New research from the University of Cincinnati suggests workers want more flexibility in their work schedules, but barriers in the workplace are keeping them quiet behind their cubicles, counters and assembly lines. Lisa M. Fisher and Therese A. Sprinkle, both doctoral candidates in the UC Department of Sociology, presented their paper, “Workplace Structure and Flexible Work Arrangements: Examining How Workplaces Fall Short and Why Workers Accept It,” at the 102nd-annual meeting of the American Sociological Association.
Fisher and Sprinkle analyzed data from the 2002 National Study of the Changing Workforce conducted by the Families & Work Institute – a nonprofit research organization based in New York – that studies changes in the workforce, workplace, families and communities.
Regardless of gender, out of the 2,776 responses for the UC study, nearly half the workers overall wished they worked fewer hours, including 63 percent of daytime workers. As for overall satisfaction with their work schedules, 49 percent would prefer to change their schedule if they could, with rotating shift workers reporting the highest level of dissatisfaction with their schedules. The researchers also found that at least 75 percent of the respondents wanted more flexible work options without job risk, and just under 60 percent reported they’d be willing to give up a day’s pay for a day off. Even among the 52 respondents who said they worked flexible/on-call schedules, 76 percent preferred more work flexibility without negative consequences.
The researchers suggest concerns over salary and career achievement may be discouraging workers from asking for more flexible schedules to address personal and family matters. “Crafting good flexible work policy is complicated, particularly due to the expectation that business needs come first,” write the researchers. “While there are organizations that view flexibility as a moral responsibility of sorts and work to implement it despite these complexities, many see flexible work arrangements at odds with work structure and counter to the business of doing business. Some implement it in only a very limited fashion so as not to impede on their overall system of work,” the researchers state in the paper.
The UC researchers examined the 2,776 workers’ interest and perceptions about workplace flexibility by comparing the following work shifts:
- Regular day shift (74 percent of the those surveyed)
- Regular evening shift (five percent)
- Regular night shift (three percent)
- Rotating shifts (eight percent)
- Split shifts (two percent)
- Flexible/on-call shifts (seven percent)
Fisher and Sprinkle chose to examine perceptions around work schedules because they say workplace structure often determines workplace flexibility.
They found that academic researchers and business managers are at odds on how to address the challenge of workplace flexibility, as previous research, they say, ignores the business of work. For example, the largest group likely to work from home was flexible/on-call workers, but less than 20-percent of that group reported that their home was their office. “Working from home may no longer be an advantage or necessarily be any more flexible than working in a fixed location, given today’s ever encroaching wireless work-life and the complexities presented by blurred boundaries and spillover between work and home where they are co-located,” write the researchers.
Sixty percent of these same flexible, on-call workers also reported holding the highest control over their schedules, while only 36 percent of the daytime workers felt they could control their own work schedules. However, the day-timers reported the highest flexibility in choosing when they started and stopped their workday, while the night shift (15 percent) reported the least control over when to start and end their workday.
The paper concludes that workplace structure must be reexamined in concert with the need for more flexibility. “Rather than just being a ‘wish list’ for time off work, it is clear that our findings show workers are willing to give up pay and make other concessions to realize greater work flexibility because it is not generally seen as something to which they are entitled,” write the researchers. “And, workers do not seem to expect the desired structure to materialize. Many likely adjust their preferences, or take the attitude that ‘It’s work,’ and ignore their needs.”
The average age of the respondents was just over 40, with the oldest workers holding daytime and split-shift jobs (42.0 and 40.9 respectively) and the 30-somethings working the evening (average age 34.5) or rotating shifts (average age 35.4). The researchers report 90 percent of those surveyed had a high-school diploma or GED (90 percent) and 29 percent held either a college bachelor’s degree or higher.
Seventy-five percent of those surveyed were white, 10 percent were African-American, 10 percent reported being Hispanic and five percent had checked the “other” category. In comparing race with work shifts, the researchers found that whites held the majority of daytime jobs (77 percent), split-shift jobs (77 percent) or flexible, on-call jobs (76 percent). Among African-Americans, 16 percent held split-shift positions; 13 percent reported working rotating shifts and 14 percent worked the night shift. Seventy-four percent overall reported working Monday through Friday, with the majority of that group composed of daytime employees and people who worked split-shifts.
In terms of gender, the respondents included 51 percent men and 49 percent women, and they were about equally divided across almost all of the shifts, although the numbers of men (57 percent) were slightly higher in the rotating shifts and women (58 percent) composed more of the split-shift category.
Eighty-three percent of those surveyed worked full-time and 67 percent reported they worked for a private, for-profit business. The researchers say 22 percent of the respondents were government workers, and that category also held the highest percentage (29 percent) of split-shift workers.