Variable work hours are an understudied source of work-to-family conflict (WFC). We examine the relationships between the magnitude and direction of work hour variability and WFC and whether work hour control and schedule predictability moderate these relationships. We estimate a series of linear regressions using the 2016 US General Social Survey, examining women and men workers separately and together. Findings indicate that as the magnitude of work hour variability increases, so does WFC, controlling for the usual number of hours worked. Work hour control helps to protect workers, especially women, from WFC when work hour variability is high and hours surge. Although schedule predictability tempers the relationship between work hour variability and WFC, its potency diminishes as variability increases. Our study emphasizes the potential benefit to workers and families of government policies and employer practices that promote work hour stability, schedule predictability, and equity in employee work hour control.
AdamsAAdamsZPrasslJ (2019) Legitimizing precarity: zero hours contracts in the United Kingdom. In: O’SullivanMLavelleJMcMahonJ, et al (eds) Zero Hours and On-Call Work in Anglo-Saxon Countries. Singapore: Springer, 41–65.
2.
BakkerABDemeroutiE (2007) The job demands-resources model: state of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology22(3): 309–328.
3.
BaniaNLeeteL (2009) Monthly household income volatility in the US, 1991/92 vs. 2002/03. Economics Bulletin29(3): 2100–2112.
4.
BaxterJHewittBWesternM (2009) Who uses paid domestic labor in Australia? Choice and constraint in hiring household help. Feminist Economics15(1): 1–26.
5.
Ben-IshaiL (2014) Job schedules that work for students. Report, Center for Law and Social Policy, Washington, DC, 22July.
6.
BergPBoschGCharestJ (2014) Working-time configurations: a framework for analyzing diversity across countries. ILR Review67(3): 805–837.
7.
BoydEMSliterMTChatfieldS (2016) Double trouble: work–family conflict and well-being for second job holders. Community, Work & Family19(4): 462–480.
8.
BoyeK (2011) Work and well-being in a comparative perspective – the role of family policy. European Sociological Review27(1): 16–30.
9.
ByronK (2005) A meta-analytic review of work–family conflict and its antecedents. Journal of Vocational Behavior67(2): 169–198.
10.
CinamonRGRichY (2002) Gender differences in the importance of work and family roles: implications for work–family conflict. Sex Roles47(11): 531–541.
11.
ClawsonDGerstelN (2014) Unequal Time: Gender, Class, and Family in Employment Schedules. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
12.
CoronCSchmidtG (2021) The ‘gender face’ of job insecurity in France: an individual- and organizational-level analysis. Work, Employment and Society36(6): 999–1017.
13.
CraigLMullanK (2010) Parenthood, gender and work-family time in the United States, Australia, Italy, France, and Denmark. Journal of Marriage and Family72(5): 1344–1361.
14.
DavisEESojournerA (2021) Increasing federal investment in children’s early care and education to raise quality access and affordability. Report, The Hamilton Project at the Brookings Institute, Washington, DC, May.
15.
Eurofound (2017) 6th European working conditions survey – 2017 update. Report, Publications Office, Luxembourg.
16.
FagnaniJLetablierMT (2004) Work and family life balance: the impact of the 35-hour laws in France. Work, Employment and Society18(3): 551–572.
17.
FugielPJLambertSJ (2019) On-call and on-demand work in the USA: adversarial regulation in a context of unilateral control. In: O’SullivanMLavelleJMcMahonJ, et al (eds) Zero Hours and On-Call Work in Anglo-Saxon Countries. Singapore: Springer, 111–135.
18.
GeorgiouD (2022) The new EU directive on transparent and predictable working conditions in the context of new forms of employment. European Journal of Industrial Relations28(2): 193–210.
19.
GlynnSJ (2019) Breadwinning mothers continue to be the U.S. norm. Report, Center for American Progress, Washington, DC, 10May.
20.
GornickJCHeronA (2006) The regulation of working time as work-family reconciliation policy: comparing Europe, Japan, and the United States. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice8(2): 149–166.
21.
GreenhausJHBeutellNJ (1985) Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of Management Review10(1): 76–88.
22.
HarknettKSchneiderDLuhrS (2020) Who cares if parents have unpredictable work schedules?: just-in-time work schedules and child care arrangements. Social Problems69(1): 164–183.
23.
HäusserJAMojzischANieselM, et al. (2010) Ten years on: a review of recent research on the job demand–control (-support) model and psychological well-being. Work & Stress24(1): 1–35.
24.
HenlyJRLambertSJ (2014) Unpredictable work timing in retail jobs: implications for employee work–life conflict. ILR Review67(3): 986–1016.
25.
HenlyJRShaeferHLWaxmanE (2006) Nonstandard work schedules: employer- and employee-driven flexibility in retail jobs. Social Service Review80(4): 609–634.
26.
KarasekRA (1979) Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly24(2): 285–308.
27.
KatzDKahnRL (1978) The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York, NY: Wiley.
28.
