Neoliberal economic globalization has changed working conditions and the definition of standard employment.1 The traditional standard employment characteristics (regular working hours, stability, and social standards linked with permanent full-time work) has lost importance and the increasing trend is characterized by a flexible labor market. The flexible labor market has created, on one hand, boundaryless jobs, which means that there are no limits on how long, when and how fast people work.2,3 On the other hand, non-standard work arrangements have increased, usually associated with low wages and temporary conditions.1 Although working at unconventional times is becoming popular, the social rhythm of the western societies remains largely unchanged. Therefore, the balance between work and personal life, or work-life balance, has been largely discussed and is considered a policy priority in the European Union.4,5

Time has been proposed as a social determinant of health, as it is a resource that people need for good health; accessing health services, partaking in healthy behaviors, resting, working and caring for dependents.2 Working hours (long working hours, irregular or shift work, night work, etc.) may create a work-life imbalance due to lack of time to sustain a personal life. Poor work-life balance has been suggested to be an intermediate factor of the associations between working hours and health-related outcomes.6 Lack of time is associated with unhealthy behaviors; unhealthy diets, alcohol consumption, smoking and/or not exercising.7 Moreover, not having time to recover from work exhaustion may result in a poor mental health status and sleeping problems.6 Also, rushing to trying to catch up with the out-of-work activities may create stress responses, such as elevated blood pressure, heart rate and cortisol levels.8 Further, low wages due to few working hours and temporary jobs may create financial insecurities that also have an impact on health status.9 Therefore, satisfaction with work-life balance is an indicator of well-being that is of public health interest.8

Current evidence on satisfaction with work-life balance is mostly based on studies of health and academic professionals,10–14 with a focus on balance with family time rather than personal time in general, and therefore with little external validity for the general population. Furthermore, almost all the studies done on working hours and work-life balance are based on “long working hours”, whereas, too few hours would also be a predictor of poor work-life balance due to the lower wages earned.15 Next, there are just two studies describing satisfaction with work-life balance in European population and they date from 2010. Thus, as work-life balance is one of the European Union priorities, an update on satisfaction with work-life balance in European workers is necessary.

Therefore, the objective of this study is to examine the associations between satisfaction with working hours and work-life balance and to describe the main reasons for dissatisfaction with working hours.

Table 1 shows satisfaction with work-life balance and working hours, which were 74.5% and 80.6%, respectively. There were statistically significant differences in the satisfaction with work-life balance and working hours according to sex, occupation, work time and welfare regime country classification (Table 1). The main reasons declared for dissatisfaction were excessive working hours (48.7%), shift work (27.9%), and inability to influence the work schedule (28.3%) (Fig. 1). The percentage of women who declared being dissatisfied with excessive working hours was higher than in men in Continental (54.69%), Southern European (51.01%), and Nordic (45.75%) countries. Otherwise, dissatisfaction for being unable to influence the work schedule was higher among men, except in Southern European countries, as dissatisfaction due to shift work, except for Anglo-Saxon Countries (Fig. 1).

Figure 1.

Main reasons of dissatisfaction with working hours by sex and country typology in the EU-28 at 2014.

(0.39MB).

There was a positive association between working hours and work-life balance (cPR: 2.56; 95%CI: 2.29-2.85; and aPR: 2.63; 95%CI: 2.28-3.04) (Table 2). Workers who were satisfied with their working hours had higher probabilities of being satisfied with their work-life balance (Table 2). After adjustment for potential confounders, higher associations of satisfaction with working hours and work-life balance were found among men, younger workers, in those that the age at the end of schooling was<15years, employees, full-time workers, apprenticeship contract workers and workers from Anglo-Saxon countries (Table 2). A similar pattern was observed among men and women at the age of having their first child (20-35 years old) and at the age of being in charge of the elderly (>50 years old) (Tables 3 and 4).

We found high satisfaction with working hours and work-life balance within European Union workers and a strong association between the two. Furthermore, the most prevalent reasons for dissatisfaction with working hours were excessive working hours, shift work, and inability to influence the work schedule.

Two previous studies have described work-life balance in the European Union. These studies found higher percentages of satisfaction with work-life balance (around 80%) than our figures (74.5%).8,21 Moreover, Lunau et al.8 found higher satisfaction with work-life balance among women and Scandinavian countries (10.8%) and lower satisfaction in Southern European countries (23.5%) of the EU-27 countries with a similar classification of welfare characteristics. Even though the patterns of the frequencies are the same, we show higher percentages of dissatisfaction with work-life balance. Those differences could be explained by the year the surveys where done (2005 and 2010 vs. 2014) and the potential effect of the economic crisis on satisfaction with working conditions (better to have a job than not). Greubel et al.21 reported an association between working at unusual times (evenings, Saturdays and Sundays) and poor work-life balance. We find a similar association, but our main variable “satisfaction with working hours” can be understood from several perspectives; amount of time (i.e. long or few hours), work schedule (i.e. shift work or working at unusual times) and being able to influence the work schedule (i.e. flexible hours, on-call periods at home or standby periods at work).

