Abstract
Evidence on the role of occupational differences in subjective working conditions during the pandemic is limited. However, an understanding of how such inequalities develop throughout the pandemic is needed to prevent an overall worsening of social inequality in society. We study occupational inequalities in subjective working conditions—work pressure and work-life balance—throughout the pandemic. We use four waves of the representative, probability-based COVID Gender (In)equality Survey Netherlands (COGIS-NL), collected between April 2020 and November 2020 in The Netherlands. The results show that higher work pressure is reported during the pandemic compared to before the pandemic, particularly among managers and professionals and white-collar workers. Occupational differences are also found in the probability of having difficulty combining work and care during the pandemic, with managers and professionals most likely to report having difficulty. These differences are no longer evident after controlling for respondent and job characteristics. This longitudinal evidence on occupational differences in subjective working conditions within the working population contributes to a better understanding of social inequalities arising and developing throughout the pandemic.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 673-689 |
Number of pages | 17 |
Journal | Sociological Inquiry |
Volume | 94 |
Issue number | 3 |
Early online date | 22 Oct 2023 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Aug 2024 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2023 The Authors. Sociological Inquiry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Alpha Kappa Delta: The International Sociology Honor Society.
Funding
We would like to thank Ilse Peeters for her help with the data preparation. Research material for the COVID‐19 Gender (In)equality Survey Netherlands (COGIS‐NL) study was supported by an ODISSEI (Open Data Infrastructure for Social Science and Economic Innovations) grant to collect data during the COVID‐19 pandemic. All authors listed on the paper were recipients of the grant. The grant allowed for the collection of data within the existing LISS panel (the Dutch Longitudinal Internet Studies for the Social Sciences). Additional funding was provided by the Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Utrecht University, and the Department of Public Administration, Radboud University Nijmegen and the Department of Sociology at the University of Amsterdam. The authors did not receive funding for the purposes of this study.
Funders | Funder number |
---|---|
COGIS‐NL | |
Department of Public Administration, Radboud University Nijmegen | |
University of Groningen | |
Department of Sociology, University of Alabama at Birmingham | |
Universiteit Utrecht |