Valuing Alternative Work Arrangements

Alexandre Mas and Amanda Pallais
Additional contact information
Amanda Pallais: Harvard University and NBER

Working Papers from Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section.

Abstract: We use a field experiment to study how workers value alternative work arrangements. During the application process to staff a national call center we randomly offered applicants choices between traditional M-F 9 am - 5 pm office positions and alternatives. These alternatives include flexible scheduling, working from home, and positions that give the employer discretion over scheduling. We randomly varied the wage difference between the traditional option and the alternative, allowing us to estimate the entire distribution of willingness to pay (WTP) for these alternatives. We validate our results using a nationally-representative survey. The great majority of workers are not willing to pay for flexible scheduling relative to a traditional schedule: either the ability to choose the days and times of work or the number of hours they work. However, the average worker is willing to give up 20% of wages to avoid a schedule set by an employer on a week's notice. This largely represents workers' aversion to evening and weekend work, not scheduling unpredictability. Traditional M-F 9 am - 5 pm schedules are preferred by most job seekers. Despite the fact that the average worker isn't willing to pay for scheduling flexibility, a tail of workers with high WTP allows for sizable compensating differentials. Of the worker friendly options we test, workers are willing to pay the most (8% of wages) for the option of working from home. Women, particularly those with young children, have higher WTP for work from home and to avoid employer scheduling discretion. They are slightly more likely to be in jobs with these amenities, but the differences are not large enough to explain any wage gaps.

JEL-codes: J22 J29 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016-09
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (19)

Downloads: (external link)
https://dataspace.princeton.edu/bitstream/88435/ds ... 0Work%20Arrangements
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 500 Internal Server Error

Related works:
Journal Article: Valuing Alternative Work Arrangements (2017)
Working Paper: Valuing Alternative Work Arrangements (2016)
Working Paper: Valuing Alternative Work Arrangements (2016)
Working Paper: Valuing Alternative Work Arrangements (2016)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pri:indrel:602

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers from Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Bobray Bordelon (bordelon@princeton.edu).