Search for: All records

Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic led to an unprecedented employer-driven shift to remote/hybrid work for those whose jobs allow it, but then came retrenchments, forging disjunctures between where one works (remote/hybrid or in-person) and individual preferences, which we term work-place mismatch. We draw on a combined worker power, employer biases, and adaptive strategy theoretical framing to investigate work-place mismatch in light of remarkable pandemic-precipitated shifts in place of work, opening up possibilities (and preferences) for remote/hybrid arrangements. In addition to examining inequities in work-place mismatch, we theorize employees’ possible adaptive strategies when confronting such mismatch—shifting where they work, changing their locational preferences, or intending to leave or actually leaving their employer. Using a nationally representative four-wave panel (October 2020–April 2022) of US employees who worked fully or partially remotely during the pandemic, we find that work-place mismatch is widespread, especially among those returning to on-site work. Hispanics, Black men, and those lacking a college degree are most likely to experience unfulfilled interest (mismatch) in remote work. Structurally disadvantaged mismatched workers also experience constrained strategies—less apt to change their work location or quit relative to white or college-educated workers. 

Working remotely at least some of the time has long been seen as promoting a better integration of work and care obligations, even though prepandemic research is mixed as to the extent to which parents benefit emotionally from remote work. We exploit dual social experiments in schooling and work spawned by the COVID-19 pandemic to understand any stress-reducing effects of working from home under different school-closing state policy contexts. The pandemic led to an unprecedented shift to (and subsequent away from) remote and hybrid work but also to the implementation of various containment policies, most notably school closures driving a shift to remote learning that were put into effect to different degrees across U.S. states. Drawing on parents’ data from a U.S. nationally representative panel survey of workers who spent at least some time working from home since the pandemic onset, we use mixed-effects models to examine whether and in what ways cross-state and over-time variations in school closure policies shape any stress-reducing impacts of remote/hybrid work. Results show that when schools were not mandated to close, remote/hybrid work largely reduces parents’—especially mothers’—stress. However, an opposite pattern emerges in the face of closing mandates. These patterns are especially pronounced among white mothers and are not observed among nonparents. 

The future of work is ambiguous at best. Despite widespread shifts to remote/hybrid work during the COVID-19 lockdown, there is a paucity of knowledge about changing job conditions in tandem with different work locales. Is the move to remote/hybrid work a disrupter or accentuator of existing norms and inequalities? Drawing on nationally representative, four-wave panel survey data (October 2020 to April 2022) collected from U.S. workers who spent at least some time working from home since the pandemic onset, we examine effects of within-person changes in where respondents work on changes in job conditions (psychological job demands, job control, coworker support, and monitoring). Estimates from fixed-effects models show that, compared with returning to working at work, ongoing remote and moving to hybrid work lead to greater reductions in psychological job demands, especially among older women and men. Black and Hispanic women moving back to the office experience the greatest loss of decision latitude and schedule control. While white workers see increased coworker support when returning to the office, returning Black and Hispanic men report a decline in coworker support. Family caregivers’ job conditions do not improve whether remote/hybrid or returning to work. Qualitative data collected from Amazon Mechanic Turk illuminate mechanisms leading to salutary effects of remote work, but also the stress of combining jobs with family carework. 

The COVID-19 pandemic precipitated a massive turn to remote work, followed by subsequent shifts for many into hybrid or fully returning to the office. To understand the patterned dynamics of subjective well-being associated with shifting places of work, we conducted a nationally representative panel survey (October 2020 and April 2021) of U.S. employees who worked remotely at some point since the pandemic (N = 1,817). Cluster analysis identified four patterned constellations of well-being based on burnout, work–life conflict, and job and life satisfaction. A total return to office is generally more stressful, leading to significantly lower probabilities of being in the optimal low stress/high satisfaction constellation by Wave 2, especially for men and women without care obligations. Remote and hybrid arrangements have salutary effects; moving to hybrid is especially positive for minority men and less educated men, although it disadvantages White women’s well-being. 

The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed where paid work is done. Workers able to do so have been required to work remotely. We draw on survey data collected in October 2020 from a nationally representative sample of 3,017 remote workers, as well as qualitative survey data collected from 231 remote workers, to examine perceived changes in work hours from before to during the pandemic. Results indicate women are at greater risk of change (either a major decrease or a major increase)—rather than stability—in work hours. Gender also intersects with caregiving, race/ethnicity, prior remote work experiences, and socioeconomic status to shape changes in hours. Women and men in the sandwich generation, as well as women (but not men) with pre-school children, are the most likely to report a decrease in work hours, whereas women with older children at home or caring for adults (but not both) are the most likely to have an increase in hours. Remote working Black women and women moving into remote work are more likely to experience a major increase in hours worked, even as Hispanic women and Black men are the most likely to report somewhat of a reduction in work hours. Gender also intersects with SES, such that women without a college degree are more likely to have a decrease in work hours, while women with an advanced degree and women managers report a considerable increase in work hours. Qualitative data further illuminate why work hours change or remain stable for remote workers during COVID-19.