Résumés
Summary
This paper examines whether flexible work schedules in Canada are created by employers for business reasons or to assist their workers achieve work-life balance. We focus on long workweek, flextime, compressed workweek, variable workweek length and/or variable workweek schedule. In the last three decades, two streams of literature have emerged on flexibility. One stream of literature discusses flexibility as demand-driven, that is, a strategic initiative of employers to enhance the business requirements of the firm. The other stream of literature discusses flexibility as supply-driven, where employees have the ability to influence the decisions about the nature of their work schedules and where employees, especially women, demand flexible work schedules for work-life balance. Thus, we ask are flexible work schedules created for business reasons or to assist workers achieve work-life balance?
Statistics Canada’s 2003 Workplace and Employee Survey data linking employee microdata to workplace (i.e., employer) microdata are used in the analysis. Results show that more than half of the workers covered in this data have at least one of the five specified types of flexible work schedules. Approximately 5% of workers have a long workweek, 36% have flextime, 7% a compressed workweek, 13% a variable workweek length, and 16% a variable workweek schedule. Only two in five Canadians have a standard work schedule. Employment status, unionized work, occupation, and sector are factors consistently associated with flexible work schedules. Personal characteristics of marital status, dependent children, and childcare use are not significantly associated with flexible work schedules, while females are less likely to have a flexible work schedule than males. Overall, results suggest that flexible work schedules are created for business reasons rather than individual worker interests. Thus, if public policy makers are committed to facilitating workers’ work-family-life balance interests, then our results suggest that separate policy initiatives designed specifically for workers will be required.
Keywords:
- work schedules,
- non-standard work,
- work-life balance
Résumé
Cet essai cherche à établir si les horaires de travail flexibles sont mis en place par les employeurs pour des raisons d’affaires ou pour aider les travailleurs à concilier le travail et leur vie personnelle. Nous avons considérés différents horaires de travail : la longue semaine de travail (48 heures et plus), l’horaire variable, la semaine de travail comprimée, la semaine de travail de longueur variable et l’horaire de travail variable d’une semaine à l’autre. Au cours des trois dernières décennies, deux courants de pensée ont émergé sur la flexibilité. Un premier courant analyse la flexibilité sous l’angle de la demande, c’est-à-dire comme une initiative stratégique des employeurs pour mieux répondre aux besoins de l’entreprise. L’autre courant considère plutôt la flexibilité du point de vue de l’offre, c’est-à-dire que les salariés disposeraient d’une certaine marge de manoeuvre pour exercer une influence sur les décisions touchant leurs horaires de travail, et plus particulièrement les femmes pour un meilleur équilibre travail-famille. Alors, nous nous demandons si les horaires de travail ont été créés pour des raisons d’affaires ou pour aider les travailleurs à atteindre un équilibre travail-famille ?
Des données statistiques provenant de l’Enquête sur le milieu de travail et les employés de Statistique Canada de 2003 ont été retenues pour l’étude car elles contiennent des micro-données concernant un salarié et son lieu de travail. Les résultats obtenus montrent que plus de la moitié des travailleurs couverts par l’enquête possèdent au moins un des cinq types d’horaire de travail flexible : environ 5 % des travailleurs ont une longue semaine de travail; 36 % bénéficient de l’horaire variable; 7 % ont une semaine de travail comprimée; 13 % ont semaine de travail de longueur variable; enfin, 16 % possèdent un horaire variable d’une semaine à l’autre. Seulement deux Canadiens sur cinq jouissent d’une semaine de travail normale. Le statut d’emploi, la nature syndiquée du travail, l’occupation et le secteur d’activité sont des facteurs qu’on retrouve constamment associés aux horaires flexibles. Des caractéristiques personnelles telles que l’état matrimonial, les enfants en bas âges et le soin des enfants ne sont pas significativement associées à des horaires de travail flexibles, et les femmes sont moins susceptibles de bénéficier d’horaires flexibles que les hommes. Dans l’ensemble, les conclusions laissent croire que les horaires de travail flexibles sont crées pour des raisons d’affaires plutôt que pour tenir compte des intérêts individuels des travailleurs. Par conséquent, si nous voulons faciliter l’équilibre travail-vie personnelle, il faudrait des politiques publiques spécifiques à cet égard.
