|Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Working at home and outside: Working conditions and non-working hours
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2021-12-118-138
Abstract
In the presence of anti-epidemic restrictions, telework has become widespread around the world. This trend has provoked numerous debates on how efficient and convenient work from home is compared to that performed on special premises. However, work from home is not the only non-standard form of work activity. This study explores different types of workplace — locations and premises where workers perform their duties. Empirical analysis exploits microdata from “The time use survey” conducted by the Russian Statistical Agency in 2019. The survey identifies six types of work: on standard premises (offices or shop-floors), telework, homebased work, work performed in special facility (like kiosks, pavilions, gas filling stations, garages, etc.), in open air facilities (like construction sites or agricultural fields), or transportation/delivery services. These types of workplace differ in terms of employment and working conditions, work safety and commuting time, potentially contributing to social stratification. Thus, heterogeneity in “workplaces” contributes to social stratification, affects distribution of economic benefits and health risks and can be an additional measure of labor market inequality.
About the Author
G. A. Monusova
Primakov Institute of World Economy and International Relations, RAS
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Galina A. Monusova
Moscow
References
1. Gimpelson V., Kapeliushnikov R. (eds.) (2006). Non-standard employment. Moscow: HSE Publ. (In Russian).
2. Gordon L., Klopov E. (1972). Man after work. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russian).
3. Patrushev V. D., Artemov V. A., Novokhatskaya O. V. (2001). Study of time budgets in Russia in the XX century. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya, No. 6, pp. 112—120. (In Russian).
4. Prudenskiy G. A. (1972). Working and non-working time problems. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russian).
5. Aguiar M., Hurst E., Karabarbounis L. (2013). Time use during the Great Recession. American Economic Review, Vol. 103, No. 5, pp. 1664—1696. https://doi.org/ 10.1257/aer.103.5.1664
6. Barrero J., Bloom N., Davis S. (2021). Why working from home will stick. NBER Working Papers, No. 28731. https://doi.org/10.3386/w28731
7. Boeri T. (2011). Institutional reforms and dualism in European labor markets. In: Handbook of labor economics, Vol. 4, Part B. Elsevier, pp. 1173—1236.
8. Eurofound (2020). Living, working and COVID-19. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
9. Hamermesh D. (2002). Timing, togetherness and time windfalls. Journal of Population Economics, Vol. 15, pp. 601—623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001480100092
10. ILO (2012). International standard classification of occupations: ISCO-08. Geneva: International Labour Office.
11. ILO (2013). Report II: Statistics of work, employment and labour underutilization. Report for discussion at the 19th International conference of labour statisticians, Geneva, October 2—11. Geneva: International Labour Office.
12. OECD (2014). Employment outlook. Paris: OECD Publishing.
13. Soares S., Bonnet F., Berg J., Labouriau R. (2021). From potential to practice: Preliminary findings on the numbers of workers working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic. ILO Brief, March 31.
14. EC, IMF, OECD, UN, World Bank (2009). System of national accounts, 2008. New York: European Communities, International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, United Nations and World Bank.
15. Weeden K., Grusky D. (2005). The case for a new class map. American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 111, No. 1, pp. 141—212. https://doi.org/10.1086/428815
Supplementary files
Review
For citations:
Monusova G.A. Working at home and outside: Working conditions and non-working hours. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2021;(12):118-138. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2021-12-118-138
Views:
999
Email this article 
