Work-Life Conflict in Canada
in the New Millennium
A Status Report
Dr. Linda Duxbury, Professor, Sprott School of Business,
Carleton University
Dr. Chris Higgins, Professor, Richard Ivey School of
Business, U.W.O.
Final Report
October 2003
Work-Life Conflict in Canada
in the New Millennium
A Status Report Final Report
October 2003 ![New window](/web/20061211084402im_/http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/gfx_common/newwindow.gif)
(1,690 KB) in PDF Format ![PDF](/web/20061211084402im_/http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/gfx_common/pdficon.gif)
(How to download PDF documents)
Executive Summary
As we enter the new millennium, Canadian governments, employers, employees
and families face a common challenge-how to make it easier for Canadians
to balance their work roles and their desire to have a meaningful life outside
of work. The research initiative summarized in this report was undertaken
to address this issue. This report conceptualizes work4-life
conflict broadly to include role overload, work to family interference,
family to work interference, work to family spillover and caregiver strain.
Answers to the following specific questions are provided in this report:
- How prevalent are the various forms of work-life conflict in Canada
at this time (reference year of 2001)?
- Has the prevalence of the various forms of work-life conflict
changed over the past decade?
- What is the impact of the various forms of work-life conflict
on:
- Canadian organizations?
- Canadian families?
- Canadian employees?
- How does gender, job type, sector of employment and dependent care
status affect these issues?
Demographic Profile of Respondents
The sample consists of 31,571 Canadian employees who work in organizations
of medium size (i.e. 500-999) and large size (1,000+ employees) in
three sectors of the economy: public (federal, provincial and municipal
governments), private and not-for-profit (NFP) (defined in this study to
include organizations in the health care and educational sectors). In total,
100 companies participated in the study: 40 from the private sector, 22
from the public sector and 38 from the NFP sector. The sample is distributed
as follows:
- 46% of the respondents work in the public sector, 33% work in the NFP
sector, 20% are employed by a private sector company;
- 55% of the respondents are women;
- 46% of the respondents work in managerial and professional positions
while 54% work in "other" positions (i.e. clerical, administrative,
retail, production, technical); and
- just over half (56%) of the respondents have dependent care responsibilities
(i.e. spend an hour or more a week in either child care or elder care).
The rest (44%) do not.
The 2001 survey sample is well distributed with respect to age, region,
community size, job type, education, personal income, family income and
family's financial well-being. In many ways, the demographic characteristics
of the sample correspond to national data, suggesting that the results from
this research can be generalized beyond this research. Approximately half
of the respondents to the survey can be considered to be highly educated
male and female knowledge workers. The majority of respondents are part
of a dual-income family and indicate that they are able to "live comfortably" (but
not luxuriously) on two full-time incomes.
The sample includes a substantial number of employees who may be at risk
with respect to work-life conflict. The mean age of the respondents
to this survey was 42.8 years of age which puts them in the mid-career/fast-track
stage of the career cycle, the "full-nest" stage of the life cycle
and the 40's transition stage of adult development. Each of these stages
is associated with increased stress and greater work and family demands.
Three quarters of the respondents are presently married or living with a
significant other and 69% are part of a dual-income family. Eleven percent
are single parents. Twelve percent live in rural areas. One in three is
a clerical or administrative employee with a lower level of formal education
(i.e. reduced job mobility) and lower personal and family income. One quarter
of the respondents indicates that money is tight in their family; 29% of
respondents earn less than $40,000 per year and just over one-quarter live
in families with total family incomes that are less than the Canadian average.
One in three of the respondents has a 'high school education or less'.
The majority of respondents have responsibilities outside of work. Seventy
percent are parents (average number of children for parents in the sample
is 2.1); 60% have elder care responsibilities (average number of elderly
dependents is 2.3); 13% have responsibility for the care of a disabled relative;
13% have both child care and elder care demands (i.e. are part of the "sandwich
generation"). The fact that these data on non-work demands correspond
closely to national data provided by Statistics Canada suggests that the
findings from this study can be generalized to all Canadians working for
large firms.
What do we know about the prevalence of role overload from this study?
Role overload is having too much to do in a given amount of time. This
form of work-life conflict occurs when the total demands on time and
energy associated with the prescribed activities of multiple roles are too
great to perform the roles adequately or comfortably. The following key
observations can be drawn regarding role overload from the data reviewed
in this report:
High levels of role overload have become systemic within the population
of employees working for Canada's largest employers: The majority
of employees in our sample (58%) are currently experiencing high levels
of role overload. Another 30% report moderate levels of role overload.
Only 12% of the respondents in this sample report low levels of overload.
