OCS Study 

MMS 2001-041 

The Effects of Offshore Employment in the 

Petroleum Industry: a Cross-National 

Perspective 

Authors 

Mark Shrimpton 

Keith Storey 

Prepared under MMS Contract 

17086 

by 

Community Resource Services Ltd. 

St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada 

Published by 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Minerals Management Service Herndon, Virginia 

Environmental Studies Program September 2001 
DISCLAIMER 

This report was prepared under contract between the Minerals Management Service (MMS) and 

Community Resource Services Ltd. This report has been technically reviewed by the MMS and it has 

been approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views 

and policies of the MMS. It is, however, exempt from review and compliance with the MMS editorial 

standards. 

REPORT AVAILABILITY 

Extra copies of this report may be obtained from the Public Information Unit (Mail Stop 5034) at the 

following address: 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Minerals Management Service 

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region 

Public Information Unit (MS 5034) 

1201 Elmwood Park Boulevard 

New Orleans, Louisiana 70123-2394 

Telephone: (504) 736-2519 or 

1-800-200-GULF 

CITATION 

Suggested citation: 

Community Resource Services Ltd.. 2001. The effects of offshore employment in the petroleum industry: 

a cross-national perspective. OCS Study MMS 2001-041. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Minerals 

Management Service, Environmental Studies Program, Herndon, VA. 86 pp. 

Page i 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

We would like to thank Rodney Cluck (Sociologist, Environmental Studies Branch, Minerals Management 

Service), the Contracting Officer Technical Representative for this project, and Claudia Rogers, the 

Project Inspector, for their support and assistance throughout this research. They and their colleague 

Harry Luton also provided much thoughtful input to our work. 

This report also benefited greatly from a review workshop held in New Orleans, Louisiana, in December 

2000. The workshop participants included regulators, consultants, academics and industry 

representatives from the United States, Canada, England and Scotland. Their input, during and 

subsequent to the workshop, was of great assistance in expanding our understanding of offshore 

employment issues and appropriate responses. Particular thanks are due to Diane Austin (University of 

Arizona), Natasha Mauthner (University of Aberdeen), Lorna McKee (University of Aberdeen) and Kathy 

Parkes (University of Oxford) for their detailed review of a post-workshop draft of the report. 

The research also drew on input received from a wide range of oil industry informants interviewed in 

Houston and New Orleans in August 2001. Their input, and the assistance of Chuck Hopson (MMS) and 

Martin Sandell (Husky Energy) in helping identify them, is greatly appreciated. 

While thanking all of the above for their assistance and input, we must stress that the final responsibility 

for the content of this report lies solely with us. 

Mark Shrimpton 

Keith Storey 

St. John’s, Newfoundland 

August 2001 

Page ii 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

This report describes the findings of a study of offshore employment that was undertaken for the Minerals 

Management Service (MMS). It was designed to complement other MMS studies by providing detailed 

information on the effects of offshore employment in the petroleum industry and the options for managing 

them. The research was largely based on a review of approximately 90 papers and reports about 

commute employment, but also benefited from key informant interviews and an international workshop. 

Most offshore oil workers spend extended periods, often one or more weeks, at their workplace – usually 

a production platform or a mobile drilling rig. They then leave to live at home onshore for a non-work 

period that is also commonly one or more weeks. The offshore accommodations, recreational facilities 

and food are provided by their employer, which also provides transportation between the workplace and 

some onshore ‘pick-up point’, commonly a heliport. This work system is variously called ‘commute’, ‘flyin’, ‘fly-in/fly-out’, ‘FIFO’ or ‘long-distance commute’ employment. It was originally developed to meet the 

needs of the offshore oil industry because daily commuting was not feasible and no ‘local’ workforce or 

permanent full-time accommodations was available. The oil industry also uses this system for some 

onshore operations such as gas fields in the Australian interior and major platform construction projects. 

This employment system should not be seen as inherently problematic – like all other systems, it offers 

advantages and disadvantages for workers, those with responsibility for health and safety, training and 

other employment-related concerns, and for employees’ families and the communities and regions in 

which they live. This report discusses some of the more important of these effects in two interrelated 

categories: human resources and family issues, and community and regional issues. The focus 

throughout is the social effects of commuting, with the economic effects and management concerns only 

discussed in connection with the effects on workers, families and the communities in which they live. 

