Age Integration as a Solution to Work–Family Conflict

The work–family conflict faced by people in the middle stages of life, when role demands are at their peak, is hardly news. In fact, work–family conflict has gone from a "side bar issue" to a "front page phenomenon" (Googins 1991). While the private and public spheres offer mostly inadequate solutions, and individuals mostly muddle through, researchers and social analysts are sounding an alarm. It is time to discuss solutions as far-reaching and revolutionary as the changes that have brought us to this critical point. I propose that a more fully age-integrated society, in which people intersperse education, work, and leisure over the life course, could be such a solution. The age-integrated model of society (Riley 1994) is an "ideal type" that provides a comprehensive framework for possible change; it is one that integrates current thinking from family and gender scholars, organizational scholars, corporate consultants, and analysts of work and the economy. The main source of work–family conflict is the erosion of the gender division of labor that was the foundation of the industrial era and the age-segregated life course. With women caring for children and running households, men had been able to focus their energies on work. By 1992, only 18% of families followed the traditional model of employed husband and homemaker wife (Reskin and Padavic 1994). Even mothers of young children, that last bastion of female reserve, have a labor force participation rate of 63%, five times higher than it was in 1950 (Cherlin 1998). Thus, the majority of working men have lost the advantages of having someone managing their personal lives, and they are losing that advantage sooner after their children arrive than in decades past. Of course, women in the labor force have never enjoyed such an arrangement. Experts estimate that by the year 2000 there will be more women than men in the labor pool from which employers draw new entrants into the workforce (Stautberg 1987). The vast majority of women currently in the labor force are in their childbearing years, and 80 to 90% of these women are expected to have children during their working lives (Galinsky, Friedman, and Hernandez 1991; Stautberg 1987). Increases in births outside of marriage and steady divorce rates of about 50% mean that there are far more single parents in the labor force than ever before. One recent study found that 23% of mothers in the workforce were single parents (Galinsky and Bond 1996). Thus, a very small and ever shrinking percentage of the labor force benefits from the unpaid work of a full-time homemaker. At the same time, caregiving for elders is something that people are increasingly likely to take on at multiple times over the life course (Marks 1996; Moen, Robinson, and Fields 1994). Yet, social institutions have not adapted to these tremendous changes in the ways that people live their work and family lives. There is a "structural lag" in the relationship between the two dynamisms that are played out in every society: the dynamism of changing lives has been outstripping the dynamism of structural change (Riley, 1987). More people from all walks of life experience work–family conflict as they wait for social structures to recognize that they are not free to devote themselves to work for several consecutive decades. Now that the responsibilities for work and family are not divided neatly along gender lines in most families, workers increasingly experience role overload; they simply have too much to do. One study of working people found almost "universal exhaustion" (Googins 1991, p. 302). Others document a sense of freneticism in the families that they studied "up close" (Helgesen 1998; Hochschild 1997). Working parents also experience role strain, because work and family compete and conflict (e.g., Greenhaus 1988; Kanter 1977). Because work institutions have largely continued to operate without paying attention to employees' personal lives, individuals and families shoulder the burden of keeping their family lives from intruding too much upon work. Work, of course, continues to spill over into family lives. Yet, now most families do not have a wife at home to buffer work's impact. In an exhaustive review of research done in the 1980s, Menaghan and Parcel 1990 found well-documented evidence of role strain in dual earner households at all socioeconomic levels. Although some studies suggest that work–family conflict is experienced similarly by men and women (Frone, Russell, and Cooper 1992; Keith and Schafer 1980), there is also evidence that women continue to bear primary responsibility for home and family and the brunt of work–family conflict (Duxbury, Higgins, and Lee 1994; Pleck 1985; Simon 1992; Thoits 1986). Leisure is perhaps the greatest casualty of the work–family crunch, especially among women. People attend to the pressing, immediate needs of jobs and children, relegating their social and personal lives to the "back burner" (Barnett and Rivers 1996, p. 93). With so many people weighed down by work–family conflict, communities suffer as well. People have more limited time and energy for volunteer work. Nor can they as easily nurture the friendships and neighborly relations that have often been key sources of social support (Googins 1991). Families are expected to solve the dilemmas of trying to raise children, have fulfilling personal lives, maintain their schools and communities, and devote themselves to work—while government and corporations mostly take a hands-off approach. Existing solutions are largely piecemeal, and do little to alter the dominance of work institutions over individual lives. Nor do they challenge the traditional model of the life course; instead, they assume