The Impact of Employment Insecurity on Partnership and Parenthood Decisions: Evidence from Couples in Germany and Australia

Laß I. The Impact of Employment Insecurity on Partnership and Parenthood Decisions: Evidence from Couples in Germany and Australia. Bielefeld: Universität Bielefeld; 2017.During the past decades, many OECD countries have seen a retreat of the standard employment relationship and a corresponding increase in non-standard forms of employment, such as fixed-term contracts, temporary agency work, part-time work and casual work. While the economic consequences of this development, e.g. for workers’ income and career prospects, have received much attention in prior research, less is known about how these changes affect workers’ family lives. Against this background, the thesis investigates how insecure employment situations affect partnership and parenthood decisions. The study looks at both objective indicators (i.e. non-standard forms of employment, unemployment) and subjective indicators of employment insecurity (e.g. perceived job insecurity, concern about the economic situation). Two partnership events are at the centre of the study: the transition to first parenthood and the risk of relationship dissolution. A special emphasis is put on the partnership context as a mediator between an individual’s employment situation and his or her partnership and fertility outcomes. Thus, the study not only investigates the impact of each partner’s individual employment situation but also the joint impact of the couple’s employment constellation. The data stem from two nationally representative longitudinal household surveys, the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) (1984-2013) and the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey (2001-2013). The first empirical chapter investigates the impact of employment insecurity on first childbirth in Germany (during the period 1985 to 2013). In order to accommodate diverging and changing gender regimes, the chapter compares couples in East and West Germany as well different couple cohorts in West Germany. One of the key findings is a negative impact of the female partner’s insecure employment (such as fixed-term contracts and perceived job insecurity) on first parenthood. Furthermore, the analysis reveals East-West differences in the link between the employment situation and first parenthood. For example, unemployment and economic inactivity of the female partner have a positive effect on first childbirth in the West but not in the East. Further, the impact of one partner’s employment situation varies with that of the other partner. The second empirical chapter takes on an internationally comparative perspective by analysing the impact of employment insecurity on first childbirth among couples in Germany and Australia (for the period 2001 to 2013). These two countries vary markedly regarding the employment system and welfare regime but at the same time share a similar gender regime. Again, a secure employment position of the female partner proves crucial for childbearing decisions. In particular, temporary agency work and perceived job insecurity among women negatively impact on first parenthood in both countries. The third empirical chapter investigates the impact of non-standard forms of employment on partnership conflicts and the risk of partnership dissolution in Germany (in the period 2001 to 2013). The chapter moves beyond previous dissolution studies by comparing cohabiting unions and marriages. The key result is that the employment situation has very different effects on these two partnership types, with cohabiting unions being less resilient to strains from the employment sphere. For example, temporary agency work among either partner negatively affects relationship stability in cohabiting unions but not in marriages. Similarly, women’s part-time work and economic inactivity destabilise cohabiting unions but have a stabilising effect in marriages. In contrast, unemployment negatively impacts on partnership stability regardless of gender and partnership type. Overall, the results highlight the heterogeneity of employment arrangements and their effects on workers’ partnership and parenthood decisions, with the impact varying by the specific employment type, gender, partnership type, institutional context and the employment situation of the respective partner. However, in many cases, non-standard employment proves detrimental for workers’ partnership and parenthood decisions. The results thus call for policy conclusions enhancing the compatibility between flexible labour markets and workers’ family lives

Weekend Work and Work-Family Conflict: Evidence from Australian Panel Data

Objective: This paper investigates whether weekend work is associated with higher levels of work-family conflict (WFC) among parents, and whether resources like schedule control or presence of a partner mitigate this effect. Background: The 24/7 economy requires many workers to work on weekends. Nevertheless, research on the impact of weekend work on families, and on WFC in particular, is underdeveloped, with previous studies relying on cross-sectional data and small samples. Method: Associations between regular weekend work and a measure of WFC are examined using data from fourteen waves of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey. The sample is restricted to workers aged 18 to 64 years with parenting responsibilities for children aged 17or less (7,753 individuals, 40,216 observations). Both pooled ordinary least squares and fixed-effects regression models are estimated. Results: Among both genders, weekend workers have significantly higher levels of WFC than those who only work weekdays. WFC is particularly high for those who work weekends and simultaneously have little control over their schedule. And whereas WFC is generally higher for single parents, week-end work affects WFC similarly for couple and single parents. Conclusion: Weekend work generally has a detrimental effect on workers’ ability to combine employment with parenting commitments. However, work-domain resources like schedule control can buffer the impact of weekend work

