work employment society 2004 fagnani 551 72

http://wes.sagepub.com/Society

Work, Employment &

http://wes.sagepub.com/content/18/3/551The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0950017004045550

2004 18: 551Work Employment SocietyJeanne Fagnani and Marie-Thrse Letablier

Work and Family Life Balance: The Impact of the 35-Hour laws in France

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

British Sociological Association

can be found at:Work, Employment & SocietyAdditional services and information for

http://wes.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://wes.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://wes.sagepub.com/content/18/3/551.refs.htmlCitations:

at Bibliotheques de l'Universite Lumiere Lyon 2 on November 14, 2014wes.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Bibliotheques de l'Universite Lumiere Lyon 2 on November 14, 2014wes.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://wes.sagepub.com/http://wes.sagepub.com/content/18/3/551http://www.sagepublications.comhttp://www.britsoc.co.ukhttp://wes.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://wes.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://wes.sagepub.com/content/18/3/551.refs.htmlhttp://wes.sagepub.com/http://wes.sagepub.com/

What is This?

- Sep 6, 2004Version of Record >>

at Bibliotheques de l'Universite Lumiere Lyon 2 on November 14, 2014wes.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Bibliotheques de l'Universite Lumiere Lyon 2 on November 14, 2014wes.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://wes.sagepub.com/content/18/3/551.full.pdfhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://wes.sagepub.com/http://wes.sagepub.com/

Work and family life balance: the impact ofthe 35-hour laws in France

Jeanne FagnaniCNRS/Matisse, Universit de Paris 1, Paris, France

Marie-Thrse LetablierCNRS/Centre dEtudes de lEmploi, Paris, France

ABSTRACT

Is it sufficient to reduce working time to improve the work and family balance? Thisarticle attempts to answer this question by analyzing the impact of the French lawreducing the working week to 35 hours on the daily life, as perceived by parentswith a young child under six years old. Six out of ten respondents reported a pos-itive impact of the reduction on their work/family balance. Their judgment isdependent on the organization of work, whether it is regular and based on stan-dard working hours or irregular schedules. It is also correlated to the negotiationprocess in the workplace.

Inequalities between workers are revealed: between those employed in shelteredeconomic sectors and family-friendly companies, and those who have to acceptunsocial or flexible hours of work in exchange of a reduction of their workingtime.The article concludes that the 35-hours law has widened the gap betweenthese two groups of workers irrespective of gender and professional status.

KEY WORDS

35-hour laws / Time policies / working time / work and family balance

Introduction

n France, the majority of dual-earner couples living with young childrenhold full-time jobs and therefore have to cope with problems in combiningpaid work with family obligations. In accordance with a long tradition of

551

Work, employment and societyCopyright 2004

BSA Publications LtdVolume 18(3): 551572

[DOI: 10.1177/0950017004045550]SAGE Publications

London,Thousand Oaks,New Delhi

I

045550 Fagnani & Letablier 18/8/04 9:08 am Page 551

at Bibliotheques de l'Universite Lumiere Lyon 2 on November 14, 2014wes.sagepub.comDownloaded from

www.sagepublications.comhttp://wes.sagepub.com/

public support to mothers employment, since the eighties, family policy hasdramatically increased the number of publicly subsidized child care places(Leprince, 2003), provided working parents with generous maternity andpaternity leaves and has extended access to parental leave schemes. Morerecently, it was assumed that the 35-hour laws would also contribute toimprove the management of the daily life of working parents. However, is it suf-ficient to reduce working time to make it easier to balance work and family life,especially against the background of increasing work flexibility, diversificationof working hours, and high unemployment? This article attempts to answer thisquestion and to investigate the role of the reorganization of working time, thepatterns of work schedule, the conditions under which the negotiations werecarried out and the working environment in the formation of parents views ofthe impact of the legal reduction in working time on their daily family life. Littlehas been said on that topic as the main objective of the laws was to create jobsby sharing work and then to reduce unemployment. And therefore, evaluationsof the impact of the laws reducing working time focused primarily on the highlycontroversial question of job creation whereas little attention was paid to otherobjectives (Brunhes et al., 2001). In fact, only results from a large survey by theMinistry of Work and Social Affairs are available to assess the impact of the 35-hour laws on working parents everyday life1 (Estrade et al., 2001; Mda andOrain, 2002). The survey on the reconciliation of work and family life by par-ents of young children, which we carried out in 2000, enabled additional analy-sis on the perceptions of working parents with regard to the effects of thereduction in working time on their daily lives. Although the survey did notfocus on the impact of the 35-hours laws, it included some questions on thattopic. The responses to these specific questions will be analysed here.

In this article we first provide a general overview of the social and eco-nomic context in which the laws reducing working time were created andimplemented. Then, in a data section, we give details on the survey from whichthe analyses of the impact of the laws on the work and life balance of workingparents are drawn. Results and findings are presented in the following section.A short analysis of a more qualitative approach follows. Finally and to con-clude, a statistical analysis summarizes the results by specifying the individualcharacteristics of the two groups of respondents: those who declared to perceivea positive impact on the reconciliation of work and family life and those whoperceived a negative impact.

Reducing working time in France: setting the economicand social context

France is the sole country in Europe whose government has used legislation toimpose a collective reduction in working time. Two laws, named after theMinister who formulated them, Aubry 1 passed in 1998 and Aubry 2 in2000, imposed a reduction in the legal duration of the working week, lowering

552 Work, employment and society Volume 18 Number 3 September 2004



http://wes.sagepub.com/

the number of hours from 39 (in place since the beginning of the 1980s) to 352

(in reality this is expressed as an annual figure of 1600 hours). The policy ofreducing working time was part of the Left Coalition Governments legislativeprogramme and after its return to power in 1997, it was one of the JospinGovernments four key elements of social policy, along with universal healthcover, the creation of employment for young people and the reform of benefitsfor dependent elderly members of the population.