a standard sequence of education, work and family, and then leisure. Finally, they do not acknowledge the kinds of fundamental changes in social structure that are needed if work–family balance is to go from a much-touted ideal to a much-needed reality. We are at a juncture that may be every bit as significant as the shift to the separate work and family spheres of industrial society (Googins 1991; Rifkin 1995; Siegel 1990). Although, short-term solutions are vital, it is also time to consider the larger social changes that would be required to provide lasting benefits to individuals and to society (Moen 1992). The age-integrated model of social structure provides the kind of template that is useful if society works toward a comprehensive solution to the urgent problem of work–family conflict. As scholars of aging and age stratification, Matilda White Riley and colleagues noted that changes in the ways that people "grow up and grow old" had not been matched by changes in how the life course was set up. The biological and social underpinnings of the typical education, work/family, and leisure sequence had been altered, leading to strains on institutions and individuals (Riley, 1987; Riley and Riley 1994). The solution they proposed was to move toward greater age integration by diminishing age barriers and bringing people of different ages together. No longer would age determine what roles an individual holds; instead, opportunities in all structures—education, work, family, leisure—would be open to people of every age, within the limits of biology (Best 1980; Riley and Riley 1994). Though the impetus for the age-integration perspective came from the study of older people who were enjoying unprecedented long and healthy lives, Riley and colleagues have long emphasized the interconnections among different age strata (e.g., Riley, Foner, and Waring 1988). Thus, they have argued that age integration would enhance the quality of life not just for older people but for people of all ages. Ideally, a society in which people intersperse education, work, and leisure over the course of their lives is one in which role strain and role overload at midlife can be dramatically lessened. With work spread out over the entire course of a lifetime, the most intense period of many jobs and careers would not have to come at the height of family responsibilities. People would be free to choose the optimal time for their intense periods of commitment to new employers or new careers. One group of researchers recently suggested that women would do best to have their children early and postpone their careers until their youngest child was about 13, because their analyses showed much less work–family conflict at that point (Higgins and Duxbury 1994). Others contend that establishing oneself at work first, and having children much later in life, may be the best work–family strategy (Sekaran and Hall 1989). As child rearing has become increasingly from biological the can be more In the young women will be able to their and later in and that work and family would be in a more age-integrated Nor would and be into the stages of life, but be as a In fact, may be required by current and in the labor As the labor has become a employers labor only for as long as they this new careers would be a of and stages would be by the of the than the age of the and Hall that that do will be at an as people live longer and continued The age-integration model could also the that women experience the most work–family conflict, they have in ways from their into the labor have that multiple roles are to and Rivers Moen, and Thoits 1986). support that commitment and energy are not but studies have that work provides and benefits for women (e.g., as is for women only social it to role strain and role overload when children are that of time on work, and roles the by caring for but too much time in these multiple roles the and In a society in which roles were spread and work were more people could work when their family demands were There is every to that people could have lives in a more age-integrated In fact, the age model people to more roles to their lives work a of the life course could the of all kinds of than on the as is currently the As one in a society in which people were longer expected to their and then the mothers not be as to a life of trying to With more people education, leisure or family from full-time work, there would also be a more of work. and people are but they are working longer and longer and 1991). The of The and of a in which there will be less work age society could provide more balance in work and the very but often work–family conflict by who work to It could also the demands of the of older people who People are longer and and one of the life is now in The of in a that not work is new (Googins 1991). There has been an in and work among older people and a of to and and that many have this The age-integration perspective can public by employers and government to consider work–family as of a larger set of life course than an of take into people of all solutions will be less piecemeal, and they are to of (Riley 1994). if to people when they have family responsibilities were to jobs for older this could solve the work–family strain of midlife and to the social if people in the middle stages of life were less by work they would be able to older in of Finally, integration of and leisure longer work lives would the dominance of work institutions over family role the labor force on the time and energy to work. Thus, many work–family the life course would free people from the current demands of work, than simply to to demands and 1996). has become increasingly Hochschild study of a showed as the up more time, family time increasingly