Mots-clés:
- horaires de travail,
- travail atypique,
- équilibre travail-vie personnelle
Resumen
Este ensayo intenta establecer si los horarios de trabajo flexibles son implantados por los empleadores por razones de negocio o por deseo de ayudar a sus trabajadores a conciliar el trabajo y la vida personal. Hemos considerado diferentes horarios de trabajo: la semana larga de trabajo (48 horas y más), el horario variable, la semana comprimida de trabajo, la semana de trabajo con duración variable y el horario variable de trabajo de una semana a otra. Durante las tres últimas décadas, han emergido dos corrientes de pensamiento sobre la flexibilidad. La primera corriente analiza la flexibilidad desde la perspectiva de la demanda, es decir como una iniciativa estratégica de los empleadores para responder mejor a las necesidades de la empresa. La otra corriente considera la flexibilidad más bien desde el punto de vista de la oferta, sugiriendo que los asalariados disponen de cierto margen de juego para ejercer una influencia sobre las decisiones relativas a sus horarios de trabajo en miras a alcanzar un mejor equilibrio trabajo – familia, y muy particularmente en el caso de las mujeres. Nos interrogamos entonces a saber si los horarios de trabajo han sido creados por razones empresariales o para ayudar a que los trabajadores alcancen un equilibrio trabajo – familia.
Hemos retenido para el estudio los datos estadísticos provenientes de la Encuesta sobre el medio de trabajo y los empleados realizada por Estadística Canadá en 2003 pues ellos contienen micro-datos concernientes al asalariado y su medio de trabajo. Los resultados obtenidos muestran que más de la mitad de los trabajadores cubiertos por la encuesta poseen al menos uno de los cinco tipos de horario de trabajo flexible: cerca de 5% de los trabajadores tienen una semana larga de trabajo; 36% benefician del horario variable; 7% tienen una semana comprimida de trabajo; 13% tienen la semana de trabajo a duración variable; finalmente, 16% poseen un horario variable de semana en semana. Solo dos canadienses sobre cinco disfrutan de una semana normal de trabajo. El estatuto de empleo, la condición sindicaliza del empleo, la ocupación y el sector de actividad son factores que se encuentran constantemente asociados a los horarios flexibles. Ciertas características personales como el estado matrimonial, la presencia de niños de corta edad y el cuidado de niños no son asociados de manera significativa a los horarios flexibles de trabajo y las mujeres son menos susceptibles de beneficiar de horarios flexibles comparativamente a los hombres. En general, las conclusiones dejan pensar que los horarios flexibles de trabajo son creados mucho más por razones empresariales que por consideración de los intereses individuales de los trabajadores. Por consecuencia, si se quiere facilitar el equilibrio trabajo – vida personal, es necesario promover políticas públicas especificas a este propósito.
Palabras claves:
- horarios flexibles de trabajo,
- trabajo atípico,
- equilibrio trabajo – vida personal
Parties annexes
References
- Atkinson, J. 1987. “Flexibility or Fragmentation? The United Kingdom Labour Market in the Eighties.” Labour and Society, 12 (1), 87–105.
- Bailyn, L., R. Drago and T. Kochan. 2001. Integrating Work and Family Life: A Holistic Approach. Report for Alfread P. Sloan Foundation Work-Family Policy Network, September.
- Baltes, B.B., T.E. Briggs, J.W. Huff, J.A. Wright and G.A. Neuman. 1999. “Flexible and Compressed Workweek Schedules: A Meta-Analysis of their Effects on Work-Related Criteria.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 84 (4), 496–513.
- Beechy, V. and T. Perkins. 1987. A Matter of Hours: Women, Part-time Work and the Labor Market. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
- Blyton, P., and J. Morris, eds. 1991. A Flexible Future? Prospects for Employment and Organization. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
- Bosch, G. 2006. “Working Time and the Standard Employment Relationship.” Decent Working Time, New Trends New Issues. J.-Y. Boulin, M. Lallement, J. Messenger, and F. Michon, eds. Geneva: ILO, 41–64.
