Most people think police officers, teachers and nurses have good paying jobs. But according to a new analysis of what those occupations earn in 60 major metropolitan areas, working in those fields is no guarantee that you'll be able to afford a house on your salary alone.
The study prepared for the National Housing Conference found that households dependent on an elementary school teacher's salary cannot afford to purchase the median price house in more than half of the areas polled.
Worse, those who depend on a policeman's earnings can't afford the median priced house in 45 of those areas, and licensed practical nurses are priced out of all but two markets.
Things aren't much better on the rental side of housing, the study also found. Only in six metro areas can janitors afford a one-bedroom apartment on 30 percent of their incomes, which is considered the standard measure of affordability. And retail salespeople can to that in just three cities.
When it come to renting a two-bedroom apartment, though, neither janitors nor sales clerks can do so on 30 percent of their earnings in any of the 60 places canvassed.
The rather sobering study is called "Paycheck to Paycheck: Working Families and the Cost of Housing America." It is part of a series of reports commissioned by NHC, a coalition of affordable housing experts from both the public and private sectors, to focus on the housing needs of working stiffs like cops, educators, nurses, clerks and janitors.
It found that not just the majority of people who work in these five vital occupations are finding it difficult to put a roof over their families' heads. Some 3.7 million families who work the equivalent of a full-time job also are forced to spend more than 50 percent of their earnings for a decent place to live.
If they want to spend less, they'll have to settle for severely substandard conditions, the report says.
And that number is up from 3 million since 1997, points out NHC President J. Michael Pitchford, who also is a senior vice president at Bank of America.
That works out to a 23 percent increase in just two years, and it's far too large a number to suit Helen Kanosky, executive vice president of the AFL-CIO Housing Investment Trust Fund. "No one should be out in the position of having to work two or three jobs to find or remain in suitable housing, and working families should not be forced to make choices among food, child care and health coverage to be able to buy or rent an affordable place to live," Kanosky commented.
The study says the primary culprit is the strong economy and the rising cost of housing between the 1997-'99 study period.
"Recent economic prosperity has benefitted many, but working families in need of affordable housing are not necessarily" among them, the report says. "In some parts of the country where economic growth is the strongest, the labor force critical to sustaining the economy either cannot find housing that is reasonably priced or cannot locate within an appropriate commuting distance of their jobs."
For more articles by Lew Sichelman, please press here.
Published: October 8, 2001
Use of this article without permission is a violation of federal copyright laws.