A higher proportion of women were satisfied with their work-life balance. This could be explained by the fact that women more frequently work part-time to be able to take care of children and the household.19 In our study, 15.96% of women and 6.23% of men had part-time work. Otherwise, the adjusted association between satisfaction with working hours and work-life balance was slightly higher among men. Our results, then, would support the idea that women take primary responsibility for managing the household while working part- or full-time.22,23

Associations between satisfaction with working hours and work-life balance were lower in the self-employed, in those with a temporary contract and also with part-time work. The same pattern was observed in workers at the age of having the first child and at ages of being at charge of the elderly. Previous studies have described a worse health status among the self-employed and higher risks for work-family conflict due to job demands.24,25 Temporary employment has been associated with psychological morbidity mediated by job insecurity or erosion of income, among other factors.26 Therefore, workers with temporary employment contracts, part-time or self-employed would experience economic-based work-life imbalance.

Workers from Nordic countries declare the highest satisfaction with working hours and work-life balance. This is coherent with the welfare regime of these countries; in Nordic countries, policies for compatibility of employment and private life are common, as is the promotion of employment for women.17 For example, Nordic welfare states have large investments in publicly provided child care for preschool children,27 also extensive services related to care for the elderly and the disabled, generous parental leaves (high compensation rates and long leave periods).27 In the contrary, Anglo-Saxon countries are characterized by deregulated labor markets and men are still the main breadwinners, with low support for female participation in the labor force.17 Despite Continental and Southern European countries having strong labor market regulations, few efforts are made to facilitate the work-life balance and there is little support to promote female employment.17 Finally, Eastern countries are similar to Anglo-Saxon countries in terms of labor market; there is a traditional model of household labor division and dual-earner families are common.17 We also observed lower disparities in the satisfaction with working hours and work-life balance in Nordic countries. Macrosocial policies may explain why satisfaction with working hours and work-life balance may not be as strongly associated as in other countries.27 Similarly, we observed that the associations of satisfaction with work-life balance from satisfaction with working hours at ages of family beginning and at ages of being in charge of the elderly were higher in Anglo-Saxon welfare regime countries, showing greater disparities than in Eastern, Southern and Nordic welfare regime countries.

The most prevalent reasons for dissatisfaction with working hours were excessive working hours, shift work, and inability to influence the work schedule. Women from Southern, Nordic and Continental countries declared excessive working hours as the main reason for dissatisfaction. This could possibly be because during the economic crisis in Europe, men became unemployed and women extended their working hours.28 The inability to influence the work schedule was declared more often by men in Continental, Eastern and Nordic Countries, as was shift work in those countries and in Southern European Countries. This is in line with the new employment definition which created boundaryless jobs with irregular working hours.2,3 Moreover, we found associations between the main dissatisfaction reasons with working hours and satisfaction with work-life balance (data not shown).

Poor work-life balance has been described as a predictor of sickness absence29 and poor self-declared health status.8 Also, inequalities in working conditions may create health inequalities30 and we have observed differences in the reporting of work-life balance. Moreover, disparities observed in poor work-life balance across welfare regimes show that, even though EU legislation covers all the countries equally, country-specific measures for work-life compatibility4 in some countries have improved work-life balance and, therefore, further measures should be applied. This study has some limitations. First, the main variable “satisfaction with work-life balance” was measured from a single question and therefore it may not assess the several perspectives of the work-life balance (i.e. work-life imbalance due to lack of time or lack of money). Future studies may measure the satisfaction with work-life balance by taking into account the several perspectives it has. In this study we could not adjust by having children, nor for caring for the elderly and disabled, which have been described predictors of poor work-life balance, especially among women19. Instead, we did a sub-analysis with the population group at the age of having the first child (20-35 years old) and at the age of being in charge of the elderly (>50 years old). Also, we cannot establish causality in the relationship between satisfaction with working hours and work-life balance due to the cross-sectional design of the study. Instead, we can infer associations. This is the first study examining the associations between satisfaction with working hours and work-life balance through several factors that explain well-being to the occupation; individual factors (i.e. sex, age, educational level), work and job conditions (i.e. occupation, work time and contract) and country characteristics (i.e. country welfare regime) and to describe the main reasons for dissatisfaction with working hours. Finally, we calculated the PR using the Poisson family, which gives us more robust associations.31

Satisfaction with working hours and work-life balance was high in Europe, but we found differences between sex, age at the end of the studies, welfare regimes and work characteristics. Also, there are still differences in the main reasons for dissatisfaction between sexes and welfare regimes. Thus, the evidence shows that inequalities in working conditions are still present and that, even though one of the policy priorities of the EU is work-life balance, there is still a lot of work to be done.

Carlos Álvarez-Dardet.

The corresponding author on behalf of the other authors guarantee the accuracy, transparency and honesty of the data and information contained in the study, that no relevant information has been omitted and that all discrepancies between authors have been adequately resolved and described.

J.M. Martínez-Sánchez and N. Matilla-Santander conceived the study. N. Matilla-Santander prepared the database and analyzed the data with the support of all the authors (J.C. Martín-Sánchez, C. Lidón Moyano, A. González Marrón, K. Bunch, J.M. Martínez-Sánchez). N. Matilla-Santander drafted the manuscript, which was critically revised by J.M. Martínez-Sánchez. All authors contributed substantially to the interpretation of the data and to revising the manuscript. All authors approved its final version.

None.

None.