The percentage of the workforce with high role overload has increased
over the past decade: Fifty-eight percent of the respondents to the
2001 survey report high levels of role overload-an increase of 11 percentage
points over what was observed in the 1991 sample. This increase in role
overload is consistent with the fact that employees in the 2001 sample
spend more time in work and family activities per week than their counterparts
in the 1991 sample. Other data from the 2001 survey would suggest that
much of this increase in role overload can be linked to new information
and communications technology (e.g. laptops, email, cell phones), organizational
norms that still reward long hours at the office rather than performance
and organizational anorexia (downsizing has meant there are too few employees
to do the work). While a full discussion of workload issues can be found
in Report One in this series, it is worthwhile to note the following:
"Comparisons done using the 1991 and 2001 samples suggest that time
in work has increased over the decade. Whereas one in ten respondents in
1991 worked 50 or more hours per week, one in four does so now; during this
same time period, the proportion of employees working between 35 and 39
hours per week declined from 48% of the sample to 27%. This increase in
time in work was observed for all job groups and all sectors."
What do we know about the prevalence of work to family interference
from this study?
Work to family interference occurs when work demands and responsibilities
make it more difficult for an employee to fulfill family role responsibilities.
The data reviewed in this report support the following deductions regarding
work to family interference:
Work to family interference is a real problem for one in four Canadians
working for larger employers: One in four Canadians report that their
work responsibilities interfere with their ability to fulfill their responsibilities
at home. Almost 40% of Canadians report moderate levels of interference.
The proportion of the Canadian workforce with high levels of work to family
interference has not changed over the past decade.
What do we know about the prevalence of family to work interference
from this study?
Family to work interference occurs when family demands and responsibilities
make it more difficult for an employee to fulfill work role responsibilities.
The following key observations can be drawn regarding family to work interference
from the data reviewed in this report:
Family to work interference is not common in Canada at this time: Only
10% of the Canadians in this sample report high levels of family to work
interference. Another third report moderate levels of family to work interference.
Very few Canadians allow their family demands to interfere with the
fulfillment of responsibilities at work: Family to work interference
has a very different distribution than observed with role overload and
work to family interference. While role overload is positively skewed
and work to family interference has a normal distribution, family to work
interference is negatively skewed. Three times as many Canadians give
priority to work at the expense of their family as the reverse (i.e. give
priority to their family).
The percentage of working Canadians who give priority to family rather
than work has doubled over the past decade: This increase can be attributed
largely to the fact that the number of employees with elder care responsibilities
has increased over the past decade.
What do we know about the prevalence of caregiver strain from this research?
For the purposes of this study, the term "caregiver" refers
to anyone who provides assistance to a disabled or elderly dependent. Caregiver
strain is a multidimensional construct which is defined in terms of "burdens" or
changes in the caregiver's day-to-day lives which can be attributed to the
need to provide care for this dependent. Four types of caregiver strains
resulting from stress have been identified: emotional (e.g. depression,
anxiety, emotional exhaustion), physical, financial and family strain. The
data reviewed in this report with respect to caregiver strain support the
following assertion:
Approximately one in four working Canadians experiences high levels
of caregiver strain: While the majority of the respondents to this
survey (74%) rarely experience caregiver strain, 9% find elder care to
be a strain several times a week or daily. Another 17% experience such
feelings approximately once a week.
What do we know about the prevalence of work to family spillover from
this study?
Work to family spillover arises when work experiences affect an employee's
ability to perform non-work roles. Traditionally, researchers have assumed
that work will have a negative impact on family (i.e. negative spillover
between domains). The concept of spillover included in this study is more
comprehensive in that it allows for the possibility that conditions at work
might have a positive, a negative, or no impact on the family. The following
observations arise from the data on work to family spillover reviewed in
this study:
Almost half of the Canadians working for larger firms (44% of this
sample) experience negative spillover from work to family: Very few
Canadians working for larger firms (only 9% of this sample) perceive that
their experiences at work have a positive impact on their family life.
Almost half of the Canadians working for larger firms (47%) are able
to compartmentalize-such employees feel that work and family are quite
separate domains and that work does not affect their family life: Employees
with fewer demands either at work (i.e. those in "other" jobs)
and/or at home (i.e. those without dependent care and/or men) are more
likely to report that work and family are separate domains.
So ... what can we conclude about the prevalence of work-life
conflict in Canada at this time?
The conclusions one reaches with respect to the prevalence of work-life
conflict in Canada depends on what measure of work-life conflict is
used and the characteristics of the group being studied. Looking at the
data optimistically (i.e. taking prevalence of work to family interference
and caregiver strain as our measure of work-life conflict), we estimate
that one in four Canadians working for medium-size and large organizations
experiences high levels of conflict between work and family. This is the
best case scenario. The worst case scenario (i.e. estimates calculated using
role overload data) is that almost 60% of Canadians who are employed outside
the home cannot balance their work and family demands.
