Work-Life Conflict in Canada in the New Millennium

Chapter Five

Family Interferes with Work: A Primer

This chapter provides a primer for interested readers on the third of the four forms of work-life conflict examined in the 2001 Balancing Work, Family and Lifestyle National Study - family interferes with work. The chapter begins by defining this construct and quantifying its prevalence in Canada at this time. The chapter then identifies the demographic and organizational factors that place employees at risk with respect to family interferes with work, articulates the consequences of high levels of this form of interference on employers, employees, families and Canadian society and looks at how this form of work-life conflict can best be reduced.

Definition

This form of work-life conflict is similar to work interferes with family, as both occur because employees cannot be physically and/or emotionally in two different places doing two different things at exactly the same time. This type of conflict reflects a different set of priorities, because employees who experience this form of interference meet family demands at the expense of work demands (i.e. do not stay late, do not take work home to do in the evening, refuse job-related travel, forgo a promotion, etc) and not vice versa.

Prevalence

Only one in 10 Canadians allows family demands to interfere with work

The 2001 survey data indicate that very few Canadians experience this form of work-life conflict. Only 10% of the sample reported that their family demands and responsibilities interfered with their ability to meet demands at work (i.e. high levels of interference). The majority (58%) of the working Canadians in our sample, in fact, reported that their family demands did not interfere with their work at all (i.e. low levels of interference). The rest of the respondents (32% of the sample) reported moderate levels of interference.

It is interesting to note that family interferes with work has a very different distribution than was observed with role overload and work interferes with family. While role overload is positively skewed and work interferes with family has a normal distribution, family interferes with work is negatively skewed. Three times as many Canadians give priority to work at the expense of their family as do the reverse.

Family interferes with work has increased over the decade

In 1991, only 5% of the working Canadians who responded to our survey reported high levels of family interferes with work. In 2001, the percentage of the sample had doubled to 10%. In other words, a greater percentage of working Canadians are putting family ahead of work today than was the case a decade ago. Analysis of the data suggests that much of this increase can be attributed to an increased need for employees to supply care to elderly dependents. The aging of the workforce means that the proportion of Canadians facing this form of work-life conflict is likely to increase dramatically over the next decade. The costs associated with this form of imbalance are also likely to increase considerably over time.

Who is at risk with respect to family interferes with work?

Which groups are at risk of experiencing high levels of family interferes with work? The following conclusions with respect to the prediction of this form of interference can be drawn from our research:

Family interferes with work has a different cause than overload and work interferes with family

Sector of employment, community, socio-economic circumstances, work demands and work characteristics were not substantive predictors of family interferes with work for either gender. These findings, combined with the fact that we were not able to explain as much of the variation in family interferes with work as we could explain for work interferes with family and role overload, indicate that this form of work-life conflict is very different than work to family interference.

The lack of a substantive relationship between family interferes with work and community of residence, sector of employment, characteristics of work and socio-economic circumstances indicates that this form of work-life conflict has little to do with circumstances at work or within the community for either gender.

Who is at risk with respect to family interferes with work?

The greater the demands the employee faces outside of work, the greater the likelihood that they will report that their family responsibilities interfere with their ability to meet obligations at work. Key predictors of family interferes with work include hours per week spent in providing child care and eldercare and having responsibility for child care. Employees with child care and/or elder care responsibilities are at the highest risk of experiencing this form of work-life conflict. Even in this higher risk group, however, the prevalence of this form of work-life conflict is low (i.e. only 13% of the women and 11% of the men with dependent care responsibilities reported high family interferes with work). These findings may be useful in dispelling the stereotype that female employees with children or elder care responsibilities give their work responsibilities a lower priority.

While time in home chores, education and volunteer work are not significant predictors of family interferes with work for either gender, this form of work-life conflict is negatively associated with hours per week spent in leisure activities (i.e. the higher the conflict, the less time in leisure). This suggests that these employees may be trying to cope with this form of interference by devoting time they would normally spend on themselves to their work and/or family roles.

Demands at home predispose an employee to family interferes with work

This form of work-life conflict is linked to what an employee has to do at home (i.e. non-work demands) and how easy it is to fulfil these responsibilities given the expectations imposed at the level of the organization (i.e. organizational culture). It is not associated with the demands an employee faces at work (i.e. work circumstances, sector of employment). Nor is it associated with where one lives.