- Boulin, J.-Y., M. Lallement and F. Michon. 2006. “Decent Working Time in Industrialized Countries: Issues, Scopes, and Paradoxes.” Decent Working Time, New Trends New Issues. J.-Y. Boulin, M. Lallement, J. Messenger, and F. Michon, eds. Geneva: ILO, 13–40.
- Cappelli, P., L. Bassi, H. Katz, D. Knoke, P. Osterman and M. Usem. 1997. Change at Work. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Chaykowski, R., and G. Slotsve. 2003. “Employer-Sponsored Training by Firm Size.” Skills Research Initiative, Working Paper Series. Ottawa: Government of Canada. Human Resources Development Canada, Industry Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. Working Paper 2003 B-02. <http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/ineas-aes.nsf/vwGeneratedInterE/ra01916e.html> (accessed January 22, 2004).
- Chowhan, J., and N.J. Buckley. 2005. “Using Mean Bootstrap Weights in Stata: A BSWREG Revision.” Statistics Canada Research Data Centres: Information and Technical Bulletin, 2 (1), 23–38. Statistics Canada. <http://www.statcan.ca/english/rdc/tools.htm> (accessed July 9, 2005).
- Comfort, D., K. Johnson and D. Wallace. 2003. Part-Time Work and Family-Friendly Practices in Canadian Workplaces. Statistics Canada and Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC), Evolving Workplace Series. No. 71-584-MIE No. 6.
- Cooke, G.B. 2005. “The Nature and Incidence of Non-standard Work Arrangements.” Unpublished dissertation. McMaster University.
- Cooke, G.B. 2007. “Alternative Work Schedules and Related Issues among Atlantic Canadians.” The Workplace Review, 4 (2), 8–15.
- Dunlop, J.T. 1958. Industrial Relations Systems. New York: Holt-Dryden.
- Duxbury, L., and C. Higgins. 2001. “Work-life Balance in the New Millennium: Where Are We? Where Do We Need to Go?” CPRN Discussion Paper. <http://www.cprn.org> (accessed February 1, 2005).
- Goetschy, J. 2006. “The Future of the EES.” Paper presented at the International Conference on Innovating Labour Market Policies: Transitional Labour Markets and Flexicurity, November 30–December 1, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
- Golden, L. 2005. “The Flexibility Gap: Employee Access to Flexibility in Work Schedules.” Flexibility in Workplaces: Effects on Workers, Work Environment and the Unions. I.U. Zeytinoglu, ed. Geneva: IIRA/ILO, 38–56. <http://www.ilo.org/public/english/iira/studies/st10book/index.htm> (accessed March 1, 2005).
- Hall, K. 1999. “Hours Polarization at the End of the 1990s.” Perspectives on Labour and Income, 11 (2), 28–37. Statistics Canada, 75-001-XPE.
- Hamilton, L.C. 2003. Statistics with STATA, Updated for Version 7. Belmont, Calif.: Duxbury/Thomson Learning.
- Houseman, S.N. 2001. “Why Employers Use Flexible Staffing Arrangements: Evidence from an Establishment Survey.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 55 (1), 149–170.
- Human Resources and Social Development Canada. 2006. “HRSD Medium-Term Policy Research Priorities.” Prepared for Annual Symposium of the Population, Work and Family Research Collaboration (PWFC), Ottawa, Ontario, March 23–24.
- Jenson, J., E. Hagen and C. Reddy, eds. 1988. Feminization of the Labor Force: Paradoxes and Promises. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Kochan, T.A., H.C. Katz and R.B. McKersie. 1986. The Transformation of American Industrial Relations. New York: Basic Books.
- Kossek, E.E., B. Lautsch and S.C. Eaton. 2005. “Flexibility Enactment Theory: Implications of Flexibility Type, Control and Boundary Management for Work-Family Effectiveness.” Work and Life Integration: Organizational, Cultural and Individual Perspectives. E.E. Kossek and S.J. Lambert, eds. Mahwah, N.J. and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 243–262.