Who has more problems balancing work and family responsibilities? The
evidence is quite clear-employed Canadians with dependent care responsibilities.
Employees who have child and/or elder care responsibilities report higher
levels of work-life conflict than those without such responsibilities,
regardless of how work-life conflict is assessed (i.e. report higher
levels of role overload, work to family interference, family to work interference
and caregiver strain, and more likely to report negative spillover). None
of the other factors examined in this study is associated with all five
work-life conflict measures. Employees without dependent care responsibilities
are more able to separate work and family. This greater ability to balance
can be attributed to two factors: fewer demands outside of work and more
degrees of freedom to deal with work issues (i.e. more control over their
time).
Job type is associated with all but one of the measures of work-life
conflict. Employees with higher demands at work (i.e. managers and professionals)
were more likely than those in "other" jobs to experience high
levels of overload, work to family interference and negative spillover (women
managers in particular report higher levels of negative spillover). Those
in "other" jobs, however, were more likely to report higher levels
of caregiver strain due to the financial stresses associated with elder
care.
Gender is associated with two out of five of the measures of work-life
conflict. Women are more likely than men to report high levels of role overload
and high caregiver strain. As noted in Report One, women devote more hours
per week than men to non-work activities such as child care and elder care
and are more likely to have primary responsibility for non-work tasks.
It is interesting to note that when job type is taken into account and
when work-life conflict is broken into its component parts, many of
the gender differences in work-life conflict referred to in the research
literature disappear. This suggests that many of the gender differences
in work-life conflict may be attributed to the fact that women are
typically compressed into a different set of jobs than men.
Sector of employment is associated with three out of five of the measures
of work-life conflict. Respondents working in the NFP sector are more
likely than their counterparts in the public and private sectors to report
high role overload, high work to family interference and negative spillover.
The elevated levels of work-life conflict in this sector can be attributed
to higher work demands (i.e. respondents in this sector spend more hours
per week in employment-related activities and are more likely to have to
spend week nights and weekend nights away from home on job-related travel)
and how work is arranged (i.e. shift arrangements, rigid work schedules).
It should be noted that the women in the NFP sector sample had the most
difficulties balancing work and family. The data indicate that the women
in this sector have three challenges to meet-heavier demands at home, heavier
demands at work, and work arrangements that give them little ability to
combine work and non-work demands.
Why should organizations care about work-life conflict?
The majority of Canada's largest employers cannot be considered to
be best practice employers: The data reviewed in this report paint
a disturbing picture for Canada's larger employers. Only about half of
the employees who participated in this study are highly committed to their
employer, satisfied with their job and view their organization as "an
above average place to work." One in three reports high levels of
job stress and one in four is thinking of leaving their current organization
once a week or more. Absenteeism (especially absenteeism due to physical
and mental health issues) also appears to be a substantial problem for
Canadian employers, with half of the respondents reporting high levels
of absenteeism (defined as three or more days of absence in the six months
prior to the study being conducted). One in four respondents misses three
or more days of work in a six-month period due to ill health, while one
in ten reports high absenteeism due to emotional, physical or mental fatigue.
Conditions within Canadian organizations have declined over time: High
job stress and absenteeism due to ill health have become more problematic
over the past decade. Almost three times as many respondents report high
job stress in 2001 (35%) than in 1991 (13%). More than half (56%) of those
in the 1991 sample did not miss work due to ill health in the six months
prior to the study being conducted, while just under one in four (24%) missed
three or more days. In 2001, the number of respondents missing three or
more days of work due to ill health increased to 28% of the sample while
the proportion reporting zero days' absence due to ill health declined to
46%.
During the same time period, job satisfaction and organizational commitment
have also appeared to decline. Whereas almost two thirds of employees in
1991 were highly satisfied with their jobs (62%) and committed to their
organization (66%), approximately half report high satisfaction (46%) or
high organizational commitment (53%) in 2001. Such findings are not surprising
given the fact that workloads (see Report One) and work-life conflict
also increased over the same time period. Taken as a whole, these findings
suggest that many of the management practices instituted by Canada's largest
organizations over the past decade (i.e. downsizing, re-engineering, focus
on hours not output, pay freezes, restructuring) have had a negative impact
on how Canadian employees perceive their job and their employer.
How an employee feels about their organization (i.e. commitment, rating
of organization as a place to work, intent to turnover) and their job (i.e.
job satisfaction, job stress) has more to do with the type of work being
done and the work environment (i.e. job type and sector of employment) than
demands outside of work (i.e. gender, dependent care status): An employee's
view of both their organization and their job, as well as the amount of
job stress they experience and their intent to turnover, can be linked to
the type of work being done and the work environment (i.e. job type, sector
of employment) rather than gender or dependent care status. In other words,
it is what you do within the work setting and how you are treated at work
rather than responsibilities outside of work or gender that influence key
organizational outcomes. Taken as a whole, the data indicate that managers
and professionals are more committed to their organizations and satisfied
with their jobs than their non-professional counterparts, despite their
jobs being associated with higher levels of stress. The data also indicate
that employees in the private sector feel more positively about their employer
and their jobs than their counterparts in the public and NFP sectors.
