Flexible working tends to have positive health
effects, according to a review of medical studies by
researchers at the Cochrane Library.
A review of ten studies covering more than 16,000
people found that self-scheduling of shifts
and gradual/partial retirement led to
statistically significant improvements in either
primary outcomes (including systolic blood pressure
and heart rate; tiredness; mental health, sleep
duration, sleep quality and alertness; self-rated
health status) or secondary health outcomes
(co-workers social support and sense of community.
No ill health effects were reported.
In one study, for example, police officers who
were able to change their shift start times showed
significant improvements in psychological wellbeing
compared to police officers who started work at a
fixed hour.
Flexitime was shown not to have
significant effects on self reported physiological
and psychological health outcomes. Similarly, when
comparing individuals working overtime with
those who did not the odds of ill health effects
were not significantly higher in the intervention
group at follow up.
The effects of contractual flexibility on
self-reported health (with the exception of
gradual/partial retirement, which when controlled by
employees improved health outcomes) were either
equivocal or negative. According to the authors of
the study, based at Durham University:
"The findings of this review tentatively
suggest that flexible working interventions that
increase worker control and choice (such as
self-scheduling or gradual/partial retirement)
are likely to have a positive effect on health
outcomes.
In contrast, interventions that were
motivated or dictated by organisational
interests, such as fixed-term contract and
involuntary part-time employment, found
equivocal or negative health effects. Given the
partial and methodologically limited evidence
base these findings should be interpreted with
caution."
The criteria for inclusion in the study were that
they had to focus on a flexible working style, have
a suitable study design with a follow-up period of
at least six
months, and report on primary health outcomes using
a validated instrument. An initial 12,000
studies was narrowed down first to 214 for full
review, then to 10 that completely met their
criteria. Excluded studies for example might
not have a before and after study, or lack a control
group, or focus on job satisfaction rather than
health outcomes.
“Flexible working seems to be
more beneficial for health and
wellbeing where the individuals
control their own work patterns,
rather than where employers are
in control,” said the review
lead, Clare Bambra of the
Wolfson Research Institute,
Durham University in the UK.
“Given the limited evidence
base, we wouldn’t want to make
any hard and fast
recommendations, but these
findings certainly give
employers and employees
something to think about.”
Co-author Kerry Joyce, also based at
the Institute, added:
“We need to know more about how
the health effects of flexible
working are experienced by
different types of workers, for
instance, comparing women to
men, old to young and skilled to
unskilled. This is important as
some forms of flexible working
might only be available to
employees with higher status
occupations and this may serve
to increase existing differences
in health between social
groups.”
|