It is important to note that there are important limitations to the literature on offshore employment. For 

example, research has focused on large operations and companies, fixed work schedules and married 

male workers. The data used are often limited, qualitative and anecdotal, and where quantitative 

research has been undertaken, different variables often confound each other and make it impossible to 

separate cause and effect. Furthermore, some important studies are old and particular to specific 

operations and temporal and geographic contexts, and it is not clear to how far their findings and 

conclusions are still relevant or can be generalized to other settings. This problem is exacerbated by the 

rapid pace of change both in the oil industry and in the attitudes and expectations of workers and their 

spouses. 

Offshore employment has implications for a wide variety of interrelated work and family life issues. These 

include the effects on: health and safety; the employment of women, minorities and older workers; and 

family life. 

 

Health and Safety: There are a number of health and safety issues associated with offshore work. They 

include those relating to: operating in a hazardous environment; the remoteness of the operations; the 

hazardous nature of the commute; the use of extended shifts and rotations; and the stressful nature of the 

commute system. 

Employment of Women, Minorities and Older Workers: The offshore workplace and commute system 

raise particular issues respecting the employment of women, minorities and older workers. Management 

approaches, human resource policies and the social environment of the workplace, including the 

accommodations, are important intervening variables. 

Family Life: Married individuals form the majority of commute workers in almost all industries and 

regions. From the outset, people writing about the work system have tended to problematize its effects 

on workers and families, with little consideration of potential advantages or the dynamics of work/family 

relationships. One of the reasons for this is that commute workers often believe there are high levels of 

marital discord among their colleagues. However, while research has shown that commute operations 

have somewhat higher proportions of separated and divorced workers than do conventional ones, it is not 

Page iii 
clear that this is a direct consequence of the work system. In some cases, these workplaces seem to 

attract separated and divorced employees. 

This is not to deny that offshore work presents challenges to family relationships and may contribute to 

separation and divorce. However, it is important to assess this in the context of an understanding of the 

range of advantages and disadvantages that the system can present and a consideration of the dynamics 

of work/families relationships. The main potential advantages and disadvantages, as identified by 

workers and members of their families, are: income from offshore work; secondary and family 

employment; separation of work and family life; access to services and facilities; independence and 

decision-making; inappropriate worker behavior; family separation; and isolation from and within the 

community. However, these advantages and disadvantages are not always experienced in the same 

ways and to the same degree. The main factors underlying such variations appear to be differences in 

the availability of alternative employment, the work environment and workers' experience of it, the 

regularity and security of employment, family members' experience and expectations of family life, and 

workers' and spouses' perceptions of the impacts on the family. 

Offshore employment also has a number of related effects on the communities and regions where the 

workers live and employers do business, including the effects on: residential patterns, expenditures, noncommute employment, local investment, community life and social and recreational services. 

Residential Patterns: The spatial distribution of the workers’ homes is a critical factor in the location and 

nature of these issues. The commute schedule and transportation arrangements can give workers and 

their families considerable flexibility as to where they live. Depending largely on the schedule, 

transportation systems and employee preferences, they may live close to, or distant from, the workplace. 

Generally speaking, the dispersal is greatest when the rotation is long, when the company provides 

transportation between the workplace and multiple ‘pick-up’ points, and when the employer defrays a 

major part of the commute costs. 

Expenditures: Most offshore workers have relatively high incomes. Wage rates are often high, and these 

are commonly combined with long hours of work and considerable amounts of overtime. Furthermore, 

these workers generally have few expenses or opportunities to spend money while at the workplace. As 

a result, they generally also have high disposable incomes. Their expenditure patterns, including 

payment of local and state taxes, are largely dependent on where they live, and can make a significant 

contribution to the economy of those communities and regions. 

Non-Commute Employment: Some offshore employees have secondary paid work while in their home 

communities. This may include the use of their oil industry work skills (for example, electricians and 

welders will also use these capabilities in their secondary, home community, employment) and/or 

involvement in traditional local farming or fishing activity. In the latter case, offshore oil labor and incomes 

can help sustain the local primary sector. 

Community Life and Social and Recreational Services: Offshore work removes some citizens from 

communities on a part-time basis. This affects their ability to participate in, and contribute to, formal and 

informal social events and networks and poses particular challenges for those responsible for or involved 

with providing those services. 