Against a background of high unemployment (roughly 12% when the lawwas drafted), the main objective of the redefinition of working time regulationswas to create employment by sharing the available work. However, at a rhetor-ical level, the French adoption of a 35-hour working week was also part of thesearch for a better worklife balance. Improvements in the social dialogue werealso assumed to produce on-going benefits (Dayan, 2002).

Therefore, the slogan of the years 19801990 work less, live better (tra-vailler moins pour vivre mieux) was taken up by the politicians. The Frenchapproach to a collective reduction in working time also had the objective, moreexplicit in the second law, of improving equality between men and women.According to this perspective, collective reduction imposed by law appeared tobe a means of limiting the development of part-time working, which remains astrongly gender-based form of work-sharing3 and which, in France, neverreceived the support of the trade unions. By proposing a reduction in workingtime, the Government implicitly aimed to promote greater family parity and amore equal sharing of paid and unpaid work. As a result, the responsibility forconciliating work and family life ought to be more equitably shared, in line withnew orientations in family policy concentrating on shared parenting and a lessunequal distribution of parental responsibility (Bttner et al., 2002). This con-cern for restoring a balance within couples also resulted in the establishment in2002 of a two-week paternity leave period.

However the working time regime of French households differs from thatof several other European countries: dual-earner families are more likely to bemade up of two full-time employees, working shorter hours, with a relativelysmall difference in the time worked by men and women (Franco and Winqvist,2002). This corresponds to the preferences expressed by women in France asanalysed by C. Fagan in a comparative research on working time preferences inEurope (Fagan et al. 2001). Therefore, while women in the majority ofEuropean countries would like to work less than 30 hours a week, Frenchwomen confirm their preference for full-time employment.

The working time regime of households in France is thus closer to that ofScandinavian countries than to that of their nearer neighbours (Germany,Netherlands and UK) where differences in working hours between men andwomen remain significant due both to part-time working by women and thelonger hours worked by men. Where part-time employment has increased inFrance since the 1980s, this has been in the form of under-employment ratherthan as a way of reconciling work and family life. Despite the increasing diver-sity in working hours, full-time working for both men and women is still a

553Working time and family life Fagnani & Letablier




predominant, respected norm in France, even within couples (Bielenski et al.,2002) contrary to the case in the United Kingdom, which has experienced agrowing deregulation of working time, and where the notion of protected andstandard hours is under challenge (Fagan, 2000).

Lastly, the reduction in working time was also deemed to be an opportu-nity for reorganizing working time, as demonstrated by the importance given tocompany negotiations as a way of better adjusting employees demands tofirms needs for flexibility. The result was a diversification in working timeregimes as well as a tendency to individualize working times, even within com-panies, and a trend towards segmenting the workforce (Ulrich and Estrade,2002).

A comparison of Employment surveys conducted in 1995 and 2001 pro-vides an evaluation of the effects of the first Aubry law (Afsa et al., 2003).During that period, the weekly working hours for full-time employees workingregular hours4 fell by 1 hour 20 minutes. The decrease in time worked is slightlygreater for men (1 hour 30 minutes) than for women (1 hour 15 minutes). Whenthe level in the company is taken into consideration, the type of change is dif-ferent: the working hours of top and middle management and supervisory staffremained practically unchanged between 1995 and 2001, while it decreased by1 hour 20 minutes for white-collar and by 2 hours for manual workers5. In2001, high and middle level management and supervisory staff actually workedan average of 45 hours a week, while the average for qualified industrial work-ers was 37 hours 25 minutes and was 37 hours 05 minutes for non-qualifiedindustrial workers. In general, the findings of the March 2001 Employment sur-vey demonstrate that employees who had changed to a 35-hour regime workedalmost two hours less per week than others, a figure that still remains lowerthan foreseen by the Aubry laws. A wide range of patterns of reduction inworking time was observed. For example, manual workers were the largestgroup to benefit from a reduction in daily working hours (38%) whereas thispattern of reduction concerned only 8 percent of employees at management andsupervisory level who were attributed days off or longer annual leaves. Longervacation was by far the most widespread option for high educated workers(62%) who gained on average 13.5 days per year (Afsa et al., 2003).

Problematic and hypotheses

For a better understanding of the impact of this law on the strategies developedby working parents to combine their jobs and family lives, it is important toemphasize the trade-offs and compromises between the state and the employ-ers. Firstly it is important to bear in mind that most employers were reluctantto support this law and strongly opposed the view of the government when itwas passed in 1998. However, they were obliged to come to terms with theimplementation of the law. According to the principle of compensation and inreturn for a reduction in working time, they benefited from a cut in social con-





tributions for low wage earners6. Many collective agreements stipulated thatwages would be frozen for a certain period of time. For a significant proportionof part-timers and low-paid workers, the outcome was a cut in real wages,which in turn might impact on the choice of child care arrangements.

The legislation on working hours has also been made more flexible, anddiversity has been the rule in introducing new forms of work organization.Against the background of unbalanced power relationships between employersand employees (taking into account a high unemployment rate and a low levelof trade union representation), employees have sometimes been obliged toaccept flexible working schedules and practices to which they traditionallyobjected7. Therefore, their perception of the reduction in working time dependslargely on the way work is organized and how new measures are integrated intotheir work regime.

In addition, the 35 working hours are calculated on an average annualbasis, which means that employees may sometimes work 42 hours or more aweek for a few months and much less at other periods. A wide range of optionsmay be developed within the same company, which reinforces the generalmovement towards the individualization and fragmentation of working sched-ules. As far as management is concerned, the units of reference are workingdays, which imply that employees may, for example, have a day off every twoweeks (or have a longer holiday period). But, at the same time, they may con-tinue to work for long hours every day, which does not help them to devotemore time to family obligations.

On the other hand, employees may be satisfied from the point of view oftheir working life, but feel that the reduction in working time has had a nega-tive effect on their private life; or, conversely, they may appreciate the conse-quences for their family life, but attack the detrimental impact on their workingconditions due to an intensification of work, especially when the reduction inworking hours has not been accompanied by an increase in employment withinthe enterprise (Estrade et al. 2001; Pelisse, 2002). In our survey, the focus is lim-ited to the influence of the law on parents views with respect to the organiza-tion of work and family life. In this frame of reference, we selected workingparents subject to heavy family commitments, that is, with at least one childunder six years old.

We have set out to test the validity of the following two hypotheses:

That the impact of the reduction of working hours on the work and fam-ily life balance of parents with young children is more positive where theorganization of the working time is regular, with manageable and pre-dictable hours. As a result, there is a risk that the reduction in working timewidens the gap between protected employees with regular, standard hoursand those others who have to accept flexible work scheduling.

That the manner in which the reorganization of working time is negotiatedbetween employees and employers, rather than the flexibility of working





per se, determines the judgment vis a vis the impact of the law on the dailylife.

As Alain Supiot stated, working time regulations limits the employershold on the workers life (Supiot, 2001: 64). But is it enough to simply reducethe duration of working time by legal means for the daily lives of parents withsmall children to improve? What factors have influenced their opinions? Towhat extent does the way in which the working time is organized, in particularwork schedules, influence their views? The time issues involved in the reductionin working time are not merely issues concerning the duration of working time;they also include work scheduling and the management of the flexible workingarrangements. One of the aims of the laws was to liberate time for life outsidework. However, other factors come into play when balancing family and sociallife, in particular, the management of the reduction and of the work reorgani-zation.

Data set and methodology

The survey was carried out at the beginning of 2000, two years after the firstlaw on the 35 hour limit was passed, using a sample drawn from the records offamilies in receipt of Family Allowance from six Caisses dAllocationsFamiliales (CAF: Local Family Allowance Fund): Montpellier, Bziers, Bourges,Cambrai, Essonne and Seine-Saint-Denis. These CAF were selected for reasonsof social and economic diversity, the number of places available in collectivechild care facilities for young children (crches and nursery schools), and theirgeographic location.

The primary aim of the survey was to investigate how working parentscombine a job with a family life, taking into account their work schedules, theirprofessional constraints and their child care arrangements. From the data avail-able in the CAF records, it was also possible to get information on their indi-vidual characteristics: level of income, level of education, professional status

From each of these six CAF, a representative sample of recipient familieshaving at least one child under six years old was constituted by random selec-tion (from 1000 to 2000, depending on the number of recipient families in eachCAF). In total 8624 questionnaires containing 77 questions were sent out bypost, and 3216 replies were obtained, representing a response rate of 38 per-cent after the elimination of families who had moved. From the data availablein the CAF records, it was possible to test the representativeness of the sampleat national level on several indicators (employment rate, family size, level ofincome, level of education) and to conclude that only large families are slightlyunder-represented.

Among the respondents, 98 percent of men and 87 percent of women livedwith a partner: only 68 women were lone mothers. As far as the couple fami-lies were concerned, the questionnaire could be completed by either the fatheror the mother.





In the survey, a question was asked in order to identify parents, fathers ormothers, already affected by the implementation of the first 35-hour law. Atotal of 658 respondents (499 women and 159 men) answered positively. Theyconstitute the sub sample on which the analysis of the impact of the law isbased. This sub-sample could not be representative of the wage-earners, havingat least one child aged under 6 and benefiting of a reduction in their workingtime. However, the value of this survey is that it does allow the judgment of par-ents to be compared according to a range of workplace and household charac-teristics. In a following question, these parents were asked: Do you feel that thelaw on the 35 hour has made it easier for you to combine your family life withyour working life? and then they were also asked to briefly comment theirresponse (open question). A brief qualitative analysis of the responses is pro-vided in this article.

Results and findings

Among the respondents who had their working hours reduced due to the imple-mentation of the law, 58 percent responded YES to the question Do you feelthat the law on the 35 hour has made it easier for you to combine your familylife with your working life? The figures were respectively 59.5 percent amongwomen and 55.2 percent among men. This proportion is found to be very sim-ilar to that given in another survey carried out by the Ministry of Work andEmployment at the same time and focusing on parents with children under 12years old (Mda and Orain, 2002). Some other public opinion surveys on thesame topic provide similar figures8.

The views of employees: less affected by individual circumstances than byconditions of work

When responses to the question on the impact of the reduction in working timeon the reconciliation of work/family life is related to individual characteristicsof working parents, it appears that these characteristics barely differentiate theresponses. This is supported by statistical tests (Chi-square test). As a matter offact, variables such as the level of educational qualifications (Table 1), salary,employee status and the sector of activity (Table 2) have little discriminatingeffect. Moreover, gender differences are not statistically significant. The pro-portion of mothers was only just higher than the proportion of fathers whostated that the reduction in working time had improved the conditions underwhich they organized their family and working life (respectively 59.5% and55.2%).

Likewise, employment status had relatively little influence on the respon-dents views. The number of employees on a permanent contract who feel a pos-itive impact on their family life is slightly higher (55.2%) than those on afixed-term contract (50%). Neither, the sector of activity made little difference,





although State employees expressed a positive opinion more frequently thanothers (Table 2).

The socio-professional category had also only a small influence on parentsviews (Table 3). For top and middle management and supervisory staff, andalso for manual workers, certain factors linked to working conditions (such ashaving to put in long working hours to do the same amount of work as before)could decrease the advantages of the reduction in working time.

The effect of the methods used to fix working hours

With respect to the Robien9 agreements, Doisneau (2000) has already shownthat the way in which work is organized is more determining than the personalcharacteristics of employees in the formation of their views about the effect ofthe reduction in working time. Our results confirm these observations. They


Table 1 Parents statement according to the level of education

Yes (has made No (has notLevel of education it easier) made it easier) Total

Low level (no diploma) 60.0 40.0 100.0 (n = 40)Collge, BEPC (equivalent to GCSE) 69.6 30.4 100.0 (n = 23)CAP/BEP/BAC (equivalent to GCE 54.2 45.8 100.0 (n = 332)

AS/A Level)University level 61.2 38.8 100.0 (n = 263)

Source:Enqute conciliation vie familiale et vie professionnelle, CNAF, 2000.(Survey on Reconciliation of Family and Working Life, CNAF, 2000).Chi-square = 0.222 (N.S.)

