Over-employment and the success of combining work and parenthood
https://doi.org/10.18184/2079-4665.2024.15.3.388-403
Abstract
Purpose: is to determine the impact of working week length on satisfaction with work-children balance in a gender context.
Methods: the empirical data are based on a structured survey of employed Russians raising children under 14 (N = 1449), the final sample size of 826 respondents. The authors’ online survey technology was used. The success of work-children balance was rated on a 10-point scale. Mean satisfaction with work-children balance as a function of parents' working hours was analysed using Mann-Whitney U-test and z-test.
Results: sociological assessments show high overemployment among parents of minor children: 56.5% of working fathers and 33.1% of working mothers work over 40 hours a week. The statistical significance of the average estimates of the differentiation of "time for children" satisfaction between overemployed, underemployed and standardly employed parents by working hours revealed gender specificity. Working fathers show no significant difference in the estimated proportions, although overemployed male respondents are 1.6 times less likely to rate the success of their work-children balance as high. Among women, there is a direct correlation: the longer the working week, the lower the average assessment of the success of work-children balance. Women with two or more children of different ages (0–6; 7–14) are the least satisfied with their work-children balance.
Conclusions and Relevance: working hours exceeding the normative standards of the RF Labour Code negatively impact women's parental well-being and impede the multi-child parenting as a national demographic goal. It is important to develop mechanisms to encourage employers to reduce overtime for women raising children under 14.
Keywords
About the Authors
N. V. TonkikhRussian Federation
Natalia V. Tonkikh, Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor; Associate Professor of the Department of Labor Economics and Human Resources Management; Head of the Laboratory for Digital Employment and Labor Organization Research
Researcher ID: O-9705-2018, Scopus ID: 57216647690
Ekaterinburg
T. A. Kamarova
Russian Federation
Tatiana A. Kamarova, Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor; Associate Professor of the Department of Labor Economics and Human Resources Management
Researcher ID: ABC-9312-2021, Scopus ID 58695264000
Ekaterinburg
T. I. Markova
Russian Federation
Tatyana l. Markova, Candidate of Sciences (Sociology), Associate Professor; Associate Professor of the Business Foreign Language Department
Researcher ID: ABC-7152-2021, Scopus ID: 57194570432
Ekaterinburg
References
1. Popov A.V. The scale and features of spreading various forms of non-standard employment in Russia’s entities. Problems of Territory’s Development. 2021; 25(4):43–62. EDN: https://www.elibrary.ru/tlzorp. https://doi.org/10.15838/ptd.2021.4.114.3 (In Russ.)
2. Pokida A.N., Zybunovskaya N.V., Pokida I.A. Secondary employment of the working population in the modern labor market. Russian economic developments. 2023; 30(1):60–67. EDN: https://www.elibrary.ru/rnsdjx
3. Greenhaus J.H., Beutell N.J. Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of management review. 1985; 10(1):76–88. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1985.4277352 (In Eng.)
4. Kalabikhina I.E. Measuring by time: a new paradigm of socio-demographic policy. Population. 2020; 23(2):37–50. EDN: https://www.elibrary.ru/klwzyk. https://doi.org/10.19181/population.2020.23.2.4 (In Russ.)
5. Shabunova A.A., Leonidova G.V. Work-family balance: assessments of successful working parents. Population. 2023; 26(1):123–134. EDN: https://www.elibrary.ru/pwjwqk. https://doi.org/10.19181/population.2023.26.1.10 (In Russ.)
6. Anisimov R.I. Precarious employment in Russia: major indicators and scales of distribution. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya. 2019; (9):64–72. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/kurvys. https://doi.org/10.31857/S013216250006652-0 (In Russ.)
7. Pobiyanskaya A.V., Kipervar E.A., Stuken T.Yu. Working hours structure in terms of duration. Russian journal of labor economics. 2022; 9(8):1325–1338. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/irlkxo. https://doi.org/10.18334/et.9.8.114832 (In Russ.)
8. Dvouletý O. Underemployment and overemployment in Central Europe. Economics and Business Letters. 2023; 12(2):147–156. https://doi.org/10.17811/ebl.12.2.2023.147-156 (In Eng.)
9. Hiemer J., Andresen M. When less time is preferred: an analysis of the conceptualization and measurement of overemployment. Time and Society. 2020; 29(1):74–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X18820736 (In Eng.)
10. Mühl A., Hartner-Tiefenthaler M., Feuchtl S. The implication of overtime for well-being and desired working hours among office workers: the role of temporal flexibility. Momentum Quarterly. 2023; 12(1):43–64. https://doi.org/10.15203/momentumquarterly.vol12.no1.p43-64 (In Eng.)
11. Reynolds J. You can’t always get the hours you want: mismatches between actual and preferred work hours in the U.S. Social forces. 2003; 81(4):1171–1199. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2003.0069 (In Eng.)
12. Golden L. Distinctions between overemployment, overwork, workaholism and heavy work investment. In: Heavy work investment: its nature, sources, outcomes, and future directions. Eds. Harpaz I., Snir R. New York: Routledge, 2014. P. 140–170. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203380987 (In Eng.)
