Access to family-friendly work practices

Differences within and between Australian workplaces

MATHEW GRAY AND JACQUELINE TUDBALL

Little is known about
the differences in employee
access to family-friendly ne of the major economic and social changes of recent decades has
work arrangements,
particularly among those
working for the same
employer.Using data from
O been the increasing numbers of mothers in paid employment. Such
changes have increased the range of choices regarding work and
family life that are available to women. This has emphasised the impor-
tance of work arrangements – often referred to as “family-friendly”
work practices – that facilitate the reconciliation of work and family life. Such
the Australian Workplace arrangements include: leave from work for family reasons; changes to work
arrangements for family reasons; practical help with child care and care of the
Industrial Relations Survey,
elderly; and relevant information and training (Evans 2001).
this article explores the Over the last 20 years both the number of employers offering a range of fam-
factors which influence ily-friendly work practices, and the number of employees availing themselves of
employees’access to,and such opportunities, has increased (Work and Family Unit 1999). While much is
known about broad trends in the availability and use of family-supportive
use of,family-supportive arrangements, much less is known about differences within organisations in
work arrangements. employee access to, and use of, these arrangements.
Existing research on differences within organisations has been based largely
on small-scale case studies of large organisations, often selected for their reputa-
tion for providing innovative solutions for employees seeking to balance their
family and working lives. This research has identified differences in internal
access to family-friendly work arrangements, which is often related to the posi-
tion employees hold in the firm (Biggs and Han 2000; Breakspear 1998;
Whitehouse and Zetlin 1999).
Thus it seems that working for an organisation offering family-friendly work
practices does not necessarily mean that all employees will be allowed to, or feel able
to, take advantage of such opportunities. Employers may make a work practice
available to some but not all employees, or employees may not make use of available
work practices because they believe that to do so might jeopardise their job security,
work assignments, or chances of promotion (Whitehouse and Zetlin 1999).
The extent to which differences exist in access opportunities among employ-
ees in the same workplace has important implications for the nature of changes
needed to increase access to family-friendly work arrangements.
This article summarises the results of recent research that looks at access to
family-friendly work practices among employees working within the same work-
place – the first large-scale analysis of this issue in Australia. The study combines
information from employers and employees, thus allowing a powerful analysis of
the incentives and constraints employers face when deciding which work prac-
tices to make available to which employees. The analysis is based upon the
Australian Workplace Industrial Relations Survey 1995 (AWIRS), a linked
employee–employer data set.

Family-friendly work practices analysed

The analysis reported here focuses particularly upon four family-friendly work
arrangements. While other factors obviously come into play, these four arrange-
ments have been found to be particularly important.
The first work practice is control over start and finish times. Some control
over the scheduling of work to meet unexpected and/or routine needs of family life
is considered one of the best ways to assist a worker with family responsibilities.
The second is access to a telephone for family reasons. Telephone access can
be very important in balancing family and work responsibilities. Such access
enables employees to make care arrangements, check up on family members,
and be contactable in the event of any problems.