Table 2 Parents statement according to the sector of activity (public or private)

Yes (has made No (has notSector of activity it easier) made it easier) Total

State employees 67.7 32.3 100.0(n = 62)

Employees in public or nationalized 57.0 43.0 100.0companies (n = 107)

Employees in the private sector 55.2 44.8 100.0(n = 459)





highlight the effect of the climate prevalent in the company on the views ofemployees, depending on whether the employer is more or less family-friendly,that is, receptive to employees non-work obligations.

Almost half of the respondents had their working hours imposed on them,while the others were able to negotiate, either through their trade unions or bychoosing the hours themselves. Parents viewed the effect of the reduction inworking time on their family life to be positive where it had been possible tonegotiate the working hours. However they were more frequently discontentedwhen their working hours had been imposed (Table 4). This confirms one of ourhypotheses and shows the determining influence of the conditions under whichthe negotiations were carried out, and also whether there was a possibility ofchoosing working hours, on the opinion of working parents concerning theeffect of the reduction of the working time on their work and life balance.

The effect of the working hours patterns and the lengthof period of advance notice of work schedule

Although the same pattern of working hours each week remain the most preva-lent work pattern, non-standard working hours affect a significant proportionof employees. In fact, one in ten of the active population experiences non-standard work patterns, such as work in the evening or at night (Boisard andFermanian, 1999). Thus, the segmentation of hours and patterns of work, and


Table 3 Parents statement according to the socio-professional category

Yes (has made No (has notSocio-professional category it easier) made it easier) Total

Top and middle management 56.5 43.5 100.0and supervisory staff in private (n = 122)companiesTop and middle management 59.5 40.5 100.0and supervisory staff in Public (n = 126)SectorMedium level health employees 60.5 39.5 100.0

(n = 81)White collar workers 59.2 40.8 100.0

(n = 240)Manual workers 52.6 47.4 100.0

(n = 76)Others (n = 13)





the lack of synchronization between working hours and the opening hours offacilities for young children, complicates the management of daily life for par-ents, which forces them to organize complex modes of child care. Even whenparents rely on a registered childminder (the most frequently publicly subsi-dized child care arrangement for children under three years old) whose work-ing hours are supposed to be more flexible than those of crches, thechildminder often refuses to look after the child outside certain times (Fagnaniand Letablier, 2003).

In their research on the effect of the intensification of work for male andfemale employees, Fagan and Burchell (2002) provided clear evidence thatunsociable hours (and long hours) have significant negative effects on theworklife balance: the greater the level of non-standard hours, the greater thedissatisfaction. Our research also shows that the views of parents with youngchildren with respect to the reduction in working time varies greatly according


Table 4 Parents statement according to whether working hours were imposed, chosen ornegotiated

Imposed Chosen by yourself Negotiated Other

YES, has made 50.6 62.5 66.2 67.5it easierNO, has not made 49.4 37.5 33.8 32.5it easierTOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%(100.0%) (49.6) (11.7) (32.8) (5.8)

Source:Enqute conciliation vie familiale et vie professionnelle, CNAF, 2000.(Survey on Reconciliation of Family and Working Life, CNAF, 2000).p < 0.005 (significant at 0.5%)

Table 5 Parents statement according to whether or not they work non-standard hours*

YES NO(has made it (has not madeeasier) it easier) TOTAL

Employees with non-standard working hours 50.4 49.6 100%(n = 274)

Employees with standard working hours 64.1 35.9 100%(n = 340)

Source:Enqute conciliation vie familiale et vie professionnelle, CNAF, 2000.(Survey on Reconciliation of Family and Working Life, CNAF, 2000).*The question was: For those who work outside the home: do you work regularly or occasionally outside normal workinghours? (after 6.00pm in the evening, at the end of the week, before 8.00am in the morning or during the night)p < 0.001 (significant at 0.1%)




to whether or not they had unsociable working hours (i.e. after 6.00 pm in theevening, at the end of the week, before 8.00 am in the morning or during thenight). More than six in ten of parents who had fixed and standard workinghours felt that the reduction in working time had improved their daily lives,against 50 percent of those who worked non-standard hours (Table 5).

In order to organize family activities and manage child care arrangements,adequate advance notice of the work schedule is vital. The importance of thisissue is reflected in the views of parents: when their employer respects the noticeperiod (as it is the case for 85% of employees concerned): more than six in tenexpressed a positive opinion on the impact of the reduction in working time,against only 37 percent where this was not the case (Table 6). In the retail andservice sectors, for example, advance warning had been reduced from twoweeks to one week.

The impact of the duration of working time

The real duration of working time also influenced employees perceptions. Therate of positive answers was higher when the duration was close to the legalnorm. Thus, 65 percent of those who work on average between 35 and 38hours a week (that is, approximately half) answered yes against only 50 per-cent of those who work 39 hours or more (Table 7). Employees who work welloutside the norm are therefore over-represented among those who consider theimpact of the reduction in working time to be negative on their family life: theymade up 51 percent of the latter while they represent only 31 percent of thesample. As a matter of fact, some employees can work normally during theweek the same amount of hours than before (i.e. 39 hours or more) but havelonger vacation because working hours are calculated on a yearly basis.


