悉尼大學 The University of Sydney：論述規劃在工作與生活平衡的工作的相關內容

Working out the work in work-life balance
規劃在工作與生活平衡的工作

Generally, the work-life balance debate assumes that individuals have too much rather than too little work – a debilitating long working hours culture is said to be pervasive (IDS, 2000). In Italy the concern about working time features in Basso’s (2003) Modern Times , An cient Hours , in the US in Schor’s (1991) The Overw orked Ame rican and in the UK in Bunting’s (2004) Willing Slaves, in which it is claimed, playing on the book’s sub-title, work is not just ruling but ruining our lives. In France campaigns for reducing working time have rallied around the phrase “work less, live better” (cited in Fagnani and Letablier, 2004). Consequently, it is the – more or less explicit – premise that work is bad and to be contained, and throughout work-life balance debate and practice, working time is the stated point of intervention.
一般來說，工作與生活平衡的辯論假定個人有太多而不是太少的工作 - 一個衰弱的工作時間長，文化被說成是普遍的（IDS，2000年）。在意大利，關于工作時間的特點巴索（2003）現代時代，一個古小時，在美國肖爾（1991）的Overw orked阿梅菜和英國鹀（2004）愿意奴隸的關注，在它被稱，打在書的副標題，工作不只是統治，但毀了我們的生活。在法國活動，減少工作時間的反彈左右的短語“工作少，生活得更好”（引在Fagnani Letablier，2004年）。因此，它是 - 明確或多或少 - 前提是工作是壞的，須載，并在整個工作與生活平衡的辯論和實踐，工作時間是既定的介入點。

That work can have a debilitating effect on life is not new. Although not framed as such, work-life balance featured in earlier debate about the hidden injuries of work and the effects of these injuries on workers’ lives. Studs Terkel’s (1972, p. xiii) influential US book Workin gstarts thus: “This book, being about work, is, by its very nature, about violence – to the spirit as well as to the body. ...The scars, psychic as well as physical, brought home to the supper table and the TV set, may have touched, malignantly, the soul of our society.” More recent, and similarly influential, analyses echo this theme. Australian Barbara Pocock (2003, p. 153), for example, picks up on the moodiness at home that results from working excessively long hours, the guilt that parents feel for not attending their children’s “significant events” at school and the fraying of community fabric as workers’ time to run local clubs disappears: “Grumpy people do not make great lovers, fathers, mothers, drivers, neighbours or golfers ” she states.
這項工作可以有一個衰弱的生活影響是不是新的。雖然沒有誣陷正因為如此，工作與生活的平衡，精選早期辯論隱藏受傷的工作和這些受傷工人的生活的影響。Studs Terkel（1972年，第13）美國有影響力的書從而日夜不停gstarts：“這本書，是關于工作，是其本質，關于暴力 - 的精神以及身體。 ...的疤痕，心理以及身體，帶回家的的夜宵表和電視機，可能會感動，惡性的靈魂，我們的社會。“更近，同樣影響力，分析呼應這一主題。澳大利亞芭芭拉•波考克（2003年，第153頁），例如，拿起喜怒無常工作時間過長，負罪感，父母覺得在家里不參加自己孩子的“重要事件”，在學校和社區織物磨損工人的時間來運行本地俱樂部消失：“脾氣暴躁的人不要讓偉大的情人，父親，母親，司機，鄰居或高爾夫球運動員”，她說。#p#分頁標題#e#

What are different now are the context and the solutions to these perceived problems. In the past, from the human relations school of the 1930s to the behavioural psychology interventions of the 1950s to the socio-technical systems of the 1970s, solutions to debilitating work were sought in job redesign and better management that aimed at “humanising” the workplace. Despite claims that work is not just ruling our lives but ruining our lives, workplace practices feature remarkably little in current work-life balance debate. Instead, the solution is said to be rolling back work in order to provide remedial opportunity for workers to recover from work.
現在有什么不同背景和解決存在的問題。在過去,從人際關系學校的1930年代的行為心理學干預1950年代社會技術系統的1970年代,解決工作中所獲得的衰弱工作再設計和更好的管理,旨在“人性化”的工作場所。盡管聲稱工作不僅僅是統治我們的生活但破壞我們的生活,工作場所的實踐特性非常小在電流平衡工作與生活的辯論。相反,這個解決方案是回滾工作為了提供補救的機會來恢復工作的工人。

However, a slight of hand occurs at this point because the most common policy prescription by government and practice offered by employers is not to shorten working hours but to provide employees with more flexibility in their working hours, for instance by part-time working or flexi-hours. Two indicative examples from two anonymised British supermarket chains are provided by Nickson et al.
然而,一個輕微的手此時出現,因為由政府提出最常見的政策指示和由雇主提供的實踐不是縮短工時而為員工提供更靈活的工作時間,比如通過兼職工作或靈活性小時。來自兩個匿名的英國連鎖超市的兩個象征性例子是由Nickson et al提供(2004) 。