Organizational culture is an important predictor of family interferes with work

Organizational culture is an important predictor of family interferes with work for both men and women. Specifically:

1. Employees who work in an organization that promotes a culture of hours (i.e. employees perceive that their career advancement will be limited if they do not work long hours) will report higher family interferes with work.
2. Employees who work in an organization that promotes a culture of work or family (i.e. one in which employees feel that they have to choose between their family and career advancement) will report higher family interferes with work.

These findings support the following conclusion: family interferes with work occurs when the types of behaviour that the work culture rewards with respect to career advancement (i.e. long hours, putting work first) are at odds with the types of behaviours one would associate with being a suitable parent/elder caregiver (i.e. spending time in family activities, taking family leave, putting family first).

The cause of family interferes with work differs for men and men

Family interferes with work has different roots for men than women. For men, this type of work-life conflict has relatively little to do with their circumstances at home (i.e. what family roles they occupy). For women, family interferes with work is substantively associated with family circumstances (i.e. life-cycle stage, family type, age of children at home). This indicates that for women (but not men), this type of conflict is associated with occupation of certain family roles. Our findings identify the following groups of women are at higher levels of risk:

• those with elder care (though it should be noted that employees of both genders with elder care responsibilities are at higher risk for family interferes with work).
• women with younger children: family interferes with work is negatively associated with age of children at home, as women with younger children (i.e. under five) have significantly higher levels of this form of interference and women with teenage children have significantly lower levels.
• women who have child care responsibilities only have more problems with this form of interference than women with dual caregiving responsibilities (i.e. both child care and elder care); women with no dependent care responsibilities do not report substantive levels of this form of conflict. The fact that women with multiple care-giving demands (i.e. both child care and elder care) report lower levels of family interferes with work than women with only child- or elder- care supports Barnett's (1998) Multiple Role Hypothesis and suggests that multiple caregiver roles offer some form of protective function to women with respect to this form of work-life conflict.
• women who are in non-traditional families (i.e. they work, their partner stays home and looks after the children) report lower levels of this form of interference than other mothers.

These findings indicate that many working women in Canada experience family interferes with work because they still have responsibility for the traditional family roles of mother (especially of younger children) and caregiver for elders.

When these role expectations are reduced (e.g. children are older and/or the spouse has assumed the role of caregiver), this form of interference is reduced, suggesting that this form of conflict is linked to traditional gender role expectations with respect to who should care for children and the elderly

These results also imply that if we have information on what roles employed women occupy, we will have some indication of the extent to which they will experience family interferes with work. No such prediction can be made for men.

What are the consequences of high levels of family interferes with work?

Approximately one in 10 of the respondents to the 2001 survey reported high levels of family interferes with work. The percent of the Canadian workforce at risk with respect to this form of work-life conflict is expected to increase dramatically in the next decade with the aging of the workforce. What impact do these high levels of role interference have on employers, employees, families and Canadian society? Answers to these questions are summarized below.

What is the impact of high levels of family interferes with work on Canadian organizations?

Family interferes with work has minimal impact on the organizational attitudes examined in this study. While family interferes with work is negatively associated with organizational commitment, job satisfaction and one's view of one's organization, and positively associated with job stress and intent to seek other employment, the relationships are significantly less than were observed with role overload and work interferes with family (i.e. statistically significant, but not substantive).

This form of work-life conflict is, however, strongly associated with high levels of absenteeism (i.e. three or more days' absence in the past six months).

Employees with high levels of family interferes with work and caregiver strain are more likely to be absent from work

Compared to their counterparts with low levels of caregiver strain, employees with high levels of caregiver strain are:

• 6.5 times more likely to have missed three or more days of work in the past six months due to child care problems,
• 1.8 times more likely to have missed three or more days of work in the past six months due to physical, mental or emotional fatigue,
• 1.6 times more likely to have missed three or more days of work in the past six months (all causes combined), and
• 1.5 times more likely to have missed three or more days of work in the past six months due to ill health.

From the organization's perspective, the main consequence of high family interferes with work is higher absenteeism due to problems with child care. This finding is not surprising given that employees with high levels of this form of conflict put family first (i.e. place a higher priority on caring for children than attending work, or cannot attend work due to demands at home).

