美国联邦公务员中哪些人被拒绝远程办公?

IF 4.2 3区 管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Gregory B. Lewis, Ximena Pizarro-Bore, M. Blake Emidy
{"title":"美国联邦公务员中哪些人被拒绝远程办公?","authors":"Gregory B. Lewis, Ximena Pizarro-Bore, M. Blake Emidy","doi":"10.1177/0734371x241274126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Discretionary rewards can motivate employees but increase social inequity. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, when supervisors had substantial discretion over whether and how frequently U.S. federal employees teleworked, those who did so several times a week liked most aspects of their jobs more than those who teleworked less, especially those who were denied telework. Though telework became a necessity rather than a reward during the pandemic, supervisor discretion is increasing during the return-to-the-office period, making unequal access to telework a potential site of social inequity. Using logit analysis on the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) before and during the pandemic, we examine how race, sex, disability status, and sexual orientation affected who was denied telework and how job characteristics affected those decisions. Black, Latino, and younger employees and employees with disabilities were more likely to have telework requests turned down; differences by gender and sexual orientation barely existed.","PeriodicalId":47609,"journal":{"name":"Review of Public Personnel Administration","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who Gets Denied Telework in the U.S. Federal Service?\",\"authors\":\"Gregory B. Lewis, Ximena Pizarro-Bore, M. Blake Emidy\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0734371x241274126\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Discretionary rewards can motivate employees but increase social inequity. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, when supervisors had substantial discretion over whether and how frequently U.S. federal employees teleworked, those who did so several times a week liked most aspects of their jobs more than those who teleworked less, especially those who were denied telework. Though telework became a necessity rather than a reward during the pandemic, supervisor discretion is increasing during the return-to-the-office period, making unequal access to telework a potential site of social inequity. Using logit analysis on the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) before and during the pandemic, we examine how race, sex, disability status, and sexual orientation affected who was denied telework and how job characteristics affected those decisions. Black, Latino, and younger employees and employees with disabilities were more likely to have telework requests turned down; differences by gender and sexual orientation barely existed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47609,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Public Personnel Administration\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Public Personnel Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371x241274126\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Public Personnel Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371x241274126","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自由裁量权奖励可以激励员工,但会加剧社会不公平。在 COVID-19 大流行之前,当主管对美国联邦雇员是否远程办公以及远程办公的频率有很大的自由裁量权时,那些每周远程办公数次的雇员比那些远程办公较少的雇员更喜欢他们工作的大部分方面,尤其是那些被拒绝远程办公的雇员。尽管在大流行病期间,远程办公成为一种必需而非奖励,但在重返办公室期间,主管的自由裁量权正在增加,这使得远程办公机会的不平等成为社会不公平的潜在根源。通过对联邦雇员观点调查(Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey,FEVS)在大流行之前和期间的对数分析,我们研究了种族、性别、残疾状况和性取向如何影响哪些人被拒绝远程办公,以及工作特征如何影响这些决定。黑人、拉丁裔、年轻雇员和残疾雇员的远程办公请求更有可能被拒绝;性别和性取向方面的差异几乎不存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Who Gets Denied Telework in the U.S. Federal Service?
Discretionary rewards can motivate employees but increase social inequity. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, when supervisors had substantial discretion over whether and how frequently U.S. federal employees teleworked, those who did so several times a week liked most aspects of their jobs more than those who teleworked less, especially those who were denied telework. Though telework became a necessity rather than a reward during the pandemic, supervisor discretion is increasing during the return-to-the-office period, making unequal access to telework a potential site of social inequity. Using logit analysis on the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) before and during the pandemic, we examine how race, sex, disability status, and sexual orientation affected who was denied telework and how job characteristics affected those decisions. Black, Latino, and younger employees and employees with disabilities were more likely to have telework requests turned down; differences by gender and sexual orientation barely existed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: The Review of Public Personnel Administration publishes articles that reflect the varied approaches and methodologies used in the study and practice of public human resources management and labor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信