and family life of and the as people increasingly to work to the and of their home lives. Hochschild in a many now work as more of a study of women in the of the a of home life (Helgesen 1998). and that within families are and more attention is to the society will up from the new by age new would be needed that support these and of commitment to work would have to or is an of or continue to it as a many people to work far more than they would 1998). The of the current of work, in a is a of an industrial separate spheres for men and women. recognize that work work and of work commitment are of an era and it us to about the benefits of and work in this very different that the of the so to the separate spheres model of industrial work, be the of the a change would the of that individuals and a work–family arrangement. that could their work without While some have experienced the of and and the in quality that can from on work these is a that more and could not solve such of the most solutions to work–family conflict offer in keeping the of life age-integrated perspective that recognize the needs of people at all of their lives. With a more to an work for a year at in for be able to over the course of their work lives, which they could to on work or take a without their or their standard of and are such 1996). Even workers on time could over the course of several in the of work and in could be to move toward a more work in which work is a of the of life 1990). not be the ideal for all people all of the People in how much between work and family they for many personal the and provide can be or more solutions to the dual to have a work and to family would have to become more such which to be the In fact, a by that almost one of their to experienced in 1997). It would be for people the socioeconomic to do more of their work from home if and the While most can easily the the who is a single may not have that could in some work from home to greater to balance work and responsibilities. or is the most work–family in Though in and individual needs may for the on the benefits of by and there is to such within and one study of many benefits of less work–family conflict and and and study of public found that more work–family balance and higher and 1996). a of employers child a in and rates of and It is also for to for and work to Although workers are the of such the same benefits would likely to and their In fact, when and benefits to they a rate of just and 1991). Of course, go in also recognize and support the work–family conflict faced by many support of employees' demands has been work–family conflict, and and greater and and 1992; and and on different of would also the of a more age-integrated As one has suggested a in which every who for children or elders at home would perhaps in the of a The would in the and which would be in the of a parents and child or they could the to for would be a over current which families that take of their children 1990). Rifkin of a volunteer or social be a key of an age-integrated their lives, people a in for work. One would be that people would a for every that they People at all ages who are in periods of time commitment to time or education, for do more take change also a role in the which could move to a more age-integrated As have argued (e.g., people have to be to and the in their for more lives. More of us have to that it is to it not all at The of the age-integrated model is that it may be possible to it over the course of the may be a more when it is spread Although institutions continue to individuals can continue to society in the by the opportunities that they do have for work–family conflict. Ideally, jobs would be as of a of the of the life course. people to because their jobs are too or not or too much There is a of people who would be to up their period of leisure at the of of labor (Riley 1998). In fact, some people themselves the midlife by on the at the of the work The of the working never have the to a Yet, jobs and work and work would it for people to continue working into the later decades of their The key to a life course is a different of the work were longer one then workers would have periods of leisure that and to their greater work Although the tremendous changes required to down age barriers are not easily current and provide for could to the of a society in which people move in and out of education, work, and leisure over the course of their lives, work–family conflict. The is the almost standard of that would in a society that work more the life and the socioeconomic the of standard of would have to shift from almost to one that a of less such as time, and No longer would work have as a of may to be a who from and gender are to some of their work so that can have toward are or to been by recent and 1991). Rifkin that continued of jobs industrial and at all of the may force a shift in thinking about the of work. In there is some evidence that people are to more about how much they recent analyses of from the of Families and that of women and of men would to work than they do. husband and wife have some of in only in a much greater in would such a 1998). The for change in how much work is in two only of life on work While having young children women to they are working too there are between older children and men who work long are likely to that they would to work and this of the of time their work. Even when their are full-time or work time, and are free to take of these men to do less work. Hochschild a of changing work from a in to the when the their so that one would be to the not to go to the full-time they were when the The just such a shift to standard of and quality of The has been a of and there are not a of that a to will be in the (e.g., 