticipated prior to the study include “Mental Health”, “Cooking Skill”, and “Trust” (of food systems).
41


G: Summary Table of Participant Information
PARTICIPANT EMPLOYMENT STATUS SEX STUDENT? AGE # OF JOBS JOB CATEGORY ESTIMATED WEEKLY SALARY HRS WORKED/ WEEK SUPPORT FACTOR
1 PT F Yes 25 1 Educational Instruction and Library Occupations $350 15-18 NO TIMING
2 PT F No 25 1 Office and Administrative Support Occupations $400 21-35 SAVINGS COST
3 PT F Yes 27 1 Sales and Related Occupations $150 15 NO COST, TIMING
4 SE M No 25 1 Sales and Related Occupations Not weekly; $1,000 to $20,000 30 LESS THAN 50% COST
5 PT F No 26 2 Healthcare Practitioners and Technical 0 c cupations/Per sonal Care and Service Occupations $800 27 SAVINGS TIMING, EASE
6 PT F No 26 1 Legal Occupations $650 33-37 OCCASIONAL HELP COST, EASE
7 PT F Applying 23 1 Healthcare Support Occupations $280 24-32 OVER 50% TIMING, EASE
8 PT F Yes 23 2 Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations/Educational Instruction and Library Occupations $300 15& 15 OCCASIONAL HELP EASE
9 PT/UE F No 27 ? Transportation and Material Moving Occupations/ Business and Financial Operations Occupations $250 <10 OVER 50% EATING LESS
10 SE/UE/PT F No 24 3 Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media Occupations/Office and Administrative Support Occupations $625 38-65 NO COST, TIMING, EASE
11 UE F No 26 1 Office and Administrative Support Occupations $600 40 NO COST, TIMING, EASE
12 PT F No 25 1 Sales and Related Occupations $750 25 SAVINGS TIMING
13 PT F Yes 23 1 Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations $200 15-25 OVER 50% TIMING
14 PT F Yes 24 1 Personal Care and Service Occupations $225 15 OVER 50% TIMING
15 PT F Yes 23 2 Educational Instruction and Library Occupations $360 30 SAVINGS TIMING, EASE
16 PT M Yes 25 1 Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations $600 15-20 LESS THAN 50% COST
17 UE F No 22 1 Sales and Related Occupations $500 40 NO TIMING
PT refers to part-time, UE to underemployed, and SE to self-employed.
42


Full Text

PAGE 1

! i WORK FOOD TRADE OFFS: MILLE N NIAL WORKERS IN ALTERNATIVE WORK ARRANGEMENTS by ALEXIS MARGUERITE HAHN B.S., California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, 2016 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Anthropology Program 2018

PAGE 2

ii © 2018 ALEXIS MARGUERITE HAHN ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PAGE 3

iii This thesis for the Master of Arts degree by Alexis Marguerite Hahn h as be en approved for the Anthropology Program B y Sarah B . Horton, Chair Anna G. Warrener David P. Tracer Date: May 12, 2018

PAGE 4

iv Hahn, Alexis Marguerite (M.A., Anthropology) Work food Trade offs: Millennial Workers in Alternative Work Arran gements Thesis directed by Sarah B. Horton ABSTRACT Millennials have now surpassed all other generations as the primary age group in the workforce. This comes in the midst of the rise of alternative work arrangements, defined here as part time work, under employment, or self employment. The interrelationships between work, health, and food choices have been well demonstrated, yet there is little research on how millennials are impacted by this rising type of employment. This research de scribes how millennia ls in alternative work arrangements exercise limited agency over their food choice s . Alternative work often results in millennials choosing foods based on factors such as time, ease, and cost. Because food choice is linked to nutrition, productivity and he alth outcomes, this discussion is important to both the public health and the economic sectors. The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication. Approved: Sarah B. Horton

PAGE 5

v T able of C ontents I. BACKGROUND ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 1 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 1 The Changing Nature o f Work ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 6 2 Agency & Food Choice ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 8 4 Food Choice & Health ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 6 Health & Work Productivity ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 8 Interrelationships: Food Choice, Health, Productivity & The Economy ................................ ................. 9 II. WORK FOOD TRADE OFFS: MILLENNIA L WORKERS IN ALTERNATIVE WORK ........... 10 Materials & Methods ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 10 Results ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 1 3 Employment & Food Choice ................................ ................................ ............................ 14 Timing ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 15 Cost ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 16 Ease ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 17 Timing, Cost, & Ease ................................ ................................ .......................... 17 Trends & Preferences ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 19 Financi al Support/Transitional Times ................................ ................................ ............... 21 Food, Trust, & Power ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 23 Other Factors ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 24 Food Choice, Physi cal Health, And Mental Health ................................ .......................... 24 Healthful? ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 26 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 27 Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 28 Moving Forward ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 29 REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 31 APPENDIX

PAGE 6

vi A . Interview Guide ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 35 B. Employment Status of Participants ................................ ................................ ............................. 37 C . Occupational Groups ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 38 D . Amount of Support and Important Factors in Work Food Trade offs ................................ ....... 39 E . The Top Ten Recurring Words from the Listing Activity ................................ .......................... 40 F . Codebook ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 41 G . Summary Table of Participant I nformation ................................ ................................ ................ 4 2

PAGE 7

1 I. BACKGROUND Introduction The purpose of my Master's thesis "WORK FOOD TRADE OFFS: MILLE N NIAL WORKERS IN ALTERNATIVE WORK ARRANGEMENTS" is to understand the relationship between employment status and food choices among millennials. Mor e specifically, this study focus es on millennials in alternative work arrangements. As employers have s hifted to contract work, and a number of millennials themselves are drawn to the independence offered by contract work, the number of workers in alternative work arrangements is growing. Katz and Krueger (2016) define alternative work arrangements as encom passing "temporary help agency workers, on call workers, contract company workers, and independent contractors or f reelancers" (Katz and Krueger, 2016, 2). For this project I am expanding this definition to include those who are either underemployed, self employed, or employed part time. As we continue into 2018, a record number of individuals in the workforce are millennials. According to the US Census Bureau (2015), the number of millennials surpasse d older generations in the work force in 2014. "Millenni al" is the term given to someone born within the years of 1982 and 2000; collectively the generation is referred to as "the millennials" (US Census Bureau, 2015). As they are the dominant population within the workforce, having knowledge of m illennials in regard to work and health is of the utmost importance ; it is critical as the link between food choice, health, and work capacity has been well demonstrated ( Barkin et al., 2010; Wanjek, 2005). Food choice has an important impact on health; poor health often leads to lower lifetime wages, lower capacity to work, and increased sick days (Barkin et al., 2010; Wanjek, 2005 ; Martorell et al., 2010 ).

PAGE 8

! 2 The Changing Nature o f Work Alternative work arrangements rose from 10% of the workforce in the 1990s to 16% of the workforce today (Ka tz and Krueger, 2017 , 39 2). This is especially interesting as the amount of alternative work was stable between 1995 and 2005 ( Ka tz and Krueger, 2016, 2). An alternative work arrangement can be described as self employed, freelance or co ntract work, although the phrase encompasses any type of work that does not follow the traditional work pattern (Katz and Krueger, 2016). Another term that is associated with alternative work arrangements is the "gig economy" ( Friedman, 2014), where indivi duals work gigs instead of a traditional nine to five job. These gigs are associated with shorter term employment, part time work, and self employed work (Friedman, 2014). Millennials are especially drawn to these types of gig jobs, and are often employed in them (Friedman, 2014, 173). According to a recent report, 26% of millennials and 34% of younger millennials consider them selves to be a part of the gig economy ( Bank of America, and Khan Academy , 2018, 6 ) . There are a few reasons hypothesized for the ri se in alternative work. Some include companies avoiding rent s haring, changes in technology, or a shift in worker demographics ( Katz and Krueger , 2017) . Changes in technology have allowed for cuts in supervis ory costs , also incentivizing this growth ( Katz and Krueger , 2017 ) . Katz and Krueger pos t ulate that economic events such as recessions (inclu ding the 2007 2008 recession) are a major contributor to this shift ( Katz and Krueger , 2017 , 388). This type of economic event provides " a weak labor market leaving workers with little bargaining power and few options for traditional employment" ( Katz and Krueger , 2017 , 388). Many workers may have sought alternative work when traditional employment was not available during the 2007 2008 recession ( Katz and Krueger , 2016).

