Recent technological advancements have facilitated alternative work arrangements. This paper investigates how flextime and working from home (WfH) relate to workers’ well-being using longitudinal data drawn from the Understanding Society study for the UK. It accounts for individual, job, and family characteristics while controlling for individual fixed effects. Additionally, it employs the Oster test to examine the potential influence of unobserved variables. Results show that men experience improved job satisfaction and mental health with flextime arrangements, while women predominantly benefit in terms of job satisfaction. Additionally, women adopting remote work report heightened satisfaction with job and life, and better mental health, whereas men primarily report greater job satisfaction. Interestingly, flextime effects are stronger for men, while WfH is more beneficial for women. Some heterogeneous effects are also found by parental status, age, and income groups.

The experience of working from home changed drastically with the arrival of COVID-19. Compared to pre-pandemic experiences, key differences included the vast number of people involved, its involuntary nature, the suddenness of its implementation, its lengthy duration, and the presence of others at home. The demands of this form of remote work during lockdown have partly been mitigated by the resources employees have accessed. This study aimed to investigate the factors impacting employee performance and wellbeing while compulsorily working from home during New Zealand's first nationwide lockdown. We analyzed qualitative data gathered from employees in two organizations. The resulting aggregate dimensions across both demands and resources include organizational factors, furniture and technology factors, and individual factors. Given the ongoing nature of COVID-19 we identify new research directions for investigating remote work, and practical implications focusing on suitable home furniture and technology, plans for future remote work, and supporting employees.

Before the COVID-19 pandemic forced large sections of the workforce to work from home, the uptake of working from home in the public sector had been limited and subject to the discretion or ‘allowance decisions’ of individual managers. Allowance decisions are influenced by factors at the organisational, group and individual levels. This research examines managers’ allowance decisions on working from home at each of these levels. It compares two qualitative datasets: one exploring managerial attitudes to working from home in 2018 and another dataset collected in mid-2020, as Australia transitioned out of the initial pandemic lockdown. The findings suggest a change in the factors influencing managers’ allowance decisions. We have identified a new factor at the organisational level, in the form of local organisational criteria. At the group level, previous concerns about employee productivity largely vanished, and managers experienced an epiphany that working from home could be productive. At the individual level, a new form of managerial discretion emerged as managers attempted to reassert authority over employees working remotely. These levels intersect, and we conclude that allowance decisions are fluid and not made solely by managers but are the result of the interactions between the organisational, group and individual levels.

In this article Ian Hunter considers his experiences, learning points and recommendations on running an international law firm research service from home for 6 months, after being sent home at one hour's notice. In the article he considers working from home, including the psychological benefits of having a ‘journey’ to work, providing a research service and a library service, managing a team and the use of communications technology.