Absenteeism due to child care and elder care problems is associated5 with
gender and the number of demands an employee has outside of work (i.e.
dependent care status) while absenteeism due to emotional, physical and
mental health problems is associated with sector of employment: The
link between absenteeism and the context variables under examination in
this study (i.e. gender, job type, sector of employment, dependent care
status) is more complex. Absenteeism due to child care and elder care
(and total absenteeism because it is made up of these two kinds of absenteeism)
is strongly associated with gender and demands outside of work (i.e. women
and employees with dependent care responsibilities are more likely to
report high levels of these types of absenteeism and, as noted in Report
One, high family demands). Absenteeism due to poor emotional, physical
and mental health, however, is associated primarily with sector of employment
(i.e. work environment), with Canadians in the public sector reporting
the highest levels and private sector employees reporting the lowest levels
of absenteeism due to these causes.
High work-life conflict is associated with increased absenteeism
and substandard organizational performance: The data reviewed in this
study leave little doubt that high work-life conflict is associated
with a number of indicators of substandard organizational performance
and increased absenteeism costs. In other words, high work-life conflict
negatively affects an organization's bottom line. The data reviewed in
this report indicate that the four6 components
of work-life conflict examined in this phase of the study have different
impacts on the organization. These differences are worthy of note in that
they provide quite different motivations for addressing this issue as
well as different prescriptions with respect to change.
Role overload is positively associated with physical and mental health
problems: Employees who have high role overload are less committed
to their organization, report higher job stress, are less satisfied with
their jobs (due largely to dissatisfaction with workloads, hours worked
and work schedules), are more likely to be absent from work (due largely
to physical and mental health problems), are more likely to be thinking
of leaving the organization (to escape frustrating and non-supportive
work environments and to get more time for themselves and more recognition
for their efforts), and have a less favourable view of their employer.
In other words, organizations which have a higher proportion of their
workforce with high levels of this form of work-life conflict are
likely to have difficulties recruiting and retaining employees and increased
costs associated with poor physical and mental health (i.e. greater absenteeism,
higher prescription drug costs, greater employee assistance program use).
The dimensions of the problem can be assessed by considering the following
data. Compared to their counterparts with low levels of role overload,
employees with high role overload are:
- 5.6 times more likely to report high levels of job stress;
- 3.5 times more likely to have high levels of absenteeism due to emotional,
physical or mental fatigue;
- 2.3 times more likely to report high intent to turnover;
- 1.6 times more likely to have high levels of absenteeism, all factors
considered, and to miss three or more days of work in a six-month period
due to ill health; and
- 2.8 times more likely to miss work due to child care problems.
In addition, employees who report low levels of role overload are 1.3
times as likely as those with high role overload to be highly committed
to their employer, 1.7 times as likely to have a positive view of their
employer and 2.0 times as likely to report high levels of job satisfaction.
Work to family interference is negatively associated with recruitment
and retention: The impact of work to family interference on the organization
is very similar to that observed with respect to role overload. This is
not surprising given the high correlation between these two constructs.
It should be noted, however, that the respondents with high levels of
work to family interference report the lowest levels of commitment (only
44% with high commitment), the lowest levels of job satisfaction (only
24% are highly satisfied with their jobs), the highest levels of job stress
(66% report high job stress) and the highest intent to turnover (44% are
thinking of leaving weekly or more, with 24% thinking of leaving several
times a week or daily!) of any of the respondents in the study. Organizational
commitment, intent to turnover and rating of the employer have all been
found to be strongly associated with recruitment and retention issues.
The data indicate that work to family interference affects how people feel
about their employer. Taken as a whole, these findings suggest that employees
who perceive that they have to put work ahead of family (e.g. feel that
they have to make a choice between career advancement and family or between
job security and family) are not as loyal and committed as employees who
do not perceive that such a choice is necessary.
Family to work interference is positively associated with absenteeism
due to child care problems. From the organization's perspective, the
main consequence of high family to work interference is higher absenteeism
due to child care problems. Respondents with high levels of family to
work interference were seven times more likely to miss three or more days
of work in a six-month period due to child care than those with low levels
of this form of work-life conflict. This suggests that organizations
could reduce this form of absenteeism by making it easier for employees
with dependent care responsibilities to vary when and where they work.
Caregiver strain is positively associated with absenteeism due to elder
care problems and emotional, physical or mental fatigue: Employees
with high caregiver strain were 13.0 times more likely than those with
low caregiver strain to miss three or more days of work in a six-month
period due to elder care problems and 1.8 times more likely to miss work
because they were emotionally, physically or mentally fatigued.
Employers could substantially decrease absenteeism in their organizations
if they reduced work-life conflict. Our calculations indicate
that employers could reduce absenteeism in their organization by:
- 24.2% if they eliminated high levels of role overload;
- 6.5% if they eliminated high levels of work to family interference;
- 3.5% if they eliminated high levels of family to work interference;
and
- 8.6% if they could eliminate high levels of caregiver strain.
The direct costs of absenteeism due to high work-life conflict
are approximately $3 to $5 billion per year: The data collected in
this study provide us with the opportunity to estimate the potential financial
cost of work-life conflict to Canadian organizations. Our estimates
suggested that, in 2001, the direct costs of absenteeism due to work-life
conflict are roughly $3 to $5 billion. When both direct and indirect costs
are included in the calculations, work-life conflict costs Canadians
approximately $4.5 to $10 billion per year. Specifically:
- The direct costs of absenteeism due to high role overload are estimated
to be approximately $3 billion per year. Direct and indirect costs of
absenteeism due to role overload are estimated to be between $4.5 (conservative
estimate) and $6 billion per year.
- The direct costs of absenteeism due to high levels of work to family
interference are estimated to be almost $1 billion per year in direct
costs alone (costs increase to $1.5 to $2 billion if one also includes
the indirect costs of this absenteeism).
- The direct costs of absenteeism due to high levels of family to work
interference are estimated to be just under $0.5 billion a year in direct
costs (approximately $1 billion per year when indirect costs are also
included in the total).
- The direct costs of absenteeism due to high levels of caregiver strain
are calculated to be just over $1 billion per year (indirect costs are
estimated at another $1 to $2 billion).
Why should families care about work-life conflict?
The data in this report paint a mixed picture with respect to the "health" of
the families in which Canadian employees live: On a positive note,
the majority of respondents are satisfied with their families and their
performance as a parent and engage in behaviours associated with positive
parenting several times a week or more. On a more cautionary note, only
38% of respondents are completely satisfied with their family's well-being
and only one in four frequently engages in activities which have been
linked to family stability.
Women are less satisfied than men with their performance as a parent: Men
are more likely than women to indicate that they are satisfied with their
abilities as a parent. This gender difference is particularly interesting
because women spend more time in child care than men. These findings suggest
that many women judge their performance as a parent using outdated and perhaps
unrealistic standards (e.g. compare themselves to their own mothers).
Family outcomes decline as family responsibilities increase: In
other words, family well-being and stability decline as family responsibilities
increase. Neither job type nor sector are associated with any of the family
outcomes examined in this study.
High work-life conflict is associated with diminished levels of
family and parental satisfaction and impaired family functioning:
The data reviewed in this study leave little doubt that high work-life
conflict is associated with a number of indicators of impaired family
functioning (i.e. lower levels of family well-being and stability, poorer
performance of parenting roles) and reduced satisfaction with the family
domain (lower levels of family life and parental satisfaction). In other
words, high work-life conflict negatively affects employees' abilities
to enjoy and nurture their families.
Role overload and work to family interference have the most negative
impact on the family: In both forms of work-life conflict, employees
with high levels of conflict are less satisfied with their family life
and their ability to parent, less likely to feel that their families are
well (i.e. report lower family adaptation) and less likely to feel that
their families are stable and work well together.
Family to work interference is negatively associated with family life
satisfaction, parental satisfaction and family well-being: Surprisingly,
employees who put family ahead of work are also less likely than those
with low levels of family to work interference to be satisfied with their
family lives and their abilities as a parent. They are also less likely
to be happy with their family's well-being. In fact, this group reports
the lowest levels of family life satisfaction, parental satisfaction and
family well-being in the study. The fact that family to work interference
is not associated with family integration suggests that either people
who put family ahead of work are doing so to keep their family units intact
or the strategy of putting family first maintains family integrity. The
costs of this strategy are clear, however-lower levels of satisfaction
with the family domain.
Caregiver strain is negatively associated with positive parenting behaviours: Employees
with high caregiver strain are less likely to engage in positive parenting
behaviour. This suggests that the time and energy devoted to elder care
activities are interfering with the time available for one's children.
Why should employees care about work-life conflict?
