Introduction

In the previous chapter, I examined a wide range of theoretical underpinnings of the flexibility paradox – namely when workers have more control over when and where they work, they may end up working harder and longer, and with work encroaching on other spheres of life. This chapter will provide a summary of evidence of this flexibility paradox from across the world. This includes my own original research with colleagues exploring the association between flexible working and overtime using longitudinal data from the UK and Germany. I also present findings looking at the association between flexible working and work spill-over examined using data across 30 European countries. Others’ work showing evidence of the flexibility paradox from across Europe, the US, India, China and other countries using both qualitative and quantitative methods are also presented. The results show that flexible working leads to work encroaching on other spheres of life not only in terms of the time spent actually working, but also thinking about work. However, as the latter part of this chapter shows, there are different variations across the population. Here I show that the flexibility paradox may depend on the workers’ gender, parental and occupational status. What is more, the way in which flexible working is introduced may also matter. The final points open up for Chapter 7 where I elaborate further how the self-exploitation patterns of the flexibility paradox may look very different for men and women. It further opens up questions for Chapter 9 which explores the importance of contexts.

Evidence of flexible working and longer working hours

Association between flexible working and long hours of work

There was evidence of flexible working being associated with longer working hours, where those who work flexibly, compared to those who do not, work longer hours or longer overtime hours. Many cross-European and national studies look at the association between working hours and access to/use of flexitime, and other types of arrangements that gave workers more control over when they work. Results show a U-shaped curve, where short working hours (for example less than 35 hours) and long working hours (50/60+ hours) were both associated with better access to flexitime – with long hours showing stronger associations (Drago et al, 2005; Golden, 2009; Lyness et al, 2012; Chung, 2019b).