Table 6 Parents statement according to whether or not the notice period for work schedules isrespected by employers

YES NO(has made it (has not madeeasier) it easier) TOTAL

Employer respects notice period 64.3% 35.7% 100%(n = 367)

Employer does not respect notice period 37.3% 62.7% 100%(n = 67)

Source:Enqute conciliation vie familiale et vie professionnelle, CNAF, 2000.(Survey on Reconciliation of Family and Working Life, CNAF, 2000).Field: Employees concerned by period of advance notice for working hoursp < 0.001 (significant at 0.1%)




Provisions for the reduction in working time are governed by several dif-ferent parameters. When a working parent is given extra days off, he, or she,may appreciate this new freedom, without however experiencing any benefit inthe management of his/her daily life. The calculation of working hours on anannual basis which takes different forms may be seen in a positive light byparents if it enables them to solve the often difficult problem of school holidaysand to spend more time with their children at these times. Nevertheless thesharp rise in the periods of working long hours and the irregular nature of workschedules can increase the difficulty of organizing their working and family livesfor the rest of the year. Of the measures introduced under the reduction inworking time, the cut in weekly working hours was granted with the highest


Table 7 Parents statement according to the average weekly working hours

YES (has made NO (has notit easier) made it easier) TOTAL

34 hours or less 60.2 39.8 100.0(n = 141)

Between 35 and 38 hours 64.5 35.5 100.0(n = 307)

39 hours or more 49.5 50.5 100.0(n = 203)

Source:Enqute conciliation vie familiale et vie professionnelle, CNAF, 2000.(Survey on Reconciliation of Family and Working Life, CNAF, 2000).p < 0.001 (significant at 0.1%)

Table 8 Parents statement according to patterns of working time reduction.

Yes (has made No (has notit easier) made it easier) Total

Working time calculated 52.7 47.3 100.0 (16.2%)on annual basis* (n = 110)Reduction of hours worked per day* 52.2 47.8 100.0 (20.7%)

(n = 136)Reduction of hours worked per week** 71.0 29.0 100.0 (22.0%)

(n = 145)Increase in days off* 59.5 40.5 100.0 (37.5%)

(n = 247)TOTAL (100%)

Source:Enqute conciliation vie familiale et vie professionnelle, CNAF, 2000.(Survey on Reconciliation of Family and Working Life, CNAF, 2000).* (N.S.)** p < 0.001 (significant at 0.1%)




rate of positive opinions from parents of young children with respect to theirdaily lives (Table 8).

Parents opinions closely correlated with perceptions ofthe employer and the working environment

The survey tried to catch the opinions of working parents towards the family-friendliness of their employer. In the questionnaire, parents were asked to scoretheir employer according to his (or her) attitude towards the family obligationsof employees with young children. The results show that the proportion of par-ents who stated that the reduction in working time had improved their daily liferises at the same rate as the increase in the score given to the employer (Figure1). More than eight in ten parents who awarded their employer the highestscore expressed a positive opinion vis a vis the impact of the 35-hour law ontheir work/family life balance, against only four in ten of those who markedtheir employer more harshly.

These results suggest that positive opinion about the effects of the reduc-tion in working time on family life are expressed by employees in protected


Figure 1 Distribution of positive and negative opinions in relation to score given by employee toemployer*

e Each Spot represents the proportion of respondents who gave the corresponding mark to their employer (Scale on theright of the graph). Ex: 19.2% of correspondents gave mark 1 to their employer.

Source: Enqute conciliation vie familiale et vie professionnelle, CNAF, 2000.(Survey on Reconciliation of Family and Working Life, CNAF, 2000).* The question was: In your view, have your employer, your line manager or the managers of your companysconsideration of the fact that you have to look after one or more children been very, or not at all, good? Couldyou award a score corresponding to your evaluation (Score 1 for not at all to 5 for very good)p < 0.001 (significant at 0.1%)




sectors who benefited, even before the law was passed, of good conditionslinked to their situation of working parents.

Reasons given by parents to justify their opinion

An analysis of responses to the open question which asked parents to commenttheir opinion confirms the primordial influence of working conditions and orga-nization of work schedules on the balance between work and family life10.

Those (fathers or mothers) who express a negative opinion (42% of thosewho accepted to comment their opinion) stated that their working conditionshad not changed (for example, they still work on Saturdays or Sundays), or thattheir employer does not respect commitments (with respect to time or days offfor the reduction in working time), or that the organization and scheduling ofwork do not allow them to enjoy time with their children more often. The jus-tifications given to their response attest of the impact of work organization andconditions under which the reduction in working time has been implemented.In addition, several respondents indicated that their workload had not beenreduced with the working time reduction, and that, as a result, their mentalavailability for their children had been affected. Most of them hold high quali-fied jobs, often in management. They complained about the increase in theirworkload: work had become more intensive, so they have to do the sameamount of work in a shorter time span than previously and they feel morestressed than before, mostly because they themselves have to do some of thetasks formerly performed by their colleagues or subordinates, in particular incompanies where no recruitment has been done.

Moreover, employees had to come to terms with flexible scheduling of theirworking time, which did not fit in with the operating hours of nursery schoolsor crches (Fagnani and Letablier, 2003). The aftermath of these changes inworking conditions was that they often had to rely on complementary childcare arrangements, particularly if the working hours of parents overlapped, andhad to use baby-sitters, grandparents or relatives, thus complicating the man-agement of their daily lives, increasing the mothers stress and perhaps entailinga rise in child care costs. Even when they had a day off (for example, once everytwo weeks), they could not use this opportunity to devote more time to theirchild because they usually had to work from home; a situation often related byprofessionals, men and women (Bouffartigue and Bouteiller, 2000). This phe-nomenon also blurred the distinction between work and family life.

Employees who experienced a worsening in the conditions of their dailylives consider that the duration of their working time had not changed. Theyalso attacked the inconsistency of work schedules from one week to the next,and the decrease in the period of advance notice, both of which complicated theorganization of child care. Splitting up the hours for the reduction in workingtime rather than allocating whole or half days also contributed to the deterio-rating quality of life outside working hours. In addition, the intensification ofwork in companies which had not taken on more staff, and the ensuing fatigue,





reduced their availability for family life. Sometimes the new work schedulesturned out to be less compatible with childrens timetables, and the desynchro-nization of family routines becomes the rule. Furthermore, the reorganizationof work has sometimes been accompanied by more rigidity (where each hourwas counted), ending amicable arrangements between employees and employ-ers. Lastly, the more frequent fragmentation of work schedules increases thetime spent travelling, as reported by respondents working in the trade sector,the retail and distribution industry, the care sector, transport, clothing manu-facture or industrial chemical manufacturing.