KimJHenlyJRGoldenLM, et al. (2020) Workplace flexibility and worker well-being by gender. Journal of Marriage and Family82(3): 892–910.
29.
KossekEELautschBA (2018) Work–life flexibility for whom? Occupational status and work–life inequality in upper, middle, and lower level jobs. Academy of Management Annals12(1): 5–36.
30.
LaBriolaJSchneiderD (2020) Worker power and class polarization in intra-year work hour volatility. Social Forces98(3): 973–999.
31.
LambertSJ (1990) Processes linking work and family: a critical review and research agenda. Human Relations43(3): 239–257.
32.
LambertSJ (2020) Fair work schedules for the U.S. economy and society: what’s reasonable, feasible, and effective. Report, Washington Center for Equitable Growth, Washington, DC, 18February.
33.
LambertSJFugielPJ (2023) Updating measures of work schedules in federal surveys. SocArXiv11July. DOI: 10.31235/osf.io/j3dk5.
34.
LambertSJFugielPJHenlyJR (2014) Precarious work schedules among early-career employees in the US: a national snapshot. Report, Employment Instability, Family Well-being, and Social Policy Network, University of Chicago, Chicago, 27August.
35.
LambertSJHenlyJRKimJ (2019) Precarious work schedules as a source of economic insecurity and institutional distrust. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences5(4): 218–257.
36.
LottYChungH (2016) Gender discrepancies in the outcomes of schedule control on overtime hours and income in Germany. European Sociological Review32(6): 752–765.
37.
LynessKSGornickJCStoneP, et al. (2012) It’s all about control: worker control over schedule and hours in cross-national context. American Sociological Review77(6): 1023–1049.
38.
McCrateELambertSJHenlyJR (2019) Competing for hours: unstable work schedules and underemployment among hourly workers in Canada. Cambridge Journal of Economics43(5): 1287–1314.
39.
McMunnABirdLWebbE, et al. (2019). Gender divisions of paid and unpaid work in contemporary UK couples. Work, Employment and Society34(2): 155–173.
40.
NawakitphaitoonKTangC (2021) Nonstandard employment and job satisfaction across time in China: evidence from the Chinese general social survey (2006–2012). Work, Employment and Society35(3): 411–431.
41.
O’SullivanMLavelleJMcMahonJ, et al. (eds) (2019) Zero Hours and On-Call Work in Anglo-Saxon Countries. Singapore: Springer.
PiasnaA (2019) Regulating uncertainty: variable work schedules and zero-hour work in EU employment policy. Report no. 5. Brussels: European Trade Union Institute.
44.
ReynoldsJ (2005) In the face of conflict: work-life conflict and desired work hour adjustments. Journal of Marriage and Family67(5): 1313–1331.
45.
ReynoldsJMcKinzieAE (2019) Riding the waves of work and life: explaining long-term experiences with work hour mismatches. Social Forces98(1): 427–460.
46.
SarstedtMDanksNP (2022) Prediction in HRM research—a gap between rhetoric and reality. Human Resource Management Journal32(2): 485–513.
47.
SchneiderDHarknettK (2019) Consequences of routine work-schedule instability for worker health and well-being. American Sociological Review84(1): 82–114.
48.
ShmueliG (2010) To explain or to predict?Statistical Science25(3): 289–310.
49.
SmithAMcBrideJ (2021) ‘Working to live, not living to work’: low-paid multiple employment and work–life articulation. Work, Employment and Society35(2): 256–276.
50.
SmithTWDavernMFreeseJ, et al. (2019) General social surveys, 1972–2018: Cumulative Codebook. Machine-readable data file. Chicago, IL: National Opinion Research Center (NORC), 1 data file (64,814 logical records) and 1 codebook (3758 pp).
51.
SyrdaJ (2022) Gendered housework: spousal relative income, parenthood and traditional gender identity norms. Work, Employment and Society37(3): 794–813.
52.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) (2022) Women in the labor force: a databook. Report no. 1097, March. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
53.
ValizadeDSchulzFNicoaraC (2022) Towards a paradigm shift: how can machine learning extend the boundaries of quantitative management scholarship?British Journal of Management. Epub ahead of print 16 November 2022. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8551.12678.
54.
Van der DoefMMaesS (1999) The job demand-control (-support) model and psychological well-being: a review of 20 years of empirical research. Work & Stress13(2): 87–114.
55.
WolfeJJonesJCooperD (2018) ‘Fair workweek’ laws help more than 1.8 million workers: laws promote workplace flexibility and protect against unfair scheduling practices. Report, Economic Policy Institute, Washington, DC, 19July.
56.
WoodAJ (2018) Powerful times: flexible discipline and schedule gifts at work. Work, Employment and Society32(6): 1061–1077.
57.
YoungMMilkieMASchiemanS (2023) Mother–father parity in work–family conflict? The importance of selection effects and nonresponse bias. Social Forces101(3): 1171–1198.
58.
ZhavoronkovaMKhattarRBradyM (2022) Occupational segregation in America. Report, Center for American Progress, Washington, DC, 29March.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
