“The Policeman and the Part-Time Sales Assistant”: Household Labour Supply, Family Time and Subjective Time Pressure in Australia 1997-2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores associations between social and policy context and how parents of young children allocate time to work and family, using data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Time Use Survey (TUS) 1997 and 2006. Over the period, Australia’s economy was growing and unemployment was low. Political rhetoric supported ‘traditional’ family values, family tax policy favoured single income or ‘modified male-breadwinner’ households, and part time work was the most common ‘family-friendly’ workplace measure. Against this background, we investigate the market labour supply and intra-household time use of mothers and fathers in couple-headed households with at least one child aged 0 – 4 years (N=747 in 1997 and 626 in 2006). We identify associations between household labour supply and total (paid and unpaid) work, the way paid work, domestic labour and childcare is divided between mothers and fathers, and their subjective feelings of time pressure, at each time point. We find that by 2006, there was lower average maternal market work and a higher proportion of families with young children conformed to the one-and-a-half earner family form than in 1997. In the main there was increased total household work, increased gender specialisation in paid work and caring labour, and much higher subjective time pressure, especially for fathers and the relatively few mothers who were employed full time.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".