Résumés
Abstract
There is evidence of heavy job demands and low control resulting in multiple negative consequences for employees and their families. Understandably, there is then a desire to move away from such practices and adopt more flexible organizational systems. In such environments, employees may be more in control of their workloads, and manage a better balance between life and work. Flexitime provides increased opportunity to fit other commitments and activities in with work, and make better use of their free time. As employees can choose their own start and finish times for the working day, they can take a little extra time off in a week. It is argued that creating such opportunities improve motivation and raises morale. This also allows for lower stress in the work place and greater enjoyment in the home. Consequently, employees experience increased performance in the work place and greater repertoire for marketing to new employers. Using WERS (The British Workplace Employee Relations Survey), the present study examines the nature of such relationships, and specifi cally explores the usage of flexitime and employee and organizational outcomes. WERS provides a useful set of information about work environment, job characteristics, and occupation, permitting researchers to conduct a more detailed analysis of individual employee behaviour. We develop our hypotheses based on the organizational behaviour literature that is concerned with exploring the nature of individual and organizational responses in challenging and stressful environments. Our results show a negative relationship between flexitime and job security. There is also no evidence of establishments with flexitime work arrangements having less stressed employees. Flexitime may however lead to increased employee participation in decision making as measured by employee discretion and team work. Our fi ndings thus stress the need to be cautious about how we build the case for the adoption of flexitime.
Keywords:
- flexitime,
- work-life balance,
- job control,
- stress,
- security,
- discretion,
- team work
Résumé
Il existe des preuves à l'effet que les milieux de travail où les exigences sont très élevées et où les travailleurs exercent un faible contrôle sur leur travail entrainent de multiples conséquences négatives pour eux et leur famille. Naturellement, il y a alors un désir de s'éloigner de telles pratiques et d'adopter des politiques organisationnelles plus souples, permettant aux employés d'avoir plus de contrôle sur leur charge de travail et d'améliorer l'équilibre entre leur vie personnelle et professionnelle. Un horaire de travail flexible off re des possibilités accrues de meilleure organisation entre les engagements hors travail et les activités de travail et permet de faire un meilleur usage du temps libre. Comme les employés peuvent choisir leur propre moment de départ et d'arrivée pour la journée de travail, ils peuvent prendre un peu de temps supplémentaire de congé par semaine. Une telle possibilité améliorerait la motivation et le moral, réduirait le stress au travail et procurerait plus de plaisir à la maison. Par conséquent, les employés seraient aussi plus productifs. En utilisant les données de l'enquête WERS (l'enquête sur les milieux de travail et les employés au Royaume-Uni), la présente étude explore l'utilisation de l'horaire flexible et ses conséquences pour les employés et les organisations. L'enquête fournit un ensemble d'informations utiles sur l'environnement de travail, les caractéristiques de l'emploi et de la profession, permettant aux chercheurs de mener une analyse plus détaillée du comportement individuel des employés. Nous avons élaboré nos hypothèses en se basant sur la littérature en comportement organisationnel qui vise à explorer la nature des réponses individuelles et organisationnelles dans les environnements diffi ciles et stressants. Nos résultats démontrent une relation négative entre les horaires flexibles et la sécurité d'emploi. Il n'y a également aucune preuve entre la mise en place d'horaires flexibles et la diminution du stress chez les employés. L'introduction d'horaires flexibles peut toutefois conduire à une participation accrue des employés à la prise de décision, telle que mesurée par la discrétion des employés et le travail en équipe. Nos résultats soulignent donc la nécessité d'être prudent sur la façon de justifi er l'adoption de l'horaire flexible.
