Exploring a family, work, and community model of work–family gains and strains

Abstract

Much of the work–family literature focuses on job or family characteristics that impact on work–life interaction. A small body of research takes a wider perspective, highlighting the importance of community characteristics. This study builds on, and extends, this research by examining the way work and community characteristics may interact in their influence on work–family interaction. Building on Voydanoff's work, this study examined whether community demands amplified the impact of work demands on work–family conflict, and whether community resources increased the impact of work resources on work–family facilitation. Data were analyzed from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia survey, distinguishing between residents of higher or lower socioeconomic status (SES) communities. Work demands (work intensity, hours) demonstrated the strongest relationship with work–family interaction. Autonomy and work hours emerged as particularly important predictors of work–family interaction for those living in lower SES areas. Whereas social support (a community resource) was a particularly strong predictor of work–family interaction for those living in higher SES areas. There was also evidence that community demands (lack of safety) are independently associated with work–family interaction and also amplify the effect of job demands (work intensity) on work–family conflict for residents of lower SES areas.

La littérature travail-famille met surtout l'accent sur les caractéristiques du travail et de la famille qui exercent un impact sur l'interaction travail-vie. Un petit corpus de recherche a adopté une perspective plus large en soulignant l'importance de la communauté sur la relation travail-vie. Cet article s'appuie sur cette recherche et la développe, en examinant comment les caractéristiques du travail et de la communauté peuvent interagir dans leur influence sur l'interaction travail-famille. En s'appuyant sur les travaux de Voydanoff, cette étude a examiné si les demandes de la communauté amplifiaient l'impact des demandes du travail sur le conflit travail-famille, et si les ressources de la communauté augmentaient l'impact des ressources du travail sur la facilitation travail-famille. Les données de l'étude «Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia» (Revenu du ménage et dynamique du travail en Australie) ont été analysées, en faisant la distinction entre les résidents de communautés de statut socio-économique favorisé ou défavorisé. Les demandes du travail (intensité du travail) étaient les plus fortement liées à l'interaction travail-famille. L'autonomie et les heures de travail s'avéraient être des indicateurs particulièrement importants de l'interaction travail-famille pour les résidents de régions de statut socio-économique défavorisé. Tandis que le soutien social (une ressource de la communauté) était un indicateur particulièrement puissant de l'interaction travail-famille des résidents de régions de statut socio-économique favorisé. Certains éléments indiquaient également que les demandes de la communauté (manque de sécurité) pouvaient amplifier l'effet des demandes du travail (intensité du travail) sur le conflit travail-famille pour les résidents de régions de statut socio-économique défavorisé.

Keywords:

• work–family
• work
• community
• socioeconomic status
• demands
• resources

Mots-clés:

• travail-famille
• Travail
• Communauté
• le statut socio-économique
• demandes
• ressources

Disclaimer

This paper uses unit record data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey. The HILDA Project was initiated and is funded by the Australian Government Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) and is managed by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research (Melbourne Institute). The findings and views reported in this paper, however, are those of the author and should not be attributed to either FaHCSIA or the Melbourne Institute.

Notes on contributors

Natalie Skinner trained in social and industrial and organizational psychology. Her research focuses on well-being in the workplace, with a particular emphasis on psychological health, job quality, and work–life interaction.

Reina Ichii has trained as an Economist in Australia and her native Japan, with significant research and industrial experience in the field of development economics. Her research interests include the care economy, microfinance, and intra-household resource allocation.

Notes

1. Voydanoff's model distinguishes between two different types of community demands and resources, those that operate within the single domain, and those that are a part of two domains (‘boundary-spanning’ demands and resources). An example of a boundary-spanning demand is working at home on the weekend, a work demand that operates in the work and family domains (Voydanoff, 2004). In this study we only considered single within-domain demands and resources.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Australian Research Council [grant number LP110200916].