Effects of Administrative License Revocation on Employment

Knoebel, Kathleen Y.; Ross, H. Laurence (Hugh Laurence) · 1996 · ROSA P / United States. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (full text — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This 1996 study, conducted by KETRON for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), investigates the economic impact of Administrative License Revocation (ALR) on drunk-driving (DUI) offenders and the employment effects of alcohol-involved crashes on innocent victims. The research was motivated by concerns from states lacking ALR laws that license revocation causes significant job loss and income reduction, potentially harming societal welfare. The study aimed to determine if short-term suspensions for first offenders and longer-term revocations for multiple offenders significantly disrupt employment, and to compare these effects against the economic impact on crash victims. The methodology involved surveying 812 DUI offenders (579 first-time, 233 multiple) and 146 crash victims across four jurisdictions representing different ALR policies: Pennsylvania (no ALR), Maryland (immediate hardship license), California (30-day hard suspension), and Delaware (90-day hard suspension). Offenders were surveyed in DUI education programs, while victims were identified through state records and arrest files. The study utilized regression models and t-tests to compare income changes and employment status between ALR and non-ALR states, controlling for variables such as jail time and education. The findings indicate that ALR does not have a pronounced impact on the employment or income of DUI offenders. Over 55% of offenders reported no change in employment or income following their arrest. Statistical analyses showed no significant difference in income reduction between offenders in ALR states and those in Pennsylvania. While nearly half of the offenders reported that license loss interfered with work, this interference did not translate into significant income loss or job termination; 94% of offenders still had jobs one month after arrest. In contrast, crash victims experienced greater employment disruption, with only 71% remaining employed one month post-crash, though the difference in income reduction between offenders and victims was not statistically significant. Additionally, many offenders admitted to driving while unlicensed, citing a low perceived risk of apprehension. The study concludes that the fear of widespread economic harm from ALR is not supported by data. The authors recommend continued support for ALR adoption in states without such laws, as the safety benefits outweigh the minimal economic consequences. They also suggest increasing the detection rate of unlicensed driving to enhance deterrence and improving public awareness of ALR laws. The research highlights that the vast majority of DUI incidents do not result in crashes, meaning the primary impact of drunk driving falls on the offenders rather than innocent victims.

Key finding

Administrative license revocation does not significantly reduce the employment or income of drunk driving offenders, whereas alcohol-involved crashes significantly impact the employment of seriously injured victims.

Methodology

survey

Sample size: 958

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via bulk_ingest_rosap on 2026-05-23 (6 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• dui enforcement