30 Family Matters No.61 Autumn 2002 Australian Institute of Family Studies

 The third is availability of permanent part-time a “sorting” of employees into jobs according to the
employment. Permanent part-time employment value placed on the work practices being offered.
has been advocated as a family-friendly work prac- The cost to employers of making family-friendly
tice because it allows employees with care or other work practices available to employees is likely to
family responsibilities to reduce their working vary between jobs, with employers being less likely
hours while retaining the benefits of permanent to make them available to employees working in
employment. Benefits include pro-rata entitle- jobs in which it is more expensive to offer it.
ments to sick leave, holiday pay, maternity leave, So far, this discussion has assumed that the provi-
and long-service leave. sion of family-friendly work practices is an additional
The fourth is availability of various ways in cost to employers. However, such arrangements can
which time is taken off work for the care of a sick have the potential benefits to employers of improved
family member. The ability to take time off to care recruitment and retention of workers, and greater
for a sick or dependent family member can be vital productivity resulting from better morale and reduc-
when children are ill or when elderly relatives tions in tardiness and absenteeism. In addition,
require assistance. While the vast majority of Aus- employers may see offering family-friendly work
tralian employees are able to take time off, the ways practices as a recruitment tool, both for the actual
in which such time is taken can vary markedly. For opportunities they provide and as a signal of broader
example, many employees are required to take such attitudes within the organisation.
time as leave without pay, holiday pay or sick pay, In summary, the profit maximising (or cost min-
which impacts on earnings and the ability of employ- imising) behaviour of employers means that they
ees to take leave for themselves when required. are likely to differentiate between employees in the
Economic theory hypothesises that whether an extent to which family-friendly work practices are
employee has access to, or is able to make use of, made available, and the ease with which employees
family-friendly work practices is likely to be deter- can access them. Employers are most likely to offer
mined by a number of factors. One is the value an such arrangements to employees in whom they
employee places upon having access to the work have invested training, who are difficult and costly
practices. Employees who place a very high value to replace, or who are able to bargain effectively.
on being able to use family-friendly work practice Differences in life circumstances mean that
may seek employment with employers who offer employees may desire different work arrangements
such arrangements. Others may negotiate with and hence may seek employment in workplaces
employers about, for example, a lower rate of pay in which offer the work practices that best meet their
return for access to family-friendly work arrange- needs, or may negotiate with employers to trade-off
ments. The value to an employee of having access wages in return for greater access.
to family-friendly work practices will be closely
related to the need they have for such arrange- Institutional context
ments, which in turn will be determined by, among The industrial relations system has been particu-
other things, their family responsibilities. larly important in workers’ access to work–family
Employers’ decisions about whether or not vol- provisions in Australia. The current Australian sys-
untarily to introduce a family-friendly work tem of industrial relations is a hybrid of conciliation
practice in the first place and, if so, whether or not and arbitration, collective bargaining and employer
to make it available to all or some employees, will power.
usually be based on an assessment of the costs and Since the 1980s, the influence of conciliation
benefits of doing so, and whether it is judged to be and arbitration has diminished. There remains,
in the best interests of the employer. however, a significant residual system of concilia-
In general, employers will be indifferent to the tion and arbitration. Bargaining, and more
mix of the level of monetary compensation and the specifically enterprise bargaining, have taken on
non-financial aspects of a job which produce the increasing importance. The character of bargaining
same cost to the employer and result in the same changed in the early 1990s with the expansion of
level of output. Employers are likely to bargain with enterprise bargaining and the diminished role of
employees in order to reach the optimal mix of trade unions in workplace agreements.
financial compensation and job conditions. If it has Despite these changes, the Australian labour
no impact upon their profits, employers may be market still has a substantial degree of regulation.
happy to accommodate employees who place a high The current system is probably best characterised
value on family-friendly work practices and are pre- as a system in which the pay and employment con-
pared to negotiate for lower wages in return for ditions of most Australian workers continue to
greater access to such arrangements. depend heavily on a combination of statutory regu-
However, in reality, the extent to which individual lation and collective bargaining.
employees are able enter into such negotiations with
employers may be limited. Typically a job has a spe-
cific set of terms and conditions with only limited
Australian Workplace Industrial
provision for variation. Often these conditions have Relations Survey
been set by a process of collective negotiation Data used in this analysis are from the Australian
between employees and employers. As already noted, Workplace Industrial Relations Survey (AWIRS)
employees who place a high value upon a particular 1995, a large-scale survey of workplaces and
set of work practices may look for employers and jobs employees conducted in 1995 by the then Australian
where these are offered. Hence we may expect to see Commonwealth Department of Industrial Relations.