Employer initiatives in such areas as work schedules, accommodations, transportation, communications, 

hiring, orientation, counseling and family policies and services can optimize the effects of the offshore 

employment in respect of all of the above issues. Regulatory authorities, trade unions, local government 

agencies, community groups and others, including the workers and families themselves, may also have 

an important role to play. 

Work Schedules: Offshore schedules commonly bring together a roster with shift work, likely involving 

the use of extended workdays. Where regular rosters are used, they vary for different types of workers, 

different employers and in different parts of the world, and they change over time. However, increasing 

numbers of personnel have very irregular schedules, or are ‘on-call’, depending on operational 

Page iv 
requirements. Twelve-hour shifts are the norm, although some may be on other schedules or on-call 24 

hours a day. Some positions normally only require day work, but most involve day and night shifts. 

The information on the effects of work schedules is often unclear or inconsistent. However, a review of 

the literature on the effects on stress, health and safety on North Sea offshore petroleum installations 

concludes that the long hours worked raise serious questions about cumulative fatigue, reduced 

performance and impaired well-being among offshore management personnel. Onshore research 

indicates that prolonged shift work may have cumulative adverse effects on sleep patterns and health, not 

accounted for solely by increasing age. However, the pattern at commute operations can be more 

complicated, with workers involved in round-the-clock activities being exposed not only to extended shifts 

and demanding work, but also to the need for adjustment to day/night shift changes. 

The scheduling of shifts poses particular difficulties offshore as rotation patterns are constrained by the 

transportation schedules and limited availability of accommodations. Lastly, there is clear evidence that, 

where employees work both day and night shifts during a period offshore, mid-rotation shift changes have 

a variety of negative effects. However, offshore personnel involved in such a pattern strongly prefer to 

work nights and then days, because it allows them to go on leave at the end of each tour adjusted to a 

normal circadian cycle. 

Accommodations: There is evidence that location, size, and type of rigs and platforms are associated 

with psychosocial outcomes among offshore personnel. However, while these findings can be attributed 

in part to the fact that newer platforms have improved design standards, recreational facilities, 

accommodations, emergency alarm systems and escape equipment, they do not allow causal 

interpretation because new installations can attract highly motivated and adaptable personnel, 

contributing to the favorable responses by employees on these newer platforms. 

Offshore workers are exposed to physical stressors such as noise, vibration, poor lighting and ventilation, 

confined living accommodations and workspace, and adverse weather conditions. Ratings of noise and 

other environmental stressors correlate with measures of psychological well-being, but the perceived 

workload may mediate these relationships. Overall though, the physical and social environment of the 

accommodations seems to make an important contribution to the quality of life and stress-levels of 

workers. Two factors appeared to be particularly important: privacy and recreational facilities; in the 

former case, privacy is seen as a key element in coping with the extended work schedule and isolated 

setting, with shared accommodation placing a strain on workers in this regard. 

The design of accommodations, together with policies respecting room allocations and the like, are all 

important. However, there is evidence that the overall social environment is of particular significance 

when it comes to worker stress. This encompasses aspects of all of the above, but is also an 

independent reflection of the management approach and includes the need, especially given longer 

rosters, for the workers to create a ‘home’ offshore. Separating work and non-work life at the workplace, 

in so far as it is possible, is also important. 

Transportation: Transportation arrangements have two major effects on employees and their families. 

First, transportation schedules can be inconvenient from worker and family perspectives, and disruptions 

can delay the worker’s arrival home and departure to the workplace, creating stress for all family 

members. Second, safety concerns related to helicopter travel are a major cause of stress in harsh and 

deep-water environments, such as are found in the North Sea and Atlantic Canada, with implications for 

both the worker and his or her family. A range of measures that can help optimize these effects on 

workers and their families. 

Communications: Difficulties communicating between the workplace and home can cause offshore 

workers and their families considerable stress. However, there have been major improvements in 

communications in the last few years. Workers and families value the new high-quality, low-cost and 

confidential links; whether or not they are used with any frequency; their availability reduces tensions 

because family members know the links can be used if the circumstances warrant. 

Page v 
Hiring and Orientation: There is obvious merit in screening out job applicants who would find offshore 

work highly problematic, and providing an effective orientation program to newly-hired employees, and 

some companies think these factors are important in selecting employees. For example, some prefer to 

hire people with previous experience of unconventional work schedules or young unmarried or recently 

married workers. However, it may be difficult to screen personnel for the possession of qualities that 

would suggest they can adapt to offshore employment. 

