Working time arrangements and exhaustion: The role of recovery experiences and satisfaction with the schedule.

Working time arrangements may be a source of strain and entail negative consequences for workers, one of which can be exhaustion. Based on the job demands-resources and the conservation of resources theories, this study explores recovery experiences from work and satisfaction with the work schedule as possible resources that may prevent or minimize such negative consequences. With a sample of 386 workers (n = 287 women; 99 men) and using a cluster analysis, we identified five working time arrangements: fixed standardized, part-time, irregular standardized, flexible standardized, and nonstandard work schedule (NWS). A one-way ANOVA found that workers in the irregular standardized schedule report higher exhaustion compared to the fixed standardized and the part-time. Exhaustion of workers in NWS is higher compared to the part-time workers. A multiple linear regression analysis found that the link between recovery experiences and exhaustion varies according to the working time arrangement. Lastly, an interaction analysis confirmed the moderator effect of satisfaction with the work schedule in the relationship between recovery experiences and exhaustion for the whole sample. When this analysis was performed separately for each cluster, this effect was only significant for NWS and by disentangling this finding by recovery dimensions, only relaxation had a significant interaction effect. This study clarifies the links between different recovery experiences and exhaustion, and points to the importance of satisfaction with the work schedule in facilitating recovery under demanding working time arrangements. Results are discussed considering the complex nature of the work-family interface.

Work-Life Conflict Among Higher Education Institution Workers' During COVID-19: A Demands-Resources Approach.

Higher Education Institutions' (HEI) workers were highly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, which magnified gender differences in terms of management of work and personal life. Most studies published so far have primarily focused on a group of HEI workers' (i.e., teachers and researchers), but not on staff members, despite their crucial role for HEI functioning. Following the Job Demands-Resources theory, we aimed to: (i) characterize work-life conflict (WLC) among men and women workers from an HEI (staff and teachers/researchers) during the COVID-19 pandemic; and (ii) explore the major predictors of WLC for both staff and teachers/researchers. This study includes a sample of 262 workers from one Portuguese HEI (n = 128 staff members; n = 134 teachers/researchers) who answered an online survey. An Independent Samples T-Test showed that the reported current WLC was significantly higher for teachers/researchers compared to staff. Moreover, women teachers/researchers showed higher WLC than men. Additionally, using a Repeated Measures ANOVA, we found that the increase in the reported levels of WLC (before the pandemic and currently) was significantly more prominent among teachers/researchers than in the staff group. Regarding the predictors of WLC for both groups separately, a Multiple Hierarchical Linear Regression showed that role overload, conceptualized as a demand, was a predictor for both staff and teachers/researchers. As for potential resources, work dedication negatively predicted WLC for staff, whereas family-friendly organization perceptions predicted less WLC for teachers/researchers. These results highlight the importance of understanding HEIs holistically, by considering workers' individual characteristics such as gender, but also distinct careers inside the institutions. As most European HEIs are currently making active efforts to promote gender-equal academic workplaces, these findings may help them design tailored and effective measures to address employees' work-life balance issues, not only considering gender, but also the different types of demands associated with each group of workers within HEIs.