Australian Institute of Family Studies Family Matters No.61 Autumn 2002 31

 The survey collected data from managers and a examination of the extent to which firms differenti-
sample of employees from 2001 workplaces with 20 ate between employees in the access they provide
or more employees, and it covered all industry sec- to a range of practices.
tors except agriculture, forestry and fishing, and The extent to which firms differentiate between
defence. employees in terms of access to family-friendly
A total of 19,155 employees were interviewed, work practices can be quantified using statistical
and the sample is generally representative of the techniques. This involves separating differences in
population of workplaces (Morehead et al. 1997). access to, and use of, these work arrangements
Respondents were randomly selected from lists of between employees into the component due to vari-
employees at each of the workplaces where man- ation between workplaces (termed between
agement gave permission for this to occur. workplace variation) and the component due to
Permission was granted at 1896 workplaces, or 95 differences between employees working in the same
per cent of the sample. A total of 30,005 question- workplace (termed within workplace variation).
naires were distributed. At one extreme, if all employees in the same
The survey gathered information on both workplace have equal access to family-friendly
employee level and workplace level variables. At the work practices, the within workplace variation will
level of the employee, data are available on a range be zero and all differences between employees will
of job characteristics (for example, hours worked, be due to differences between workplaces. At the
occupation), human capital characteristics (for other extreme, if there is no correlation among
example, educational attainment, level of employer employees working in the same workplace, the
provided training), and demographic characteristics degree of variation in the within workplace and
(for example, number and age of dependent chil- between workplace measures will be the same. The
dren, difficulty speaking English, health conditions). main results and conclusions are summarised in
The survey also contains information on a wide this article. Detailed results can be found in Gray
range of work practices that may assist employees to and Tudball (2002).
balance family and work demands. Overall, just over half (52 per cent) of the
A key feature of the survey with respect to the employees reported having control over start and
current study is that each respondent can be linked finish times. A slightly smaller proportion of
to workplace-level data collected in the main sur- employees reported that they could get permanent
vey, allowing comparison of individuals at the same part-time work in their current workplace if they
workplace. needed it (43 per cent). Three-quarters of employ-
ees reported that they had access to a telephone for
family reasons.
Differences within and between workplaces Turning to the ways in which employees usually
The research reported here takes the approach of take time off to care for a sick family member, holi-
comparing reports by different employees working day leave and sick leave are the most commonly
for the same employer about their access to family- used form of leave, with 44 and 43 per cent of
friendly work practices. This approach allows an employees respectively reporting usually doing this.

Variables included in estimates of determinants of access and use

ariables taken into account in the regression analysis include employee characteristics, job character-
V istics and workplace characteristics.
Employee characteristics that are controlled for include demographic and human capital characteristics
such as age, educational attainment, and migrant status. The impact of children is captured by the age of
the youngest child. Many employees have care responsibility for non-child family members, so a control for
having a non-child dependent was also included.
Mothers continue to undertake the majority of housework, child care and care of older family members, and
so the effects of children and other caring responsibilities are allowed to differ between men and women.
Employee characteristics include occupation, hours of work, length of time with current employer (tenure),
and having received firm-provided training.
A range of workplace and organisation level characteristics are included in the model. The most important
of these are workplace size which may be related to the ability of an employer to offer flexibility, variables
which control for work culture (proportion of managers who are female and the proportion of employees
who are female).
Other factors included in the model are workplace sector (government, private or non-commercial), having
an equal employment opportunity policy and the presence of an active trade union.