Temporary employment and work‐life balance in Australia

While it is often believed that temporary forms of employment, such as fixed-term contracts, casual work and temporary agency work, provide workers with more flexibility to balance work and private commitments, convincing empirical evidence on this issue is still scarce. This paper investigates the association between temporary employment and work-life balance in Australia, using longitudinal data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey for the period 2001 to 2017. In contrast to previous studies, we compare results from pooled cross-sectional and fixed-effects regressions to investigate the role of time-constant unobserved worker characteristics in linking temporary employment and work-life outcomes. The results show that, after accounting for job characteristics and person-specific fixed-effects, among women only casual employment is unequivocally associated with better work-life outcomes than permanent employment. For men, we mostly find negative associations between all forms of temporary employment and work-life outcomes, but the magnitudes of these associations are much smaller and mostly insignificant in fixed-effects models. This result suggests that male temporary employees have stable unobserved traits that are connected to poorer work-life balance

Working from Home, COVID-19 and Job Satisfaction

This paper examines the impact of the growth in the incidence of working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic on workers' job satisfaction. Using longitudinal data collected in 2019 and 2021 as part of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey, fixed-effects models of job satisfaction are estimated. Changes in the share of total weekly work hours usually worked from home are not found to have any significant association with changes in job satisfaction for men. In contrast, a strong significant positive (but non-linear) association is found for women, and this relationship is concentrated on women with children. These findings suggest the main benefit of working from home for workers arises from the improved ability to combine work and family responsibilities, something that matters more to women given they continue to shoulder most of the responsibility for house and care work

Labour markets, families and public policies shaping gender relations and parenting: Introduction to the Special Issue

Objective: This article introduces the reader to the Special Issue "Labour markets, families and public policies shaping gender relations and parenting" and gives a theoretical and empirical overview of gender roles and gender equality in Europe. Background: This Special Issue analyses the connection between labour markets, families, social policy, and gender relations in several European countries. Method: The six included articles are based on qualitative and quantitative approaches and data that have been gathered in Finland, Norway, Poland, Spain, and across the entire EU. Results: Key findings are: (1) In less egalitarian countries, children of single parents suffer more nutritional, educational and social life deprivation. (2) The institutional design of parental leave can contribute to reproducing gender inequality in the use of leave. (3) The institutional design interacts with cultural norms in shaping fatherhood practices of migrant fathers. (4) Individualised, performance-based wage and career schemes can counteract the effects of gender-equalising family policies. (5) Fathers taking leave independently from the mother and for an extended period are more involved in childcare beyond the leave period, and (6) the use of longer unpaid parental leave by mothers leads to a more unequal distribution of childcare between the parents. Conclusion: This Special Issue highlights that even in the most egalitarian countries, there remain persistent challenges to achieving gender equality regarding labour market, institutions and family life

Does Temporary Employment Increase Length of Commuting? Longitudinal Evidence from Australia and Germany

By definition, temporary workers, such as fixed-term, casual and temporary agency workers, have jobs that are far less stable than permanent jobs. However, surprisingly few studies have investigated whether and to what extent this lesser stability translates into longer commutes to work. Using data from the German SOEP and the Australian HILDA Survey, this article investigates the link between temporary employment and length of commutes in different institutional contexts. We compare three types of temporary workers and apply fixed-effects regression, thereby accounting for unobserved worker heterogeneity. We also estimate unconditional quantile regression (UQR) models, thus allowing us to examine how the commuting length differential varies over the commuting length distribution. The results suggest that the link between temporary employment and commuting length varies by employment type and institutional context, as well as location in the distribution. On average, agency work is associated with longer commutes than permanent work in both countries, whereas fixed-term contracts are only associated with longer commutes in Germany. Further, UQR shows these associations are often strongest in the upper end of the distribution. For casual work, mean regression suggests no commuting length differential, whereas the UQR shows negative associations for large parts of the distribution

Does temporary employment increase length of commuting? Longitudinal evidence from Australia and Germany

