Changes in occupational well-being during COVID-19: the impact of age, gender, education, living alone, and telework in a Finnish four-wave population sample

Abstract

Objectives This study investigated how occupational well-being evolved across different phases, before and during the COVID-19 outbreak in the Finnish population. Whereas studies have suggested that certain demographic groups (eg, young, female) are more at risk during COVID-19, less is known whether the effects of such demographic factors may vary (i) across different phases of the unfolding viral outbreak and (ii) on different dimensions of occupational well-being. As they are predictors of changes in burnout, job boredom, and work engagement, we examined age, gender, education, living alone, and teleworking. This is the first study to provide such detailed knowledge regarding the changes in various occupational well-being dimensions before and during the COVID-19 outbreak. Methods We collected randomized population panel data at the end of 2019 and conducted three follow-up surveys with 6-month intervals (N=532). The data were analyzed with latent change score models. Results Whereas during spring 2020, occupational well-being slightly improved, in autumn 2020 well-being decreased back to pre-COVID-19 levels. There was an indication of slight increases in job boredom between before COVID-19 and summer 2021. Well-being deteriorated more for the young and those who lived alone. There was also some indication of females, those with lower education, and non-teleworkers experiencing less favorable changes in occupational well-being. Teleworking appeared to have more beneficial effects on well-being for those with lower education. Conclusions The study suggests that only relatively minor changes in well-being took place among the employed population. A particular focus in workplaces should be targeted at younger employees.

Longitudinal development of well‐being among Finnish employees during 2019–2021: Relationships with personality trait profiles

“…Prior to COVID‐19, work engagement remained rather stable over time (for a review, see Mäkikangas, Kinnunen, Feldt & Schaufeli, 2016), as theorized in its definition. Similar findings on stability over time have also been reported during the COVID‐19 pandemic (Kaltiainen & Hakanen, 2022; Oksa et al ., 2021). Some studies have demonstrated a decrease of work engagement during the pandemic (Oksa et al ., 2021; Syrek, Kühnel, Vahle‐Hinz & de Bloom, 2021), but it has also been reported to returned to its prior level when the crisis continued and employees adapted to the new situation and the likelihood that employees psychosocial and physical working conditions changed less (Bernstein, Blunden, Brodsky, Sohn & Waber, 2020; Kaltiainen & Hakanen, 2022).…”

“…Similar findings on stability over time have also been reported during the COVID‐19 pandemic (Kaltiainen & Hakanen, 2022; Oksa et al ., 2021). Some studies have demonstrated a decrease of work engagement during the pandemic (Oksa et al ., 2021; Syrek, Kühnel, Vahle‐Hinz & de Bloom, 2021), but it has also been reported to returned to its prior level when the crisis continued and employees adapted to the new situation and the likelihood that employees psychosocial and physical working conditions changed less (Bernstein, Blunden, Brodsky, Sohn & Waber, 2020; Kaltiainen & Hakanen, 2022). There is also recent evidence that highlighted the within‐person work engagement processes during remote work and yielded altogether four different longitudinal profiles (Mäkikangas et al ., 2022).…”

“…However, the results revealed separation in developmental well-being paths, indicating a smaller group of individuals with decreased well-being and certain groups of individuals with temporarily increased well-being during the pandemic. Aligning with prior research regarding stability of work engagement (Kaltiainen & Hakanen, 2022;M€ akikangas et al, 2016;, most respondents belonged to the Stable well-being profile, with high stable levels of work engagement and low burnout and psychological distress across all measurement points. The second biggest group belonged to the Engaged well-being profile, with the highest work engagement and lowest burnout and psychological distress symptoms across all measurement points compared with the other profiles.…”

The mediating role of general academic emotions in burnout and procrastination among Chinese medical undergraduates during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study

“…The prevalence of burnout differs by gender among medical professions ( 56 ). Female medical professionals suggested suffer more from burnout, due to discriminative behavior from patients, occupational biases or gendered macro-aggressions ( 57 – 59 ). However, an investigation assessing the frequency of psychological distress among physician residents showed that, whereas female residents were more likely to suffer from anxiety and depression, male residents were more vulnerable to burnout ( 60 ).…”

Overbenefitting, underbenefitting, and balanced: Different effort–reward profiles and their relationship with employee well-being, mental health, and job attitudes among young employees

“…For example, in Finland, mental illness is among the top reasons for applying for sickness benefits [ Social Insurance Institution of Finland (SIIOF), 2020 ]. Furthermore, employee ill-being has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially among young adults ( Kaltiainen and Hakanen, 2022 ). Among the young, establishing a career may be challenging ( Vuori and Price, 2015 ) and expectations towards work may be high ( Twenge and Campbell, 2008 ).…”