1997). the of a that support to this to of that they would to their lives, and two they more balance in their lives. that who are working and in the of what could become a social of showed that one had a change that their and of were about the change they had such a change but of that the change was a in The point is the dominance of work institutions over all in the of an age-integrated society, current structures and that the dominance of work institutions would have to be would have to that many lives have traditional work The has been to as the long to a and there are many The current and in small may to move society in the of greater are more to their in a that as much on as it on One showed that only of small provide they are more about 1987). or faced times will as the that some employees' to ways of standard of they the that are they a work the as and organizational analysts that the kinds of changes that when they a to the As and point the to work–family conflict come from that have the greatest may be by the evidence that about work–family as they choose their jobs and 1996; and and 1989). also that people who are 1994) or of greater work and in and are more to to their In may to from working for greater work–family Working a of the best for their the in after an of the of the the of if had a to on their are very of As a to as an ideal so that can the best a on to suggest that the that employers can simply the people who to their work is a is just in of about the that because of the of about to to the same experienced workers are just more studies document the likely benefits of a work that is fully social will the In the employers simply to more about the of research evidence that work–family have benefits for The is the of gender that work–family conflict as a issue" and continues to that women are more likely to and for work, and less and jobs work 1996; 1992; which a separate spheres model gender Of course, women at the of the socioeconomic who are women of bear the greatest brunt of gender to and 1991, when mothers work to for it has for men in the work and of family life, the life for men and women proposed by the age model will not As change in of are by a commitment to gender (Moen and men have to themselves to work–family balance 1992; 1989). As long as and continue to to who the traditional many men little for until men and social support for work, they will have little for by their and less to in of gender women have been in the life that and their social roles (Helgesen 1998; and Yet, if women are the and work and time for they will have less in society and in their and 1992; and 1990). the at that corporate women be the of more careers the to and more without changing the ways careers and women would be by a that to such a an age-integrated life course provides more for the of child women will be if they are the who postpone their careers or their child rearing in an to work–family conflict. In fact, the of a life course the of women from one period of work to as they are and into caring for children, communities, and Yet, as more men are the by and continued and may become more for The to also to greater gender as men women in the role of work in their lives. There is also evidence that men are on a greater of family responsibility which may to women for more In fact, there is about work–family balance among men and and recent studies document higher of and conflict and their between work and family and One study showed that among a of who be expected to fully to traditional gender work were work–family conflict and 1994). In have only to a decades to the for fundamental change in gender There has been a in work as more and more work roles have up for women and social as as structures have in women and men in a social that for the changes in gender that would greater work–family social structures are to to the (Riley and 1994). The changes in and in the how social can be 1994). In the social shift from a primary focus on the of children, which is as a by so many in a to In fact, that the time during which people are young children is now a small of the entire life course (Riley 1992). more people are not to raise children at the could be in of responsibilities that could to a of and to 1996, p. to that or more time for a perhaps more men will and to for the age integration "ideal type" were in could the work–family conflict of the of to the current of age, and needs to live in families and time their society the changes needed to support a new social in which education, work, family, and leisure are not to of the life course, there is for greater social as well. While age integration may a in many ways it is also a very one (Moen 1992). The family could take on child responsibilities if education, work and leisure were over the life course. The would be to move from the of greater age integration to There is tremendous for research that can about the and of the kinds of solutions to work–family conflict the age-integrated model of work would have to be and take into the and of the current The changes needed are so that the of toward greater age integration may too The changes required of to an age-integrated society themselves to It is to in on a and it would not work or what it The more but more is to as to be than as to the There are us toward age integration (Moen 1992; Riley 1998). out that when there are to it when the of for change the of from a of and and have up a of to the work–family As has social change is when set on there is every to be Because the to an age-integrated society are a small change that one of is to on In the the challenge of toward age integration to in the of families, a more of work, and more lives.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.