IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/intlab/v157y2018i4p609-630.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When two worlds collude: Working from home and family functioning in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Alfred M. DOCKERY
  • Sherry BAWA

Abstract

This article analyses the effect of employees working from home on their partners' assessments of family functioning using Australian household panel data collected from 2001 to 2013 in 48 multivariate models. Some evidence is found that working from home contributes to better relationships and a more equitable division of household responsibilities for couples with children. Limited evidence of negative externalities is observed, notably where male employees work substantial hours from home. Overall the findings contribute to the weight of evidence that working from home is conducive to families achieving a better work‐life balance.

Suggested Citation

  • Alfred M. DOCKERY & Sherry BAWA, 2018. "When two worlds collude: Working from home and family functioning in Australia," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 157(4), pages 609-630, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:intlab:v:157:y:2018:i:4:p:609-630
    DOI: 10.1111/ilr.12119
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ilr.12119
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ilr.12119?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jessica R. Mesmer-Magnus & Chockalingam Viswesvaran, 2006. "How Family-Friendly Work Environments Affect Work/Family Conflict: A Meta-Analytic Examination," Journal of Labor Research, Transaction Publishers, vol. 27(4), pages 555-574, October.
    2. Nicholas Bloom & James Liang & John Roberts & Zhichun Jenny Ying, 2015. "Does Working from Home Work? Evidence from a Chinese Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(1), pages 165-218.
    3. Ada Ferrer-i-Carbonell & Paul Frijters, 2004. "How Important is Methodology for the estimates of the determinants of Happiness?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(497), pages 641-659, July.
    4. Alfred Michael Dockery & Sherry Bawa, 2014. "Is working from home good or bad work? Evidence from Australian employees," Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre Working Paper series WP1402, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School.
    5. A.M. Dockery & Sherry Bawa, 2014. "Is Working from Home Good Work or Bad Work? Evidence from Australian Employees," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 17(2), pages 163-190.
    6. Li, Jianghong & Johnson, Sarah E. & Han, Wen-Jui & Andrews, Sonia & Kendall, Garth & Strazdins, Lyndall & Dockery, Alfred, 2014. "Parents' Nonstandard Work Schedules and Child Well-Being: A Critical Review of the Literature," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 35(1), pages 53-73.
    7. Dockery, Alfred M., 2012. "Deriving the labour supply curve from happiness data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(3), pages 898-900.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gimenez-Nadal, Jose Ignacio & Velilla, Jorge, 2020. "Home-based work, time endowments, and subjective well-being: Gender differences in the United Kingdom," MPRA Paper 104937, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Belinda Hewitt, 2021. "The Dynamics of Family Formation and Dissolution," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 54(4), pages 506-517, December.
    3. Beck, Matthew J. & Hensher, David A. & Wei, Edward, 2020. "Slowly coming out of COVID-19 restrictions in Australia: Implications for working from home and commuting trips by car and public transport," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    4. Pabilonia, Sabrina Wulff & Vernon, Victoria, 2020. "Telework and Time Use in the United States," GLO Discussion Paper Series 546, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    5. Mark Wooden, 2021. "Job Characteristics and the Changing Nature of Work," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 54(4), pages 494-505, December.
    6. Sanna Nivakoski & Massimiliano Mascherini, 2021. "Gender Differences in the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Employment, Unpaid Work and Well-Being in the EU," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 56(5), pages 254-260, September.
    7. Marcela-Sefora Nemțeanu & Dan-Cristian Dabija, 2023. "Negative Impact of Telework, Job Insecurity, and Work–Life Conflict on Employee Behaviour," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-18, February.
    8. MORIKAWA Masayuki, 2018. "Long Commuting Time and the Benefits of Telecommuting," Discussion papers 18025, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alfred Michael Dockery & Sherry Bawa, 2015. "When two worlds collude: working from home and family functioning," Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre Working Paper series WP1504, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School.
    2. A.M. Dockery & Sherry Bawa, 2014. "Is Working from Home Good Work or Bad Work? Evidence from Australian Employees," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 17(2), pages 163-190.
    3. Alfred Michael Dockery & Sherry Bawa, 2014. "Is working from home good or bad work? Evidence from Australian employees," Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre Working Paper series WP1402, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School.
    4. Emilio Bisetti & Benjamin Tengelsen & Ariel Zetlin‐Jones, 2022. "Moral Hazard In Remote Teams," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(4), pages 1595-1623, November.
    5. Mabel Andalon & Matthew Jones, 2022. "A simple model of working from home," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 25(2), pages 193-214.
    6. Prager, Fynnwin & Rhoads, Mohja & Martínez, Jose N., 2022. "The COVID-19 economic shutdown and the future of flexible workplace practices in the South Bay region of Los Angeles County," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 241-255.
    7. Michał T. Tomczak & Elias Mpofu & Nathan Hutson, 2022. "Remote Work Support Needs of Employees with Autism Spectrum Disorder in Poland: Perspectives of Individuals with Autism and Their Coworkers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-13, September.
    8. Yugang He, 2022. "Home Production: Does It Matter for the Korean Macroeconomy during the COVID-19 Pandemic?," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-12, June.
    9. Jaroslaw Morawski, 2022. "Impact of working from home on European office rents and vacancy rates," Zeitschrift für Immobilienökonomie (German Journal of Real Estate Research), Springer;Gesellschaft für Immobilienwirtschaftliche Forschung e. V., vol. 8(2), pages 173-188, October.
    10. Arntz, Melanie & Ben Yahmed, Sarra & Berlingieri, Francesco, 2018. "Working from Home: Heterogenous Effects on Hours Worked and Wages," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181630, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    11. Mark Wooden, 2021. "Job Characteristics and the Changing Nature of Work," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 54(4), pages 494-505, December.
    12. Seng-Su Tsang & Zhih-Lin Liu & Thi Vinh Tran Nguyen, 2023. "Family–work conflict and work-from-home productivity: do work engagement and self-efficacy mediate?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    13. Arntz, Melanie & Ben Yahmed, Sarra & Berlingieri, Francesco, 2022. "Working from home, hours worked and wages: Heterogeneity by gender and parenthood," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    14. Guillaume Gueguen & Claudia Senik, 2022. "Adopting Telework. The causal impact of working from home on subjective wellbeing," Working Papers halshs-03455306, HAL.
    15. Gueguen, Guillaume & Senik, Claudia, 2022. "Adopting Telework. The causal impact of working from home on subjective well-being in 2020," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Docweb) 2201, CEPREMAP.
    16. Gimenez-Nadal, Jose Ignacio & Velilla, Jorge, 2020. "Home-based work, time endowments, and subjective well-being: Gender differences in the United Kingdom," MPRA Paper 104937, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. José María Ortiz-Lozano & Pedro César Martínez-Morán & Iván Fernández-Muñoz, 2021. "Difficulties for Teleworking of Public Employees in the Spanish Public Administration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-14, August.
    18. Inga Laß & Mark Wooden, 2023. "Working from Home and Work–Family Conflict," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 37(1), pages 176-195, February.
    19. Inga Laß & Esperanza Vera-Toscano & Mark Wooden, 2023. "Working from home, COVID-19 and job satisfaction," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2023n04, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    20. Guillaume Gueguen & Claudia Senik, 2023. "Adopting telework: The causal impact of working from home on subjective well‐being," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 61(4), pages 832-868, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:intlab:v:157:y:2018:i:4:p:609-630. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ilounch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.