Mots-clés :
- flexitime,
- conciliation travail-vie personnelle,
- job control,
- stress,
- sécurité,
- discrétion,
- travail d'équipe
Resumen
Hay evidencia de las exigencias del trabajo pesado y bajo control dando lugar a múltiples consecuencias negativas para los empleados y sus familias. Es comprensible, no es entonces un deseo de alejarse de esas prácticas y adoptar sistemas de organización más flexible. En estos entornos, los empleados pueden ser más en el control de sus cargas de trabajo, y gestionar un mejor equilibrio entre la vida y el trabajo. Horario flexible ofrece una mayor oportunidad para adaptarse a otros compromisos y actividades con el trabajo, y hacer un mejor uso de su tiempo libre. Como los empleados pueden elegir su propio inicio y fi n de la jornada de trabajo, pueden tomar un poco de tiempo fuera en una semana. Se argumenta que la creación de oportunidades como mejorar la motivación y eleva la moral. Esto también permite reducir el estrés en el lugar de trabajo y un mayor disfrute en el hogar. En consecuencia, los empleados experimentan un mayor rendimiento en el trabajo y un mayor repertorio de marketing para nuevos empleadores. Usando WERS (los británicos lugar de trabajo de Relaciones Laborales Survey), el presente estudio examina la naturaleza de tales relaciones, y específi camente explora el uso de horarios flexibles y el empleado y los resultados de la organización. WERS proporciona un conjunto de información útil sobre el medio ambiente de trabajo, las características del empleo y la ocupación, permitiendo a los investigadores a realizar un análisis más detallado del comportamiento de los empleados individuales. Desarrollamos nuestras hipótesis sobre la base de la literatura comportamiento organizacional que se refi ere a la exploración de la naturaleza de las respuestas individuales y organizacionales en situaciones difíciles y estresantes. Nuestros resultados muestran una relación negativa entre el horario flexible y la seguridad laboral. Tampoco hay pruebas de los establecimientos con régimen de horario flexible de trabajo con menos empleados estresados. Horario flexible sin embargo, puede conducir a la participación de los trabajadores aumentó en la toma de decisiones, medido por el criterio de los empleados y el trabajo en equipo. Nuestros resultados por lo tanto hincapié en la necesidad de ser cautelosos acerca de cómo construimos el caso de la adopción de horarios flexibles.
Palabras clave:
- horario flexible,
- trabajo y la vida de balance,
- control de trabajos,
- estrés,
- seguridad,
- discreción,
- trabajo en equipo
Parties annexes
Parties annexes
References
- Allensprach, H. 1975. Flexible Working Hours. Geneva: International Labor Office.
- Arnott, J., and K. Emmerson. 2000. “In Sickness and In Health: Reducing Sickness Absence in the Police Service.” Police Research Series Paper 147. London: Home Office.
- Ashford, S., C. Lee and P. Bobko. 1989. “Content, Causes and Consequences of Job Insecurity: A Theory Based Measure and Substantive Test.” Academy of Management Journal, 32, 803-829.
- Atkinson, J., and N. Meager. 1986. Changing Work Patterns: How Companies Achieve Flexibility to Meet New Needs. Sussex: Institute of Manpower Studies.
- Bailyn, Lotte. 1993. Breaking the Mould: Women, Men, and Time in the New Corporate World. New York: The Free Press.
- Batt, Rosemary, and P. Monique Valcour. 2003. “Human Resources Practices as Predictors of Work-Family Outcomes and Employee Turnover.” Industrial Relations, 42 (2), 189-220.
- Berg, Peter, Arne L. Kalleberg and Eileen Appelbaum. 2003. “Balancing Work and Family: The Role of High Commitment Environments.” Industrial Relations, 42 (2), 168-188.
- Bevan, S., S. Dench, P. Tamkin and J. Cummings. 1999. “Family Friendly Employment: The Business Case.” DfEE Research Report 136. London: HMSO.
- Bolton, J. Harvey. 1971. Flexible Working Hours. Wembley, England: Anbar Publications.
- CIPD. 2002. Getting a Kick Out of Work: Flexible Working Trends. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel Development.
- Dekker, S. W., and W. B. Schaufeli. 1995. “The Effects of Job Insecurity on Psychological Health and Withdrawal: A Longitudinal Study.” Australian Psychologist, 30, 57-63.
- Dex, S., and F. Scheibl. 1999. “Business Performance and Family-Friendly Policies.” Journal of General Management, 24 (4).
- DfEE. 2000. “Work-Life Balance 2000 Baseline Survey.” London: Department for Education and Employment.
- DTI. 2003. “The Second Work-Life Balance Study: Results from the Employers’ Survey.” Employment Relations Research Series 22. London: Department for Trade and Industry.
- Eaton, Susan C. 2003. “If You Can Use Them: Flexibility Policies, Organizational Commitment, and Perceived Performance.” Industrial Relations, 42 (2), 145-167.
- Fang, T., and B. Lee. 2007. “Family-friendly Benefit Programs and Employee Labor Market Outcomes.” 82nd Western Economics Association Annual Conference. Seattle, Washington, June 29-July 3, 2007.
- Fenwick, R., and M. Tausig. 2001. “Scheduling Stress: Family and Health Outcomes of Shift Work and Schedule Control.” American Behavioral Scientist, 44 (7), 1179-1198.