PAGE 9

3 Moreover, alternative workers are cheaper for employers in general, due to the usual lack of benefits (Kalleberg et al., 2000, 263) . Creating a lternative jobs may also be appealing due to its flexibility for employ ers ; alternative work often allows for employers to screen or cut employees without significant investment, cutting costs (Kalleberg et al., 2000). A push for jobs with greater flexibili ty for employees may also have augmented t his growth ( Katz and Krueger , 2017 ). How ever, this leads to less job security within alternative work arrangements (Kalleberg et al., 2000). The structure of capitalism influences individuals ' actions by forcing them to remain within, and by the rules of, the structure. This limits the choices t hat those without control (of the means of production) have over the ways in which they live; those without control must work for wages to live (Ros e berry, 1997, 31) . This is what initially draws m illennials into the workforce. Among the unemployed, those individuals who find employment a year later are most likely to find it within an alternative work arrangement (Katz and Krueger, 2017 , 390) . T his may suggest alternative work arrangements are an easier entry point into the working economy than traditional jobs . This study focuses on the Denver metropolitan area, which according to Frey (2 018 ) is the third fastest growing metropolitan area in the United States in its population of young adults. This makes it a useful site in which to examine the relationship betwee n millennials ' food choices and work arrangements. There are varying statistics on alternative work arrangements in Ame rica. In 2015, 10.1% of all US workers were self employed ( U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2017 ). More specifically, in 2015, the underemployment rate in Colorado was 7.9 % ( Webster and Loayza, 2016, 3). Following a peak of involuntary part time employment of 25 % in 2010, the percent of involun tarily part time workers remained at 15.4 in 2015 for the state of Colorado ( Webster and Loayza, 2016, 12). Overall, alternative work

PAGE 10

4 arrangements are still on the rise since the turn of the millennium (Katz and Krueg er, 2016). Millennials in alternative work arrangements are especially of interest as they are a group that typically has lower income, a lack of benefits, and a lack of control over their work environment ( Friedman, 2014 ; Katz and Krueger , 2016 ) . Lower in come, a lack of benefits, and a lack of control over their work environments operate together to lower agency in food choice. Agency & Food Choice The United States widely holds individuals responsible for t heir own status whether that is in social, econ omic, or health contexts. This is bound to the " pul l yourself up by the bootstraps" mentality that is prolific in American culture (Winne, 2008, xx). The ideal of the American Dream further facilitates this, as America is seen to be the land of opportunity , where individuals can obtain anything they want. This mentality extends into food choice. But these choices ignore the idea of agency, or the "activity of human subject in structured contexts" that are created from the past yet also shape the future (Ros eberry, 1988, 172). That means that activities, such as food choice, do not form independently. Individuals exist "within larger historical, political, and economic movements" (Roseberry, 1988, 169). This highlights the "impact of structures of power" (Ros eberry, 1988, 169) on people and their actions (such as food choices). Food choice is an action of agency that is then constrained by the structures one finds oneself in. The main political economic structure in the United States is capitalis m. The accumu lation of capital Ñ whether economic, cultural, or social Ñ allows for an individual or group to access a greater amount of resources. This access directly affects the agency an individual or group can have, and what actions the individual or group takes. Food almost always requires economic capital, or money. Because of this, f ood choice is an action of agency that is

PAGE 11

5 then di ctated within capitalist rules (Pollard et al. , 2002). Food choice is a ffected by other macro level contexts, which include "social, cult ural, political, e conomic" conditions that both "facilitate and co nstrain" (Sobal and Bisogni, 200 9, 41) food choices. Work can constrain the hours of eating, place of food, sanitation condition, type of food purchased, and the amount of time taken consumi ng the food (Devine et al., 2006, 6; Wanjek, 2005). For a working adult , the workplace becomes a significant environmental factor in food choice. Working individual s have to navigate their food choices based on the agency they have within their own constrai nts. Devine et al (2006) define food choice for working parents " as the ways that people actively conceptualized and manage[d] food selection in response to the emotional, temporal, or physical strain of conflicting work and family roles" (Devine et al., 20 06, 4). This definition succinctly demonstrates the complexity of food choices; they are both personal and social . Yet, this definition does not capture food choice for millennials who have no children and are in alternative work arrangements. Since the ri se of alternative work arrangements is relatively new, little literature exists on alternative workers' food choices. I alter Devine et al. 's (2006) definition of food choice to describe the food choice of millennials. Food choice is constructed by the way s that millennials shift their food selection in response to managing the multiple roles that they hold at the nexus of political, temporal, workplace, and other environmental factors that shape their agency to do so. Political factors include trust of the government and food system, as well as ethical beliefs. This study examine s the food choices of Millennials aged 22 27 living in the Greater Denver area who have been out of college for longer than 6 months and have no children . S emi structured interview s were co nducted to address the main research question:

PAGE 12

6 1. How does participation in an alternative work arrangement within a capitalist society influence the food choices of millennials? This study also addresses the subsequent research questions : 1. What trade offs between food and work do millennials make ? 2. How does the influence of capitalism encourage individuals to forgo adequate nutrition or even contemplate work/food trade offs? Furthermore, Pollard et al. (2002) claims that factors of food c hoice for adults can be broken down into two sections those factors which influence agency and those which influence choice within agency (Pollard et al. , 2002, 376). This can be described as the factors that determine "what a per son is able to buy and c onsume" ( i.e. availabil it y, purchasing power) and "what a person chooses to buy and consume", within that ability ( i.e. habits, ideology) (Pollard et al. , 2002, 376). It is within these two sections that I will explore millennial's food choices. Food Choi ce & Health Food choice has major influences on one's health. Children who have poor nutr ition growing up tend to have reduced work capacity and lower wages as adults than those children who eat health il y ( Martorell et al., 2010). Poor f ood choice s may res ult in people who are either malnourished, with many nutritional deficiencies (Wanjek, 2005,12 ) or people who are calorically Ô fed ' but who ha ve a diet high in fat, sugar and salt (Wanjek, 2005,12). The health of the se pop ulations is the result of the nutr itional quality of their food choices. We cannot forget, however, that vulnerable populations (like those who are unhealthy) are often limited in how much agency they can exercise in their environment (Dover and Lambert , 2016, 4), and are not to blame for their position. Individuals are both actors and agents in their own health status (Dover and Lambert ,

PAGE 13

7 2016, 2). The way that people choose foods within their choice constraints may work to further constrain or expand their agency in food choice . For examp le, food choices that lead to poor health may then decrease the individual's productivity and therefore purchasing power. As such, individuals must navigate their food choice s within their status as work er s (Devine et al. , 2006, 8). Those in alternative wo rk arrangements are usually paid less than those in traditional jobs, limiting the ir monetary resources and agency in food choice ( Friedman, 2014, 179). Quick meals devoid of nutritional value are the most prominent food choice strategy for those with low income , worsening their overall health (Devine et al., 2006, 10). Despite socioeconomic status, the millennial generation do es value certain food choice ideals. Millennials value ethical eating and sustainable practices ( Johnstone and Lindh, 2018 ). Millen nials in general visit the grocery store less when compared to older generations (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017), and spend more of their money devoted to purchasing food on prepared foods (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017). This is reflected in their spending more on fo ods such as pasta and sugar than any other generation ( Kuhns and Saksena, 2017, iii ). As income increases, so does spending on food at home (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017). A recent study by the Economic Research Service (ERS) within the United States Department of Agriculture found specifically that millennials of higher incomes tend towards purchasing unprocessed ingredients, and buy more vegetables. This makes sense as millennials also value less processed foods (Gerdes, 2017). Again, millennials who do not ha ve t he income to purchase these foods of value (i.e. sustainable, ethical, less processed) instead purchase prepared foods that are often lacking in sufficient nutrition (Kuhns and S aksena, 2017; Devine et al., 200 6). Poor nutrition from these choices crea tes a lower capacity for work, and then creates a feedback loop that may then leave this group of m illennial workers especially vulnerable to poor health and low socioeconomic

