Research Finds Unpredictable Work Schedules Increase Material Hardship

An article published in Social Forces, “Hard Times: Routine Schedule Unpredictability and Material Hardship among Service Sector Workers,” examines the association between unpredictability in work schedules and household material hardship. The authors, Daniel Schneider and Kristen Harknett, found that workers who experience schedule unpredictability are more likely to experience hunger and housing, medical, and utility hardships.

Schneider and Harknett used survey data collected between 2017 and 2019 from a cross-sectional sample of 37,263 hourly workers employed at 127 of the largest U.S. retail or food service companies. Work schedule unpredictability was measured by self-reported sources of schedule stability or instability such as advanced notice for schedules, on-call shifts, last minute shift cancellations and timing changes, and volatile work hours. The authors compared these data on work schedule unpredictability to workers’ self-reported experiences with hunger, housing, medical, and utility hardships.

The analysis found retail and food service workers experience significant sources of unpredictability in their work schedules. Fifteen percent of workers reported less than 72 hours advance notice of their schedules and a similar share reported 3-6 days of notice. About 35% of workers reported at least 2 weeks of advance notice of their work schedules. Twenty-five percent of workers reported having on-call shifts, 15% reported cancelled shifts within the last month, and about 70% reported shift timing changes. Overall, 20% of workers benefitted from schedules with no sources of unpredictability and 37% reported just one source. Forty percent of workers reported two to three sources of unpredictability and just 3% reported four sources. 

Controlling for other factors, Schneider and Harknett found a positive correlation between schedule unpredictability and increased instances of material hardships. Approximately half of workers who indicated no sources of unpredictability in their schedules reported some form of material hardship compared to 70% among workers who reported three sources of unpredictability and 75% among workers who reported four sources of unpredictability. Twelve percent of workers indicating no sources of unpredictability in their schedules reported housing hardships compared to 28% of workers who had four sources of unpredictability in their schedules. Eighteen percent of workers with predictable schedules had medical hardships compared to 42% of workers with four sources of unpredictability. The share of workers with utility hardships rose from 24% to 44% between those with predictable schedules and those with the most unpredictable schedules.

Workers with unpredictable schedules struggled the most with hunger: while 23% of workers with predictable schedules reported struggling with hunger, 40% of workers with three sources of unpredictability reported the same. Half of workers with four sources of unpredictability in their work schedules struggled with hunger.

The findings suggest a worker’s earnings and living conditions are tied not only to wages but also schedules. The authors highlight that, to date, wages have received far more attention in policy proposals and research than the temporal dimension of low-wage work. Seven cities or states have passed “secure scheduling” legislation designed to make work schedules more stable and predictable. The authors call for further research into the effectiveness of these solutions to the precarity of low-wage work.

Read the article at: https://bit.ly/3DSgz8d