Particularly noteworthy is the fact that this is the only form of work-life conflict which is associated with absenteeism due to problems with child care.

There is a substantive cost of absenteeism due to high family interferes with work

The link between family interferes with work and absenteeism can be better appreciated by examining the costs of this form of work-life conflict to Canadian organizations. While only one in 10 of the respondents to this survey reported high levels of family interferes with work, the absenteeism associated with this form of work-life conflict was estimated to be just under $0.5 billion a year in direct costs (approximately $1 billion per year when indirect costs are also included in the total). These findings indicate that the organization can reduce costs associated with absenteeism by making it easier for employees with dependent care responsibilities to vary when and where they work (i.e. facilitate the ability to work from home).

What is the impact of high levels of family interferes with work on Canadian employees?

The strategy of putting family ahead of work does not appear to be as harmful to one's mental health as the alternatives: trying to do it all (i.e. role overload) or putting work ahead of family. Compared to their counterparts with low family interferes with work, employees with high family interferes with work were approximately:

• twice as likely to say their health is fair/poor,
• 1.6 times more likely to report high levels of perceived stress, burnout and depressed mood, and
• 1.6 times less likely to indicate that they were satisfied with their lives.

While the association between this form of work-life conflict and employee outcomes is not as strong as that observed with respect to role overload and work interferes with family, it is still cause for concern.

What is the impact of high levels of family interferes with work on Canadian families?

High levels of work interferes with family are negatively associated with three of the family outcomes examined in this study. Compared to their counterparts with high family interferes with work, those with low levels of this form of work-life conflict are:

• twice as likely to live in families with high levels of wellbeing (i.e. adaptation)
• 1.5 times as likely to be satisfied with their family life, and
• 1.5 times as likely to be satisfied with their parental abilities.

In other words, employees who put family ahead of work are less satisfied with both their families and their abilities as parents. They are also less likely to be happy with the level of their family's well-being. It is interesting to note that the respondents with high family interferes with work reported the lowest levels of family life satisfaction, parental satisfaction and family well-being in the study. It is hard to tell the direction of causality here. Is it because they are dissatisfied with these dimensions of their life that they have decided to put family first (i.e. trying to remedy the situation)? Or, has the fact that they have met family demands at the expense of their work (and possibly career progression) made them more dissatisfied, critical or resentful of circumstances at home that have made such choices/sacrifices necessary? Additional research is needed in this area to answer this question.

The fact that family interferes with work is not associated with family integration suggests that either people who put family ahead of work are doing so to keep their family units intact or the strategy of putting family first maintains family integrity.

What is the impact of high levels of family interferes with work on Canadian society?

To answer this question we looked at the impact of this form of interference on the use of Canada's health care system and the decision to have children.

Family interferes with work can be linked to poorer mental health

One in 10 of the employees in this sample have high levels of work interferes with family. While these individuals make more use of Canada's health care system than their counterparts who do not experience such interference, the magnitude of the relationship between this form of work-life conflict and the use of Canada's health care system is (with one exception) lower than can be observed with the other three forms of work-life conflict. Compared to their counterparts with low levels of family interferes with work, employees with high levels of family interferes with work were, in the six months prior to the study being done:

• 1.9 times more likely to have sought care from a mental health professional,
• 1.6 times more likely to have received care on an outpatient basis three or more times,
• 1.4 times more likely to have seen a physician three or more times,
• 1.3 times more likely to have visited a hospital emergency room, and
• 1.3 times more likely to have had to spend at least one night in the hospital.

One aspect of these data is worthy of note - the high association between family interferes with work and the use of mental health care services. That is, those with high levels of this form of interference are almost twice as likely to seek such care as those with low levels. What causes this association is hard to determine from these data, as the direction of causality is not clear. We can speculate that putting family first in a society that materially and socially recognizes the opposite behaviour (i.e. putting work first) is associated with higher levels of stress and depression and lower self-esteem. This explanation assumes that family interferes with work contributes to poorer mental health. Alternatively, it may be that family is more likely to rise in priority compared to work when there are problems at home, when demands associated with health care increase or when an individual is stressed or depressed (i.e. in poorer mental health). In this case, poorer mental health is assumed to lead to higher levels of family interferes with work rather than the reverse. Future research should seek to determine the direction of causality of this relationship as it affects how the issue could best be addressed.