32 Family Matters No.61 Autumn 2002 Australian Institute of Family Studies

The next most common means of taking time off is Hours flexibility
leave without pay (33 per cent), paid family leave
(18 per cent), and taking time off and making it Of particular importance is the finding
up later (16 per cent). A very small proportion that within workplaces that offer some
reported not being able to take any time off at all. employees control over start and finish
For each of the four work practices, there is a times, employees with children, or an
great deal of variation in access to family-friendly adult dependent requiring care, are no
work practices among employees in the same work- more likely than employees without
place, as well as between employees working in dependents to have control over their start
different workplaces. Nonetheless, the variation in and finish times. Further, there is no evi-
access to a range of work practices is greater among dence that people with dependent
employees working in the same workplace than the children, who would benefit from flexibil-
variation between workplaces. ity of start and finish times, are “sorting”
Indeed, there are relatively few workplaces in into workplaces that offer this work
which a high proportion of employees reported hav- arrangement. No differences in the likeli-
ing access to each work practice. For example, in hood of having control over start and finish
only 35 per cent of workplaces did more than 70 per times are found between men and women
cent of employees report having control over start once employee and workplace characteris-
and finish times, and in only 6 per cent of work- tics (observable and unobservable) are
places did more than 90 per cent of employees taken into account.
report having flexibility of hours. Occupation is an important determi-
nant of the chances of having control over
start and finish times. For example, pro-
Modelling the determinants of fessionals are the most likely to have
access and use flexibility over hours worked, followed by
The finding that employees have differential access managers and administrators, and then
within organisations to family-friendly work prac- salespeople and personal service workers.
tices raises the question as to the characteristics The occupations least likely to report
which affect the likelihood of an employee having having control over start and finish times
access to, or using, these arrangements. To identify are plant and machinery operators and
these characteristics, a random effects probit drivers.
regression model was used – a technique that allows Having received organisation-provided training
the estimation of the relative importance of a range is estimated to increase the chances of having con-
of variables in determining access to each of the trol over start and finish times, as are increases in
work practices (see Gray and Tudball 2002 for a tenure with the current employer.
detailed description). Being a member of a trade union decreases the
The fact that there are data on multiple employ- probability of having control over start and finish
ees from each workplace allows the effects of times. This is probably a reflection of the fact that
unmeasured differences between workplaces to be unions tend to formalise work arrangements and
taken into account. This improves the accuracy reduce supervisor discretion. Given that many
with which the determinants of access to and use of firms have a formal policy of fixed start and finish
each work practice can be estimated. times, but supervisors exercise their discretion not
The modelling of the determinants of access and to enforce this rule strictly, reducing supervisor dis-
use is restricted to three of the work practices cretion may reduce the chances of an employee
referred to earlier: control over start and finish having flexibility over the actual hours worked.
times; access to a telephone for family reasons; and Similarly, the presence of an active trade union in
availability of permanent part-time employment. the workplace is estimated to have a negative effect
While it is possible to describe the overall distribu- on the flexibility of hours worked.
tion of the different types of leave used, it is not Part-time workers are estimated to be slightly
possible to model the determinants of the type of less likely than full-time workers to have control
leave taken to care for family members. This is over start and finish times. This finding suggests
because of the lack of information on the frequency that part-timers trade off flexibility in working
of use for each type of leave makes meaningful times for a lower number of hours of work. It has
interpretation of the estimation results impossible. sometimes been argued that increases in the num-
The analysis is restricted to workplaces where at ber of female managers will lead changes in work
least some employees are using the work practice. cultures and practices which will lead to work
(See accompanying box for further details of the places becoming more family-friendly. There is no
specification of the model.) evidence of this occurring with workplaces in which
A wide range of employee and workplace level a higher proportion of managers are female not
factors are found to be determinants of the proba- increasing the chances of an employee having con-
bility of an employee having access to each of the trol over start and finish times.
work practices. While there are some differences in
the determinants, clear patterns emerge. The fol- Access to a telephone for family reasons
lowing discussion highlights the most important Regarding control over start and finish times, there
findings. (For a detailed discussion of the results see is little evidence of a relationship between having
Gray and Tudball 2002.) caring responsibilities, as measured by the presence