PAGE 14

8 status in the long term . Health & Work Productivity There is a wealth of inform ation on how health influences work productivity. To be a productive worker is to act to produce benefits and or profits for both yourself and the company for which you work. The relationship between health and work productivity is of utmost importance for the government and employers alike, as capitalism is rooted in the productivity of the worker. The environment in which one works has a large influence on how healthy the employees tend to be. A study by Watts et al. (2016) showed that workers' perception s of the importance of health in their workplaces significant ly predicted fast food intake, fruit/vegetable intake, and obesity (Watts et al. , 2016, 70). Perceptions about workplace health included the importance of health to coworkers and the availability of healthy vs. unhealthy food at work (Watts et al., 2016, 69). In environments where health was not a part of the work culture, there were higher instances of being o verweight (Watts et al., 2016 ) . Barkin et al. (2010) found that obesity has an effect on o ne's in come; income is commonly used as a measurement of economic productiv ity. An increase of obesity in millennials has been attributed to a shift away from an active lifestyle as well as in a shift to a less healthy diet (Barkin et al. , 2010). Over the course of an adult's life, Barkin et al. (2010) estimated that obese women will earn $956 billion less and obese men $43 billion less than healthy adults in working wages. This is a huge shift in productivity levels both for the employee and a loss for th e economy. This statistic also highlights the difference in the importance of health and physical appearance for men and wome n in the workplace. The statistics reflect both the discrimination that women face in the workplace based on appearances ( Adam itis , 2000 ) as well as the wag e labor gap between men and wome n in the United State s ( U.S. Department of

PAGE 15

9 Labor, 2016). Productivity is not affected by obesity alone; other conditions of poor health adversely affect productivity . Iron deficiency alone can lead to a decrease of 30% in physical work capacity for iron deficient adults ( Wanjek, 2005 , 1 3 ; citing WHO, 2001, p. 30). That translates to a loss of $5 billion in productivity (Wanjek, 2005, 17; citing Ross and Horton, 1998, 38). The World Health Organizatio n found that " a dequate nourishment can raise national productivity levels by 20 percent" (Wanjek, 2005; citing W HO, 200 3). Furthermore, unhealthy individuals are generally " associated with negative labor market outcomes" as they more frequently miss work ( Barkin et al., 2010, 241; citing Baum and Ford 2004; Finkelstein et al. , 2005). The impact of g ood nutrition on health and productivity is well demonstrated, yet its importance needs to be disseminated throughout all economic sector s . Interrelationships: Foo d Choice, Health, Productivity, & The Economy In conclusion, there is a strong web of connectedness among food choices, health, and productivity which influence the economy. Poor food choices can lead to poor health (Barkin et al. , 2010), and poor health i n turn may lead to loss of productivity and economic instability (Wanjek, 2005). For example, each year, billions of dollars in wages are lost on adult workers with poor health in the United States (Barkin et al., 2010; Wanjek, 2005). This loss is accompani ed by increased medical bills. These bills are often paid by employers (Barkin et al., 2010), worsening the net loss. Yet many m illennials in alternative work arrangements do not qualify for benefits, thus having to pay out of pocket (Friedman, 2014, 183) . This makes them even more vulnerable to the financial stress that constrains their food choices. The relationship among worker health, productivity, and company profits has become clear for some employers, as some businesses have decided to shift their wel lness plans from

PAGE 16

10 Ôtreatment' to Ôprevention' (Barkin et al., 2010). In the United States $5.6 billion in direct and indirect costs coul d be saved annually if only 10% of the adult population aged 35 to 74 engaged in some form of walking (Wanjek, 2005, 17; c iting Jones and Eaton, 1994). Overall this interrelationship highlights the fact that "good nutrition is good business and a sound investment" (Wanjek, 2005, 5). Th e relationship between food choice, health, productivity and the economy is important to und erstand especially in the new economic context of alternative work and millennial workers. II. WORK FOOD TRADE OFFS: MILLENIAL WORKERS IN ALTERNATIVE WORK ARRANGEMENTS This research project aims to understand the influence of specific alternative work arr angements ( i.e. underemployment , self employment , and part time employ ment ) on millennial workers' food choices . It examines how millennials ma ke food choices while navigating between their political, temporal, work, and other environments . How alternative work arrangements influence millennial health and productivity via food choice has yet to be demonstrated. Millennial workers in these types of alternative work arrangements were interviewed about their experiences with work and hea lthful eating. The int errelationship between work, food choice, and health is important to describe as more millennials enter the work force, and as more millennials join in alternative work arrangement s ; this relationship is critical for encouraging health and creating stable networks for healthful choices among millennials. Materials & Methods This study provide s useful information for future research to encourage both individual health and productivity within alternative workplaces wh ere employees are increasingly of the mi llennial generation. The study took place in the Denver metropolitan area, this location was

PAGE 17

11 appropriate as Denver is the third largest in young adult population growth in the United States (Frey, 2018). Participant recruitment occurre d via flyer postings at various locations in the Greater Denver Area that cater to m illennials (i.e. grocery stores, popular cafes ) as well as on Craigslist. The flyer describe d the subject population, asking " Are you a M illennial 22 27? Have you held a bachelor's degree for a t least six months? Are you self employed, working part time, or under employed? Are you without kids and living in the Greater Denver Area?" It then asked if they were interested in participati n g in a sem i structured interview. A contact email was then pr ovided for the inter ested participant s . Participants who completed the interview receive d a ten dollar gift card as a thank you for their time. Methods cons iste d of one phase of qualitative semi structured interviews of millennials employed in alternative work arrangements. S emi structured interviews were used because they offer more flexi bility in the interview setting ! participants are able to expand on whatever they see fit ( Brinkmann, 2018 , 579). Without the flexibility in semi structured interviews, t he nuances in the experiences and worldviews of the participants would be difficult to discern . Interviews lasted from 12 to 35 m inutes, depending on the will of the participant. Participant interview audio was recorded using Zoom software; o riginal audio files were de identified . ( They were titled only by gene ric title of participant, e.g. " participant 1 " ) . All participant contact information was destroyed immediately after the interview as no further contact with research participants wa s necessary . Th e interview was stratified into two sections. The first sec tion addressed the participants' employment status and background; the second section addressed food choice s and healthful eating. The second section also included a free listing activity for the p articipant to identify the 15 foods they most commonly ch o ose to consume and the 15 foods they would cho o se under an

PAGE 18

12 ideal employment status for an ideal diet . The questions are listed in Appendix A. The audio files of these interviews were first transcri bed via Temi .com; the transcriptions were then reviewed, and edited for accuracy. The transcriptions were coded via the Atlas.ti software , version 1.6.0 . The interviews were first analyzed in a cross case comparative an alysis for themes and patterns. Codes were created first a priori from the research questions, and then subsequent emergent codes were devised from the transcribed texts during the coding process . The coding process began with 15 a priori codes. After coding, however, 15 additional emergent c odes were added. These emergent codes , listed in Appendix F, captured the prominent themes that re curred in the interviews. Atlas.ti was used mostly for the highlighting and organization of codes and quotations. Meaning was then derived from these patterns and the overall narratives described by participants. T hese resul ts were then complied into a qualitative account of experiences of work/food trade off s . Additionally, the lists of the 15 foods consumed most often and 15 foods believed to be ideal for a h ealthful diet were compiled into separate documents. The lists were then analyzed for word frequencies within the Atlas.ti software to identify any highly recurring answers among participants. T he top ten re curring words in each list were then analyzed ind ependent ly from Atlas.ti for meaning. They are listed from greater frequency to lower frequency in Appendix E . The study was approved through the Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board, or COMIRB , and classified as posing minimal risk to participants . Atlast.ti, a Qualitativ e Data Analysis Software (QDAS) was used as a tool yet was not the main factor in analysis. Reporting the use of a QDAS follows t he suggestions laid out by Paulu s et al (2017) for transparency of methods

