Work-Life Benefits, Policies, and Programs
As illustrated, U.S. employers generally have far more latitude to determine work and family policy with few requirements to even offer policy support (Kossek & Distelberg, 2009).
Still, many organizations have made “deliberate organizational changes—in policies, practices, or the target culture—to reduce WLC and/or support employees’ lives outside of work” (Kelly et al., 2008, p. 310). While this change may in part be altruistic, WL issues are also expected to affect the “bottom line” in terms of talent management, human capital outcomes, financial performance, and operational and business outcomes (Richman, Johnson, & Noble, 2011). Since employers offer WL benefits on a voluntary basis, access and availability are uneven; more benefits are received by higher-income workers, employees of medium and large rather than small firms, white-collar (vs. blue-collar) workers, and full-time (vs. part-time) workers (Catalyst, 2011; Kossek & Distelberg, 2009; Society for Human Resource Management [SHRM], 2011). We discuss the range of potential WL benefits per the Society for Human Resource Management’s (2011) grouping in their benefits report: (a) leave benefits, (b) “familyfriendly” benefits, and (c) flexible working benefits. Yet we recognize (and examine) the difference between policies existing and policies being usable (see Kirby & Krone, 2002). See Table 14.3 for a summary of these policies.In general, patterns of leave taking are marked by gender, racial, and class differences (Rudd, 2004). The only standardization for leave policies in the United States is the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), a governmental mandate for job-protected family leave. Job-protected family leave is especially important in the United States, where a significant part of health and welfare benefits are provided through employment relationships (Rudd, 2004).
Maternity leave is the most studied benefit; Buzzanell and colleagues (see also Buzzanell & Liu, 2005, 2007; Meisenbach, Remke, Buzzanell, & Liu, 2008) extensively studied women’s attempts at maternity leave negotiations, examining how women talk about, enact, and respond to workplace pregnancy and maternity leave processes. One key takeaway from this research is that maternity leaves are an occasion for the (re)production of gender, especially in defining women as less than ideal workers. A second takeaway is that although standardization is implied, “companies enacted maternity leaves as burdens and nonroutine events” (Buzzanell & Liu, 2005, p. 11). These takeaways imply increased WLC.When considering “family-friendly” benefits, some companies have set a new standard by offering a menu of flexible work arrangements and a variety of “personal” rather than specifically parental benefits, recognizing that these benefits in particular may cause resentment among those who have no need for them (e.g., Burkett, 2000; see also the Relational Impacts on Work-Life Conflict section). Finally, regarding flexible work, according to the SHRM 2010 Job Satisfaction survey (SHRM, 2010), 46% of employees cited flexibility to balance WL issues as “very important” to job satisfaction, and flexibility is associated with lower levels of WLC. Experimental trials of several flexible-working benefits have been conducted and have resulted in lowered WLC (e.g., Moen, Kelly, & Chermack, 2009). However, measuring flexibility as formally offered by the employer is often insufficient as an indicator of flexibility available to the employee. On the (less) flexible side, many employers limit flexibility to a small portion of the workforce or workday (Galinsky, Bond, Sakai, Kim, & Giuntoli, 2008). Conversely, supervisors can also permit more flexibility than is formally allowed.
Table 14.3 Work-Life Benefits
| Work-Life Benefits Category | Access | Sample Benefits |
| Leave benefits | 84% FT/41% PT | Paid family leave, paid parental leave, paid time off for volunteering or to serve on the board of a community group, sabbatical programs, and donation programs for paid time off and/or sick leave |
| “Family-friendly” benefits | 59% FT/36% PT | Dependent care flexible spending accounts, bringing a child to work in an emergency, an on-site lactation/mother’s room, elder care benefits, domestic partner benefits, child care centers, referrals and backup care, and adoption assistance |
| Flexible working benefits | 76% FT/46% PT | Part-time work, flextime (allows employees to select their work hours within limits established by the employer), telecommuting, flexible breaks/meals, and compressed workweek |
SOURCE: Society for Human Resource Management (2011).
NOTE: N = 600 companies surveyed; FT = full time; PT = part time.Outcomes of Work-Life Benefits, Policies, and Programs. In their review of more than 150 peer-reviewed studies, Kelly et al. (2008) note the difficulty in reporting the success of WL policies because some studies evaluate the impact of having WL policies available to employees (more common), while other studies evaluate the impact of employees’ use of these policies (see their review for extended references). Yet employers consistently cite improvement in worker morale and job satisfaction after introducing WL benefits or programs (Richman et al., 2011). In particular, WL benefits are cited as increasing organizational commitment (Eaton, 2003), increasing “organizational attractiveness” for applicants (Richman et al., 2011), increasing job satisfaction (McNall, Masuda & Nicklin, 2010), and reducing turnover intention (McNall et al., 2010).
Kossek, Lewis, and Hammer (2010) further note mixed consequences of WL initiatives for individuals and organizations—while they may enable employees to manage work and caregiving, they can perpetuate stereotypes of ideal workers and increase work intensification because employees work harder out of gratefulness for the flexibility they have been granted (see also Drago, 2007). Finally, in their meta-analytic examination of aspects of “family-friendly” workplaces in reducing WLC, Mesmer-Magnus and Viswesveran (2005) utilized 38 studies (total N = 13,605) and found that they “may provide less assistance to workers in managing WLC than one may hope, as none explained more than seven percent of the variance in WLC” (p. 555). Yet of the dimensions studied, they found that a “family-friendly” work culture seemed most influential in reducing WLC.