IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/war/wpaper/2026-1.html

Men’s working-time flexibility and transition to 2nd birth: Evidence for couples in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Agata Kałamucka

    (University of Warsaw, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Interdisciplinary Centre for Labour Market and Family Dynamics)

  • Anna Matysiak

    (University of Warsaw, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Interdisciplinary Centre for Labour Market and Family Dynamics)

  • Beata Osiewalska

    (University of Warsaw, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Interdisciplinary Centre for Labour Market and Family Dynamics
    Cracow University of Economics)

Abstract

Advances in information and communication technologies have accelerated the diffusion of flexible working-time arrangements, with important implications for work–family reconciliation and fertility. Yet flexible schedules are not uniform. Employee-oriented flexibility, which grants workers control over when they work, differs fundamentally from employer-oriented flexibility, characterised by unpredictable hours and employer-driven schedule changes. These forms are unevenly distributed across social groups and may have contrasting consequences for family formation. While previous research has focused largely on women and employee-oriented flexibility, much less is known about how men’s working-time flexibility—particularly employer-oriented forms—shapes fertility behaviour. This paper examines the association between fathers’ working-time flexibility and the transition to a second birth in Germany. Using longitudinal data from the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) for 2003–2019 and applying event history analysis, we analyse couples with one child, adopting a couple-level perspective that accounts for mothers’ employment status and schedule flexibility. The results show no overall association between men’s flexible schedules and second births in baseline models. However, important heterogeneity emerges once a couple’s characteristics are considered. Among dual-earner couples, fathers’ employer-oriented working-time flexibility significantly reduces the likelihood of a second birth, particularly when mothers have fixed schedules. In contrast, employee-oriented flexibility is positively associated with second births, but only in male breadwinner couples. Further analyses reveal that these relationships also vary by men’s socio-economic status. Overall, the findings highlight the importance of distinguishing between types of flexibility and considering couple-level contexts when assessing how labour market changes influence fertility.

Suggested Citation

  • Agata Kałamucka & Anna Matysiak & Beata Osiewalska, 2026. "Men’s working-time flexibility and transition to 2nd birth: Evidence for couples in Germany," Working Papers 2026-1, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    • Handle: RePEc:war:wpaper:2026-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.wne.uw.edu.pl/download_file/6849/0
    File Function: First version, 2026
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2010-016 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Gary S. Becker, 1981. "A Treatise on the Family," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number beck81-1, January.
    3. Ariane Pailhé & Anne Solaz & Maria Stanfors, 2021. "The Great Convergence: Gender and Unpaid Work in Europe and the United States," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 47(1), pages 181-217, March.
    4. Bernt Bratsberg & Selma Walther, 2024. "The impact of flexibility at work on fertility," IFS Working Papers W24/27, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    5. Heejung Chung & Mariska van der Horst, 2020. "Flexible Working and Unpaid Overtime in the UK: The Role of Gender, Parental and Occupational Status," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 151(2), pages 495-520, September.
    6. Scheffel, Juliane, 2010. "Honey, I'll be working late tonight. The effect of individual work routines on leisure time synchronization of couples," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2010-016, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    7. Nobuko Nagase & Mary C. Brinton, 2017. "The gender division of labor and second births: Labor market institutions and fertility in Japan," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 36(11), pages 339-370.
    8. Senhu Wang & Hao Dong, 2024. "Flexible Working Arrangements and Fertility Intentions: A Survey Experiment in Singapore," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 40(1), pages 1-26, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Joan Garcia-Roman, 2025. "Gender differences in routine housework among one-person households: A cross-national analysis," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 52(12), pages 369-382.
    2. Myriam Chatot & Julie Landour & Ariane Pailhé & for the EpiCOV team, 2023. "Socioeconomic differences and the gender division of labor during the COVID‐19 lockdown: Insights from France using a mixed method," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1296-1316, July.
    3. Victor Leocádio & Ana Paula Verona & Simone Wajnman, 2025. "A review of research of the relationship between gender equity and fertility in low-fertility settings," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 1-26, March.
    4. Erin Hye-Won Kim & Adam Ka-Lok Cheung, 2019. "The Gendered Division of Household Labor over Parenthood Transitions: A Longitudinal Study in South Korea," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 38(4), pages 459-482, August.
    5. Ewa Jarosz & Anna Matysiak & Beata Osiewalska, 2023. "Maternal Free Time: A Missing Element in Fertility Studies," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 49(4), pages 801-828, December.
    6. Alessandro Cigno, 2007. "A Theoretical Analysis of the Effects of Legislation on Marriage, Fertility, Domestic Division of Labour, and the Education of Children," CESifo Working Paper Series 2143, CESifo.
    7. Lamia Kandil & Hélène Perivier, 2017. "La division sexuée du travail dans les couples selon le statut marital en France - une étude à partir des enquêtes emploi du temps de 1985-1986, 1998-1999, et 2009-2010," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2017-03, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
    8. repec:plo:pone00:0160320 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Robert Kaestner, 1995. "The Effects of Cocaine and Marijuana Use on Marriage and Marital Stability," NBER Working Papers 5038, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Yan Yu, 2015. "The Male Breadwinner/Female Homemaker Model and Perceived Marital Stability: A Comparison of Chinese Wives in the United States and Urban China," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 34-47, March.
    11. Kota Ogasawara & Mizuki Komura, 2022. "Consequences of war: Japan’s demographic transition and the marriage market," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 1037-1069, July.
    12. Allan Puur & Leen Rahnu & Liili Abuladze & Luule Sakkeus & Sergei Zakharov, 2017. "Childbearing among first- and second-generation Russians in Estonia against the background of the sending and host countries," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 36(41), pages 1209-1254.
    13. Sunnee Billingsley, 2010. "The Post-Communist Fertility Puzzle," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 29(2), pages 193-231, April.
    14. Ahn, Kunwon & Winters, John V., 2025. "Causal Effects of Education on Marriage," IZA Discussion Papers 17665, IZA Network @ LISER.
    15. Marcén, Miriam & Molina, José Alberto & Morales, Marina, 2018. "The effect of culture on the fertility decisions of immigrant women in the United States," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 15-28.
    16. Peggy Barlett & Linda Lobao & Katherine Meyer, 1999. "Diversity in attitudes toward farming and patterns of work among farm women: A regional comparison," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 16(4), pages 343-354, December.
    17. Michael E. Martell & Peyton Nash, 2020. "For Love and Money? Earnings and Marriage Among Same-Sex Couples," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 260-294, September.
    18. William S. Schulze & Michael H. Lubatkin & Richard N. Dino, 2002. "Altruism, agency, and the competitiveness of family firms," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(4-5), pages 247-259.
    19. Luis Garicano & Thomas N. Hubbard, 2016. "The Returns to Knowledge Hierarchies," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(4), pages 653-684.
    20. Jeffrey T. Macher & John W. Mayo & Olga Ukhaneva & Glenn A. Woroch, 2017. "From universal service to universal connectivity," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 77-104, August.
    21. Ravi Prakash & Abhishek Singh, 2014. "Who Marries Whom? Changing Mate Selection Preferences in Urban India and Emerging Implications on Social Institutions," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 33(2), pages 205-227, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure
    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J22 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Time Allocation and Labor Supply

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:war:wpaper:2026-1. 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: Jacek Rapacz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fesuwpl.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.