Title |
Women’s employment patterns after childbirth and the perceived access to and use of flexitime and teleworking
|
---|---|
Published in |
Human Relations, August 2017
|
DOI | 10.1177/0018726717713828 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Heejung Chung, Mariska van der Horst |
Abstract |
This article sets out to investigate how flexitime and teleworking can help women maintain their careers after childbirth. Despite the increased number of women in the labour market in the UK, many significantly reduce their working hours or leave the labour market altogether after childbirth. Based on border and boundary management theories, we expect flexitime and teleworking can help mothers stay employed and maintain their working hours. We explore the UK case, where the right to request flexible working has been expanded quickly as a way to address work-life balance issues. The dataset used is Understanding Society (2009-2014), a large household panel survey with data on flexible work. We find some suggestive evidence that flexible working can help women stay in employment after the birth of their first child. More evidence is found that mothers using flexitime and with access to teleworking are less likely to reduce their working hours after childbirth. This contributes to our understanding of flexible working not only as a tool for work-life balance, but also as a tool to enhance and maintain individuals' work capacities in periods of increased family demands. This has major implications for supporting mothers' careers and enhancing gender equality in the labour market. |
X Demographics
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 28 | 31% |
United States | 10 | 11% |
Netherlands | 4 | 4% |
Australia | 3 | 3% |
Colombia | 2 | 2% |
Canada | 1 | 1% |
Brazil | 1 | 1% |
Italy | 1 | 1% |
France | 1 | 1% |
Other | 5 | 6% |
Unknown | 33 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 64 | 72% |
Scientists | 15 | 17% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 8 | 9% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 503 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 85 | 17% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 66 | 13% |
Student > Bachelor | 39 | 8% |
Researcher | 33 | 7% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 28 | 6% |
Other | 80 | 16% |
Unknown | 172 | 34% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Business, Management and Accounting | 117 | 23% |
Social Sciences | 96 | 19% |
Psychology | 41 | 8% |
Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 22 | 4% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 1% |
Other | 42 | 8% |
Unknown | 178 | 35% |