Flexibility loss and worker well-being: what happens to job satisfaction when workers lose their telework usage?

IF 3.2 2区经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Socio-Economic Review Pub Date : 2024-03-05 DOI:10.1093/ser/mwae009

Satoshi Araki, Jeremy Rappleye

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The association between flexible work arrangements (FWA) and worker well-being has been extensively investigated. However, the Covid-19 pandemic has generated a new phenomenon where workers return to inflexible workstyles after experiencing FWA. This article examines the consequence of this ‘flexibility loss’ with attention to telework and job satisfaction (JS). Using panel data collected by the Japanese government in 2020–2021, regressions and generalized structural equation modeling reveal (a) workers who frequently telework exhibit higher JS in both years; (b) on average, losing telework does not affect JS; and (c) workers who experienced telework-related challenges in 2020 and continue to work remotely next year report lower JS, whereas those who lost telework opportunities possess higher JS. These results suggest that a new type of labor stratification emerges based on the compound of workers’ FWA experience (upsides or downsides) and their FWA usage (continuation or withdrawal), which affects well-being either functionally or adversely.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

灵活性的丧失与工人的幸福感：当工人失去远程工作的使用权时，工作满意度会发生什么变化？

灵活工作安排（FWA）与工人福祉之间的关系已得到广泛研究。然而，"Covid-19 "的流行产生了一种新的现象，即工人在经历了灵活工作安排后又回到了不灵活的工作方式。本文研究了这种 "灵活性丧失 "的后果，并关注了远程工作和工作满意度（JS）。利用日本政府收集的 2020-2021 年面板数据，回归和广义结构方程模型显示：（a）经常远程工作的工人在这两年都表现出较高的工作满意度；（b）平均而言，失去远程工作机会不会影响工作满意度；以及（c）在 2020 年经历过远程工作相关挑战并在下一年继续远程工作的工人报告的工作满意度较低，而失去远程工作机会的工人则拥有较高的工作满意度。这些结果表明，出现了一种新型劳动分层，其基础是工人的远程工作经验（好处或坏处）和远程工作使用情况（继续或退出）的复合，这对福祉产生了功能性或负面影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Socio-Economic Review Multiple-

CiteScore

6.80

自引率

10.80%

发文量

期刊介绍： Originating in the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics (SASE), Socio-Economic Review (SER) is part of a broader movement in the social sciences for the rediscovery of the socio-political foundations of the economy. Devoted to the advancement of socio-economics, it deals with the analytical, political and moral questions arising at the intersection between economy and society. Articles in SER explore how the economy is or should be governed by social relations, institutional rules, political decisions, and cultural values. They also consider how the economy in turn affects the society of which it is part, for example by breaking up old institutional forms and giving rise to new ones. The domain of the journal is deliberately broadly conceived, so new variations to its general theme may be discovered and editors can learn from the papers that readers submit. To enhance international dialogue, Socio-Economic Review accepts the submission of translated articles that are simultaneously published in a language other than English. In pursuit of its program, SER is eager to promote interdisciplinary dialogue between sociology, economics, political science and moral philosophy, through both empirical and theoretical work. Empirical papers may be qualitative as well as quantitative, and theoretical papers will not be confined to deductive model-building. Papers suggestive of more generalizable insights into the economy as a domain of social action will be preferred over narrowly specialized work. While firmly committed to the highest standards of scholarly excellence, Socio-Economic Review encourages discussion of the practical and ethical dimensions of economic action, with the intention to contribute to both the advancement of social science and the building of a good economy in a good society.