Australian Institute of Family Studies Family Matters No.61 Autumn 2002 33

 of dependent children or a dependent practice and equally very few work places in which
adult, and having access to a telephone all, or even most, employees have access to the
for family reasons. The only effect is that work practice.
women whose youngest dependent child While variations exist between each of the work
is 13 years or older are estimated to be 5 practices examined, a number of clear patterns
percentage points more likely than emerge. There appears to be no relationship
women with no dependent children to between having dependent children and the likeli-
have access to a phone. hood of having access to each work practice, the
Employees with higher levels of educa- only exception being that mothers with teenage
tional attainment are more likely than children are more likely to report having access to
otherwise similar employees with a lower a telephone for family reasons. No differences are
level of education to report having access evident between males and females in the probabil-
to a telephone. The effects of occupation ity of having control over start and finish times, or
are surprisingly small, with only profes- access to a telephone for family reasons. However,
sionals, managers and administrators women are found to be more likely than men to be
being more likely than employees in able to get permanent part-time work in their cur-
other occupations to have access to a rent workplace.
telephone. Employees who speak a lan- Employees who have recently received
guage other than English at home are less employer-provided training are much more likely
likely than those who speak English at than colleagues who have not received training to
home to have phone access. have access to each work practice, and increases in
Having received organisation-provided tenure are also estimated to increase that probabil-
training is estimated to increase the prob- ity. These findings support the argument that
ability of telephone access. Part-time employers are most likely to make family-friendly
employees are 3 percentage points less work practices available to employees in whom
likely than those working full-time to they have invested the most, either through formal
have telephone access. Being a casual or informal on-the-job training.
employee is found to have no effect on There is a very strong occupation effect, with
the likelihood of having access to a tele- professionals and managers and administrators
phone for family reasons. being much more likely than those in other occu-
pations to have control over start and finish times
Permanent part-time employment and access to a telephone for family reasons.
As noted earlier, the estimates of the probability of However, full-time employed professionals, para-
being able to get permanent part-time work if professionals, clerks and tradespeople are less likely
needed are restricted to full-time employees. As for to report being able to get permanent part-time
control over start and finish times and access to a work if needed.
telephone for family reasons, there are no statisti- Taken together, these findings suggest that even
cally significant relationships between having although the work practices analysed are of assis-
dependent children and the probability of being tance to employees in successfully managing their
able to get permanent part-time work. family and work responsibilities, employees with
The determinants of access to permanent part- the greatest care commitments (at least in terms of
time work differ somewhat from those of hours time) have no increased probability of being able to
flexibility and telephone access. Women are 9 per- use these work practices. This finding applies to
centage points more likely than men to report being both men and women.
able to get permanent part-time work in their cur- The analysis does not provide direct evidence
rent workplace if needed. It is noteworthy that on why employees with dependent children, partic-
Indigenous employees are 15 percentage points ularly very young children, or other caring
more likely than non-Indigenous employees with responsibilities, are no more likely than other
otherwise similar characteristics to report being employees to report having access to family-
able to get permanent part-time employment. friendly work practices. However, one possible
Having received organisation-provided training explanation is discussed below.
in the previous 12 months increases by 11 percent- Employers may primarily offer family-friendly
age points the probability of permanent part-time work practices on the basis of employee attributes
work being available. Increases in tenure are esti- which make them of value to the employer, and
mated to increase the probability of being able to having dependent children or other caring respon-
get permanent part-time employment at a decreas- sibilities does not increase that value.
ing rate. In other words, each additional year of Employers may also be providing flexible work
tenure has a smaller impact upon the likelihood of conditions to employees in the senior jobs as a way
being able to get permanent part-time employment of increasing the value of these jobs as an incentive
if needed. for junior employees to exert greater effort in an
attempt to attain promotion. If this is the case it
Overall patterns and implications implies that employers are seeing the flexible work
For the four work practices examined there is a conditions in terms of the broader concept of
great deal of variation within workplaces. This work–life balance rather than work–family balance.
means that there are very few workplaces in which The question remains as to why, if employees
none of the employees have access to the work with caring responsibilities value access to family-

34 Family Matters No.61 Autumn 2002 Australian Institute of Family Studies

friendly work practices, they don’t trade-off their employers to the potential workplace benefits of
level of pay for better work conditions. Or why they offering family-friendly work practices.
don’t take up jobs with employers who offer a mix of Any attempts to increase access to such work
financial compensation and work practices which practices via legislative or other means must take
better suit their needs. account of the risk that if the costs to employers are
It could be the case that employees with caring perceived to increase, then employers may choose
responsibilities do not value flexible work condi- not to employ those likely to make heavy use of
tions more highly than additional income than do these work practices. Alternatively, employees with
employees with no caring responsibilities. This is family responsibilities may bear the costs indirectly
plausible given that employees with dependent chil- through lower wages and conditions.
dren need both flexibility and income, whereas
those with no dependent children may have a lesser
need for money. These are important questions that There are relatively few workplaces in which a high proportion of
require further investigation. employees reported having access to each family-friendly work practice.

