How does working time flexibility affect gender-specific work intentions?
In this chapter, I present findings from a conjoint experiment conducted in Switzerland and aimed at investigating the elasticity in the within-household division of paid and care work given varying policy contexts. Whereas in my previous research I have analysed similar questions mostly with respect to the role of family policies, in the present contribution I move a step closer to Klaus Armingeon’s research in what concerns the explanatory variable, namely the labour market. Thus, I ask how flexible work arrangements affect the genderspecific allocation of time on paid work and care work. The results indicate that women spend more time on the labour market and less on care work under flexible work conditions. However, this does not apply for women with traditional childcare preferences. Moreover, men only partly agree on women’s stronger labour market involvement. Finally, men with non-traditional childcare preferences indicate that they would invest half a day more in childcare duties if flexibility in working time and working place were available – without however reducing their labour market involvement. Overall, the findings illustrate that intended behaviour is very much embedded in dominant gender roles.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Albertsen, Karen, Guobjörg Linda Rafnsdóttir, Asbjörn Grimsmo, Kristinn Tómasson, and Kaisa Kauppinen. 2008. “Workhours and Worklife Balance.” Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, Supplement 2008 (5): 14–21.Google Scholar
- Armingeon, Klaus. 1994. Staat und Arbeitsbeziehungen: Ein Internationaler Vergleich. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
- Armingeon, Klaus. 1999. “Politische Reaktionen Auf Steigende Arbeitslosigkeit.” In Nationaler Staat und Internationale Wirtschaft, edited by Andreas Busch and Thomas Plümper, 169–96. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
- Armingeon, Klaus, and Lucio Baccaro. 2012. “The Sorrows of Young Euro : The Sovereign Debt Crisis of Ireland and Southern Europe.” In Coping with Crisis : Government Reactions to the Great Recession, edited by Nancy Bermeo and Jonas Pontusson, 162–97. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
- Brayfield, April, Marina A. Adler, and Ye Luo. 2001. “Patterns in Family Policy Preferences in the European Union.” Social Thought & Research 24 (1&2): 89–119.Google Scholar
- Bütler, Monika. 2007. “Arbeiten lohnt sich nicht - ein zweites Kind noch weniger. Zu den Auswirkungen einkommensabhängiger Tarife auf das (Arbeitsmarkt-)Verhalten der Frauen.” Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik 8 (1): 1–19.Google Scholar
- Gornick, Janet C., and Marcia K. Meyers. 2003. Families That Work Policies for Reconciling Parenthood and Employment. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
- Hainmueller, Jens, Daniel J. Hopkins, and Teppei Yamamoto. 2014. “Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments.” Political Analysis 22 (1): 1–30.Google Scholar
- Hakim, Catherine. 2003b. “Competing Family Models, Competing Social Policies.” Family Matters 64: 52–61.Google Scholar
- Hakim, Catherine. 2003c. Models of the Family, Fertility and Employment Patterns. Paper Presented to Euroconference on The Second Demographic Transition in Europe: The Implications of Family and Fertility Change for Individuals, Families and Society. Belgium.Google Scholar
- Häusermann, Silja and Christine Zollinger. 2014. “Familienpolitik.” In Handbuch der Schweizer Politik, edited by Peter Knoepfel, Yannis Papadopoulos, Pascal Sciarini, Adrian Vatter, and Silja Häusermann. Zürich: NZZ Libro.Google Scholar
- Lott, Yvonne. 2017. “Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Pressure and Work-to-Home Conflict for Women and Men in Germany.” Forschungsförderung Working Paper, Nr. 46. Düsseldorf: Hans Bö ckler Stiftung.Google Scholar
- Petitclerc, Amélie, Sylvana Côté, Orla Doyle, Margaret Burchinal, Catherine Herba, Henrik Daae Zachrisson, Michel Boivin, et al. 2017. “Who Uses Early Childhood Education and Care Services? Comparing Socioeconomic Selection across Five Western Policy Contexts.” International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy 11 (1): 3.Google Scholar
- Plantenga, Janneke, and Chantal Remery. 2010. “Flexible Working Time Arrangements and Gender Equality. A Comparative Review of 30 European Countries.” Luxembourg: https://doi.org/10.2767/29844.
- Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle, Dominique Oehrli, and Meret Lütolf. 2018. “Could Childcare Policies Shape Family Models? Empirical Evidence from a Conjoint-Analysis.” Paper Presented at the SPSA Annual Conference 2018, Geneva, January 5-6, 2018Google Scholar
- Vuri, Daniela. 2016. “Do Childcare Policies Increase Maternal Employment?” IZA World of Labor.Google Scholar
- Wendt, Claus, Monika Mischke, and Michaela Pfeifer. 2011. Welfare States and Public Opinion. Perceptons of Healthcare Systems, Family Policy and Benefits for the Unemployed and Poor in Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar