Search results

The authors aim to compare how formal flexibility, such as telework, differs from informal overtime work at home regarding the work-family interface.

By using data from the Finnish Quality of Work Life Surveys from 2003 and 2008, the positive and negative measures concerning the work-family interface are examined through logistic regression analysis.

Employees doing informal overtime at home are more likely to be affected by negative emotions concerning work disrupting family lives. Additionally, negotiations between couples over the allocation of time become areas of conflict. Only weak evidence is provided for both telework and informal work at home supporting family life.

In studying homeworking, it is important to separate between formal and informal flexibility at work. The data exceptionally enable that. The limitations of the data are cross-sectionality and only a few measures for assessing the positive work-family interface.

The contribution of the study is to show how informal overtime at home is related with stronger negative implications for work-family interface, when separated from telework. The article discusses how well-intentioned working schedule flexibility results in family life being infringed upon. Informal work may help attain a better work-family interface, but, with dual-earner employment being predominant in Finland, informal overtime work can increase pressures on families. The authors encourage the policy- and organisation-level recognition of informal overtime risks.