HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1...
-
Upload
macy-loker -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1...
![Page 1: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE
Jouko NATTI1, Timo ANTTILA2, Tomi OINAS2 & Satu OJALA1
1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and Humanities, Finland
2 University of Jyväskylä, Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy, Finland
Funded by Academy of Finland
![Page 2: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
INTRODUCTION
• Focus on paid work at home– Increasing phenomenon, indicates changing
time-space relations of paid work– Mixed findings in earlier studies
• Extent– Different estimates (survey / diary data)– Duration: part-time / full-time– Timing: evening, weekend (Breedveld 2003)
![Page 3: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Predictors
• Individual (family) factors– Older age (Callister & Dixon)– Family situation (spouse, children) (Golden
2008; Wight & Raley 2009)• Home infrastructure
– Separate space at home (Tietze & Musson 2002; Kossek et al. 2006)
• Work characteristics– High socioeconomic status, job autonomy
![Page 4: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Time use consequences• Working time
– Longer working hours (Callister & Dixon 2001)– Commuting: no effect / shorter (Michelson &
Crouse 2002)• Household work: minor effects
– Men: less time to childcare (Wight & Raley 2009)
• Leisure: minor effects– Less social relations (Michelson 2002)
![Page 5: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
AIMS• (1) The extent, duration and timing of paid work at
home among women and men.
• (2) The predictors of home-based work. – Individual and family characteristics (age, children, and partner). – Home’s infrastructure (internet connection at home, number of
rooms at home), and – Work characteristics (socio-economic status, industry, and working
time autonomy),
• (3) The relationship of working at home to time use– Assumptions: HBW is linked to the lengthening of working hours,
reduced commuting time. – In addition, home-based work potentially increases time for
household work and child care, increases presence at home and time with family and decreases time for social relations.
![Page 6: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
DATA AND METHODS• Data
– Use of Time -study (2009-2010), collected by Statistics Finland.
– Time use diaries (7.480 days)– Focus on15-64 year old employees (n=3.382)
• Methods– Descriptive: cross tabulation– Multivariate: logistic regression (predictors)
and covariate analysis (time use)
![Page 7: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
1. EXTENT OF HOMEWORKING• Interview data
– Only few (1% of men and 2% of women) said that they work at home only (full-time)
– Working occasionally or partially at home was more common (42% of men and 32% of women).
• Diary data– Operationalization: combination of main activity
(paid work) and location (home)– 7 % of men and 6 % of women worked (10+ min.) at
home during average diary day
• Results vary depending on the type of data. – Focus on diary-based working at home.
![Page 8: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Duration and timing• Duration (home-based workers)
– Mean 122 min. (men), 139 (women); – Distribution: 3+ hours 21 % (men), 24% women) (Fig.)– Gender differences: longer hours among women
• Timing – Weekly timing
• Weekdays 7-9 % (Monday 9-12 %; Friday 4 %)• Weekends 6 % (Saturday 3-5 %, Sunday 6-8 %)
– Season: Spring 8-9 %; Summer 3-6 %– Type of day: 9-10 % on working days, 5-6 % on
holidays, 3-4 % while being sick– Minor gender differences
![Page 9: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
HBW: distribution of duration
![Page 10: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Prevalence of paid work at home among men and women during the day
(%, diary data, employees)
![Page 11: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
2. PREDICTORS OF HBW•Individual-level factors
• Age was classified into four groups (25-34, 35-44, 45-54, and 55-64 years old).
– Living with a partner or without a partner was indicated by Family status.
– Children were classified into two groups: no children at home, or at least one child less than 18 years old at home.
• Home infrastructure factors (Household interview data)• Internet connection (no, yes)• Number of rooms at home (1-2, 3-4, 5 or more)
• Work-related factors– Socio-economic status: manual workers, lower-level non-
manuals, upper-level non-manuals– Industry (NACE classification): 8 sectors– Working time autonomy was measured by asking respondents if
they can influence the starting and finishing times of their work by at least 30 minutes (no, yes).
![Page 12: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Men Women Exp(B) (sig.) Exp(B) (sig.) Age (ref. 15-29) 30-39 ,948 1,087 40-49 ,924 1,226 50-64 1,075 1,322 Living with a partner (ref. No) 1,235 1,091 Children (ref. No children) 1,101 ,848 Number of rooms at home
(ref. 1-2)
3-4 1,992 2,284* 5+ 2,687* 2,680* Internet connection at home
(ref. No) 1,001 1,127
Socio-economic status Manual worker (ref) * *** Lower level white-collar 1,940 1,352 Upper level white-collar 2,441** 5,333*** Industry (ref. Manufacturing and construction) ** * Wholesale and retail trade, hotels 1,380 1,168 Transport, communication 1,692 ,872 Finance, business activities 1,199 1,166 Public administration ,749 ,661 Education 7,009*** 2,706* Health, social services 1,705 1,174 Other industry 3,270 1,351 Flexible working time (ref. Fixed starting and finishing
times) 1,306 ,871
Constant ,000 ,007 Chi Square 101,091 109,426 -2LL 668,944 787,677 Nagelkerke R square ,162 ,149 N 1492 1874
![Page 13: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
3. HBW AND TIME USE• In examining overall time use we apply
Robinson and Godbey’s (1997) classification of the main categories of primary activities.– paid work, – committed time for household maintenance, – personal time devoted for self – free time activities.