Family interferes with work has less of a negative impact on health care costs

Both the relative risk and the absolute risk associated with high family interferes with work are lower than observed in the other forms of work-life conflict. In terms of absolute risk, only one in 10 of the respondents to this survey put family ahead of work (i.e. reported high levels of family interferes with work). Similarly the relative risk associated with high family interferes with work is lower than was observed with respect to role overload. Nevertheless, the increased number of physician visits associated with this form of work-life conflict is calculated to be just under a $250 million a year. Similarly, the increased number of inpatient hospital days due to this form of interference is estimated to be another quarter of a billion dollars.

While the relative risk of visiting the hospital emergency department resulting from this form of work-life conflict is similar to that observed with role overload and work interferes with family, the costs associated with these visits is lower (approximately $52 million) due largely to the fact that few Canadians allow family demands to take priority over work (i.e. prevalence is low).

These data would suggest that Canadian society will benefit (though employers may not) if more Canadians place a higher priority on family than work.

Interference from family to work not strongly associated with prescription drug use

Family interferes with work is not associated with prescription drug use. This finding is consistent with the fact that respondents with high family interferes with work do not make as great a use of medical care services as their counterparts with high role overload or caregiver strain.

The decision to delay or not have children reduces family interferes with work for women

The 2001 data shows that women who have made the decision not to have children because of their work report significantly lower levels of family interferes with work than their counterparts who have not made such a decision. This finding is not surprising since this group of women has fewer constraints to deal with at home. While the findings from this study validate the decision (it is easier to focus on your career if you do not have children) the use of this coping strategy is not good for Canada. Again, these data point to the need for Canadian policy-makers and organizations to address the issue of work-life balance if they wish to increase fertility levels in this country.

What can we do to reduce family interferes with work?

What can employers, employees and their families do to help reduce the percent of the population at risk of high family interferes with work? Answers to these questions are summarized below. Things that can be done by employees are addressed first. This is followed by strategies that can be employed by employees and their families.

What can employers do to help employees cope with family interferes with work?

While organizations can do a lot to help their employees cope with role overload and work interferes with family, their options are much more limited when it comes to helping reduce family interferes with work. None of the organizational strategies examined in this study were strongly associated with this form of work-life conflict and interventions such as perceived flexibility and management support, which were effective at alleviating role overload and work interferes with family, had little (i.e. perceived flexibility) to no (i.e. supportive manager) impact on family interferes with work. That being said, we can provide some advice to organizations who wish to help employees cope with family interferes with work. These suggestions are summarized below.

Increase perceived flexibility

While the impact of perceived flexibility on family interferes with work is minimal and limited to employees with dependent care, the data reveal three strategies that are effective at upper management levels. Organizations who wish to help employees with dependent care cope with family interferes with work should make it easier for these employees to arrange their work schedule to meet personal and family commitments, vary their work hours, and take their holidays when they want. It is, however, important for organizations to recognize that these strategies are only effective at high levels (i.e. employee feels that they can rearrange their schedule and vary their hours) as employees with moderate flexibility in these areas realized no increased ability to cope with family interferes with work.

Non-supportive management increases family interferes with work

While working for a supportive manager does not help employees cope with family interferes with work, reporting to a non-supportive manager exacerbates this form of conflict. The following behaviours, in particular, are associated with increased family interferes with work: makes me feel guilty about time off work for personal or family reasons, and focuses on hours of work and not on output.

Working a regular work day reduces family interferes with work

Employees who work a fixed work day (i.e. start and stop times are the same every day) report substantially lower levels of family interferes with work while employees who work flextime report the highest levels of this form of conflict. It would appear that knowing one's exact hours of work helps an employee plan family activities so that they do not interfere with their work duties.