Counseling: Offshore work challenges employees and their families in various ways and leads some to 

experience psychosocial problems. Most workers and family members deal with these problems 

themselves, or use informal coping strategies. However, research indicates that offshore workers derive 

only limited social support from other workers, and while their spouses and friends may also serve as 

onshore confidantes, the spatial dispersal of workers’ homes may limit this option. Increasing numbers of 

employers use a more comprehensive and effective approach, employee assistance programs. 

Family Policies and Services: There is plenty of evidence that the home life problems of many commute 

workers are in reality work problems, and that domestic problems have reciprocal effects in the 

workplace. The worker brings home work-related concerns and stress, and the commute system 

generates its own tensions in domestic and personal life. These tensions are in turn brought back to the 

workplace, where they may affect productivity, safety, retention and other management concerns. 

Married commute workers see the family life impacts as being the primary determinant of satisfaction with 

the system. 

The research on commute employment indicates the types of responses and interventions that may be 

appropriate in addressing the challenges for family life. They may broadly be placed in four categories: 

those that improve the compatibility of the work organization and family life; those that improve the 

compatibility of the work culture and home life; those that improve self-selection during hiring and help 

new-hires and their families get used to a new work pattern; and, those that provide assistance, perhaps 

through a counseling program or support group, to employees and family members requiring them. 

In conclusion, as was noted above, offshore employment should not be seen as inherently problematic. It 

offers both advantages and disadvantages for workers, their families and their communities, as well as for 

others with responsibility for health, safety, training and other employment-related concerns. The 

challenge is to recognize these effects and implement policies and practices that address them. From an 

industry perspective, there is evidence that the benefits – from such things as increased employee 

retention and productivity, and reduced accident rates – can be considerable, and the costs modest. 

However, that said, the literature reviewed for this project contains little systematic information about 

response initiatives and their success. As a result, it was not possible to identify or allocate 

responsibilities respecting best practices. Instead, there is a need for further research if the effects of 

offshore work are to be fully understood and related best practices identified. 

Page vi 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page No.

Disclaimer............................................................................................................................................. i 

Acknowledgements ..............................................................................................................................ii 

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................iii 

1.0 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................1 

1.1 Offshore Employment and Commute Work Systems................................................................ 1 

1.2 Research Objectives, Scope and Methodology ........................................................................ 2 

1.3 Research Constraints................................................................................................................ 3 

1.4 Report Format............................................................................................................................ 4 

2.0 HUMAN RESOURCES AND FAMILY ISSUES...................................................................................5 

2.1 Health and Safety ...................................................................................................................... 5 

2.2 Employment of Women, Minorities and Older Workers ............................................................ 6 

2.3 Family Life ................................................................................................................................. 7 

3.0 COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL ISSUES ..........................................................................................17 

3.1 Residential Patterns ................................................................................................................ 17 

3.2 Expenditures............................................................................................................................ 18 

3.3 Non-Commute Employment .................................................................................................... 19 

3.4 Local Investment ..................................................................................................................... 19 

3.5 Community Life and Social and Recreational Services .......................................................... 20 

4.0 RESPONSES TO COMMUTE EMPLOYMENT ISSUES...................................................................21 

4.1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 21 

4.2 Work Schedules ...................................................................................................................... 21 

4.3 Accommodations ..................................................................................................................... 27 

4.4 Transportation ......................................................................................................................... 29 

4.5 Communications...................................................................................................................... 30 

4.6 Hiring and Orientation.............................................................................................................. 31 

4.7 Counseling............................................................................................................................... 31 

4.8 Family Policies and Services................................................................................................... 32 

5.0 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................................35 

5.1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 35 

5.2 Limitations of the Literature ..................................................................................................... 36 

5.3 Research Requirements.......................................................................................................... 37 

6.0 PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS AND REFERENCES..................................................................40 

6.1 Personal Communications....................................................................................................... 40 

6.2 References .............................................................................................................................. 40 

LIST OF APPENDICES 

Appendix 1 Participants: Commute Employment Workshop 

Page vii 
1.0 INTRODUCTION 

1.1 Offshore Employment and Commute Work Systems 

The first offshore oil wells were drilled in the late 19th Century, but such activity was rare until after the 

Second World War. It then saw rapid growth in the Gulf of Mexico starting in the1950s and in the North 

Sea starting in the 1960s. The technologies developed in these regions facilitated the spread of offshore 

oil activity to a number of other ‘frontier regions’, and by 1993 the United Nations International Labor 

Office (ILO) estimated the total global offshore oil and gas workforce had reached about a quarter of a 

million people (ILO 1993:11). 

