FEMALE PART-TIME workers earn 6 per cent less per hour than women working full-time with similar qualifications and education, a report has found.
However, there is no significant pay penalty for part-time men compared with full-time men with similar characteristics, according to the Economic and Social Research Institute study published today.
Women working part-time tend to be in less lucrative sectors such as hospitality and retail compared with full-time women of similar education, age and marital status.
The study found there had been a “marked increase” in the percentage of employees with flexible work arrangements since the height of the boom.
A quarter of employees are part-time and an eighth work some of their time at home, the study published by the ESRI and The Equality Authority found.
The study found that some types of flexible work improved work-life balance, while others had a negative effect on family life and found that some types resulted in less earnings per hour than full-time counterparts.
The Workplace Equality in the Recession Survey written by Helen Russell and Frances McGinnity of the ESRI is published this morning. It compares data from 2003 and 2009 surveys of 5,000 employees.
It found that 29 per cent of employees worked flexible hours in 2009 compared with 23 per cent cent on 2003, that 26 per cent worked part-time in 2009 compared with 20 per cent in 2003 and 12 per cent worked from home regularly compared with 8 per cent in 2003.
This increase in flexible working arrangements has resulted in a drop in working hours for those in employment from 37.6 in 2003 to 35.1 in 2009. The main shift towards flexible working was in the private sector.
Almost 40 per cent of women work part-time compared with 12 per cent of men. Part-time work had the “strongest and clearest impact in reducing work-life conflict and work pressure” of all types, the report found.
There was a noticeable jump in men working part-time but this appears not to be voluntary.
“Given the high proportion of male part-time employees who are dissatisfied with their hours worked (21 per cent) we cannot rule out that some of the rise in part-time work may be involuntary particularly among men” the report said.
Working from home was the only type of flexible work which was more used by men (14 per cent) than women (11 per cent) and the only one where the workers earned more than their “normal” counterparts.
Those working regularly from home earned almost a third more than those who did not, the report found. It looked at those working from home from five days a week to less than one day a week, during regular working hours.
Employees working from home tend to have higher earnings and greater autonomy “although this is already accounted for by the type of jobs they do,” the study found. Employees working from home tended to be in professional and managerial groups.
Overall working from home reduced employee wellbeing with higher work-life conflict and pressure. It “may be seen more as a form of work intensification than as an arrangement for promoting work-life balance”, the report said.
“Spill-over” may be the reason working from home has a negative impact on work-life balance. “The technology which allows you to work from home allows you to work in the evenings and people don’t have space between work and home,” Dr McGinnity said.
More than a quarter of employees at home worked over 45 hours per week compared with 15 per cent of all employees.
Of workers on flexi-time both men and women earn less per hour than non-flexible counterparts, a change from 2003.
“This suggests that during the recession employers may be deflecting the costs associated with this work practice onto the employees, which was not the case during the boom,” the report said.
The report also found a 10 percent rise in formal equality policies and found the presence of an equality policy was associated with higher job satisfaction and, higher employee commitment.