• Covariate analysis: estimated time use by comparison groups– Covariates: day type, background factors (age,
partner, children, socioeconomic status)
![Page 14: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Men Women
Paid work at home Paid work at home
NO YES Sig. NO YES Sig.
Contracted time 298 345 *** 252 285 ***paid work 271 319 *** 228 273 ***commuting 27 26 24 12 ***Committed time 159 139 208 241 household work 49 53 96 120 Construction, repairs and other 48 42 36 43 child care 18 8 * 25 40 *shopping and household travel 43 36 51 38 *Personal time 615 610 646 608 ***sleep 493 496 505 491 meals 77 72 81 66 ***groom 45 41 59 51 *Education (adult) 4 13 18 24 Free Time 354 326 311 277 *organizations 5 7 4 2 sports and exercise 40 28 36 33 culture and entertainment 5 7 6 4 reading 27 36 37 40 radio 3 1 2 2 television 128 113 93 95 socializing with family 6 3 7 8 socializing with friends 39 34 47 28 *hobbies 53 45 36 36 other free time 15 18 14 13 free time travel 33 32 27 17
![Page 15: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
DISCUSSION• The extent of HBW is linked to the type of data
– Interview data: 34-43 %, diary data 6-7 %• Changes over time: some increase in interview data, no change
in diary data (1999 > 2009)
– Duration: Still supplementary (average: 2 hours per day)– Daily timing: morning, afternoon, evening (men)– Weekdays: high in Mondays, low in Fridays– Weekend days: high in Sundays, low in Saturdays
![Page 16: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Predictors of HBW
• The role of individual and family (spouse, children) characteristics minor
• Best predictors: – work characteristics: high socioeconomic status
(women) and industry (men) – and home infrastructure (space)
![Page 17: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Time use consequences
• Working time and commuting: stretching working hours– Longer working hours both among men and women,
less commuting time among women• Household activities: minor effects
– Women: home-based workers spent less time on shopping and more time on child care (men less)
• Personal time: less time among women– Women: home-based workers spent less time to
personal needs, especially to meals. • Leisure: minor effects
– Women: home-based workers spent less time to socializing with friends,
![Page 18: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Limitations and strengths
• Limitations > further studies– Diary data (minutes):
• Higher limit for HBW hours (now 10 min)– Focus on employees
• Self-employed workers and freelancers missing– Finnish data > comparative perspective
• Strengths– Representative data– Combination of interview and diary data
![Page 20: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Table 1. The extent (%) of paid work at home by gender in the interview data (employees only)
(in parentheses 1999-2000 figures)
Men Women
Paid work at home
- Work only at home 1 (1) 2 (3)
- Work sometimes or partly at home 42 (35) 32 (32)
- Does not work at all at home 57 (64) 66 (65)
Total 100 100
N 1500 1882
Motives (only home-based workers)
- Overtime 46 (42) 39 (38)
- Agreed (telework) 41 (44) 45 (41)
- Both 14 (10) 13 (9)
- Don't know 0 (3) 0 (4)
Total 100 100
N 107 121
![Page 21: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Table 2. The extent (%) of paid work at home by gender in the diary data (employed persons)
Proportion of those who have done paid work at home during the diary days (%)
Men Women
Weekday 9 7 - Monday 12 9- Tuesday 9 6- Wednesday 8 7- Thursday 8 7- Friday 4 4Weekend 6 6- Saturday 5 3- Sunday 6 8Season of the year
- Winter (December-February) 7 8- Spring (March-May) 9 8- Summer (June-August) 6 3- Autumn (September-November) 7 7Type of the day
- Workday 10 9- Sick 3 4- Free day, weekend 1 1- Holiday 5 6- Other 9 5
![Page 22: HOME-BASED WORK, GENDER AND TIME USE Jouko NATTI 1, Timo ANTTILA 2, Tomi OINAS 2 & Satu OJALA 1 1 University of Tampere, School of Social Sciences and.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022070306/5516abab550346f6208b503f/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Table 3. The duration (minutes) of paid work at home by gender in the diary data
Men WomenDuration of paid work at home (minutes)- Those who have worked at home 122 140
Distribution of paid work hours at home (%) - 0 93 94
- 10-50 min 3 2
- 1-2 t 3 2
- 3+ t 1 2
Only those working at homeDistribution of paid work hours at home (%) - 10-50 min 38 39
- 1-2 t 41 37
- 3+ t 21 24