Suchergebnisse

In dem Buch wird das multilokale Leben und Wohnen von Personen mit einem beruflich genutzten Zweitwohnsitz (Shuttles) und von Personen in einer Partnerschaft mit getrennten Haushalten über große Distanzen (Fernbeziehungen) im Kontext beruflicher Mobilitätsanforderungen und des sozialen Wandels empirisch untersucht. Die Ergebnisse der Arbeit beruhen auf einer standardisierten Befragung von zufällig ausgewählten Zugezogenen in vier deutschen Großstädten und vertiefenden qualitativen Interviews. Besonderheiten multilokaler Lebens- und Wohnformen werden in Bezug auf sozialstrukturelle Merkmale, Wohnbedingungen und Wohnbedürfnisse mittels Vergleichsgruppenanalysen untersucht.

In dem Buch wird das multilokale Leben und Wohnen von Personen mit einem beruflich genutzten Zweitwohnsitz (Shuttles) und von Personen in einer Partnerschaft mit getrennten Haushalten über große Distanzen (Fernbeziehungen) im Kontext beruflicher Mobilitätsanforderungen und des sozialen Wandels empirisch untersucht. Die Ergebnisse der Arbeit beruhen auf einer standardisierten Befragung von zufällig ausgewählten Zugezogenen in vier deutschen Großstädten und vertiefenden qualitativen Interviews. Besonderheiten multilokaler Lebens- und Wohnformen werden in Bezug auf sozialstrukturelle Merkmale, Wohnbedingungen und Wohnbedürfnisse mittels Vergleichsgruppenanalysen untersucht.

Against the background of the ongoing flexibilisation of labour markets and a rising labour force participation of (highly) qualified women, job-related commuting between a main and secondary residence has become more important in Western capitalist countries as is the case in contemporary Germany. The limited number of recent empirical studies on this kind of multilocational living arrangement almost entirely focuses on commuters in couple/family households. The main objective of this article is, firstly, to provide data about the characteristics and formation contexts of job-related multilocational household organisations as a whole, in order to make a contribution to the discussion of the forms and causes of this currently important phenomenon. Secondly, by means of comparison analyses, the multilocational form of living is compared to the group of long-distance movers, in order to provide insights into who prefers commuting to migration with the complete household under which circumstances. The article draws on data of a field research study, which have been obtained from an individual based random sample from official registers of inhabitants of four metropolises in Germany. The sample was restricted to individuals with specific characteristics (in-movers, age 25 to 59). The fully structured postal interviews were complemented by qualitative telephone interviews with selected commuters. The results show that commuters are a heterogeneous group. Living in a partnership and the social connections established thereby play a prominent role for multilocational household organisations. Among male commuters, one can distinguish between those who are young, never married and predominantly childless, on the one hand, and a group of older married commuters with children in the household, on the other. The vast majority of female commuters, however, live childless. As men commute between two residences even if they live with a family, they significantly more often have a job-related secondary residence than women. Late modern characteristics of job-related multilocational living arrangements are dual earner households for male commuters and high occupational positions for female commuters. The commuting between two accommodations is strongly connected to the career entry, on the one hand, and is also important in a later occupational career phase as a partly longer-lasting period, on the other hand. It may be suggested that the rise of fix-term employment will further increase the importance of multilocational living arrangements in Late Modernity.

Vor dem Hintergrund der andauernden Flexibilisierung der Arbeitsmärkte und einer steigenden (hoch-)qualifizierten Frauenerwerbstätigkeit hat das beruflich bedingte Pendeln zwischen einem Haupt- und Zweitwohnsitz in westlichen Industrieländern wie Deutschland an Bedeutung gewonnen. Die wenigen Studien über diese Art multilokaler Lebensführung beziehen sich nahezu vollständig auf Pendler/innen ('Shuttles') in Paar- bzw. Familienhaushalten. Der Artikel verfolgt das Ziel, erstens, Merkmale und Entstehungskontexte von berufsbedingten multilokalen Haushaltsorganisationen im Allgemeinen zu untersuchen und damit einen Beitrag zur aktuellen Diskussion über die Ausprägungen und Ursachen dieses gegenwärtig bedeutenden Phänomens zu leisten. Zweitens wird die multilokale Lebensform mit "traditionellen" Fernwandernden verglichen, um Erkenntnisse darüber zu gewinnen, wer und unter welchen Umständen das berufliche Pendeln zwischen zwei Wohnsitzen einem Umzug mit dem gesamten Haushalt vorzieht. Der Beitrag bezieht sich auf Daten einer Primärerhebung, in der eine Zufallsstichprobe von Personen aus dem Einwohnermelderegister von vier deutschen Metropolen gezogen wurde. Die Grundgesamtheit ist auf Individuen mit spezifischen Merkmalen (Zuwandernde zwischen 25 bis 59 Jahren) begrenzt. Die Ergebnisse der standardisierten postalischen Befragung wurden durch qualitative Telefoninterviews mit ausgewählten Shuttles vertieft. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass es sich bei Shuttles um eine heterogene Gruppe handelt. Das Leben in einer Partnerschaft und die damit verbundenen sozialen Bindungen spielen für multilokale Haushaltsorganisationen eine entscheidende Rolle. Unter den männlichen Pendlern kann eine Gruppe junger, lediger und meist kinderloser Männer und eine Gruppe älterer, verheirateter Pendler mit Kindern im Haushalt identifiziert werden. Die große Mehrheit der weiblichen Shuttles lebt dagegen kinderlos. Weil Männer auch in einer Lebensgemeinschaft mit Kind zwischen zwei Wohnsitzen pendeln, haben sie signifikant öfter als Frauen einen berufsbedingten Zweitwohnsitz. Spätmoderne Ausprägungen beruflich bedingter multilokaler Lebensmuster sind doppelerwerbstätige Haushalte für männliche Pendler und hohe berufliche Stellungen für Pendlerinnen. Das Pendeln zwischen zwei Wohnsitzen ist einerseits mit dem Berufseinstieg eng verbunden und spielt andererseits auch in einer späteren Berufsphase für eine zum Teil länger andauernde Periode eine bedeutende Rolle. Es ist anzunehmen, dass die Bedeutungszunahme befristeter Beschäftigung zu einem Anstieg multilokaler Lebensformen in der Spätmoderne führt.