The ILO data showed the United States to have the world’s largest, as well as the oldest, offshore 

industry. The first offshore drilling occurred in very shallow coastal waters in California in 1886. Oil 

production in Louisiana and Texas, which first developed early in the twentieth century, moved into the 

adjacent Gulf waters in 1938 with production from the Creole field, located in nine feet of water a mile off 

the Louisiana coast (Gramling 1996:33-44). Offshore activity in California and especially the Gulf 

expanded rapidly in the late 1940s and 1950s, and by the early 1990s, the ILO estimated the US had 

37,500 company and contractor offshore personnel. The latest Minerals Management Service estimate 

(Zatarain, pers. com. 2000) is that there are 39,945 persons directly involved in offshore activity; however, 

this excludes workers on supply and support vessels, but includes a few onshore employees. Many of 

these US offshore employees work on the thousands of small near-shore platforms and rigs in the Gulf, 

with many workers commuting on a daily basis, using crewboats or airboats (Broom, pers. com. 2000). 

However, the recent trend is to larger deep-water projects. 

Other nations with large offshore sectors in 1993 included the United Kingdom (33,000 employees, 

including the crew of mobile units and support vessels) and Norway (19,000, including contractors). 

Parkes (1998) quotes UK data showing that the workforce averaged about 30,000 personnel during the 

mid-1990s, a slight decline from the ILO figure. On the other hand, she also quotes a Norwegian figure 

(approximately 25,000 employees) that is considerably larger than the ILO’s estimate. Activity started 

with gas exploration and development in the southern North Sea, and moved on to oil and gas fields in 

the northern North Sea and, most recently, the West of Shetlands area. The distances from the shore 

and the harsh North Sea and Northeast Atlantic environments have resulted in the use of relatively large 

and complex facilities. While North Sea activity initially involved mostly US companies, personnel, 

technologies and practices, it evolved in response to the local environmental, regulatory and socioeconomic contexts. In some cases, in a reverse technology transfer, North Sea approaches and 

technologies are being adopted for new US deep-water activities. 

The ILO report found that some developing countries have significant offshore oil labor forces. For 

example, it was estimated that India had approximately 9,350 offshore workers, including contract staff, 

China had about 5,200, Qatar had 1400 directly employed and Trinidad and Tobago had 550 operator 

personnel. There has also been a spread of activity to such other developed, developing and lessdeveloped jurisdictions as Angola, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria and Thailand. 

The offshore oil industry is truly global, with many of the same companies, and senior and specialist 

personnel, being involved in activity in different parts of the world. 

Most offshore oil workers spend extended periods, often one or more weeks, at their workplace – usually 

a production platform or a mobile drilling rig. They then leave the workplace and return to shore to live at 

home with their families, if any, for a non-work period that is also commonly one or more weeks. The 

offshore accommodations, recreational facilities and food are provided by the employer, which commonly 

also provides or pays for some or all of the costs of transportation between the workplace and worker’s 

home community. 

This work system is variously called ‘commute’, ‘fly-in’, ‘fly-in/fly-out’, ‘FIFO’ or ‘long-distance commute’ 

employment; the first of these terms is used in the rest of this report. It was originally developed to meet 

the needs of the offshore oil industry because daily commuting was not feasible and no ‘local’ workforce 

Page 1 
or permanent full-time accommodations was available1

. It is now also used by the mining industry and by 

other land-based and marine activities in remote and/or hazardous environments, in situations where the 

local labor force cannot meet industry needs, and where the work schedule makes a daily commute 

impractical. 

The oil industry also uses this system for some onshore operations. For example, about 1000 production 

workers commute to gas fields in the Cooper Basin in Southeastern Australia. Commute systems have 

been used for major oil industry construction projects. In one example, most of the labor force building 

the Hibernia production platform at a green-field coastal site in Newfoundland, Canada, alternated 

between living in a well-equipped 3500-person construction camp and in their home communities. 