- Ferrer, A., and L. Gagné. 2006. The Use of Family Friendly Workplace Practices in Canada. Working Paper Series No. 2006-02. Montreal, QC: Institute for Research on Public Policy.
- Galinsky, Ellen, and Arlene A. Johnson. 1998. Reframing the Business Case for Work-Life Initiatives. New York: Families and Work Institute.
- Golden, Lonnie. 2001. “Flexible Work Time: Correlates and Consequences of Work Scheduling.” American Behavioral Scientist, 44 (7), 1157-1178.
- Golden, Lonnie, and Deborah M. Figart, eds. 2000. Working Time: International Trends and Policy Perspectives. London/New York: Routledge.
- Golembiewski, Robert T., Samuel Yeager and Rick Hilles. 1975. “Factors Analysis of Some Flexitime Effects: Attitudinal and Behavioral Consequences of a Structural Intervention.” Academy of Management Journal, 18 (3), 500.
- Guérin, G., S. St-Onge, V. Haines, R. Trottier and M. Simard. 1997. “Les pratiques d’aide à l’équilibre emploi-famille dans les organisations du Québec.” Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations, 52 (2), 274-303.
- Hicks, William D., and Richard J. Klimoski. 1981. “The Impact of Flextime on Employee Attitudes.” Academy of Management Journal, 81 (24), 333.
- Jacobson, D., and J. Hartley. 1991. “Mapping the context.” Job Insecurity: Coping with Jobs at Risk. J. Hartley, D. Jacobson, B. Klandermans and T. Van Vuuren, eds. London: Sage, 1-23.
- James, L. R., R. G. Demaree and G. Wolf. 1984. “Estimating Within-Group Interrater Reliability with and without Response Bias.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 85-98.
- Karasek, R. A. 1989. “Control in the Workplace and Its Health-Related Aspect.” Job Control and Worker Health. S. Sauter, J. Hurrell, and C. Cooper, eds. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 129-160.
- Karasek, R. A., and T. Theorell. 1990. Health Work. New York: Basic Books.
- Kim, Jay S., and Anthony F. Campagna. 1981. “Effects of Flexitime on Employee Attendance and Performance.” Academy of Management Journal, 24 (4), 729.
- Kinnuneni, U., S. Maunoi, J. Natti and M. Happonen. 2000. “Organizational Antecedents and Outcomes of Job Insecurity: A Longitudinal Study in Three Organizations in Finland.” Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 443-459.
- Lero, Donna S., Julia Richardson and Karen Korabik. 2009. “Cost-Benefit Review of Work-Life Balance Practices.” Paper submitted to The Canadian Association of Administrators of Labour Legislation (CAALL), Ottawa.
- Marchington, M. 1990. “Analysing the Links between Product Markets and the Management of Employee Relations.” Journal of Management Studies, 27 (2), 111-132.
- Matteson, M. T., and J. M. Ivancevich. 1987. Controlling Work Stress: Effective Human Resource and Management Strategies. San Francisco and London: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
- ONS. 2000. “Labor Force Survey.” Autumn and Spring. London: Office of National Statistics.
- Perry-Jenkins, Maureen, Rena L. Repetti and Ann C. Crouter. 2000. “Work and Family in the 1990s.” Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 981-998.
- Piotet, Francoise. 1988. The Changing Face of Work: Researching and Debating the Issues. Luxembourg : Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
- Rosenblatt, Z., and A. Ruvio. 1996. “A Test of a Multidimensional Model of Job Insecurity: The Case of Israeli Teachers.” Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 587-605.
- Rotter, J. B. 1966. “Generalized Expectancies for Internal versus External Control of Reinforcement.” Psychological Monographs, 80 (1) (Whole No. 609).
- Sales, S. M. 1969. “Organizational Role as a Risk Factor in Coronary Disease.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 325-336.
- Selye, H. 1956. The Stress of Life. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Stone, R., T. Kemp and G. Weldon. 1994. “Part-time Working and Job Sharing in the Police Service.” Police Research Series Paper 7. London: Home Office.
- Walton, P. 2002. “The Flexibility Take-up Gap.” Croner’s Flexible Working Briefing. Issue No. 105, 27 August, 4-5.
- Wood, Stephen J., Lillian M. de Menezes and Ana Lasaosa. 2003. “Family-Friendly Management in Great Britain: Testing Various Perspectives.” Industrial Relations, 42 (2), 221-250.