A number of benefits appear to help employees cope with family interferes with work

Seven of the family-friendly benefits considered in this study (child care referral, on-site day care, part-time/reduced work week, personal day off with pay, EAP, taking a family/emergency day off work, and short-term personal leave) were linked to the occurrence of family interferes with work for employees with dependent care. The relationship between two of these strategies, use of child care referral and part-time work, and family interferes with work is negative (i.e. interference decreases as use of these strategies increases) indicating that these two benefits do, in fact, help employees with child- and/or elder- care cope with family demands that interfere with work. In all other cases, however, the relationship between family interferes with work and use of benefits was positive. Since it is unlikely that the benefit itself would cause an increase in work-life conflict, these findings suggest that employees use these organizational benefits when they are experiencing greater interference. Unfortunately, cross-sectional data (collected at one point in time) does not allow us to determine the extent to which each of these benefits helps employees cope with family interferes with work. We can, however, say that virtually everyone in this sample who used these benefits indicated that the benefits had helped them cope to a moderate/great extent.

Effectiveness of some strategies depends on gender

There are several gender differences in the relations discussed above that give further guidance to organizations that wish to help their employees with dependent care cope with family interferes with work. Organizations can help women by giving them more flexibility to arrange their work schedules to meet personal and family commitments and by reducing the extent to which managers assess performance by looking at hours rather than output. They can help men, on the other hand, by giving them child care referral benefits; that is, the organization has a referral service to help employees find child care in their community.

What can individuals do to cope with family interferes with work?

The research has shown that, generally speaking, individual coping strategies are not effective at helping employed Canadians deal with family interferes for several reasons. The analysis of the 2001 data determined that the use of strategies such as seek social support, off-shift work with spouse, use alcohol and/or prescription drugs, find another activity to take one's mind off things or active coping (prioritize, and schedule, plan and organize) had no relationship with the occurrence of family interferes with work.

Effectiveness of other coping strategies depends on both gender and dependent care status

Analysis of the 2001 data leads to the identification of four coping strategies (reducing the quality of things one does, working harder, just trying to forget about things, delegating work to others) that were associated with family interferes with work when gender and dependent care status were taken into account. In all cases, the relationship between the use of the strategy and family interferes with work depended on both gender and dependent care status. The following observations on coping with family interferes with work can be made by looking at these relationships.

Reducing the quality of their work does not help men/women with dependent care responsibilities cope with family interferes with work

There is no relationship between the tendency to reduce the quality of things one does and family interferes with work for those without dependent care. On the other hand, there is a positive relationship between reducing the quality of things one does and family interferes with work for the parents/givers of elder care. These findings suggest that men and women with dependent care cope with stress at home by lowering their standards at work (i.e. let family interfere with work). The implication of this is that employers who are interested in quality of work need to implement strategies to reduce family interferes with work and enhance work-life balance.

Working harder seems to help those without dependents cope with family interferes with work

Working harder seems to help men and women without dependent care responsibilities cope with family interferes with work. The same cannot be said for men and women with dependent care responsibilities, who report a strong positive relationship between use of this strategy and family interferes with work. It may be that those without child care and/or elder care are able to reduce this form of interference by increasing their efforts at home - a strategy that becomes less effective as demands outside of work increase.

Delegating work to others does not help women cope with family interferes with work

Delegating appears to be a more effective coping strategy for men than for women. There is no association between the frequency with which one delegates work to others and family interferes with work for women, regardless of dependent care status. For men, on the other hand, family interferes with work decreases as delegation increases. Men with dependent care experience slightly more benefits from the use of delegation, than do their counterparts without dependent care. Gender role theory suggests that these findings may be due to the fact that women have difficulty giving up responsibility for the family role (i.e. child care, elder care, home chores). While the tasks themselves might be delegated to others, the responsibility for the task remains with the women. Men have no such problems.

Just trying to forget about it can help those without dependents cope with family interferes with work

The results with respect to trying to forget about problems, and family interferes with work, is an interesting one. For those with dependent care responsibilities the findings are quite clear - interference increases concomitantly with the use of this strategy. For men and women without such caregiving responsibilities, higher use of this strategy is associated with a plateau effect of family interferes with work. The strategy appears to be particularly effective for women without dependents. These findings reveal that it is easier for those without care-giving responsibilities to successfully separate family from work and 'forget about' challenges outside of work.

Family coping strategies ineffective at reducing family interferes with work

Virtually none of the family coping strategies examined in this study were associated with family interferes with work. Only two strategies were substantively associated with family interferes with work: hire help to care for the children and get by on less sleep. In both cases, however, family interferes with work increased concomitant to the use of the strategy.