On average, temporary jobs are far less stable than permanent jobs. This higher instability could potentially lower workers' incentives to relocate towards the workplace, thereby resulting in longer commutes. However, surprisingly few studies have investigated the link between temporary employment and commuting length. Building on the notion that individuals strive to optimize their utility when deciding where to work and live, we develop and test a theoretical framework that predicts commuting outcomes for different types of temporary workers - fixed-term, casual and temporary agency workers - and in different institutional contexts. We estimate fixed-effects regression models using 17 waves of data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey and the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP). As expected, the results show that the link between temporary employment and commuting length varies by employment type and institutional context. Agency work is associated with longer commutes than permanent work in both countries, whereas this applies to fixed-term contracts for Germany only. For casual work, the findings suggest no commuting length differential to permanent employment. In terms of policy, our findings suggest lengthy commuting can be a side effect of flexible labour markets, with potentially negative implications for worker well-being, transportation management and the environment

Arbeiten in sozialen Berufen - Hohe Systemrelevanz, ungünstige Arbeitsbedingungen

Soziale Berufe zeichnen sich durch hohe Systemrelevanz bei niedrigem Einkommen aus. Berufe in der Pflege, Erziehung und Sozialarbeit werden ganz überwiegend von Frauen ausgeübt. Beschäftigte in sozialen Berufen arbeiten häufig in Teilzeit. Vielfach arbeiten die Beschäftigten nicht im gewünschten Stundenumfang. Gesundheitspflegende wollen besonders oft Stunden reduzieren, während in der Altenpflege sowie Erziehung und Sozialarbeit Beschäftigte oft mehr Stunden arbeiten wollen. Vielfach sind die Beschäftigten durch großen Zeitdruck belastet. Viele Beschäftigte erwägen, die Stelle zu wechseln. Höherer Stundenlohn, mehr Zeitautonomie und nachhaltiges Gesundheits- und Belastungsmanagement wären bedeutsame Impulse für die Aufwertung sozialer Berufe

Familien in der Coronapandemie: Was hat belastet, was hat geholfen und was kann man für zukünftige Krisenstrategien lernen?

In der Pandemie ist die Lebenszufriedenheit deutlich gesunken, vor allem in Zeiten von Kontaktbeschränkungen. Nach Lockerung der Restriktionen ist die Lebenszufriedenheit wieder etwas angestiegen. Um gut durch Krisen zu kommen, sind u.a. drei Dinge wichtig: Gute Beziehungen in der Familie, finanzielle Sicherheit und die Fähigkeit zu Optimismus. Familie zu haben, und dabei vor allem eine gute Beziehungsqualität in der Partnerschaft und zu den Kindern, war in der Pandemie zentral für das Wohlbefinden. Familienpolitik ist in Krisenzeiten besonders wichtig. Dies umfasst verlässliche, ganztägige Kita- und Schulbetreuung, niederschwellige psychosoziale Beratungsangebote für Kinder und Jugendliche sowie familienfreundlichere Arbeitsplätze. Etwa ein Drittel der Menschen im mittleren Alter hatte ernsthafte finanzielle Sorgen in der Pandemie, was mit einer niedrigeren Lebenszufriedenheit verbunden war. Politische Maßnahmen wie Kurzarbeit (oder bei der Energiekrise die Gaspreisbremse), die finanzielle Risiken schnell abfedern, sind hier hilfreich. Die Fähigkeit, auch in Krisen positive Seiten zu sehen, hängt eng mit einer höheren Lebenszufriedenheit zusammen. Eine Prise Optimismus und ein Blick auf andere Lebensaspekte können in Krisen zu Resilienz beitragen. Politik sollte die Chancen, die sich aus Krisen ergeben, angehen und unterstützende Maßnahmen breit kommunizieren

Eltern während der Corona-Krise: Zur Improvisation gezwungen

Die Studie gibt einen Überblick über die Größenordnungen der von der Schließung von Kindertagesstätten (Kitas) und Schulen betroffenen Elterngruppen sowie der Veränderungen auf dem Arbeitsmarkt in den Monaten des Lockdowns. Im Anschluss werden vier Themenbereiche, die während der Krise an Relevanz gewannen, näher betrachtet: Eltern in systemrelevanten Berufen, Homeoffice als Lösung, Arbeitsteilung zwischen Frau und Mann sowie psychologische Folgen der Krise für Eltern