On the other hand, parents who give a positive opinion put forward argu-ments common to both fathers and mothers, and common to a broad spectrumof professions. Availability is the key word that occurred repeatedly in themajority of responses: fathers and mothers stated that they could devote moretime to their children than before. This availability was defined as: Saturdaysoff; a whole or half day off on Wednesday; more flexible daily workinghours enabling parents to take their children to school in the morning or col-lect them in the evening; and more time with children during school holidays.Some mention that they feel less tired and stressed than before, and so can bemore available for their family. Others refer to greater flexibility in managingdays off, or said that they make savings on child care costs, an important issuefor low-income families. Still others cite new opportunities for parents toarrange to take turns in looking after children. In addition, being able to nego-tiate a Wednesday or half a day off a week offered more flexibility in dealingwith the constraints of the educational system11.

Almost all the men who stated a positive impact of the 35-hour week ontheir family lives emphasized the fact that they spent more time with their chil-dren, even when they live separately from the mother. Those fathers or motherswho voiced a positive opinion on the impact of the reduction in working timeon their daily lives are more likely to have modest or average income, whilethose who said they took more days off with their children are higher educatedholding jobs at managerial or supervisory level. A recent study of the measuresused to reduce working time according to different occupations provides sameoutcomes (Afsa et al., 2003).

Positive and negative opinions: a statistical analysis

A multivariate analysis (multiple correspondence analyses) was used to providea summary of the overall findings of the survey. The analysis concerns the 658respondents who are affected by the 35-hour law and who have answered YESor NO to the question: Do you feel that the law on the 35-hour week has madeit easier for you to combine your family life with your working life?. The twogroups YES and NO have been analysed in respect with the following key vari-ables (characterizing variables):





Level of education (four levels: 1No qualification/did not know,2Education up to GCSE equivalent, 3Education up to GCE AS/A levelequivalent, 4University level).

Profession (six clusters: 1Top and middle management and supervisorystaff; 2Middle level in public/administrative/scientific/arts/commercialprofessions; 3Middle level health employees; 4 White-collar employees;5Manual workers; 6Others).

Length of working week Non-standard working hours or not Time arrive home after work Factors in allocation of work schedule


Table 9 Variables that best describe the two groups of parents who had answered yes or noto the following question *: Do you feel that the law on the 35-hour week has made it easier foryou to combine your family life with your working life?

Variables Test-value p

YES (has made it Score given to employer: 5 (Very good) 4.71 p < 0.001easier)

Measures used to apply the reduction in working 3.58 p < 0.001time: reduction of hours worked per weekEmployee has standard working hours 3.23 0.001Works, on average, between 35 and 38 hours 3.12 0.001per weekWorking hours negotiated with employer 2.98 0.001Score given to employer: 4 (Good) 2.98 0.001No work organized outside norms 2.80 0.003Employee has a Works Council which assists 1.97 0.024with child care

NO (has not made Score given to employer: 1 (Not at all) 3.68 p < 0.001it easier)

Measures used to apply the reduction in working 3.58 p < 0.001time: no reduction in hours worked per weekWorking hours imposed by employer 3.49 p < 0.001Employee has working hours outside norms 3.23 0.001Score given to employer: 2 (A little) 3.03 0.001Organization of working time outside norms 2.80 0.003Works, on average, between 39 and 40 hours 2.20 0.014per week

Source:Enqute conciliation vie familiale et vie professionnelle, CNAF, 2000.(Survey on Reconciliation of Family and Working Life, CNAF, 2000).* The key variables have been put in order of priority with the help of the value-test using SPAD software(Version 3) (A. Morineau, 1984, Notes sur la caractrisation statistique dune classe et les variables-tests, Bulletinstechniques, Centre Statistique Informatique Appliques,Vol. 2, no12, pp. 2027)




Work schedules imposed, chosen, or negotiated Net average monthly salary Assistance from Works Council for looking after or leisure activities for

children Score given to employer by employee

The ranking of variables that impacts on individuals opinion is given inTable 912. The interest of the method is to analyse a specific variable (in thiscase: work and family life balance) by exploring all the links it has with all theother variables. Modalities of characterizing variables are classified using a sta-tistical criterion: the test-value. Items are ranked by importance order. When thevalue-test is positive it means that the variable well characterizes the group, andconversely when the value-test is negative. Whatever the variables, the value-test is a statistical criteria similar to a normal distribution with mean 0 andstandard deviation 113.

Table 9 collates the results and attests of the dramatic role played by work-ing conditions, by working time schedules, and by the way of introducing thereduction in working time, in the formation of respondents opinions about theeffect of the 35-hour week on family life. Positive impact of the 35-hour lawappears to be closely linked to a perception of the employer as being family-friendly. On the other hand, those who feel a negative effect of the law expressnegative views of their company, in particular with regard to working condi-tions and employers attitude towards employees family obligations.

Discussion and conclusion

The results of the survey presented in this article confirm our hypothesesaccording to which it is not sufficient to reduce working time for working par-ents feeling more comfortable with their work and familylife balance. Otherconditions are required such as an organization of working time compatiblewith family needs and child care arrangements, good conditions under whichthe reduction of working time is introduced in companies and negotiated. Also,the methods used to implement the law have a large influence on the views ofparents with young children. Those working in protected and family-friendlysectors that benefited, even before the law was passed, from preferential condi-tions linked to their situation of working parents, declared more frequentlythan the others that the reduction of working time has made it easier for themto combine their family life with their job.

Although a majority of parents assessed a positive opinion about the extratime off they have got, a not negligible proportion was therefore disappointedand considered that no significant change affected their family life, or even thatthe impact was negative. In fact, parents of very young children perceived theimpact of the reduction in working time on their daily lives according to thespecific constraints they faced in organizing their family and working life.