Many Canadians working for Canada's largest employers are in poor mental
health: Over half of the employed Canadians who responded to our survey
report high levels of perceived stress; one in three reports high levels
of burnout and depressed mood. Only 41% are satisfied with their lives
and one in five is dissatisfied. Almost one in five perceives that their
physical health is fair or poor. These data are disturbing as they can
be considered to be a "best case scenario" and reflect the mental
health status of employed Canadians, many (if not virtually all) of whom
can be considered to have a "good" job, in one of the "best
countries to live in the world!" This begs the following question:
If a substantial number of employed Canadians can be considered to be
in poor mental health, what is the prevalence of mental health problems
in those groups that are considered to be at risk with respect to stress,
depression and poor physical health (e.g. contingent workers, the unemployed,
those on social assistance)?
The physical and mental health of Canadian employees has deteriorated
over time: Overall, the 1990s appears to have been a tough decade
for Canadians working for medium and large organizations. Comparison of
the 1991 and 2001 samples indicates that the prevalence of high levels
of perceived stress and depression in the Canadian labour force has increased
in the past decade. In 1991, 44% of the respondents to our survey reported
high levels of perceived stress; this had increased to 55% with high levels
of perceived stress in 2001. In 1991, 24% of the respondents to our survey
reported high levels of depressed mood compared to 36% in the 2001 sample.
This decline in mental health over the past decade is not surprising given
the increase in work demands noted in Report One. Taken as a whole, these
data suggest that the increase in work demands over the past decade, as
well as the proliferation of work-life conflict, are having a negative
impact on the mental health of employees.
Women report higher levels of perceived stress, burnout and depressed
mood than men: The data are unequivocal-women are more likely than
men to report high levels of perceived stress, burnout and depressed mood.
The fact that these gender differences were observed when job type, dependent
care status and sector of employment are taken into account suggests that
such differences have more to do with gender differences in socialization
than in either work or non-work demands. These findings may, for example,
be due to women being more likely to self-examine their emotional feelings
and acknowledge problems with respect to their mental health. Alternatively,
it may be that women are less able to cope effectively with multiple stressors
within their environment. Finally, these gender differences in mental
health may exist because women who work for pay outside of the home have
added stressors associated with paid employment to their lives with little
concomitant decrease in the stressors associated with their family roles.
Managers and professionals are in better mental and physical health
than employees working in clerical, administrative, technical and production
positions within the organization: Managers and professionals can
be considered to be in better overall mental health (i.e. less likely
to be depressed, more likely to be satisfied with their lives) and physical
health (i.e. more likely to describe their health as very good to excellent)
than employees who occupy blue and pink collar jobs (i.e. clerical, administrative,
production positions). This finding is particularly striking given the
fact that the managers and professionals in our sample are more likely
than the blue and pink collar employees to work long hours, take work
home with them and report high role overload, high work to family interference,
negative work to family spillover and high job stress-conditions which
are generally a recipe for poorer mental health. Taken in concert, these
findings suggest that managerial and professional employees are more able
than their non-professional counterparts to cope with these higher work
demands. These findings are consistent with the literature presented in
Report One which suggests that employees in professional positions have
a greater perception of control than non-professionals and that it is
these higher levels of control that help them cope with heavier work demands.
Unfortunately, we still do not know what contributes to this increased
sense of control. Possible explanations include better working conditions,
more interesting work, higher levels of flexibility, higher job security,
increased job mobility (linked to their higher levels of education) and
higher socio-economic status (i.e. more formal education, higher incomes).
These data also suggest that the physical and mental health issues we
observed in the other group may be more a function of their work environment,
the types of jobs they do and their working conditions than the time spent
in work itself.
Female managers and professionals are more likely than females in "other" positions
to report high levels of burnout: The data suggest that managerial
and professional positions and motherhood are not compatible in that they
both impose heavy demands. Women who work in managerial and professional
positions are more likely to experience symptoms of burnout than any other
group of employees. These higher levels of burnout can be attributed to
the fact that this group of women appears to be in a "no win" situation
with respect to work and family-they have heavier work demands than other
women and heavier family demands than men. In other words, female managers
and professionals are more likely than workers in any other group to try
to "burn the candle at both ends"-succeed at a high-level job
while not sacrificing standards at home. Such a strategy appears to be
unsustainable over time.
Employees who have no dependent care responsibilities are in better
physical and mental health than employed Canadians who spend time each
week in child and/or elder care: The data are also unequivocal with
respect to the impact of parenthood and/or elder care on employee physical
and mental health. The greater the number of non-work demands assumed
by an employee, the more likely they are to report that they are stressed,
burnt out and that their health is fair or poor. In other words, the job
of parent/elder caregiver can be considered to be a high-demand, low-control
position-one which we know challenges an individual's ability to cope.
Individuals or couples without children or elder care responsibilities
can act relatively independently as they do not have the constraints or
the demands of caring for children or elderly dependents. The addition
of the parent/elder caregiver role complicates an employee's life situation
as it places greater demands on them at the same time as it adds constraints.
