The work-related characteristics of an individual act as pegs around which other nonwork activities are scheduled on a day-to-day basis. In this paper, four dimensions of the medium- to long-range work arrangements that are important to day-to-day temporal and spatial characteristics of work patterns (and hence to day-to-day activity–travel schedules) are identified. The four dimensions are full-time versus part-time employment, teleworking or not, inflexible or flexible work schedules, and regular or alternate shifts. This paper develops a comprehensive taxonomy of work arrangements in each of these four dimensions and empirically analyses the factors affecting the work arrangement decisions along three of these dimensions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BhatC. R., and KoppelmanF. S.. A Retrospective and Prospective Survey of Time-Use Research.Transportation, Vol. 26, No. 2, 1999, pp. 119–139.
2.
PendyalaR. M., and GouliasK. G.. Time Use and Activity Perspectives in Travel Behavior Research.Transportation, Vol. 29, No. 1, 2002, pp. 1–4.
3.
ArentzeT. A., and TimmermansH. J. P.. A Learning-Based Transportation Oriented Simulation System.Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 38, 2004, pp. 613–633.
4.
BhatC. R., and KoppelmanF. S.. A Conceptual Framework of Individual Activity Program Generation.Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 27, No. 6, 1993, pp. 433–446.
5.
DammD.Interdependence in Activity Behavior. In Transportation Research Record 750, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1980, pp. 33–40.
6.
BowmanJ. L., and Ben-AkivaM. E.Activity-Based Disaggregate Travel Demand Model System with Activity Schedules.Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 35, 2000, pp. 1–28.
7.
BhatC. R., and SrinivasanS.. A Multidimensional Mixed Ordered-Response Model for Analyzing Weekend Activity Participation.Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 39, No. 3, 2005, pp. 255–278.
8.
BhatC. R., and SinghS. K.. A Comprehensive Daily Activity–Travel Generation Model System for Workers.Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 34, No. 1, 2000, pp. 1–22.
9.
GalinskyE., BondJ. T., and SwanbergJ.. The 1997 Study of the Changing Work Force.Families and Work Institute, New York, 1998.
10.
GoldenL.Flexible Work Schedules: What Are We Trading Off to Get Them?Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 124, No. 3, 2001, pp. 50–67.
CohanyS. R.Workers in Alternative Employment Arrangements.Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 119, No. 10, 1996, pp. 31–45.
13.
HamermeshD. S.Workdays, Workhours, and Work Schedules: Evidence for the United States and Germany.W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, Kalamazoo, Mich.,1996.
14.
ErickcekG., and HousemanS.. A Report on Temporary, Part-Time and Contract Employment in the United States.W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, Kalamazoo, Mich.,1997.
15.
LedermanJ.Two People, One Job: Job Sharing Keeps Parents Working and Helps Companies Retain Employees.New York Times, Jan. 14, 2001, p. 8.
16.
KimmelJ.Moonlighting in the United States.Employment Research, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1995.
17.
FawknerE.Moonlighting's Greatest Challenge … How to Beat the Time Crunch.A Home-Based Business Online (AHBBO), June 2000. www.ahbbo.com/timecrunch.html. Accessed July 25, 2004.
18.
MokhtarianP. L.A Typology of Relationships Between Telecommunications and Transportation.Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 24, No. 3, 1990, pp. 231–242.
19.
SalomonI.Technological Change and Social Forecasting: the Case of Telecommuting As a Travel Substitute.Transportation Research Part C, Vol. 6, Nos. 1–2, 1998, pp. 17–45.
20.
KurlandN. B., and CooperC. D.. Manager Control and Employee Isolation in Telecommuting Environments.Journal of High Technology Management Research, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2002, pp. 107–126.
21.
PopuriY. D., and BhatC. R.. On Modeling Choice and Frequency of Home-Based Telecommuting. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1858, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 55–60.
22.
NillesJ. M.Traffic Reductions by Telecommuting: A Status Review and Selected Bibliography.Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 22, No. 4, 1988, pp. 301–317.