Divergences between employees were to be seen whatever their profession andsector of activity is between those who can take full advantage of the reduc-tion in working time within the framework of standard, predictable, and man-ageable working hours, and those who are unable to benefit from it as they aresubject to working time calculated on a yearly basis (which implied periodswith long working hours) or to unsociable work schedules badly synchronizedwith the daily routine of young children.

Therefore, this research suggests that, taking into account the extreme het-erogeneity of workplaces, it is not sufficient to mechanically reduce workingtime for there to be an improvement in the daily lives of working parents liv-ing with young children. Assessing the impact of the law on the organizationof work and family life requires a qualified approach, given the disparitiesbetween the organization of work and the heterogeneity of family circum-stances. However, at an earlier stage in the procedure, the conditions underwhich the negotiations were carried out go back to the question of the balanceof power between employers, trade unions and employees within a companyand to the quality of the social dialogue and their repercussions direct orindirect on the well-being of families, an issue of prime importance for fam-ily policy.

This survey was a preliminary attempt to assess the impact of the 35-hourlaw on the work and family balance of parents with young children. At the timethe survey was carried out, little information on the impact of the law on fam-ily life was available, mainly because it was not its main objective. However,although the survey provides interesting outcomes, it has also limitations. Theselimitations are due to the period during which it was carried out. The resultswould have been more convincing if the survey had been carried out later afterthe new regulations of working time were implemented in all companies. By2000, the law did not apply then to small enterprizes (with less than 20 employ-ees)14. Moreover, the response rate looks rather low. However, it is rather sim-ilar to other surveys performed by CNAF or using the same data base, i.e.recipients of family allowances (CNAF, 2000). People might be reluctant toanswer such surveys because they fear controls over their rights or because theyare not confident in the anonymity.

The new government, in place since June 2002, has already made amend-ments to the law in order to attenuate its rigidity and there is currently moreflexibility in the implementation. In particular, all companies now can calculateworking time on an annual basis (law of 17 January 2003). This reform mighthave some perverse impact on the everyday life of working parents if thechanges in working schedules have not been negotiated in good conditions.Moreover, the number of overtime hours per year that are permitted for eachemployee has been progressively increasing. This means that employers are nomore encouraged to hire new staff to compensate for the reduction in the work-ing time, and consequently that the challenge of the Aubry laws is no longer onthe political and economic agenda.





Notes

1 Enqute RTT et modes de vie (Study on Reduction of Working Time andLifestyle), DARES, Ministre de lemploi et de la Solidarit, Paris.

2 The Aubry 1 law, dating from 13 June 1998, abrogates the measures set outin the Robien law of 1996. These measures instituted compensations to com-panies that reduced the working time of their employees in order to encouragethe creation of new jobs. Aubry 1 went further, setting the legal duration ofworking hours at 35 per week from 1 January 2000 for companies with morethan 20 employees, and from 1st January 2002 for all others. Aubry 1included a new clause on aid encouraging companies to negotiate a reductionin working time before the date at which the decree in the legal limit came intoforce. These measures for aid were subject to the signature of a convention withthe State, following an agreement between social partners. Companies whichlinked the reduction of working time to an increase in the size of the workforcealso benefited from a cut in social contributions (6% for a reduction in work-ing time of 10%, and 9% for a reduction of 15%). Relief was also given tocompanies facing economic difficulties who kept staff on instead of laying themoff. The Aubry 2 Law (19 January 2000) extended the application of the 35-hour week to small companies. The second law contains amendments to thefirst law, covering the overtime regime, the working time regime for managerialemployees and the modulation of working time. In particular, the second lawputs forward a broader range of options for reducing hours, including specificmeasures for top and middle management and supervisory staff. It implementsnew reductions in employers contributions and establishes a system guaran-teeing the income of employees paid at the level of the SMIC (statutory mini-mum wage). The two laws define two phases in the implementation of theworking time reduction: the first one was incitative and the second one wasimperative.

3 Eighty-five percent of part-time jobs are held by women (Source: EmploymentSurvey, INSEE, 2002).

4 Defined as working the same hours every week. This was the case for aboutthree quarters of full-time employees, excluding teachers, in 1995 and 2001.

5 It should be remembered that this data takes into account only the measuresapplied by the first Aubry law, therefore before its full extension to the publicsector and small companies with less than 20 employees.

6 Employers did not have to pay for the social security contributions of their lowpaid employees.

7 It is illustrative that sometimes they do not even take up the recently establishedpaternity leave which is statutory for the employer: only 40 percent of fatherstook two weeks off within the four months following the birth of their childduring the second semester of 2002.

8 A CSA/Liaisons Sociales telephone survey of 765 employees representative ofthe French population aged over 15 years carried out in March 2001 reached avery similar conclusion. When asked the question In your opinion, has thechange to the 35-hour week enabled a better reconciliation of family and work-ing life?, 64 percent of those questioned responded positively (68% in the





public and 63% in the private sector), 25 percent responded negatively (20%in the public, and 28% in the private sector) and 11 percent were undecided.

9 Previous to the Aubry laws, the Robien law, dated 11 June 1996, instituted asystem of help to companies that set up a reduction in working time to encour-age or safeguard employment. This measure was abrogated when the firstAubry law came into force.

10 A total of 365 responses to the open question were analysed.11 In France, children attending nursery school (cole maternelle) or primary

school (until they are 11 years old) do not have school classes on Wednesday.So, parents have to find solutions for their children to be cared for.

12 The Values-tests method was used to interpret the classes. According to thismethod, is considered to be significant, for a given class, any variable for whichthe variable mean within the class deviates significantly (statistically) (+ or )from the mean of the variable on the whole sample (Morineau, 1984). The riskof error has been fixed at 5 percent.

13 A probability P is associated to the value-test. So, if the value-test is >1.96 (fullvalue), the deviation is significant at 5 percent (bilateral test). At 10 percent thevalue-test is 1.64. To get the corresponding probability, multiply by 2.

14 See note 2.

References

Afsa, C., Biscourp, P. and Pollet, P. (2003) La baisse de la dure du travail entre1995 et 2001, INSEE Premire 881.

