1 / 22

HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE

HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE. Jouko NATTI 1 , Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and Humanities, Finland 2 University of Jyväskylä, Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy, Finland Funded by Academy of Finland.

salene
Download Presentation

HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI1, Timo ANTTILA2, Tomi OINAS2 & Satu OJALA1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and Humanities, Finland 2 University of Jyväskylä, Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy, Finland Funded by Academy of Finland

  2. INTRODUCTION • Focus on paid work at home • Increasing phenomenon, indicates changing time-space relations of paid work • Mixed findings in earlier studies • Extent • Different estimates (survey / diary data) • Duration: part-time / full-time • Timing: evening, weekend (Breedveld 2003)

  3. Predictors • Individual (family) factors • Older age (Callister & Dixon) • Family situation (spouse, children) (Golden 2008; Wight & Raley 2009) • Home infrastructure • Separate space at home (Tietze & Musson 2002; Kossek et al. 2006) • Work characteristics • High socioeconomic status, job autonomy

  4. Time use consequences • Working time • Longer working hours (Callister & Dixon 2001) • Commuting: no effect / shorter (Michelson & Crouse 2002) • Household work: minor effects • Men: less time to childcare (Wight & Raley 2009) • Leisure: minor effects • Less social relations (Michelson 2002)

  5. AIMS • (1) The extent, duration and timing of paid work at home among women and men. • (2) The predictors of home-based work. • Individual and family characteristics (age, children, and partner). • Home’s infrastructure (internet connection at home, number of rooms at home), and • Work characteristics (socio-economic status, industry, and working time autonomy), • (3) The relationship of working at home to time use • Assumptions: HBW is linked to the lengthening of working hours, reduced commuting time. • In addition, home-based work potentially increases time for household work and child care, increases presence at home and time with family and decreases time for social relations.

  6. DATA AND METHODS • Data • Use of Time -study (2009-2010), collected by Statistics Finland. • Time use diaries (7.480 days) • Focus on15-64 year old employees (n=3.382) • Methods • Descriptive: cross tabulation • Multivariate: logistic regression (predictors) and covariate analysis (time use)

  7. 1. EXTENT OF HOMEWORKING • Interview data • Only few (1% of men and 2% of women) said that they work at home only (full-time) • Working occasionally or partially at home was more common (42% of men and 32% of women). • Diary data • Operationalization: combination of main activity (paid work) and location (home) • 7 % of men and 6 % of women worked (10+ min.) at home during average diary day • Results vary depending on the type of data. • Focus on diary-based working at home.

  8. Duration and timing • Duration (home-based workers) • Mean 122 min. (men), 139 (women); • Distribution: 3+ hours 21 % (men), 24% women) (Fig.) • Gender differences: longer hours among women • Timing • Weekly timing • Weekdays 7-9 % (Monday 9-12 %; Friday 4 %) • Weekends 6 % (Saturday 3-5 %, Sunday 6-8 %) • Season: Spring 8-9 %; Summer 3-6 % • Type of day: 9-10 % on working days, 5-6 % on holidays, 3-4 % while being sick • Minor gender differences

  9. HBW: distribution of duration

  10. Prevalence of paid work at home among men and women during the day (%, diary data, employees)

  11. 2. PREDICTORS OF HBW • Individual-level factors • Age was classified into four groups (25-34, 35-44, 45-54, and 55-64 years old). • Living with a partner or without a partner was indicated by Family status. • Children were classified into two groups: no children at home, or at least one child less than 18 years old at home. • Home infrastructure factors (Household interview data) • Internet connection (no, yes) • Number of rooms at home (1-2, 3-4, 5 or more) • Work-related factors • Socio-economic status: manual workers, lower-level non-manuals, upper-level non-manuals • Industry (NACE classification): 8 sectors • Working time autonomy was measured by asking respondents if they can influence the starting and finishing times of their work by at least 30 minutes (no, yes).

  12. 3. HBW AND TIME USE • In examining overall time use we apply Robinson and Godbey’s (1997) classification of the main categories of primary activities. • paid work, • committed time for household maintenance, • personal time devoted for self • free time activities. • Covariate analysis: estimated time use by comparison groups • Covariates: day type, background factors (age, partner, children, socioeconomic status)

  13. DISCUSSION • The extent of HBW is linked to the type of data • Interview data: 34-43 %, diary data 6-7 % • Changes over time: some increase in interview data, no change in diary data (1999 > 2009) • Duration: Still supplementary (average: 2 hours per day) • Daily timing: morning, afternoon, evening (men) • Weekdays: high in Mondays, low in Fridays • Weekend days: high in Sundays, low in Saturdays

  14. Predictors of HBW • The role of individual and family (spouse, children) characteristics minor • Best predictors: • work characteristics: high socioeconomic status (women) and industry (men) • and home infrastructure (space)

  15. Time use consequences • Working time and commuting: stretching working hours • Longer working hours both among men and women, less commuting time among women • Household activities: minor effects • Women: home-based workers spent less time on shopping and more time on child care (men less) • Personal time: less time among women • Women: home-based workers spent less time to personal needs, especially to meals. • Leisure: minor effects • Women: home-based workers spent less time to socializing with friends,

  16. Limitations and strengths • Limitations > further studies • Diary data (minutes): • Higher limit for HBW hours (now 10 min) • Focus on employees • Self-employed workers and freelancers missing • Finnish data > comparative perspective • Strengths • Representative data • Combination of interview and diary data

  17. Thank you!jouko.natti@uta.fi

  18. Table 1. The extent (%) of paid work at home by gender in the interview data (employees only)(in parentheses 1999-2000 figures)

  19. Table 2. The extent (%) of paid work at home by gender in the diary data (employed persons)

  20. Table 3. The duration (minutes) of paid work at home by gender in the diary data

More Related