PAGE 19

13 Results When first intervi ewing participants, it was clear that many had never discussed food choice nor healthfulness; these terms took some adjusting to for many participants. Perhaps this was a reaction to their status as young adults, many of whom are just beginning to forge th eir own food choices independently of their family or University dorms. The listing activity solicited vocal reactions from participants. These ranged from " This makes me look healthy actually " to " Jeez this list is sort of sad É " . Some found the lists diff icult or even embarrassing to recall. The intentionality of food choice ranged between a conscious effort to eat healthfull y to Ô shock ' about what the participant consumed on a weekly basis. As one participant put it: " Wow this is giving me a lot to go ho me and think abou t ." There were a total of 17 study participants. The majority of participants ( 15 ) were female with the average age being slightly over 24 years old. The majority of participants ( 12 ) were also employed part time ; only a few were underempl oyed or self employed. Four participants had two or more jobs; those with more than one job often described their employment as two categories ( i.e. self employed and underemployed). Participants' employment status is reflected in Appendix B. The United St ates Bureau of Labor Statistics (2018) recognizes 23 major occupational groups. In this study, 12 out of the se 23 occ upational groups are represented . Appendix C displays the occupational groups in which millennials in this study worked. Although the total number of participants is 17, Appendix C shows 21 different occupational groups . This is due to several participants holding more than one job at a time. Many participants had schedules that were not stable, and therefore were unable to quantify the exact hours they worked. However, working hour averages range from less th an ten hours a week to up to 60; with the average hours worked falling just over 26 hours per week.

PAGE 20

14 On average , participants made $440 dollars a week; this was calculated with the excepti on of a self employed participant who received sporadic sums of money and could not provide an average. Data is listed in Appendix G. This average is over $8,000 dollars less than the sufficient annual income for one person living in Denver in 2015 accordi ng to Cooper and Gould ( 2015). This is especially troubling as prices in Denver have climbed substantially since 2015 , without wage adjustment (Bell Policy Institute , 2017). The key factors discussed by Pollard et al. (2002) in adult food choices (availabi lity and monetary cost, time constraints, sensory appeal, familiarity, social interactions, personal ideology, media, and health) (Pollard et al. , 2002, 376), were all consistent with the findings of this study. Yet millennials in alternative work arrangem ents have limited agency in being able to make food choices based on all of these factors. The main influences of employment on food choice for millennials in alternative work arrangements (Appendix D) were split into the following categories: "TIMING", "E ASE ", "COST", and "EATING LESS ." "TIMING" denotes that the hours that the participant worked shaped their food choices. "EASE " denotes that the participant's job made them seek Ôeasy' foods which were convenient or required little to no skill or time to ma ke. "COST" denotes that the participant's employment constrained their food choice on a basis of how much food costs. "EATING LESS" is a unique finding where one participant said that her employment status made her depressed and less likely to eat. Work " TIMING" was the most commonly discussed factor in food choice for millennials (11 out of 17) . The summary of participant results can be found in Appendix G. Employment & Food Choice Millennials were asked to self identify as either self employed, under employed, or employed part time. Among the participants, 12 reported being part time, two underemployed,

PAGE 21

15 one self employed, and two in a combination of the se employment status es (Appendix B). As Devine et al. (2006) suggest, the working context of an indiv idual becomes a large factor in food choice. Several food coping strategies exist in relation to workplace or economic pressures, including managing emotions from stress, reducing time/effort in obtaining food, reducing expectations of food, prioritizing a nd making trade offs (Devine et al. , 2006, 8). The trade offs discussed most often by millennials in alternative work were in relation to time, ease, and cost . A mount of food was a trade off also discussed significantly by one participant . Interviewees report ed that the most common way that employment interfered with healthful eating was due to their work hours or lack of breaks. Only three participants initially reported that their food choices were not affected by their employment; they however noted later i n their interviews that work timing indeed a ffected their food choices. More than the lack of income to purchase healthful foods, millennials often found that their work schedules early mo rning, late nights, no breaks ! encouraged trade offs . Even those mil lennials who had significant savings or financial support from others also reported that the hours of their jobs interfered with their abilities to eat healthfully. Timing Millennials reported that due to their alternative work arrangements, they were unab le to take breaks or eat at regular meal times. This would often result in participants eating in their cars on the way to or from work, or even between jobs. They then chose on the go foods like granola bars. Some even mentioned early morning or overnight shifts which would significantly affect their eating patterns throughout the day. Often these individuals had jobs in the " Healthcare Support " or " Food Preparation and Serving Related " o ccupational groups, in positions such as early morning baristas. One participant explained,

PAGE 22

16 I work so early like the opening shiftÉ so I'm always up a t like 5am. So I take lunch at nine . And the n I eat like a second lunch at two . Then I eat dinner. I probably eat more because I'm awakeÉ just because I'm moving and doing th ings. Another participant worked as a medical scribe and had to work many overnight shifts. Because of this she had to eat before and after work and sleep during the day; this was a significant alteration to her normal mealtimes. She would often grab a ba gel from " Einstein's " bagels as well, as it was a food that was quick and close to her job. Cost Healthier foods are on average more expensive than less healthy ones ( Rao et al. , 2013). Not being able to eat as much fresh produce as one desired was a comm on theme among participants. As one participant put it: " I can't eat as much fresh produce as I'd like because of my pay grade." This sentiment is represented in the results of the listing activity. " Frozen " fell into the top ten mos t frequently used words in the 15 M ost Commonly Consumed list; while " fresh " w as a word that was in the top ten most frequently used words from the 15 Most Healthful list (Appendix E). " Fresh " was associated with higher costs. When asked about why pasta was on her Top 15 Most Co mmo nly Consumed list, a participant exclaimed, " Pasta is just so cheap ! " Choosing cheap and quick foods was a common thread within the interview dialogue. T his is similar to the findings of Devine et al. (2006) , who found that low income work encouraged a cost based trade off towards a less healthful diet; because of this, foods like macaroni and cheese, which is inexpensive, were favored. As one worker who was self employed said: " I'm confined to someÉ certain menu items É or whether that be at a grocery st ore or at a restaurant. I don't necessarily want to buy a $20 salad at a restaurant versus going home and eating one. "

PAGE 23

17 Some participants Ñ especially those in service occupations including waitressing and being a barista Ñ mentioned that they worked directly with food. Each participant who worked with food reported that it was detrimental to their health. O ften free or discounte d food was offered to participants in the work environment, prompting employees to eat at work. Eating at work occurred despite the b elief that it was unhealthy Ñ due to convenience or cost effectiveness . This supports the idea that those in alternative work arrangements have less agency in food choice due to their lower incomes ( Friedman, 2014, 179). Ease Millennials often chose foods t hat were perceived as "EASY ." This was a response to a lack of time, lack of energy, lack of income, and even lack of skill. Snack foods were often utilized by millennials because they require little to no preparation, and therefore were seen as "EASY ." Ot her easy foods included those that required no work (pre packaged snacks like chips, hummus, pretzels, fruit, or granola bars) or only required simple preparation, like pasta. Easy foods most often did not necessitate cooking skill or the ownership of appl iances. Participants listed "frozen foods" in the 15 Most Commonly Consumed and the opposite category, "fresh foods" in the 15 Most Healthful food lists, respectively (Appendix E). " Frozen food " wa s associated with a lower cost, easier preparation, and les s time; " fresh food " was perceived as more expensive, harder to prepare, and more time consuming. Easy foods were also seen as the solution for those who did not have time nor did not know how to cook. Timing, Cost, & Ease A concern with t iming , cost, an d ease led many millennials not to cook. Several participants mentioned that they were not confident in their cooking skills, which were often believed to be a necessary factor in healthful eating. Cooking wa s seen as something that takes

PAGE 24

18 time and effort t o learn. Many said that their commute times or oddly scheduled shifts did make cooking meals more difficult or unappealing. Devine et al. found that the most common food choice/work coping strategy for those with lower income was found to be eating "quick meals" which were almost always of poor nutritional value (Devine et al. , 2006, 10) , this aligns with millennials wanting to make trade offs based on time, cost, and ease . As one interviewee put it: " I do eat a lot of fish because I get frozen fish. Probabl y not the most healthy food but it's easy to cook ." A long day often meets a lack of extra income to buy healthier convenience meals or creates a lack of will to spend time and energy cooking. Some participants who were trying to take control of their ea ting habits had mentioned practicing their cooking skills or using cooking home delivery services such as " Home Chef ." These home delivery services usually involve a monthly or weekly subscription which delivers in gredients and a recipe to a preferred addr ess; different services are available that cater to different budgets and dietary preferences. Many of these services also allow se veral free meals or a trial week, making them temporarily accessible to those who find they are constrained by costs . In the case of this participant , t he delivery service helped cushion some of the time consuming aspects of cooking a meal. Cooking delivery services are a way that millennials are using their agency to improve their cooking knowledge in their new adult lives. Th e emphasis on time, cost, and ease also often resulted in fast food consumption for the participants. As one put it: I have to buy the inexpensive things that I can afford. And the hours that I work, I don't get home until six thirtyÉ seven o'clock. So by the time I get back I'm like WELL I don't really want to cook anything at all like so I' ll go through a drive through or something super quick and easy .

PAGE 25

19 One notable exception to this pattern was a woman who worked from home, in the "Sales and Relat ed Occupations" occupational sector. Contrary to others, she said that her job allowed her to spend more time cooking and preparing meals. This was a benefit she found to having an alternative work arrangement that increased her ability to eat healthfully . Trends & Preferences Many participants commented on the popularity and moral dilemmas surrounding " ethical eating ." These practic es were connected to the "vegan" trend, " organics ", and " eating less ani mal products ." One participant noted that she had be en : Évery conflicted lately with the whole vegan waveÉ what's right what's not. Who knows? So that's why I put the first two. I don't know. I think I've come to the conclusion to eat more ethicallyÉ than cutting out a complete column from the food pyramid . Meats were specifically subject to lower consumption. Several reasons were given for the reduction, the first being that eating less meat was an ethical action. Participants who felt this way also believed that eating less meat was more sustainable and e co friendly. This is consistent with the findings by Johnstone and Lindh, ( 2018), wh o noted that many millennials feel that eating sustainably or ethically empowers them (Johnstone and Lindh, 2018, 135) in a structure that otherwise leaves them little tru e choice. This may be a reason why several participants had contemplated eating less meat or becoming vegan, as meat consumption is often viewed as less ethical than a plant based diet. The next reason for buying less meat was that meat was often more expe nsive than other foods. As a way to avoid spending more, millennials chose to eat less meat. Finally, there was a common belief that meat was a food that required higher quality and therefore was restricted to those who had the income to purchase it. Parti cipants mentioned the importance of " antibiotic free " , " organic " , and " higher grade " meats ; many who wanted to buy

PAGE 26

20 meat of higher quality mentioned that they would have more meat in their diets if they had a higher income. Other trends that became appare nt during the study was the desire for avocados, kombucha, and alcoholic beverages. Millennials commented on their preference for avocados, six participants included avocados on their 15 Most Healthful f oods l ist. Millennials would often report that they c ould not bring themselves to buy avocados often. This was due to the high price of avocados; avocados were then consumed as a novelty item. Kombucha was mentioned in four of the interviews. Kombucha, a fermented probiotic tea, was consumed for multiple rea sons , t he first being that it was what other healthy people " seemed to be " eating. The second reason was for probiotics. Finally, participants enjoyed the taste of Kombucha. Alcoholic beverages such as beer, wine, and liquor were also chosen for several re asons. These included alcohol use for socializing, for relaxation or mental health, and for digestion . One woman stated, " I just feel like it that helps my digestion, to be honest. It's like there's probiotics in it. It's goodÉI staunchly believe it's good for you ." Another trend among millennials in alternative work arrangements was that they would shift the location where they shopped if they had a higher income. Many mentioned moving away from relatively less expensive stores and start ing to shop at Who le Foods. Additionally, they would expand their food choices to encompass more expensive produce and products that were not on sale. Foods were also chosen due to personal preferences. Interestingly, cheese was the most commonly consumed item among the pa rticipants. This may be a reflection of the over arching per capita trend of cheese consumption in the United States. According to the USDA: Economic

PAGE 27

21 Research Service (2018), cheese consumption per capita has more than doubled between 1975 and 2016 . The s tudy results from the Economic Research Service (ERS) within the United States Department of A griculture is consistent with the desires of the millennials in this study when asked how their food choices would change with a higher income. That is, millennia ls of higher incomes tend towards purchasing unprocessed ingredients, are less likely to buy pasta, and buy more vegetables ( Kuhns and Saksena, 2017). Another finding consistent with the current study is that millennials buy fewer grains, white meat, and r e d meat than other generations (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017, iii ). M illennials spend more on prepared foods, pasta, and sugar than any other generation ( Kuhns and Saksena, 2017, iii ). These food choices align with the trade offs millennials in alternative work are making in regard s to quicker, cheaper, and easier foods. The study by the ERS also found that millennials spend an average of 12 minutes less eating and drinking than traditionalists (retirees) and spend "significantly less time on food preparation, pr esentation, and cleanup" than members of Generation X (Kuhns and Saksena, 2017, iii) . Both of these data points reflect the on the go nature of the majority of millennials ' lives and the i r lack of confidence in preparing their own foods. Financial Support /Transitional Times Many participants had financial support from family or savings. Only five millennials reported that they had no support, four described their reliance on savings, and the remaining eight participants received some financial support (App endix D). Four millennials were supported over 50% by their parents or lived at home. The four millennials in this study who were supported over 50% did not find cost to be a primary factor in their food choices; this

PAGE 28

22 makes sense as they did not need to de vote as much of their earned money towards non food items ( i.e. rent, car payments). Millennials living at home aligns with the extended childhood often attributed to young adults in the United States today (Twenge and Park , 2017). This extended childho od is characterized by the initiation of adult activities at a later age when compared to older generations (Twenge and Park , 2017, 2). This pattern of extended childhood extends across racial, socioeconomic, regional, and gender categories (Twenge and Park , 2017, 6). Extended childhood may in part be due to the phenomena of " boomeranging ." This is defined as leaving one's parents' home, only to return later (Houle and Warner, 2017; citing Goldscheider and Goldscheider, 1999). Student debt has common ly been pointed to as a reason for this return home. However, when investigated by Houle and Warner, debt was found to play a small role in this return home; boomeranging is more accurately predicted by labor market weakness , with higher rates of boomerang ing in poorer labor market conditions ( Houle and Warner, 2017, 104). This aligns with Katz and Krueger's (2017 ) discussion of why millennials enter alternative work arrangements in the first place ! a weak labor market. Most individuals in this study who we re heavily supported were in a period of transition towards their next economic or e ducational goal Ñ whether that is saving money or applying for another degree. Seven of the participants were enrolled in some type of class, and one was applying for her nex t degree; this highlights the period of transition they found themselves in. The number of millennials pursuing another academic degree may be a reflection of a weak labor market, which would make the competition for jobs more intense. The participants enr olled in classes li st ed their status as a student as one of the reasons they found themselves in an alternative work arrangement.