These data suggest that efforts to more proactively manage a more diverse
workforce and implement policies and programs to help working mothers
and fathers and those with elder care issues have had no appreciable impact
on this group of employees.
Motherhood presents more mental health challenges than fatherhood: Parenthood
appears to have a different impact on the life satisfaction of mothers than
fathers. Fatherhood is not associated with life satisfaction for men. Mothers,
however, are less satisfied with their lives than women without children.
Similar findings were observed with respect to depressed mood. Mothers are
more likely to report high depressed mood than women without children/elder
care. Having either child care or elder care responsibilities is not, however,
associated with depressed mood for men. These findings support the research
literature in the area which suggests that the role of working mother is
qualitatively different from the role of working father and that the "quality" of
motherhood as a role is not as high as fatherhood (i.e. dads do the "fun" family
tasks while mothers do the "hard stuff"). Further research is
needed to determine if these differences are due to social, workplace or
family factors (or some combination) so that targeted policies are developed
and supports implemented. More equitable sharing of childrearing within
the family may lead to better mental health outcomes for working mothers.
Men who work in the public sector report poorer mental health: Men
in the public sector sample appear to be exposed to a fairly unique set
of stressors. They are more likely than any other group of men to report
high perceived stress and depressed mood and less likely to report that
they are satisfied with their lives. Further research is needed to determine
what conditions within the public sector work environment are impairing
the mental health of these men.
High work-life conflict is associated with declines in employee
physical and mental health: The data reviewed in this study leave
little doubt that high work-life conflict is associated with a number
of indicators of physical and mental health problems at the employee level.
Employees who are stressed, depressed and burnt out are not as productive
as those in good mental health. Perceived stress, depression and burnout
are also linked to increased absenteeism, greater use of prescription
medicines and employee assistance programs, and lower levels of creativity,
innovation and risk taking, which, in turn, can all be expected to negatively
affect an organization's bottom line.
The four components of work-life conflict have differential impacts
on the physical and mental health of employees: These differences
are worthy of note in that they provide quite different motivations for
addressing this issue as well as different prescriptions with respect
to change.
- Employees with low levels of role overload are in better mental
health: Respondents with low role overload appear to be in the best
mental and physical health of any of the respondents in the survey.
Only 20% of those with low role overload report high stress, only 4%
are burnt out and only 14% report high levels of depressed mood. Furthermore,
60% of the respondents with low role overload indicate that they are
very satisfied with their lives. These data suggest that the mental
health of employed Canadians would be significantly improved if organizations
ensured that work demands were more manageable (i.e. hired more staff,
reduced travel demands, put limits on the use of technology to support
after-hours work).
- Employees with high levels of role overload are more likely to report
high levels of burnout: Role overload is positively associated with
perceived stress, burnout and depressed mood, and negatively associated
with life satisfaction and perceived physical health. Examination of
the data indicates that employees with high role overload are 12 times
more likely than those with low role overload to report high levels
of burnout. These findings indicate that the long hours that employers
expect from their workforce are not sustainable over time.
- Work to family interference is associated with higher levels of
perceived stress, depressed mood and burnout: The respondents with
high work to family interference can be considered to be "at risk" with
respect to burnout and perceived stress (62% of the respondents with
high work to family interference report high levels of burnout and 77%
report high levels of perceived stress). Employees with high work to
family interference are 5.6 times more likely than those with low levels
of work to family interference to report high levels of burnout, 2.4
times more likely to report high levels of depressed mood and 2.2 times
as likely to report high levels of perceived stress. These findings
suggest that the strategy of "trying to do it all" and "meeting
heavy demands at work at the expense of one's personal life" impairs
one's mental health.
- Family to work interference is less problematic for employees than
other forms of work-life conflict: The alternative strategy-putting
family ahead of work-does not appear to be as harmful to one's mental
health as putting work ahead of family. It is, however, still cause
for concern.
- Employees with high caregiver strain are most likely to be depressed: Respondents
with high levels of caregiver strain appear to be at the highest risk
with respect to perceived stress (80% with high caregiver strain report
high stress), depressed mood (60% with high caregiver strain report high
depressed mood) and impaired physical health (28% with high caregiver
strain report that their health is fair or poor). They are also the least
likely to be satisfied with their lives.
Recommendations
There is no "one size fits all" solution to the issue of work-life
conflict. The data from this study show quite clearly that different policies,
practices and strategies will be needed to reduce each of the five components
of work-life conflict: role overload, work to family interference,
family to work interference, caregiver strain and negative work to family
spillover. That being said, the data indicate that there are a number of
strategies and approaches that the various stakeholders in this issue (i.e.
employers, employees, families, unions and governments) can use to reduce
work-life conflict. Thirty-nine such recommendations are provided in
the main body of the report. The recommendations fall into two broad groupings:
reduce demands (at either work or home) or increase the amount of control
the employee has over the work-life interface. Either of these strategies
should yield positive results. These recommendations are summarized below.