23.
PopuriY. D.On Modeling the Choice and Frequency of Home-Based Telecommuting by Individuals. M.S. thesis. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Texas at Austin,2001.
24.
MarianiM.. Telecommuters. Occupational Outlook Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 3, 2000, pp. 10–17.
25.
Workers on Flexible and Shift Schedules in 2001 Summary.Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C., 2002. www.bls.gov/news.release/flex.nr0.htm. Accessed Nov. 12, 2004.
26.
McCampbellA. S.Benefits Achieved Through Alternative Work Schedules.Human Resource Planning, Vol. 19, No. 3, 1996, pp. 30–37.
27.
BeersT. M.Flexible Schedules and Shift Work: Replacing the ‘9-to-5’ Workday?Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 123, No. 6, 2000, pp. 33–40.
28.
KrantzR., NataleM. D., and KrolikT. J.. The U.S. Labor Market in 2003: Signs of Improvement by Year's End.Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 127, No. 3, 2004, pp. 3–29.
29.
MillerC. F.Part-Time Participation Over the Life Cycle Among Married Women Who Work in the Market.Applied Economics, Vol. 25, 1993, pp. 91–99.
30.
LesterB. Y.Part-Time Employment of Married Women in USA: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 55, No. 1, 1996, pp. 61–71.
31.
ConnellyR., and KimmelJ.. Marital Status and Full-Time/Part-Time Status in Child Care Choices.Applied Economics, Vol. 35, 2003, pp. 761–777.
32.
BernardinoA. T., Ben-AkivaM., and SalomonI.. Stated Preference Approach to Modeling the Adoption of Telecommuting. In Transportation Research Record 1413, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1993, pp. 22–30.
33.
MahmassaniH. S., YenJ., HermanR., and SullivanM. A.. Employee Attitudes and Stated Preferences Toward Telecommuting: An Exploratory Analysis. In Transportation Research Record 1413, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1993, pp. 31–41.
34.
SullivanM. A., MahmassaniH. S., YenJ-R.. Choice Model of Employee Participation in Telecommuting Under a Cost-Neutral Scenario. In Transportation Research Record 1413, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1993, pp. 42–48.
35.
MokhtarianP. L., and SalomonI.. Modeling the Choice of Telecommuting: 3. The Importance of Attitudinal Factors in Behavioral Models.Environment and Planning A, Vol. 28, 1996, pp. 1877–1894.
36.
BagleyM. N., and MokhtarianP. L.. Analyzing the Preference for NonExclusive Forms of Telecommuting: Modeling and Policy Implications.Transportation, Vol. 24, 1997, pp. 203–226.
37.
ManneringJ. S., and MokhtarianP. L.. Modeling the Choice of Telecommuting Frequency in California: An Exploratory Analysis.Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 49, 1995, pp. 49–73.
38.
BelangerF.Workers’ Propensity to Telecommute: An Empirical Study.Information & Management, Vol. 35, 1999, pp. 139–153.
39.
DruckerJ., and KhattakA. J.. Propensity to Work from Home: Modeling Results from the 1995 Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1706, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000, pp. 108–117.
40.
GarietyB. S., and ShafferS.. Wage Differentials Associated with Flex-time.Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 124, No. 3, 2001, pp. 68–75.
41.
DexS., and ScheiblF.. Flexible and Family Friendly Work Arrangements in UK-Based Small and Medium Enterprises: Business Cases.British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 39, No. 3, 2001, pp. 411–431.
42.
BhatC. R., and SardesaiR.. On Examining the Impact of Stop-Making and Travel Time Reliability on Commute Mode Choice: An Application to Predict Commuter Rail Transit Mode for Austin, TX. Technical paper, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Texas at Austin, Aug. 2004.
43.
YenJ.Interpreting Employee Telecommuting Adoption: An Economics Perspective.Transportation, Vol. 27, 2000, pp. 149–164.
