Who is Teleworking and Where from? Exploring the Main Determinants of Telework in Europe

Abstract

Telework and ICT-based mobile work (TICTM) arrangements have emerged in response to technological changes driven by digitalisation, increasing flexibility within the labour market, and globalisation. As telework becomes more widespread, these flexible models of work are rapidly expanding to new categories of employees, changing the factors traditionally found to be important for telework eligibility. The aim of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of new profiles of teleworkers, examining main factors that increase or decrease the likelihood of different TICTM arrangements. We apply multinomial logistic regression models to a sample of more than 20,000 workers from the 6th European Working Conditions Survey. Our findings confirm the heterogeneity in the profiles of teleworkers, particularly distinguishing by TICTM arrangement. Occasional teleworkers are usually male managers or professionals, but a relevant percentage of highly mobile teleworkers are technicians and associate professionals, while clerical support workers amount to a large group of home-based teleworkers. The majority of occasional and highly mobile teleworkers are still men, but this can no longer be said of home-based teleworkers. The correlations between telework and permanent contracts, full-time jobs, and living in urban areas are weak, showing that TICTM is spreading into more precarious, temporary, and lower-paid jobs, especially among home-based teleworkers and highly mobile teleworkers.

Job Quality and Work—Life Balance of Teleworkers

“…Although telework is not directly addressed in the Sixth EWCS, this survey does include several questions based on the main place of work and the reported use of ICT, which allowed us to create a proxy indicator that captures the incidence of telework and mobile work in all EU Member States. Adapting the definition of telework and mobile work proposed by Eurofound and ILO [ 15 ], we combined work location, level of mobility, and high ICT use to categorize three types of teleworkers and mobile workers [ 16 ]: (a) Regular home-based teleworkers are those who use ICT devices at least several times a month to work from home, and at all other locations (except the employer’s premises) less often than several times a month; (b) highly mobile teleworkers are those who work with the help of ICT devices at least several times a week in at least two locations other than the employer’s premises, or work daily in at least one other location; (c) occasional teleworkers are those working primarily at the employer’s premises, but occasionally (less than several times a month) work from home or other locations (less frequently and/or at fewer locations).…”

“…The expansion of different flexible remote work arrangements in recent years is altering the old profile associated with telework: High-status jobs that enjoy more desirable contracts, afford a high degree of autonomy, are result-oriented, and are in little need of monitoring and control [ 28 ]. Teleworking arrangements are now diffusing to more traditional parts of the economy and occupations with a lower status, also expanding among employees with routine tasks that were previously inflexibly tied to the office desk [ 16 , 18 , 29 , 30 ]. The diffusion of telework to clerical and low-skilled jobs implies that the working conditions associated with telework should have also deteriorated.…”

“…Therefore, our investigation takes the variability among the various types of remote workers as a main dimension of analysis, as recent research has shown that the level of mobility and the intensity of ICT use varies across telework arrangements, and it has a significant influence on working conditions. Since literature on gendered impacts of telework and digitalization highlight that segregation patterns of the real economy are being replicated in the digital economy, and the different implications for work–life balance of the flexibility associated with remote work [ 16 , 33 , 34 , 35 ], we incorporated the interactions between gender and type of telework as a crucial differentiating factor.…”

“…Thus, studies on the association between flexible working practices, job quality, and work–life balance are still scarce and inconclusive [ 12 ]. One possible explanation for these contradictory findings is that existing studies do not usually distinguish between different groups of teleworkers, neglecting that the consequences of telework may greatly differ depending on the kind of remote location [ 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. Hence, the aim of this article is to contribute to this debate, exploring the consequences that working remotely or telework has for several dimensions of job quality and work–life balance, focusing on two crucial axes of analysis: First, the differences by type of remote work, depending on place and frequency of flexible arrangements, and second, gender differences.…”

“…Hence, the aim of this article is to contribute to this debate, exploring the consequences that working remotely or telework has for several dimensions of job quality and work–life balance, focusing on two crucial axes of analysis: First, the differences by type of remote work, depending on place and frequency of flexible arrangements, and second, gender differences. Following Eurofound and ILO, we combined work location, level of mobility, and ICT use to categorize three main types of teleworkers according to their telework arrangements [ 6 , 15 , 16 ]: Regular home-based teleworkers, highly mobile teleworkers, and occasional teleworkers.…”