Alternative work arrangements: meeting the challenges

Canadian Psychology, Feb-May 1998 by Armstrong-Stassen, Marjorie

Abstract

This article first examines the forces behind the emergence of alternative work arrangements in Canada in the past two decades. It then focusses upon five alternative work arrangements: part-time employment, temporary or contingent employment, flextime, compressed work weeks, and teleworking. Each alternative work arrangement is discussed in terms of its prevalence and predicted future status in Canada, the existing research findings from studies using Canadian data, and the challenges that each alternative work arrangement poses for I-O psychology. In general, there is a need to develop integrative theoretical models that incorporate factors relevant to alternative work arrangements and to conduct more empirical research comparing different alternative work arrangements and assessing alternative work arrangements across different organizations and industries. I-O psychologists need to take a more proactive role in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of alternative work arrangements.

We are currently witnessing a major structural change in work forms in Canada. The standard work form -- full-time, full-year permanent jobs -- is being supplanted by various forms of 'non-standard' work such as part-time work and temporary or contract work. These alternative work arrangements now account for approximately 30 percent of total employment in 'Canada and represented half of all the new jobs created between 1981 and 1986 (Economic Council of Canada, 1990). Moreover, it is predicted that the 'non-standard' job of today will become the standard job of the future (Human Resources Development Canada, 1994). It is therefore incumbent upon policy-makers, managers, and I-O psychologists to be prepared to meet the challenges that alternative work arrangements will pose for society as a whole, for organizations, and for individual workers.

This article first provides an overview of alternative work arrangements in Canada, the forces that have contributed to their emergence and growth, and the concerns that have been raised about such arrangements. I then focus upon five alternative work arrangements: part-time work, temporary or contingent work, flextime, compressed work weeks, and teleworking. Each alternative work arrangement section deals with the definition of the term and the various forms that the particular work arrangement may take, a general overview which provides a selective review of the literature and issues, prevalence in Canada and predicted future status, research findings from studies using Canadian data, and the challenges posed by each alternative work arrangement for I-O psychologists. This paper is not intended to provide an exhaustive review of the five alternative work arrangements but to present a Canadian perspective based upon the Canadian experience with each of these alternative work arrangements.

There are several reasons for the rapid growth of alternative work arrangements in Canada. According to Human Resources Development Canada (1994), one of the primary reasons is the current trend of organizational restructuring and downsizing and the desire of employers for greater flexibility in controlling their labour costs. The use of alternative work arrangements allows employers the freedom to bring in workers on an as-needed basis and to avoid laying off their full-time permanent employees. Another major reason for the growth of alternative work arrangements is the increase in the service economy which has traditionally relied upon non-standard employment. The dramatic growth in alternative work arrangements is not totally employer driven but also reflects the desires of employees for greater flexibility in their own lives. The increased participation of women in the labour force, especially women with children, has created a need for different working arrangements that allow women to balance their work and family responsibilities.

The growth in alternative work arrangements is, however, not without its critics. Several writers (e.g., Barling & Gallagher, 1996; Betcherman, McMullen, Leckie, and Caron, 1994) have expressed serious concerns about non-standard employment. These concerns focus upon compensation, job security, opportunities for training and career development, and protection for non-standard employees. Compared to full-time, long-term positions, the typical non-standard job pays less, offers fewer, if any, benefits, provides less employment security, and is less likely to be covered by labour legislation. There is also an increasing concern that nonstandard jobs are creating a polarization of the labour force into core workers who occupy "good" jobs and peripheral workers who occupy "bad" jobs (Economic Council of Canada, 1990). Clearly, there is a role that I-O psychology can play not only in ensuring the successful implementation of alternative work arrangements but also in addressing the criticisms that have been raised about these arrangements so that individual well-being and welfare are protected.