PAGE 29

23 Food, Trust, & Power Participants stated that the confusion created by the inundation of social media and marketing le d the m to distrust food systems. This is consistent with millennials being skeptical of big institutions in general (Diggles, 2014, 7) ; this includes the government and government regulated programs. One participant who stated their desire to eat organically ev en doubted the validity of the claim organic : " Éthe food companies are they really organic?" Yet, many give these companies and labels the benefit of the doubt due to popular media, or blindly trust them in self acknowledged ignorance. This illustrates tha t people are often limited in how they can exercise agency in their environment ! in particular, over food choice (Dover and Lambert , 2016, 4). When asked where she got her information on healthful food, one participant said in jest, " I don't knowÉ popular m edia? What healthy people get. Sure. What's in Whole Foods. If it's in Whole Foods, it has to be healthy right?" Some participants mentioned that they do not have the time to do their ow n food research ! they must rely on the pre vetting they assume is done by grocery stores and markets. Millennials trust that the organic section of the grocery store is organic, and that a product in the " health food a isle " i s healthy due to their limited agency (Dover and Lambert , 2016; Pollard et al. 2002). This works well for capitalist markets that rely on the trust of their consumer in order to make a profit (Morgan and Hunt, 1994). The demographic of millennials in alternative work arrangements is especially helpful to these market goals, as these individuals are partic ularly limited in their agency to distrust food systems. Johnstone and Lindh (2018) found that millennials either wanted greater transparency from their food choices or were indifferent (Johnstone and Lindh, 2018, 134). Their indifference was often due to feeling that despite the information they received , the choice would be "out of their control" (Johnstone and Lindh,

PAGE 30

24 2018, 134). After all, "food means power, and power means food" (Belasco and Scranton, 2014, 4). Other Factors When asked where participan ts received their healthful food knowledge, they either cited media or marketing, recommendations, or their mothers. Some of the media or marketing sources that stood out were magazines, the " health section " in the grocery store, or the internet in genera l. The recommendations came from family, government recommendations like " My Plate " (the current dietary guide for the United States) , and doctors. Regarding mothers, multiple participants referenced their mothers teaching them how to eat or cooking for th em during childhood as sources of their ideas of ideal healthful diets. This highlights the connectivity of adult food choices to childhood eating behaviors and environment. One participant described enacting her agency to avoid unhealthy foods in spite of the pressures of timing, cost, and ease. She noted that her workplace was mostly female; these females often discussed health and attempted to eat more healthfully. They would do this as a group. She said that this subculture within the workplace helped her resist the unhealthy snacks in the breakroom that were " always tempting ." The women worked together to help resist what they believed to be unhealthy albeit convenient, cost effective (free) foods. The impact of income and costs on food choices led mi llennials with financial support to experience work and food choice in a different way. Food Choice, Physical Health & Mental Healt h Food choice is the result of complex relationships and personal calculations (Sobal and Bisogni, 2009); if the American public had greater knowledge about the foods they were consuming, they might change their food choices. In the United States alone, 60 to 70 million

PAGE 31

25 people are affected by digestive disease (National Institutes of Health, 2009; National Institute of Diabet es and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 2014 ). This makes the human gut a focus of current research in health. De Fillipo et al. emphasize that "diet has a dominant role over other possible variables such as ethnicity, sanitation, hygiene, geography, and cl imate, in shaping the gut microbiota" (De Fillipo et al. , 2010, 14695). This is important as the human gut has many roles. It promotes "immunity, digestion, assimilation, synthesis, metabolism of varied compounds, storage of fats, and prevention of growth of pathogenic bacteria, thus ensuring wellbeing of the host" (Chatterjee et al., 2017, 468). It has been found that gut microbiota has a profound effect on diabetes, and can be a barrier for the body against pathogenic bacteria (Chatterjee et al., 2017, 471 2). This in turn helps illustrate the relationship between productivity, poor health, and obesity ( Barkin et al. , 2010 ; Wanjek, 2005 ). Poor health and obesity, which have roots in gut health and food choice, have both been shown to decrease the work capaci ty of a working adult ( Martorell et al . , 2010; Wanjek, 2005 ). Understanding t he relationship between work capacity and food choice ! which can supp ort or discourage a healthy gut ! is important for those who are struggling with gut health. Individuals may be able to make small shifts in food choice that lead to better health outcomes and greater work capacity. Yet their ability to shift behaviors while in alternative work arrangements may be inhibited by the constraints on millennial s ' income, work hours, wo rk environment, and cooking ability. Additionally, recent studies have shown a linkage between gut health and mental health. This includes a bi directional communication that is mediated through the autonomic nervous system, enteric nervous system, neuroen docrine system, and immune system (Foster and Neufeld, 2013). This axis could have implications for understanding

PAGE 32

26 depression (Foster and Neufeld, 2013 ), which is one of the most common mental disorders in the United States (National Institute of Mental Hea lth, 2017). One participant who was not satisfied with her extremely part time employment status (less than ten hours a week) mentioned her employment status as something that affected both her mental health and food choices. She said: " I feel like just b eing bored and depressed and not workingÉ I have way less of an appetite just in general as well . " She also described her minimal employme nt as not requiring much energy ! she found no reason to need fuel in the form of food. She said : " I am way less inclin ed to even go get anything to eat . " The participant also noted "ice chips" as one of her most frequently consumed foods , further detailing her lack of appetite . She shifted her food choices to eating less food (Appendix D). This demonstrates the importanc e of these linkages in addressing both public health and health policies within work environments, as these positive feedback loops may exacerbate problems with employment status, poor food choice, and health. Healthful? What is healthful for these m illen nials in alternative work arrangements? The majority of participants said that eating healthy foods was important, but was not the only factor in a healthful life. Most mentioned either happiness, exercise, or mental health in addition to making good food choices. This was well summarized by one participant : I think it extends more to me more than just diet. I think it has to do with everything in the whole body. I'm a firm believer that your mind dictates how you feel what you do, if you have a healt hy mind set, and are happy and healthy with your diet and your lifestyle, then you will be healthy overall.

PAGE 33

27 Most participants found that a healthful lifestyle required both conscious thought a nd balance. According to these m illennials one can't focus on only one area of we llbeing and still be considered to lead a healthful life . In healthful food choices one need s to pay attention to what will fuel you (energy). Participants believed that diets should include indulgence in moderation for a healthful life . Although participants did not describe f ood choice as the determining factor of a healthful life , non processed, plain, and "from the Earth" foods were described as ideal for being healthful. This is consistent with Sharon Gerdes' findings; she is a foo d scientist who has found that a "clean label and unprocessed have become synonymous with healthy" for millennials (Gerdes, 2017, 22) . Being h ealthful for millennials was overwhelmingly found to be the result of balance in one's life between diet, exercise , and mental health or mindset. Limitations There are several limi t ations to this study. One is that recruitment was done randomly, resulting in the participants being primarily female. Another limitation is understanding the financial stability or foo d choices of the participants' families of birth and how they may have affected participant s ' food choices . This may have provided useful background on the participants' food choices and prioritization of factors influencing work food trade offs. The work food trade offs of millennial workers in alternative work arrangements are not unlike other groups of low wage workers . For example, low income working parents also make work food trade offs in reducing the ir a llocation of time and effort to food (Devine et al., 200 6). Yet m illennials in alternative work do so in alignment with millennial trends , represented in an aversion to cooking and desire to make ethical or sustainable food choices . The aversion to cooking highlights these millennials ' life stage as early adults ; the aversion may also be an

PAGE 34

28 emulation of past generations ' desire for less time spent on preparing food . Finally, millennials in alternative work show a desire to make ethical or sustainable food choices, and have fo und unique ways to attempt these choices while staying within their means. Additionally, it's difficult to generalize the results from the sample t o all millennials as a group, as the sample may not represent all millennials. Conclusion Most millennials in alternative work arrangements find themselves making food choices to accommodate work schedule s and lowe r salaries that they describe as less th an ideal. These work food tradeoffs are mainly made due to a concern with timing, ease, and cost; millennials in alternative work arrangements reported that timing was their most significant work food tradeoff. M illennials with significant savings or finan cial support also found their tradeoffs centered around the timing of work. Those who are in alternative work arrangements still value millennial food ideals, yet are constrained in their ability to always act accordingly. Quick , convenient meals were a co mmon choice for m illennials who felt that their food choices were altered by their employment in an alternative work arrangement, despite their feelings that these meals weren't the healthiest choice to make. This is similar to the findings by Devine et al . , (2006, 10), where quicker Ô convenience ' meals were a key work life food strategy. Millennials in alternative work arrangements often acknowledge the importance of healthy eating for a healthful life, but do not think this occurs in isolation. Participan ts often mentioned the importance of balance in one's life; balance with one's mental health and physical health were all reported to be necessary for a healthful life.