Mit dem sozialen und wirtschaftlichen Wandel hat berufsbezogenes Pendeln zwischen einem Haupt- und Nebenwohnort (Shutteln) in unserer spätmodernen Gesellschaft an Bedeutung gewonnen. Die distanzintensive Lebensform wirft eine Vielzahl raumwissenschaftlicher Fragestellungen auf, die in bisherigen empirischen Untersuchungen vernachlässigt wurden. Die raum-zeitlichen Strukturen des Shuttelns und deren Determinanten stehen deshalb im Mittelpunkt des Beitrags. Die Ergebnisse der standardisierten Primärerhebung zeigen, dass Shutteln nur für Frauen ein eher großstädtisches Phänomen ist, Männer dagegen häufiger aus Kleinstädten und Landgemeinden in Arbeitsplatzzentren pendeln. Die raum-zeitliche Organisation der Haushalte steht mit externen Faktoren einer flexibilisierten Berufswelt in Zusammenhang. Auf das Distanz- und Periodizitätsverhalten wirken sich auf individueller Ebene die Lebensphase, das Geschlecht und der Haushaltskontext aus. Die Verteilung von Shuttles an ihrem Wohnsitz am Arbeitsort auf unterschiedliche städtische Wohnlagen erklärt sich über Eigenschaften des Wohnumfelds und die Erreichbarkeit der Arbeitsstätte.

PurposeCoworking (shared flexible working spaces) grew exponentially before the COVID-19 pandemic. The crisis led to spaces closing but demand is likely to increase as homeworking/remote working levels remain permanently higher post-pandemic. Previous studies largely focused on 'satisfied customers' – freelancers and entrepreneurs in the urban core; but these are a poor guide to future preferences given an increasingly diverse set of potential users. Understanding these preferences is of significant value to future providers, investors and real estate operators.Design/methodology/approachThe authors employ a mixed-methods approach, observing self-organised coworking sessions and online platforms, and a questionnaire of the coworking networks/groups. The authors address the research questions: i) how do individuals' make decisions about how and where to engage in shared working and ii) do they consider locational characteristics (beyond accessibility) and social and physical (environmental) aspects of coworking?FindingsProximity to home is a key result. Participants are mostly local and seek community, with a strong emphasis on effective work routines. Results stress the importance placed on social factors and in-space amenities, but affordability is also important. Coworkers experiencing both informal groups and organised spaces rate the informal experience as significantly more beneficial.Practical implicationsThere are implications for the real estate element of future provision and funding models.Originality/valueThe authors contribute to the understanding of coworking preferences/motivations through addressing methodological limitations of previous studies. Rather than surveying individuals in coworking spaces, the authors study individuals who engage in coworking in various forms which will reflect the diverse (users, spaces, locations) demands for future coworking.

COVID-19 is more likely to lead to Long COVID among persons of working age. We outline the first estimates of the impact of Long Covid on employment in the UK. Using estimates of cumulative prevalence of Long COVID, activity-limiting Long COVID in the working-age population and of economic inactivity and job loss resulting from Long COVID, we provide evidence of the profound impact of Long COVID on national labour supply. Since the start of the pandemic, cumulatively 2.9 million people of working age (7% of the total) in the UK have had, or still have, Long COVID. This figure will continue to rise due to very high infection rates in the Omicron wave. Since the beginning of the pandemic, economic inactivity due to long-term sickness has risen by 120,900 among the working-age population, fueling the UK's current labour shortage. An estimated 80,000 people have left employment due to Long COVID. We argue that governments need to tackle the twin challenges to public health and labour supply and provide employment protection and financial support for individuals and firms affected by Long COVID.

