Opportunity or Exploitation? A Longitudinal Dyadic Analysis of Flexible Working Arrangements and Gender Household Labor Inequality
Opportunity or Exploitation? A Longitudinal Dyadic Analysis of Flexible Working Arrangements and Gender Household Labor Inequality
Key takeaways
Bibliography: Wang, S., Cheng, C., 2024. Opportunity or Exploitation? A Longitudinal Dyadic Analysis of Flexible Working Arrangements and Gender Household Labor Inequality. Social Forces 102, 1446–1466. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soad125
Authors:: Senhu Wang, Cheng Cheng
Collections:: Gender Scale
First-page: 1446
Abstract It has been extensively debated over whether the rise of flexible working arrangements (FWAs) may be an “opportunity” for a more egalitarian gender division of household labor or reinforce the “exploitation” of women in the traditional gender division. Drawing on a linked-lives perspective, this study contributes to the literature by using longitudinal couple-level dyadic data in the UK (2010–2020) to examine how couple-level arrangements of flexible working affect within-couple inequality in time and different types of household labor. The results show that among heterosexual couples, women’s use of FWAs significantly intensifies their disproportionate share of housework and maintains their heavy childcare burden regardless of whether their husbands use FWAs. In contrast, men’s use of FWAs does not change the unequal gendered division of housework and childcare, even when their wives do not use any FWAs. These patterns of intensified gender inequalities are more pronounced in routine housework tasks (e.g., cooking, washing, and cleaning), and among the reduced hours and teleworking arrangements. Overall, rather than providing an “opportunity” for a more egalitarian division of household labor, the use of FWAs maintains or even exacerbates the “exploitation” of women under the existing traditional gender norms.
content: "@wangOpportunityExploitationLongitudinal2024" -file:@wangOpportunityExploitationLongitudinal2024
Reading notes
Imported on 2025-04-27 17:42
⭐ Important
- & The results show that among heterosexual couples, women’s use of FWAs significantly intensifies their disproportionate share of housework and maintains their heavy childcare burden regardless of whether their husbands use FWAs. (p. 1446)
- & In contrast, men’s use of FWAs does not change the unequal gendered division of housework and childcare, (p. 1446)
- & limited changes have taken place in the private sphere, resulting in an uneven and stalled gender revolution (England 2010; Goldscheider, Bernhardt, and Lappegård 2015). (p. 1446)
- & women still carrying out a disproportionate share of housework and childcare. Gender inequality in unpaid household labor not only affects individual life chances, such as labor market outcomes (Cunningham 2008), but also has broader societal consequences, such as lowest-low fertility (McDonald 2000). (p. 1447)
- & First, there was clear within-couple gender inequality in housework hours, with women doing 4–8 hours more housework per week than their husbands. (p. 1454)
- & Second, for traditionally “female-typed” housework tasks (e.g., shopping, cooking, cleaning, and washing), among 43–71% of couples, it was mostly the wife who completed these tasks. Among less than 20% of couples, these tasks were done mainly by the husband. (p. 1454)
- & Third, for traditionally “male-typed” tasks (e.g., gardening and DIY), the husband was primarily responsible for these tasks among 40–67% of couples. In contrast, the wife mostly did these tasks among less than 20% of couples. (p. 1454)
- & Finally, childcare also appeared to be mainly the wife’s responsibility. Around 35–54% of couples had mostly the wife doing the childcare, compared with less than 5% of couples where it was mainly the husband (p. 1454)