Defining work-life balance is difficult, as it relates to each individual’s perception of what it is, what it means and how is it articulated, implemented and managed. This also
applies to the employer’s perspective. Industrial Relations Victoria (2007) and Kalliath and Brough (2008, p. 325) stated that work-life balance is about people having a measure of control over when, where and how they work.
Kalliath and Brough (2008, p. 326) defined work-life balance as:
… the individual’s perception that work and non-work activities are compatible and promote growth in accordance with an individual’s current life priorities.
This identifies the individual’s need for a balance between work and personal life, but the ability to have work compatible with current life priorities may appear unattainable. This ability would depend on a number of factors, including the type of work, qualifications, experience and suitable vacancies in the right location (Burke, 2006).
The Office of Public Employment (2004), Parkes and Langford (2008), Pocock (2005) and SSA-Vic (2005) support a working definition that:
… work-life balance is a lifestyle that allows one to successfully achieve what he or she wants in the areas of work, friendships, family and community and social activities, with no activity being to the detriment of another.
Work-life balance is drawn from multiple life roles, is highly personal and means different things to different people; it is not a static concept, as people’s needs vary depending on individual requirements and over time (Kalliath & Brough, 2008, p. 324). If needs vary across individuals and possibly over time, then how should or could an organisation address this within their workforce management practices and policies? With the growing awareness of the current skills shortage and ‘the war for talent’, a subtle shift has occurred in the arguments for work-life balance, from responding to individual employee needs to a broader-based business case (Parkes & Langford, 2008, p. 268). Placing work-life balance needs within the work context has led to gains in retention, motivation and commitment from employees and thus increased productivity and diversity (Parkes & Langford, 2008). Therefore, in the workplace setting, work-life strategies, policies, programs and practices aim to address flexibility, quality of work and life and work-life balance (Toten, 2006; Bardoel, De Cieri, & Mayson, 2008). Toten (2006, pp. 507-514) identified that work-life balance strategies include study leave and assistance, part-time work, paid parental leave, flexible working hours, job-sharing, work arrangements or purchased leave, rostered days off, working from home or telecommuting, career breaks, compressed working weeks and casual work.
Work-life conflict is a concept that describes the difficulty between people’s work and home lives as inharmonious and detrimental to the individual, both at home and work (Pocock, 2004; Duxbury & Higgins, 2008). Duxbury and Higgins (2008, p. 8) noted that the amount of work-life conflict a worker experiences depends on the type of conflict being considered; the person’s gender, the type of dependent care responsibilities and the position within the organisation. Employees’ position or status in the workplace is noted as a source of conflict, but its impact on people will vary with their experiences and roles at work and outside of work. The proportion of employees experiencing these specific forms of work-life conflict will increase in the next several years as the number of employees with elder-care responsibility increases. Duxbury and Higgins (2008, p. 1) identified two of the groups that may be at risk of experiencing higher levels of work-life conflict (or overload) as being women in the ‘sandwich generation’ who have both childcare and elder-care responsibilities and women with dependent care responsibilities. These areas of potential conflict relate to demands placed on individuals because of caring responsibilities, and workplace stressors may also contribute to work-life conflict. Therefore, organisations need to understand how an individual may be affected by such conflicts and how their workforce policies and practices could be used to assist employees in meeting personal needs whilst still participating actively in the workplace.
Organisations need to understand the importance of employees who have caring responsibilities. The nature of carer responsibilities is likely to change with population ageing, and it is anticipated that many members of the workforce will need to assume responsibility for caring for their aged parents. Rather than exiting the workforce, people will seek working arrangements that facilitate managing both work and carer roles (Kramar, 2006, p. 13). Therefore, the suite of workforce practices and provisions that assist employees in this regard needs to be carefully considered in providing appropriate assistance to the individual, without resulting in increased pressure on co- workers. Not all employees will require leave or work arrangements for caring purposes but this type of leave arranged and managed in the workplace requires careful consideration on the organisation’s part, extending to the management practices used. Without effective management, the policies that support employees with caring responsibilities will not be effective for either individuals or the organisation.
According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare [AIHW] (2007, p. 15), caring undertaken by older people is significant. Nearly 600,000 Australians provide care for older relatives or friends, and family members provide over 80% of the help given to people over 60 years of age (Managing Work-Life Balance, 2003). Martin (2006)
reported on an ABS study that found that nearly 50% of adults provided care for other children or adults, up from 42% in 2000. Forty-eight per cent of carers were employed; of these, 60% had used one or more work arrangements in order to fulfil their carer responsibilities. Women were more likely to provide care, and the most common work arrangements were paid leave and flexible working hours (Martin, 2006).
Furthermore, the care of elderly relatives often arises unexpectedly and is one of the main reasons for employees taking time off work (Shoptaugh, Phelps & Visio, 2004). The Taskforce on Care Costs (2007, p. 5) found that one in three Australians surveyed expect to care for an aged person and/or a person with a disability in the next five years. The ability to take leave or change working arrangements to care for an older person is not standard across all workforces, awards and industries. The Council on the Ageing (Tasmania) (2003, p. 5) commented that elder or ‘grey care’ may become a large burden for the community, organisations and employees as well. Therefore, it can be argued that flexible work arrangements are important in order to meet employees’ needs related to caring responsibilities.
Duxbury and Higgins (2008, p. 6) noted that elder-care is more likely to be shared than childcare, and the demands of each sort of care are different. Employees with elder- care responsibilities are more likely to report difficulties in balancing work and home responsibilities than those with no elder-care commitment (Neal, Chapman, Ingersoll- Dayton, Emlen & Boise, 1990). The likelihood of a person needing to provide care to someone else increases with age, peaking for women between 55 and 64 years of age and for men aged over 75 (Neal et al, 1990). If mature-aged people are being encouraged to remain in the workforce, for many the question of being able to provide direct or indirect care and stay in employment will remain a concern. Similarly, Dobkin (2009, p. 1) found that employees who are caregivers are most likely to be middle-aged and have accumulated the most expertise, skills and institutional memory, and are consequently the most expensive for organisations to replace. Considering the larger cohort of older employees in the workforce, the need for them to provide care is a likely prospect. How organisations respond to providing employees with leave to care for others will need to be considered from both the perspective of the employee and the organisational need, as it will require a range of options and not a one-off or one-size- fits-all approach.
Organisations that have addressed elder-care concerns have typically done so by offering consultation and referral services to assist employees with elder-care arrangements. Employees’ success or failure in procuring satisfactory elder-care
arrangements could have a dramatic impact on other employee attitudes and behaviours (Shoptaugh, Phelps and Visio, 2004, p. 181). Organisations are attempting to clarify their roles in this process and develop effective interventions according to Shoptaugh, Phelps and Visio (2004, p. 192) who found that only 11% of their respondents (predominantly female nurses) reported that they were satisfied with their elder-care arrangements.
The House of Representative Standing Committee on Family and Human Services (2006) noted that the current demographic pattern is leading to a ‘care crunch’ converging particularly on middle-aged Australians who find that they are responsible for caring for both children and ageing parents. The challenge for employees and employers with regard to caring responsibilities is immense and there is no one-size- fits-all approach that will provide access and equity to everyone at the exact times of need. The current literature portrays work-life balance as one of the central components of organisational workforce policies in order to attract, engage and retain employees.