Employers have their own interest in flexible working hours (Wiseet al. in this issue; see also Schneider et al. 2006). Having to service a 24/7 economy, employers need to deviate from the 9 to 5 work day. Flexible working hours schemes are offered as work-life balance allowing employers to appear employee-friendly whilst meeting business needs. Other useful work-life balance provisions, such as cre` ches, are a more expensive option for employers and are less prevalent. In Schneider et al.’s (2006) research, 83 per cent of employers in German Rheinland-Pfalz offered flexible working hours and only 30 per cent other types of work-life balance provision. The perception of employer-employee win-win may well therefore be a one-sided gain. As Wise et al. note, the flexibility needs being met tend to be those of employers rather than employees.
雇主在靈活的工作時間內有他們自己的興趣，（Wiseet人在這個問題上也看到Schneider等人，2006）。經濟服務24/7，雇主需要脫離9至5個工作日。作為工作與生活的平衡，讓雇主出現員工友好的同時滿足業務需求提供靈活的工作時間計劃。其他有用的工作與生活平衡的規定，如創建`CHES，是一個為雇主和更昂貴的選擇是不太普遍。施耐德等人。“（2006年）的研究中，83％在德國萊茵蘭 - 普法爾茨州的雇主提供靈活的工作時間只有30％，其他類型的工作與生活的平衡提供。雇主與雇員雙贏的看法，因此很可能是一種片面的增益。 Wise等人。注意，需要得到滿足的往往是那些雇主而不是雇員的靈活性。#p#分頁標題#e#
http://ukthesis.org/thesis_sample/guanlileizuoye

As the above examples also reveal, flexible working arrangements have a common theme – workers having caring responsibilities. The common premise is that work-life balance provisions are introduced to help employees reconcile what they want to do (care) with what they have to do (work). However, there is ambiguity here. Current public discourse aimed at the prime targets of work-life balance programmes (young working mothers) promotes, even idealises, work. In lifestyle magazines, TV drama and “Yummy Mummy” novels aimed at affluent, suburban 30-something females, work features as a place of intellectual expression and personal achievement as opposed to the loving but intellectually stultifying and socially under-appreciated
realm of school runs, grocery shopping and coffee mornings (see also Behr, 2007). Under these circumstances, work can represent escape and self-expression. Indeed, academic research has found that, for women, having more than two children leads to longer working hours “as a means of escaping family stress” (Cowling, 2005, p. 30) – a point also argued by Hochschild (1997). Even when work is experienced as stressful, workers may prefer it to home Trinca and Fox argue in Better than Sex; “running parallel with the exhaustion and long hours in the workplace there [is] a sense of excitement and purpose about work. It seem[s] that many people fe[el] real at work, where life [is] sometimes smoother than at home” (Trinca and Fox, 2004, p. 7).
正如上面的例子也顯示，靈活的工作安排有一個共同的主題 - 工人擁有關懷責任。共同的前提是，工作與生活的平衡規定，幫助員工調和他們想要做什么，與他們有什么做的（工作）（護理）。然而，存在模棱兩可。當前的工作與生活平衡計劃（青年工作的母親）的首要目標旨在促進公共話語，甚至理想化，工作。在生活方式的雜志，電視劇和小說“漂亮媽媽”瞄準富裕，郊區30出頭的女性，知識表達和個人成就，而不是作為一個地方的工作特點的愛，但智力愚鈍和社會贊賞學校的運行，買菜和咖啡的早晨（見Behr，2007）的境界。在這種情況下，工作可以代表逃生和自我表達。事實上，學術研究已經發現，對于女性而言，有兩個以上孩子會導致更長的工作時間“逃避家庭壓力的一種手段”（Cowling，2005年，第30頁） - 這一點也辯稱的Hochschild（1997）。即使工作經歷的壓力，工人可能會更喜歡它首頁特林卡和福克斯認為比性更好;“平行運行的枯竭和長時間在工作場所，是對工作的興奮和目的感。 [S]，它似乎很多人FE[EL]真正的在工作，生活有時比在家里更順暢“（特林卡和福克斯，2004年，第7頁）。

This experience raises a key point. Not only do work-life balance programmes pay little attention to deleterious work per se, they also ignore the possibility that work can be a source of satisfaction and self-fulfilment. As Isles (2004, p. 23) states, “work can make a major contribution – for somethe major contribution – to overall life satisfaction” (emphasis in the original). Two-thirds of both UK men (66 per cent) and women (68 per cent) are satisfied or very satisfied with their current job according to Introduction Isles, who even argues that around 8 per cent of the UK workforce or 2.4m workers prefer work to home, suffering “work-lust”.#p#分頁標題#e#
這方面的經驗，提出了一個關鍵點。工作與生活平衡方案不僅不注意本身有害的工作，他們也忽略的來源可以是工作滿意度和自我實現的可能性。作為群島（2004年，第23頁）的狀態，“工作可以使一個重大貢獻 - 為主要貢獻somethe - 整體生活滿意度”（重點為原文）。三分之二的兩個英國男人（66％）和女性（68％）表示滿意或非常滿意自己目前的工作介紹三島，他們甚至認為，8％左右的英國勞動力或2.4米工人的喜歡離家工作，患“工作的欲望”。

Thus, premised on negative and reductionist assumptions about work, the work-life balance debate fails to capture more varied employee attitudes to and engagement with work. This can be counter-productive, for, as Moore points out in her contribution to this issue, whether work-life balance is achieved can depend more on employee work attitudes than on employer work-life balance provisions.
因此，消極和還原工作假設為前提，工作與生活平衡的辯論未能捕捉更多樣化的員工的態度和參與工作。這可能是適得其反，摩爾指出，在這個問題上她的貢獻，實現工作與生活的平衡是否可以更多地取決于員工的工作態度比雇主的工作與生活的平衡規定。