工作的未来?当远程/混合或返回工作岗位时,改变工作条件的差异

IF 4.4 2区 社会学 Q1 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR Work and Occupations Pub Date : 2023-09-29 DOI:10.1177/07308884231203668
Wen Fan, Phyllis Moen
{"title":"工作的未来?当远程/混合或返回工作岗位时,改变工作条件的差异","authors":"Wen Fan, Phyllis Moen","doi":"10.1177/07308884231203668","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The future of work is ambiguous at best. Despite widespread shifts to remote/hybrid work during the COVID-19 lockdown, there is a paucity of knowledge about changing job conditions in tandem with different work locales. Is the move to remote/hybrid work a disrupter or accentuator of existing norms and inequalities? Drawing on nationally representative, four-wave panel survey data (October 2020 to April 2022) collected from U.S. workers who spent at least some time working from home since the pandemic onset, we examine effects of within-person changes in where respondents work on changes in job conditions (psychological job demands, job control, coworker support, and monitoring). Estimates from fixed-effects models show that, compared with returning to working at work, ongoing remote and moving to hybrid work lead to greater reductions in psychological job demands, especially among older women and men. Black and Hispanic women moving back to the office experience the greatest loss of decision latitude and schedule control. While white workers see increased coworker support when returning to the office, returning Black and Hispanic men report a decline in coworker support. Family caregivers’ job conditions do not improve whether remote/hybrid or returning to work. Qualitative data collected from Amazon Mechanic Turk illuminate mechanisms leading to salutary effects of remote work, but also the stress of combining jobs with family carework.","PeriodicalId":47716,"journal":{"name":"Work and Occupations","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Future(s) of Work? Disparities Around Changing Job Conditions When Remote/Hybrid or Returning to Working at Work\",\"authors\":\"Wen Fan, Phyllis Moen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/07308884231203668\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The future of work is ambiguous at best. Despite widespread shifts to remote/hybrid work during the COVID-19 lockdown, there is a paucity of knowledge about changing job conditions in tandem with different work locales. Is the move to remote/hybrid work a disrupter or accentuator of existing norms and inequalities? Drawing on nationally representative, four-wave panel survey data (October 2020 to April 2022) collected from U.S. workers who spent at least some time working from home since the pandemic onset, we examine effects of within-person changes in where respondents work on changes in job conditions (psychological job demands, job control, coworker support, and monitoring). Estimates from fixed-effects models show that, compared with returning to working at work, ongoing remote and moving to hybrid work lead to greater reductions in psychological job demands, especially among older women and men. Black and Hispanic women moving back to the office experience the greatest loss of decision latitude and schedule control. While white workers see increased coworker support when returning to the office, returning Black and Hispanic men report a decline in coworker support. Family caregivers’ job conditions do not improve whether remote/hybrid or returning to work. Qualitative data collected from Amazon Mechanic Turk illuminate mechanisms leading to salutary effects of remote work, but also the stress of combining jobs with family carework.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47716,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Work and Occupations\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Work and Occupations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/07308884231203668\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Work and Occupations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07308884231203668","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

工作的未来充其量是模棱两可的。尽管在2019冠状病毒病封锁期间,人们普遍转向远程/混合工作,但人们对随着不同工作地点而变化的工作条件缺乏了解。向远程/混合工作的转变是现有规范和不平等的破坏者还是加剧者?根据从自疫情爆发以来至少有一段时间在家工作的美国工人中收集的具有全国代表性的四波面板调查数据(2020年10月至2022年4月),我们研究了受访者工作场所的内部变化对工作条件变化(心理工作需求、工作控制、同事支持和监督)的影响。固定效应模型的估计显示,与重返工作岗位相比,持续远程工作和转向混合工作更能减少心理上的工作需求,尤其是在老年女性和男性中。回到办公室的黑人和西班牙裔女性在决策自由和日程控制方面的损失最大。白人员工在回到办公室后得到的同事支持有所增加,而黑人和西班牙裔男性员工则表示得到的同事支持有所减少。无论是远程/混合还是重返工作岗位,家庭照顾者的工作条件都没有改善。从亚马逊mechanical Turk收集的定性数据阐明了导致远程工作有益影响的机制,但也揭示了将工作与家庭护理结合起来的压力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Future(s) of Work? Disparities Around Changing Job Conditions When Remote/Hybrid or Returning to Working at Work
The future of work is ambiguous at best. Despite widespread shifts to remote/hybrid work during the COVID-19 lockdown, there is a paucity of knowledge about changing job conditions in tandem with different work locales. Is the move to remote/hybrid work a disrupter or accentuator of existing norms and inequalities? Drawing on nationally representative, four-wave panel survey data (October 2020 to April 2022) collected from U.S. workers who spent at least some time working from home since the pandemic onset, we examine effects of within-person changes in where respondents work on changes in job conditions (psychological job demands, job control, coworker support, and monitoring). Estimates from fixed-effects models show that, compared with returning to working at work, ongoing remote and moving to hybrid work lead to greater reductions in psychological job demands, especially among older women and men. Black and Hispanic women moving back to the office experience the greatest loss of decision latitude and schedule control. While white workers see increased coworker support when returning to the office, returning Black and Hispanic men report a decline in coworker support. Family caregivers’ job conditions do not improve whether remote/hybrid or returning to work. Qualitative data collected from Amazon Mechanic Turk illuminate mechanisms leading to salutary effects of remote work, but also the stress of combining jobs with family carework.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
24.10%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: For over 30 years, Work and Occupations has published rigorous social science research on the human dynamics of the workplace, employment, and society from an international, interdisciplinary perspective. Work and Occupations provides you with a broad perspective on the workplace, examining international approaches to work-related issues as well as insights from scholars in a variety of fields, including: anthropology, demography, education, government administration, history, industrial relations, labour economics, management, psychology, and sociology. In addition to regular features including research notes, review essays, and book reviews.
期刊最新文献
Book Review: Exit, Voice, and Solidarity: Contesting Precarity in the US and European Telecommunications Industries by Doellgast, Virginia More Than a Match: “Fit” as a Tool in Hiring Decisions The Gender Wage Gap, Between-Firm Inequality, and Devaluation: Testing a New Hypothesis in the Service Sector. Living to Work (from Home): Overwork, Remote Work, and Gendered Dual Devotion to Work and Family Disability and the State Production of Precarity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1