Boundaryless working hours and recovery in Germany

Abstract

Objective Due to recent trends such as globalization and digitalization, more and more employees tend to have flexible working time arrangements, including boundaryless working hours. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationships of various aspects of boundaryless working hours (overtime, Sunday work, and extended work availability) with employees’ state of recovery. Besides, we examined the mediating and moderating role of recovery experiences (psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery, and control) in these relationships. Methods We used data from 8586 employees (48% women; average age of 48 years) who took part in the 2017 BAuA-Working Time Survey, a representative study of the German working population. Regression analyses were conducted to test main effects as well as mediation and moderation. Results Overtime work, Sunday work, and extended work availability were negatively related to state of recovery. Psychological detachment mediated these relationships. Furthermore, we found that relaxation and control mediated the association between extended work availability and state of recovery. However, no relevant moderating effects were found. Conclusions Altogether, our findings indicate that various aspects of boundaryless working hours pose a risk to employees’ state of recovery and that especially psychological detachment is a potential mechanism in these relationships. In addition, the results suggest that a high level of recovery experiences cannot attenuate these negative relationships in leisure time. Therefore, employers and employees alike should try to avoid or minimize boundaryless working hours.

Exploring Middle School Teachers’ Job Demands and Job Resources during COVID-19

“…According to Schaufeli (2017), and Schaufeli and Taris (2014), extending working hours is categorized as a job demand in the JD-R model of organizational well-being. The literature shows that rapid changes in working hours compel employees to work longer (Vieten et al, 2022;Wendsche et al, 2021). While high job demands call for recovery, the same demands impede employees from disconnecting from work (Sonnentag, 2018).…”

The association of work-related extended availability with recuperation, well-being, life domain balance and work: A meta-analysis

“…Moreover, employees may not always be aware of their own stress response and level of physiological activation when engaging in work-related tasks during leisure time. Assessing certain physiological parameters such as electrodermal activity (Posada-Quintero & Chon, 2020; Rockstroh et al, 2020a), hair cortisol (Fendel et al, 2020; Staufenbiel et al, 2013), heart parameters (Blum et al, 2019; Kim et al, 2018), keyboard typing (Freihaut & Göritz, 2021; Vizer et al, 2009), breathing patterns (Rockstroh et al, 2020b; Widjaja et al, 2013) or mouse usage (Freihaut et al, 2021; Zimmermann et al, 2003), may contribute to a more objective picture of the strain associated with WREA. We also believe it valuable if studies not only assess the consequences but also the actual extent of WREA more objectively than is possible with self-reports, as employees may not necessarily be aware of the total time they spend engaging in WREA.…”

How Transformational Leadership Affects the Off-work Recovery of Daily Personal Energy Resources via Work Engagement: Resource and Demand-based Pathways

“…Regarding recovery experiences, Chawla et al (2020) found that challenging demands perceived as sources of strain limit their beneficial outcomes to the work domain and impair off-job recovery. Negative spillover in form of ruminating about work-related tasks (Syrek & Antoni, 2014), boundaryless working hours (Vieten et al, 2022) and depleted personal energy resources in general (Meijman & Mulder, 1998) impair off-job recovery processes. More specifically, Bennett et al (2018) could show that negative spillover resulting from job demands impairs psychological detachment, relaxation, and control, but not significantly mastery.…”