Concluding comments
It is worth highlighting that the research in this
This paper examines the extent to which access to article is based on the latest data available, col-
family-friendly work practices is influenced or lected in 1995. The effect of the changes in the
determined by differential access within or between industrial relations system since that time – away
organisations. The study is based on the 1995 from a centralised system towards one with
Australian Workplace Industrial Relations Survey increased bargaining and agreement making at the
data set – a large-scale representative linked workplace and individual levels – is unclear. On
employee–employer data set. the one hand, it is argued that the emphasis on
The analysis reveals that the variation in access individual level bargaining promotes the introduc-
to a range of work practices is greater among tion of work conditions that are better tailored
employees working in the same workplace than the towards the needs of individual employees. On the
variation between workplaces. This is the first time other hand, the employees who are most likely to
this issue has been explored empirically. There are be able to negotiate successfully with employers
relatively few workplaces in which a high propor- over work conditions are those with skills in short
tion of employees reported having access to each supply and hence the greatest bargaining power.
family-friendly work practice. Statistical modelling There is an urgent need for a new AWIRS-style sur-
suggests that a number of employee characteristics vey to examine the effects of these changes.
are found to be related to the probability of access-
ing family-friendly arrangements. References
Overall, employers are most likely to offer such Biggs, S. & Han, J., with assistance from Warrilow, P.
arrangements to employees with high skills levels or (2000), Learning to Think Flexibility? The Reality
Versus the Rhetoric of Flexible Work Practices, Families
in whom they have invested training or other at Work, Sydney.
resources. This has significant ramifications for those Breakspear, C. (1998), From Juggling to Managing? The
who are the most vulnerable in the labour market. Evolution of Work and Family Policies in Three
The analysis reveals that the employees most likely Organisations, UNSW Studies in Organisational
Analysis and Innovation, Number 14, Industrial
to need family-friendly work practices – mothers, Relations Research Centre, University of New South
fathers and other carers – have no greater access to Wales, Sydney.
family-friendly work practices than other employees. Evans, J. (2001), “Firms’ contribution to the reconciliation
These findings have important implications for between work and family life”, Labour Market and
Social Policy Occasional Papers No. 48, OECD, Paris.
policy. First, evidence of differential access of Gray, M.C. & Tudball, J. (2002), Family-friendly Work
employees within organisations to family-friendly Practices: Differences Within and Between Workplaces,
work practices means that policy makers need to Research Report No. 7, Australian Institute of Family
Studies, Melbourne.
focus on increasing the availability of such prac- Morehead, A., Steele, M., Alexander, M., Stephen, K. &
tices within organisations to all employees, Duffin, L. (1997), Changes at Work: The 1995
regardless of occupational or employment status or Australian Workplace Industrial Relations Survey,
training, who would benefit from access to these Longman, South Melbourne.
Whitehouse, G. & Zetlin, D. (1999), “Family-friendly” poli-
practices. Second, the finding that employees with cies: Distribution and implementation in Australian
the lowest levels of education, job tenure and organ- workplaces”, The Economic and Labour Relations
isation-provided training are least likely to have Review, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 221–239.
access to family-friendly work practices means that Work and Family Unit (1999), Work and Family State of
Play 1998, Work and Family Unit, Department of
policies need to pay particular attention to the situ- Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business
ation of these types of employees. (DEWRSB), Canberra.
The question remains as to what policy instru-
ments the government can use to increase the Matthew Gray is a Principal Research Fellow at the
coverage of access to family-friendly work prac- Australian Institute of Family Studies. Jacqueline Tudball
is a Research Officer at the Social Policy Research Centre,
tices, particularly to employees with dependent University of New South Wales.
children or other care responsibilities. Possibilities This article presents a revised and distilled version of
include regulation of the conditions of employment Family-friendly Work Practices: Differences Within and
Between Workplaces, by M.C. Gray and J. Tudball,
via industrial relations legislation and information Research Report No. 7, Australian Institute of Family
campaigns aimed at raising the awareness of Studies, Melbourne, 2002.

Australian Institute of Family Studies Family Matters No.61 Autumn 2002 35