PAGE 35

29 Moving Forward Every day, more m illennials enter into the workforce. As t he economy i s growing to foster the employment of individuals in alternative work arrangements , more and more m illennial workers will find themselves in an alternative work arrangement in the coming years . In contrast to traditional full time jobs, individuals in alte rnative work arrangements are not granted as many benefits or protections und er law. As seen in this study, m illennials in alternative work arrangements report limit ed agency in their food choices due to the tradeoffs they make with work. These food choice s have serious possible implications for their physical and mental health. These health risks highlight how those in alternative work arrangements find themselves face to face with new occupational health and safety risks (Howard, 2017, 7). Since alternati ve work is not going away, we cannot wait to address this until the millennial work force gets sick. Without th e benefits of a full time job, m illennial workers in alternative work arrangements may be especially vulnerable to negative health outcomes rela ted to their food choices. They may also be saddled with debt from covering their own health care costs. T o help cushion this double blow, more research on work and food choice should be done. This may lead to health plans or the creation of benefits for those employed in alternative work arrangem ents. This will save companies on health care c osts, o n training costs (due to reduced turnover of sick workers) (Wanjek, 2005 ) , and will provide many m illenni als with a better foundation for health as they age. A gain, as Wanjek suggests, "good nutrition is good business and a sound investment" (Wanjek, 2005, 5). As the number of both m illennials in the workforce and in alternative work arrangements continues to grow, we must expand the discourse of public health to include millennials in alternative work arrangements . These workers are an important part of the American economy

PAGE 36

30 and cannot be left behind. P erhaps alternative workplaces can begin following the companies who have shifted to preventative healthcare, as workplace environment can "maximize health" (Barkin et al. , 2010, 242). Further discussions should be held on how healthful eating practices can be encouraged in these alternative work arrangements; changes are necessary to ensure the health and productiv ity of both the individuals and companies at large.

PAGE 37

31 References Adamitis, Elizabeth M. "Appearance matters: A proposal to prohibit appearance discrimination in employment." Wash. L. Rev. 75 (2000): 195. Bank of America, and Khan Academy. 2018 Better M oney Habits Millennial Report . Report. Bank of America. Winter ed. 2018. Barkin, Shari L., William J. Heerman, Michael D. Warren, and Christina Rennhoff. "Millennials and the World of Work: The Impact of Obesity on Health and Productivity." Journal of Business and Psychology 25, no. 2 (2010): 239 245. Baum, C. L., 2nd, & Ford, W. F. The wage effects of obesity: A longitudinal study. Health Economics, (2004) 13(9), 885 Ð 899. Bell Policy Institute . Economic Mobility in Colorado . Bell Policy Institute , 2017, www.bellpolicy.org . Accessed 22 Mar. 2018. Brinkmann, S. 2018. The Interview. In Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. eds., The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, 5th Edition, Sage: Thousand Oaks, California pp.576 599Preview the document Cooper, David, and Elise Gould. "EPI's Family Budgets and Income Sufficiency in Denver." Economic Policy Institute , 19 May 2015, www.epi.org/publication/epis family budgets and income sufficiency in Denver / . De Fillipo, Carlotta, Duccio Cavalieri, Monica Di Paola, Matteo Ramazzotti, Jean Baptiste Poullet, Sebastien Massart, Silvia Collini, Giuseppe Pieraccini, and Pa olo Lionetti. "Impact of diet in shaping gut microbiota revealed by a comparative study in children from Europe and rural Africa." PNAS 107, no. 33 (August 17, 2010): 14691 4696. http://www.p nas.org/content/107/33/14691.full.pdf . Devine CM, Jastran M, Jabs J, Wethington E, Farrell TJ, Bisogni CA. "A lot of sacrifices": Work family spillover and the food choice coping strategies of low wage employed parents . Social Science and Medicine . 20 06;63(10):2591 2603. Diggles, Michelle. "Millennials Ð Political Explorers." Washington, DC: Third Way (2014). Dover, Robert VH, and Estelle V. Lambert. ""Choice Set" for health behavior in choice constrained settings to frame research and inform policy: examples of food consumption, obesity and food security." International journal for equity in health 15, no. 1 (2016): 1. Finkelstein, E., Fiebelkorn, C., & Wang, G. (2005). The costs of obesity among full time employees. American Journal of Health Pr omotion, 20(1), 45 Ð 51. Foster, Jane A. and Karen Anne McVey Neufeld. "Gut Brain Axis: How the Microbiome

PAGE 38

32 Influences Anxiety and Depression." Trends in Neurosciences 36, no. 5 (2013): 305 312. Frey, William H. "The Millennial Generation: A Demographic Bri dge to America's Diverse Future." Brookings. February 20, 2018. Accessed April 16, 2018. https://www.brookings.edu/research/millennials/ . Friedman, Gerald. "Workers without employers: shado w corporations and the rise of the gig economy." Review of Keynesian Economics 2, no. 2 (2014): 171 188. Gerdes, Sharon. "Millennials Redefine 'Healthy'." Dairy Foods 118, no. 4 (2017): 22 Goldscheider, Frances K., Calvin Goldscheider, and ProQuest (Fi rm). The Changing Transition to Adulthood: Leaving and Returning Home . Vol. 17. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications, 1999. Houle, Jason N., and Cody Warner. "Into the red and back to the nest? Student debt, college completion, and returning to t he parental home among young adults." Sociology of education 90, no. 1 (2017): 89 108. Howard, John. "Nonstandard work arrangements and worker health and safety." American journal of industrial medicine 60, no. 1 (2017): 1 10. Johnstone, Leanne, and Cecilia Lindh. "The sustainability " age dilemma: A theory of (un) planned behaviour via influencers." Journal of Consumer Behaviour 17, no. 1 (2018). Jones, T.; Eaton, C. "Cost Ð benefit analysis of walking to prevent coronary heart disease", Archives of Family Medicine. 1994. Vol. 3, N o. 8, pp. 703 Ð 710. Kalleberg, Arne L., Barbara F. Reskin, and Ken Hudson. "Bad Jobs in America: Standard and Nonstandard Employment Relations and Job Quality in the United States." American Sociological Review 65, no. 2 (2000): 256. doi:10.2307/265744 0. Katz, Lawrence F., and Alan B. Krueger. The rise and nature of alternative work arrangements in the United States, 1995 2015 . No. w22667. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2016. Katz, Lawrence F., and Alan B. Krueger. "The Role of Unemployment in the Rise in Alternative Work Arrangements." American Economic Review 107, no. 5 (2017): 388 92. doi:10.1257/aer.p20171092. Kuhns, Annemarie, and Michelle Saksena. "Food Purchase Decisions of Millennial Households Compared to Other Generations." (2017). Martorell, Reynaldo, Paul Melgar, John A. Maluccio, Aryeh D. Stein, and Juan A. Rivera. "The Nutrition Intervention Improved Adult Human Capital and Economic Productivity." The Journal of Nutrition 140, no. 2 (2010): 411 414.

PAGE 39

33 Morgan, Robert M., and Shelby D. Hunt. "The commitment trust theory of relationship marketing." The journal of marketing (1994): 20 38. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. "Digestive Diseases Statistics for the United States." November 01, 2014. Accessed September 28, 2017. https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health information/health statistics/digestive diseases. National Institute of Mental Health. "Major Depression Among Adults." Accessed December 1, 2017. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/prevalence/major depression amongadults.shtml. National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Opportunities and Challenges in D igestive Diseases Research: Recommendations of the National Commission on Digestive Diseases. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; (2009). NIH Publication 08 Ð 6514. Paulus, P., Woods, M., Atkins, D., Macklin, R. 2017. The discourse of QDAS: rep orting practices of ATLAS.ti and NVivo users with implications for best practices, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20: 1, pp. 35 47 Pollard, J., SF L. Kirk, and J. E. Cade. "Factors affecting food choice in relation to fruit and vegetable intake: a review." Nutrition research reviews 15, no. 2 (2002): 373 387. Rao, Mayuree, Ashkan Afshin, Gitanjali Singh, and Dariush Mozaffarian. "Do healthier foods and diet patterns cost more than less healthy options? A systematic review and meta analysis." BMJ open 3, no. 12 (2013): e004277. Roseberry, William. 1997. Marx and Anthropology. Annual Review of Anthropology 26: 25 46. Roseberry, William. 1988. Political Economy. Annual Review of Anthropology 17: 161 185 Ross, J.; Horton, S. 1998. Economic consequences of iron deficiency (Ottawa, The Micronutrient Initiative). Sobal, Jeffery, and Carole A. Bisogni. "Constructing food choice decisions." Annals of Behavioral Medicine 38, no. 1 (2009): 37 46. Twenge, Jean M., and Heejung Park . "The Decline in Adult Activities Among US Adolescents, 1976 Ð 2016." Child development (2017). U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. "15 million people were self employed in 2015, or 10.1 percent of all U.S. workers." U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Acce ssed June 29, 2017. https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2016/self employment in the united states/home.htm . U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2018 Standard Occupat ional Classification System. November