Bielenski, H., Bosch, G. and Wagner, A. (2002) Working Time Preferences inSixteen European Countries, Report for the European Foundation for theImprovement of Living and Working Conditions.

Boisard, P. and Fermanian, J.D. (1999) Les rythmes de travail hors normes,Economie et Statistique 3212: 11131.

Bouffartigue, P. and Bouteiller, J. (2000) Rduire le temps sans rduire la charge?Les cadres et les 35 heures, Travail et emploi 82: 3752.

Brunhes, B., Clerc, D., Mda, D. and Perret, B. (2001) 35 heures: lheure du bilan.Paris: Descle de Brouwer.

Bttner, O., Letablier, M- T. and Pennec, S. (2002) Laction publique face aux trans-formations de la famille en France, Rapport de recherche 02, Centre dtudesde lemploi, Paris.

CNAF (2000) Prestations familiales 2000, Statistiques nationales. CNAF:Direction des Statistiques, des Etudes et de la Recherche, Paris.

Dayan, J-L. (2002) Trente cinq heures: des ambitions aux ralits. Paris: laDcouverte.

Doisneau, L. (2000) Les accords Robien un an aprs: lexprience des salaris,Travail et Emploi 83: 6678.

Estrade, M-A., Mda, D. and Orain, R. (2001) Les effets de la rduction du tempsde travail sur les modes de vie. Quen pensent les salaris un an aprs?,Premires Synthses, Dares 21.1.

Fagan, C. and Burchell, B. (2002) Gender, Jobs and Working Conditions in Europe.Luxembourg: Office for Official publications of the European Communities.





Fagan, C. (with T. Warren and I. McAllister) (2001) Gender, Employment andworking-time preferences in Europe. Luxembourg: Office for OfficialPublications for the European Communities.

Fagan, C. (2000) Working Time Preferences and European Employment Policy,Paper presented at the International Working Party on Labour MarketSegmentation, UMIST, UK, July.

Fagnani, J. and Letablier, M.T. (2003) Qui soccupe des enfants pendant que lesparents travaillent?, Recherches et Prvisions 72: 2135.

Franco, A. and Winqvist, K. (2002) Les hommes et les femmes concilient travail etvie familiale, Statistiques en bref, Eurostat, Thme 3, 9/2002.

Leprince, F. (2003) Laccueil des jeunes enfants en France: tat des lieux et pistesdamlioration. Rapport pour le Haut Conseil de la population et de la famille,Paris, La Documentation franaise, 192 p. (URL) www.ladocumentationfran-caise.fr/brp/notices/034000070/shtml.

Mda, D. and Delteil, V. (2003) Les cadres face la rduction du temps de travail:toujours loin des 35 heures, mais plus satisfaits en termes de temps dgag,Travail et Emploi (to be published).

Mda, D. and Orain, R. (2002) Transformations du travail et du hors travail: lejugement des salaris, Travail et Emploi 90: 2338.

Morineau, A. (1984) Notes sur la caractrisation statistique dune classe et les vari-ables-tests, Bulletins techniques, Centre Statistique Informatique Appliques2:12.

Pelisse, J. (2002) A la recherche du temps gagn. Les 35 heures entre perceptions,rgulations et intgrations professionnelles, Travail et Emploi 90: 722.

Supiot, A. (2001) Beyond Employment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Ulrich, V. and Estrade, M-A. (2002) La rorganisation des temps travaills avec le

passage aux 35 heures: un facteur de segmentation de la main-duvre, Travailet Emploi 92: 7194.

Jeanne Fagnani

Jeanne Fagnani is Research Director at the Centre National de la Recherche

Scientifique (CNRS) (MATISSE, University of Paris 1). From 1990 to 1994, she was

responsible for the research programme funded by the National Family Allowance Fund

(CNAF). As an Expert Member of the European Observatory on National Family

Policies (19941997), she had, among other things, to analyse systems of transfers

(income tax and family benefits) as far as families were concerned.At the CNRS she has

conducted many comparative research projects, funded by the European Commission,

in collaboration with European colleagues. In these projects she has investigated, in par-

ticular, the interactions between family policy, female employment and labour markets.

She has recently made a comparative analysis of family policies in Germany and France

and highlighted their impact on their respective fertility rates and mothers employment

patterns. She is currently the French partner of the European team Transitions (funded

by the European Commission) which is conducting a three-year cross-national





comparative research: the overall objective is to examine how young men and women

negotiate motherhood and fatherhood and work-family boundaries in the context of

different national welfare states regimes. She recently published, in collaboration with

Fine-Davis, M., Giovannini, D., Hojgaard, L., and Clarke, H., Fathers and mothers. Dilemmas

of the work-life balance, A Comparative Study in Four European Countries. Dordrecht,

Boston and London: Kluwer, 2004.

Address: 39 rue dEstienne dOrves 92260 Fontenay Aux Roses, France.

E-mail: [email protected]

Marie-Thrse Letablier

Marie-Thrse Letablier is Research Director at the Centre National de la

Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) in Sociology (Centre dEtudes de lEmploi) in Paris

(France). Her main research interests include work, family and gender issues from a

European and comparative perspective. She has been involved in several European

Research Networks, on social and family policies, on womens employment and on

work and family balance. Her publications include Families and Family Policies in Europe

(with Linda Hantrais, Longman, 1996), Familles et travail: contraintes et arbitrages (with

Jeanne Fagnani, Paris: la Documentation Franaise, 2001) and a chapter on Work and

Family Balance: a new Challenge for Politics in France in J. Z. Giele and H. Holst edited

book Changing Life Patterns in Western Industrial Societies (Elsevier, 2003).

Address: Le Descartes I 29, promenade Michel Simon 93166 Noisy le Grand, Cdex,

France.

E-mail: [email protected]



work employment society 2004 fagnani 551 72

Documents

employment http

time work

family life balance

combiningpaid work

organization of work

flexible hours of work

luniversite lumiere

family obligations