What can employers do?
Employers who wish to address work-life balance need to:
-
identify ways of reducing employee workloads. Special attention needs
to be given to reducing the workloads of managers and professionals
in all sectors.
-
recognize that unrealistic work demands are not sustainable over time
and come at a cost to the organization which is often not recognized
or tracked. Accordingly, we recommend that the employer start recording
the costs of understaffing and overwork.
-
identify ways to reduce the amount of time employees spend in job-related
travel.
-
hire more people in those areas where the organization is overly reliant
on unpaid overtime.
-
collect data which reflect the total costs of delivering high quality
work on time (i.e. paid and unpaid overtime, subsequent turnover, employee
assistance program use, absenteeism).
-
change their accountability frameworks and reward structures.
-
tangibly reward and recognize overtime work.
-
develop an etiquette around the use of office technologies (e.g. laptops,
email, cell phones)
-
make alternative work arrangements more widely available within their
organization.
-
reduce their reliance on both paid and unpaid overtime.
-
give employees the opportunity to say "no" when asked to
work overtime. Saying "no" should not be a career-limiting
move.
-
implement time off in lieu of overtime pay arrangements.
-
provide a limited number of days of paid leave per year for child care,
elder care or personal problems.
-
provide appropriate support for their employees who work rotating shifts.
-
measure the use of the different supportive policies and reward those
sections of the organization that demonstrate best practices in these
areas. Investigate those areas where use is low.
-
implement cafeteria benefits packages which allow employees to select
those benefits which are most appropriate for their personal situation
on a yearly basis.
-
offer child care and elder care referral services.
What can employees do?
Employees should:
-
say "no" to overtime hours if work expectations are unreasonable.
-
try to limit the amount of work they take home to complete in the evenings.
If they do take work home, they should make every effort to separate
time spent in work from family time (i.e. do work after the children
go to bed, have a home office).
-
try to reduce the amount of time they spend in job-related travel.
-
take advantage of the flexible work arrangements available in their
organization.
What can governments do?
To reduce work-life conflict within their constituencies, governments
(federal, provincial and municipal) need to:
- implement legislation:
- which stipulates that an employer's management rights do not include
an implied right to require an employee to work overtime except in the
case of an emergency,
- that gives employees the right to time off in lieu of overtime pay,
- that entitles employees to up to five days of paid personal leave per
year, and
- includes specific language around long-term unpaid leave for the care
of an elderly dependent.
-
take the lead with respect to the issue of child care by determining
how to best help employed Canadians deal with child care issues (i.e.
develop appropriate policies for parents of children of various ages,
identify and implement relevant supports).
-
take the lead with respect to the issue of elder care by determining
how to best help employed Canadians deal with elder care issues (i.e.
develop appropriate policies, identify and implement relevant supports).
-
"lead by example" with respect to the availability and accessibility
of flexible work arrangements and supportive policies.
-
investigate ways to increase Canadians' awareness of how social roles
and responsibilities have changed over the past several decades, what
changes still need to happen, and why (e.g. social marketing campaign,
education programs in schools, advertisements).
-
examine how they can reduce the "financial penalties" associated
with parenthood (i.e. determine how to concretely recognize that this
group of employees has higher costs).
What can unions do?
Unions need to:
-
become advocates of employee work-life balance by undertaking
public campaigns to raise awareness of work-life issues and suggest
ways in which the situation can be improved. This advocacy should be
done outside the collective bargaining process.
-
Include work-life provisions (e.g. flexible work arrangements,
family-friendly benefits) in negotiations during the collective bargaining
process with the objective of gaining new accommodations in collective
agreements.
- Set up educational campaigns to:
- increase individual workers' knowledge of work-life balance issue,
and
- give employees the tools they need to effectively deal with situations
as they arise.
4 Throughout this report, the term "work" refers
to paid employment.
5 A negative association means that, as the levels of work-life
conflict increase, the levels of the outcome decrease (i.e. as overload
increases, commitment decreases). A positive association, however, means
that as the levels of work-life conflict increase, so do the levels
of the organizational outcomes (i.e. as overload increases, so does job
stress).
6 The spillover measure is not used in this report to calculate
the costs of imbalance. The way this variable was quantified (i.e. negative
spillover, no spillover, positive spillover) makes it inappropriate for
these kinds of data analysis.
Work-Life Conflict in Canada
in the New Millennium
A Status Report Final Report
October 2003 ![New window](/web/20061211084402im_/http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/gfx_common/newwindow.gif)
(1,690 KB) in PDF Format ![PDF](/web/20061211084402im_/http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/gfx_common/pdficon.gif)
(How to download PDF documents)
|