PAGE 40

34 30, 2017. Accessed March 21, 2018. https://www.bls.gov/soc/2018/major_groups.htm#13 0000 . US Census Bureau. "Millennials Outnumber Baby Boom ers and Are Far More Diverse." The United States Census Bureau. 2015. Accessed December 01, 2016. http://www.census.gov/newsroom/press releases/2015/cb15 113.html U.S. Depar tment of Labor. Women's Bureau. 2016. Women's Earnings and the Wage Gap . https://www.dol.gov/wb/resources/Womens_Earnings_and_the_Wage_Gap_17.pdf. USDA: Economic Research Service. Dairy products: Per capita consumption, United States (Annual). February 9, 2018. Raw data. United States. Wanjek, Christopher. Food at Work: Workplace solutions for malnutrition, obesity and chronic diseases . International Labour Organization, 2005. Watts, Allison W., Melissa N. Laska, Nicole I. Larson, and Dianne R. Neuma rk Sztainer. "Millennials at Work: Workplace Environments of Young Adults and Associations with Weight Related Health." Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 70, no. 1 (2016): 65 71. Webster, Michelle, and Loayza, Jesus. State of Working Col orado . Report. 2016 ed. Denver, CO: Colorado Center on Law & Policy, 2016. 1 55. Winne, Mark. Closing the food gap: Resetting the table in the land of plenty . Beacon Press, 2008. World Health Organization (WHO). 2001. World Health Organization (WHO) . 2003a. Battling iron deficiency anaemia , available online: http://www.who.int/ nut/ida.htm [Nov. 2004].

PAGE 41

35 Appendix A: Interview G uide I. Employment Status and Background 1. What is your age, level of education, year, and gender? 2. Since this stud y is with millennials in alternative work arrangements, could you tell me your employment status? a. So would you describe your employment status as ____ [self employed, underemployed, or employed part time]? i. [If employed part time]: How many hours a week do you typically work? b. How long have you been ____ [self employed, underemployed, or employed part time]? 3. Are you satisfied with your current employment status? 4. Approximately how much money do you earn a week? 5. Do you have any financia l support from family or family savings, or any other financial assets that augment your budget? II. Food choice and healthful eating 1. How do you think your employment affects your food choices if at all? a. can you give me at least one concrete examp le? 2. Do you think your job interferes with your ability to eat healthfully? And how so? a. can you give me at least one concrete example? 3. How do you think a higher income or steadier job would change your food choices? 4. Please list the 15 foods yo u consume most often. 5. Please list ideal 15 ideal foods for a healthful diet.

PAGE 42

36 6. Please describe why you consume the foods listed in #4 the most often. 7. Please describe why the foods listed in #5 are ideal for a healthful diet. 8. What does "healthful" mean to you?

PAGE 43

37 B : Employment S tatus of P articipants Participant Underemployed Self Employed Part Time 1 X 2 X 3 X 4 X 5 X 6 X 7 X 8 X 9 X X 10 X X X 11 X 12 X 13 X 14 X 15 X 16 X 17 X

PAGE 44

38 C: Occupational Groups Occupational Groups Represented Number of Jobs in Study Educational Instruction and Library Occupations 3 Office and Administrative Support Occupations 2 Sales and Related Occupations 4 Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations 1 Legal Occu pations 1 Healthcare Support Occupations 1 Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations 2 Transportation and Material Moving Occupations 1 Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media Occupations 1 Personal Care and Service Occupations 2 Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations 1 Business and Financial Operations Occupations 2 This table represents the occupational groups that millennials in this study worked in. Although the total number of participants is 17, this table shows 21 diffe rent jobs. This is due to several participants holding more than one job at a time. Occupational groups from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics ( 2018).

PAGE 45

39 D: Amount of S upport and I mportant F actors in W ork F ood T rade O ffs PARTICIPANT SUPPORT LEVEL TIMING E AS E COST EATING LESS 1 NO X 2 SAVINGS X 3 NO X X 4 LESS THAN 50% X 5 SAVINGS X X 6 OCCASIONAL HELP X X 7 OVER 50% X X 8 OCCASIONAL HELP X 9 OVER 50% X 10 NO X X X 11 NO X X X 12 SAVINGS X 13 OVER 50% X 14 OVER 5 0% X 15 SAVINGS X X 16 LESS THAN 50% X 17 NO X TOTALS 11 7 7 1 This table describes the level of financial support millennials had, and the key influences that their employment status' had on their food choices. "TIMING" denotes that the hours that the participant worked shaped their food choi ces. "EASE " denotes that the participant's job made them seek Ôeasy' foods which were convenient or required little to no skill or time to make. "COST" denotes that the participant's employment constr ained their food choice on a basis of how much food costs. "EATING LESS" is a unique finding where one participant said that her employment status made her depressed and less likely to eat.

PAGE 46

40 E : The Top Ten Recurring Words f ro m t he Listing Activity 15 Most Commonly Consumed 15 Most Healthful Top 10 Items Overall Cheese Fish Cheese Chicken Chicken Chicken Coffee Milk Yogurt Yogurt Spinach Apples Eggs Apples Fish Rice Fresh Rice Apples Yogurt Milk Carrots Bananas Spinach Chocolate Rice Bananas Froze n Water Eggs

PAGE 47

41 F : Codebook Emergent codes that were not anticipated prior to the study include "Mental Health", "Cooking Skill", and "Trust" (of food systems).

PAGE 48

42 G: Summary T able of P articipant I nformation PARTICIPANT EMPLOYMENT STATUS SEX STUDENT? AGE # OF JOBS JOB CATEGORY ESTIMATED WEEKLY SALARY HRS WORKED/ WEEK SUPPORT FACTOR 1 PT F Yes 25 1 Educational Instruction and Library Occupations $350 15 18 NO TIMING 2 PT F No 25 1 Office and Administrative Support Occupations $400 21 35 SAVINGS COST 3 PT F Yes 27 1 Sales and Related Occupations $150 15 NO COST, TIMING 4 SE M No 25 1 Sales and Related Occupations Not weekly; $1,000 to $20,000 30 LESS THAN 50% COST 5 PT F No 26 2 Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations/Personal Care and Servic e Occupations $800 27 SAVINGS TIMING, EASE 6 PT F No 26 1 Legal Occupations $650 33 37 OCCASIONAL HELP COST, EASE 7 PT F Applying 23 1 Healthcare Support Occupations $280 24 32 OVER 50% TIMING, EASE 8 PT F Yes 23 2 Food Preparation and Serving Relate d Occupations/Educational Instruction and Library Occupations $300 15 & 15 OCCASIONAL HELP EASE 9 PT/UE F No 27 ? Transportation and Material Moving Occupations/ Business and Financial Operations Occupations $250 <10 OVER 50% EATING LESS 10 SE/UE/PT F No 24 3 Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media Occupations/Office and Administrative Support Occupations $625 38 65 NO COST, TIMING, EASE 11 UE F No 26 1 Office and Administrative Support Occupations $600 40 NO COST, TIMING, EASE 12 PT F No 25 1 Sales and Related Occupations $750 25 SAVINGS TIMING 13 PT F Yes 23 1 Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations $200 15 25 OVER 50% TIMING 14 PT F Yes 24 1 Personal Care and Service Occupations $225 15 OVER 50% TIMING 15 PT F Yes 23 2 Educa tional Instruction and Library Occupations $360 30 SAVINGS TIMING, EASE 16 PT M Yes 25 1 Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations $600 15 20 LESS THAN 50% COST 17 UE F No 22 1 Sales and Related Occupations $500 40 NO TIMING PT refers to part time, UE to underemployed, and SE to self employed.