13. Gimpelson V., Kapelyushnikov R. Precarious employment and the Russian labor market: Working Paper. Moscow: Higher School of Economics, 2005. 36 p. EDN: https://www.elibrary.ru/wentul (In Russ.)
14. Toshchenko Zh.T., Anisimov R.I., Kuchenkova A.V. et al. Precariat: the emergence of a new class: Monograph. Moscow: Center for Social Forecasting and Marketing, 2020. 400 p. EDN: https://www.elibrary.ru/atvube (In Russ.)
15. Oaxaca R.L., Sagyndykova G. The effect of overtime regulations on employment. IZA World of Labor. 2020; 89. https://doi.org/10.15185/izawol.89.v2 (In Eng.)
16. Popova R.I., Toksanbaeva M.S. Non-standard forms of employment in small business. Population. 2018; 21(3):68–83. EDN: https://www.elibrary.ru/vlqapq. https://doi.org/10.26653/1561-7785-2018-21-3-05 (In Russ.)
17. Kipervar E.A., Pobiyanskaya A.V. Impact of working hours on job satisfaction. Herald of Siberian Institute of Business and Information Technologies. 2023; 12(2):83–90. EDN: https://www.elibrary.ru/yqdhhm. https://doi.org/10.24412/2225-8264-2023-2-83-90 (In Russ.)
18. Kuchenkova A.V. Secondary employment in the context of precarization on the Russian labor market. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya. 2019; (9):73–83. EDN: https://www.elibrary.ru/sboinu. https://doi.org/10.31857/S013216250006659-7 (In Russ.)
19. Conen W. Multiple jobholding in Europe: structure and dynamics: In: WSI Study. № 20. Düsseldorf: Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliches Institut (WSI), 2020. 61 p. URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/225443/1/wsi-study-20.pdf (accessed: 18.06.2024) (In Eng.)
20. Sliter M.T., Boyd E.M. Two (or three) is not equal to one: multiple jobholding as a neglected topic in organizational research. Journal of organizational behavior. 2014; 35(7):1042–1046. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1944 (In Eng.)
21. Klimenko L.V., Posukhova O.Yu. Gender aspects of precarization of labour in Russian society. Woman in Russian society. 2017; (1(82)):29–40. EDN: https://www.elibrary.ru/ygsnsz. https://doi.org/10.21064/WinRS.2017.1.3 (In Russ.)
22. Brough P. Timms C., Chan X.W., Hawkes A., Rasmussen L. Work-life balance: Definitions, causes, and consequences. In: Handbook of socioeconomic determinants of occupational health: from macro-level to micro-level evidence. Ed. Theorell T. Cham: Springer, 2020. P. 473–487. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31438-5_20 (In Eng.)
23. Kelliher C., Richardson J., Boiarintseva G. All of work? All of life? Reconceptualising work-life balance for the 21st century. Human resource management journal. 2019; 29(2):97–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12215 (In Eng.)
24. Razumova T.O., Serpukhova M.A. Theoretical and methodological foundations for the formation of the work-life balance indicator. Living standards of the population in the regions of Russia. 2022; 18(4):466–476. EDN: https://www.elibrary.ru/gaihag. https://doi.org/10.19181/lsprr.2022.18.4.4 (In Russ.)
25. Korolenko A.V., Kalachikova O.N. "Time for children": modern parents’ resource opportunities. Social Area. 2019; (5(22)):1–15. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/muhcwp. https://doi.org/10.15838/sa.2019.5.22.1 (In Russ.)
26. Bagirova A.P., Blednova N.D. Combination of professional and parental labor in assessments of Ural women: objective and subjective barriers. Woman in Russian society. 2021; (S):150–167. EDN: https://www.elibrary.ru/rqremu. https://doi.org/10.21064/WinRS.2021.0.10 (In Russ.)
27. Pishnyak A., Nadezhdina E. Employment of Russian women after childbirth: incentives and barriers. The Journal of Social Policy Studies. 2020; 18(2):221–238. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/invkir. https://doi.org/10.17323/727-0634-2020-18-2-221-238 (In Russ.)
28. Zannella M., De Rose A. Gender differences in the subjective perception of parenting time. The Italian Journal of Economic, Demographic and Statistical Studies. 2020; 74(2):49–60. URL: http://www.sieds.it/listing/RePEc/journl/2020742P049_060_Zannella.pdf (accessed: 02.10.2024) (In Eng.)
29. Gurko T.A. Dynamics of well-being of fathers and mothers with minor children. Sociological science and social practice. 2021; 9(3(35)):59–72. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/rvscgb. https://doi.org/10.19181/snsp.2021.9.3.8433 (In Russ.)
30. Greenhaus J.H., Collins K.M., Shaw J.D. The relation between work-family balance and quality of life. Journal of vocational behavior. 2003; 63(3):510–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00042-8 (In Eng.)
Review
For citations:
Tonkikh N.V., Kamarova T.A., Markova T.I. Over-employment and the success of combining work and parenthood. MIR (Modernization. Innovation. Research). 2024;15(3):388–403. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18184/2079-4665.2024.15.3.388-403