PurposeThis paper has three aims: Firstly, it puts the pandemic-induced surge in homeworking into context by charting trends in homeworking in the UK since the early 1980s. Secondly, it examines what effect the growth in homeworking during the pandemic has had on employees' self-reported levels of productivity. Thirdly, it assesses whether the spike in homeworking is a flash in the pan or a permanent feature of the post-pandemic world.Design/methodology/approachThe paper uses cross-sectional and longitudinal data taken from three nationally representative surveys of workers: (1) the Labour Force Survey (LFS), an official government survey carried out between 1981 and 2019; (2) a special module of the Opinions and Lifestyle Survey (OPN), also an official government survey, which has been run every week since the pandemic began in March 2020; and (3) the Understanding Society Covid-19 Study, an online survey of the same people interviewed on six occasions during 2020.FindingsThe recent surge in homeworking in the UK during the pandemic has been dramatic. Before 2020, it had taken almost 40 years for homeworking to grow by three percentage points, but its prevalence grew eight-fold virtually overnight as people were instructed to work at home if they can because of the pandemic. Despite theories and predictions to the contrary, employees reported that their productivity was not adversely affected. Seven out of ten employees said that they were able to get as much done while working at home in June 2020 as they were able to do six months earlier. By September 2020, this proportion had risen to 85%. However, around one in six homeworkers reported that their productivity had fallen.Research limitations/implicationsWhile there are solid theoretical reasons for the paper's findings, these data do not allow us to test all of the mechanisms involved. In addition, our outcome measure relies on employees' self-reports of how their hourly productivity changed when working at home and is not based on a direct measure of changes to output per hour. However, surveys of employers also suggest that, on average, productivity has not been reduced by the pandemic-induced surge in homeworking.Social implicationsThis paper argues that a higher level of homeworking is here to stay. Nine out of ten employees who worked at home during the pandemic said that they would like to continue working at home when they did not have to. Furthermore, those keenest to continue working at home were the most productive, hence providing a business case for a sustained increase in the prevalence of homeworking after the pandemic has passed. Nevertheless, the experience of homeworking varies with those with higher domestic commitments reporting significantly lower levels of productivity.Originality/valueThere is an urgent need to investigate what effect enforced, as opposed to voluntary, homeworking has had on employee productivity. In addition, in order to decide whether continued homeworking should be encouraged or discouraged, policymakers and employers need to know what effect continuing with these arrangements is likely to have on employee productivity. This paper answers these questions using robust survey data collected in the UK throughout 2020, complemented by evidence taken from a variety of employer surveys.

Purpose: this paper has three aims. First, it puts the pandemic-induced surge in homeworking into context by charting trends in homeworking in the UK since the early 1980s. Secondly, it examines what effect the growth in homeworking during the pandemic has had on employees' self-reported levels of productivity. Thirdly, it assesses whether the spike in homeworking is a flash in the pan or a permanent feature of the post-pandemic world. Design/Methodology/Approach: the paper uses cross-sectional and longitudinal data taken from three nationally representative surveys of workers: (1) the Labour Force Survey, an official government survey carried out between 1981 and 2019; (2) a special module of the Opinions and Lifestyle Survey, also an official government survey, which has been run every week since the pandemic began in March 2020; and (3) the Understanding Society Covid-19 Study, an online survey of the same people interviewed on six occasions during 2020. Findings: the recent surge in homeworking in the UK during the pandemic has been dramatic. Before 2020 it had taken almost 40 years for homeworking to grow by three percentage points, but its prevalence grew eight-fold virtually overnight as people were instructed to work at home if they can because of the pandemic. However, despite theories and predictions to the contrary, employees reported that their productivity was not adversely affected. Seven out of ten employees said that they were able to get as much done while working at home in June 2020 as they were able to do six months earlier. By September 2020, this proportion had risen to 85%. Originality/Value: there is an urgent need to investigate what effect enforced, as opposed to voluntary, homeworking has had on employee productivity. In addition, in order to decide whether continued homeworking should be encouraged or discouraged, policy makers and employers need to know what effect continuing with these arrangements is likely to have on employee productivity. This paper answers these questions using robust survey data collected in the UK throughout 2020 complemented by evidence taken from a variety of employer surveys. Social Implications: the paper argues that a higher level of homeworking is here to stay. Nine out of ten employees who worked at home during the pandemic said that they would like to continue working at home when they did not have to. Furthermore, those keenest to continue working at home were the most productive, hence providing a business case for a sustained increase in the prevalence of homeworking after the pandemic has past. Nevertheless, the experience of homeworking varies with those with higher domestic commitments reporting significantly lower levels of productivity. Research Implications/Limitations: while there are solid theoretical reasons for the paper's findings, these data do not allow us to test all of the mechanisms involved. In addition, our outcome measure relies on employees' self-reports of how their hourly productivity changed when working at home and is not based on a direct measure of changes to output per hour. However, surveys of employers suggest that, on average, productivity has not been reduced by the pandemic-induced surge in homeworking.