IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arz/wpaper/eres2023_81.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The unshackled workforce: three stages in the pandemic timeline in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Behnaz Avazpour
  • Christhina Candido
  • Iva Durakovic
  • Samin Marzban

Abstract

Since the onset of COVID, restrictions have forced many workers to change where and when they work (Marzban et al, 2021; Mendrika et al., 2021). In Australia, three distinct stages were experienced (ABS, 2021; Stobart & Duckett, 2022). In 2020, strict lockdown restrictions and the absence of vaccines meant that workers were mostly working from home (Duckett & Stobart, 2020; Durakovic et al., 2023). In 2021, a combination of snappy lockdowns and the increased vaccine uptake, meant that there was a slow push towards returning to in-office work (Massar et al., 2022). In 2022, lockdowns were lifted and the “living with COVID” stage meant a stronger emphasis on in-office work which has been received with little enthusiasm by most workers (Property Council of Australia, 2022). This reports findings from these three stages, focusing on the working experience reported by office workers in Australia. A total of 233 questionnaires from three rounds of the SHE (Sustainable and Healthy Environments) COVID survey were deployed in Australia, enabling descriptive and correlational analyses to be conducted. During the first of lockdowns in 2020, workers found the ability to perform more focused work and work-life balance were the most positive aspect of working from home. However, they were struggling with increased workload and setting up their home-offices with appropriate ergonomics. During all three stages of the survey, the most consistent positive aspect of not having to work from the office HQ was not having to commute to work and the most negative aspect was internet connectivity. Other reported positives and negatives changed through time though which serves as an indicator of how workers adapted their work and lifestyles. For instance, in 2021, survey results show that while workers were still reporting satisfaction with the improved balance between life and work, they also started to report their struggles with stress of increased workloads and isolation from colleagues. In 2022, during the “living with COVID” stage, isolation from their colleagues was the most notable pitfall of working from elsewhere. However, they found that having more control over their workplace and the ability to customize their workspace based on their needs as the most positive aspect of working from elsewhere. In all rounds of the survey, workers reported being more satisfied with flexible working arrangements post COVID-19 than with what they had access to before the pandemic and as such a clear desire for the gained increased flexibility to be kept in the longer term. Further, workers also indicated that interactions with their colleagues were the most important reason to work from office HQs. Since unshackled from office HQs in 2020, Australian workers may have gained greater appreciation of the value of in-office experiences and the need to interact with colleagues in person has increased over time but they are still unwilling to revert to pre-pandemic ways of working. In moving forward, findings highlight the need for companies to foster a supportive and adaptable work culture and style that suits the post-pandemic, unshackled Australian workforce.

Suggested Citation

  • Behnaz Avazpour & Christhina Candido & Iva Durakovic & Samin Marzban, 2023. "The unshackled workforce: three stages in the pandemic timeline in Australia," ERES eres2023_81, European Real Estate Society (ERES).
  • Handle: RePEc:arz:wpaper:eres2023_81
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://eres.architexturez.net/doc/oai-eres-id-eres2023-81
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Australian lockdown periods; Flexible working arrangements; Post-COVID workspace;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R3 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location

    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:arz:wpaper:eres2023_81. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Architexturez Imprints (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eressea.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.