- Kropf, M.B. 1999. “Flexibility Initiatives: Current Approaches and Effective Strategies.” Women in Management Review, 14 (5), 177–185.
- Levesque, M. 2007. “Unionization.” Perspectives on Labour and Income, August, 1–8. Statistics Canada, 75-001-XPE.
- Lee, S., and D. McCann. 2006. “Working Time Capability: Towards Realizing Individual Choice.” Decent Working Time, New Trends New Issues. J.-Y. Boulin, M. Lallement, J. Messenger and F. Michon, eds. Geneva: ILO, 65–91.
- Lewis, S., R. Gambles and R. Rapoport. 2007. “The Constraints of a ‘Work-Life Balance’ Approach: An International Perspective.” International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18 (3), 360–373.
- Lipsett, B., and M. Reesor. 1998. “Alternative Work Arrangements in Canadian Workplaces.” The Changing Nature of Work, Employment and Workplace Relations: Selected Papers from the 34th Annual CIRA Conference, 29–44.
- MacDermid, S.M. 2005. “(Re)Considering Conflict between Work and Family.” Work and Life Integration: Organizational, Cultural and Individual Perspectives. E.E. Kossek and S.J. Lambert, eds. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Earlbaum, 19–40.
- Marshall, K. 2001. “Part-Time by Choice.” Perspectives on Labour and Income, Spring, 20–27. Statistics Canada, 75-001-XPE.
- McCrate, E. 2005. “Flexible Hours, Workplace Authority and Compensating Wage Differentials in the US.” Feminist Economics, 11 (1), 11–39.
- Meltz, N. 1993. “Industrial Relations Systems as a Framework for Organizing Contributions to Industrial Relations Theory.” Industrial Relations Theory: Its Nature, Scope and Pedagogy. R. Adams and N. Meltz, eds. Metuchen, N.J.: IMLR Press/Rutgers University: Scarecrow Press, 161–182.
- Messenger, J.C. 2006. “Towards Decent Working Time.” Decent Working Time: New Trends, New Issues. J.-Y. Boulin, M. Lallement, J.C. Messenger and F. Michon, eds. Geneva: ILO, 419–441.
- Mooney, C.Z., and R.D. Duval. 1993. Bootstrapping: A Nonparametric Approach to Statistical Inference. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences Series, No. 95.
- OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2006. “Boosting Jobs and Incomes—Policy Lessons from Reassessing the OECD Jobs Strategy.” OECD Employment Outlook 2006. www.oecd.org (accessed September 1, 2006).
- Parasuraman, S., and C. Simmers. 2001. “Type of Employment, Work-Family Conflict and Well-Being: A Comparative Study.” Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22 (5), 551–568.
- Piore, M.J. 1986. “Perspectives on Labor Market Flexibility.” Industrial Relations, 25 (2), 146–166.
- Shields, M. 2000. “Long Working Hours and Health.” Perspectives on Labour and Income, 12 (1), 49–56. Statistics Canada, 75-001-XPE.
- Statistics Canada. 2006. “Detailed Information for WES 2003 Data.” <http://www.statcan.ca/cgi-bin/> (accessed May 25, 2006).
- Usalcas, J. 2008. “Hours Polarization Revisited.” Perspectives on Labour and Income, March, 5–15. Statistics Canada, 75-001-XPE.
- Verma, A. 2005. “What Do Unions Do to the Workplace? Union Effects on Management and HRM Policies.” Journal of Labor Research, 26 (3), 415–449.
- Zeytinoglu, I.U. 1993. “Negotiation Issues for Part-Time Workers: The Impact of Occupation.” Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations, 48 (2), 305–320.
- Zeytinoglu, I.U. 1999. “Flexible Work Arrangements: An Overview of Developments in Canada.” Changing Work Relationships in Industrialized Economies. I.U. Zeytinoglu, ed. Amsterdam, Netherlands and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 41–58.