Smaller numbers of workers are involved in commute work in other industries including, most notably, 

mining. A 1996 survey finding that about 3000 miners working at 14 Canadian commute operations 

(Community Resource Services Ltd. 1996). There are also several thousand commute miners in 

Australia. A 1991 survey estimated 4215 workers were employed at 26 commute-based mines in 

Western Australia (Department of Mines 1991:6). The total has increased rapidly since then; by 2000 

there were 48 such operations (Anaconda 2000), with others planned, and it has been estimated that 

more than 40% of the state’s direct metal-mining workforce commute (Storey 2001a). There are also 

commute mines elsewhere in Australia, and in Alaska (where the Red Dog mine employs about 380 

people), Colombia, Chile, Brazil and Papua - New Guinea (Hogan and Berry 2000:653; ILO 1995:19; 

McLean and Hemsley 1994). Other users of this work system include fishing, marine transportation, 

hydroelectric power generation and the military. 

1.2 Research Objectives, Scope and Methodology 

This project was designed to complement other Minerals Management Service (MMS) studies by 

providing detailed information on the effects of offshore employment and the options for managing them, 

with an emphasis on operations in deep water and hazardous environments. Such employment clearly 

has a range of effects on the nearly forty thousand US citizens who work in the US OCS, others who work 

offshore in foreign jurisdictions, the approximately quarter of a million offshore workers around the world, 

and their families and communities. 

The commute system used at most offshore operations differs from traditional work systems principally 

because of the distinctive pattern of presence in, and absences from, the place-of-work and place-ofresidence. Other characteristics, such as the extended workday and shift arrangements, while important, 

are not unique to this type of employment. Other work arrangements may have some, but not all, of 

these characteristics. As such the commute system gives rise to some issues that are unique and others 

that are shared with other systems. 

Offshore employment is not inherently problematic. Like all other work systems, it offers both advantages 

and disadvantages for workers, as well as for others with responsibility for health, safety, training and 

other employment-related concerns. It also has implications, which can again be positive or negative, for 

employees’ families and the communities and regions in which they live. Some of the more important of 

these issues are discussed in this report in two interrelated categories: human resources and family 

issues, and community and regional issues. 

The focus throughout is the social effects of commuting. The economic effects (for instance, in terms of 

the purchasing patterns of commute operations) and management concerns (for example, safety, 

retention and productivity) are only discussed in connection with the effects on workers, families and the 

communities in which they live. However, it has been shown that the above issues are of direct relevance 

to the oil and mining industries. In particular, safety, retention and productivity are linked to the 

characteristics of the work system and management approaches and human resources policies that take 

the characteristics and effects of the commute system into account can be highly cost-effective. 

 1 On the original development of this work system in the oil industry, in the Gulf of Mexico, see Gramling (1996:74).

Page 2 
The research saw the initial preparation of a bibliography on commute employment, its effects and their 

management. It covers offshore employment in the US, Canada, the United Kingdom, Norway and other 

jurisdictions, as well as commute employment in the mining industry; it includes over 200 books, papers 

and reports and has been incorporated into the Minerals Management Service socio-economic 

bibliography. 

This report provides a summary and discussion of the use of commute employment and its effects, as 

revealed by the literature, key informants and professional knowledge of the principal investigators. It 

benefited greatly from a review workshop held at the New Orleans Airport Hilton Hotel, New Orleans, 

Louisiana, December 7th and 8th 2000. This was attended by 19 regulators, consultants, academics and 

industry representatives drawn from the US, Canada, England and Scotland (Appendix 1). A draft of this 

report was distributed to all participants two weeks prior to the workshop, and formed the basis of the 

agenda, which also included presentations on ongoing research in Arizona, Oxford and Aberdeen. These 

presentations and workshop discussions demonstrated, not least, the similarities between research 

findings and offshore employment issues in the Gulf of Mexico, the North Sea and Atlantic Canada. 

The research also drew on input received from a wide range of oil industry informants interviewed in 

Houston and New Orleans in August 2001. These interviews sought to provide a more detailed 

understanding of offshore petroleum operations in the Gulf of Mexico, responding to the limited literature 

on this topic. 

1.3 Research Constraints 

It is important to note that there are some important lacunae, biases and constraints in the literature that 

forms the basis of most of this report. In particular, most studies of the effects of commute work examine: 

• commute employment in the North Sea offshore oil industry, and the North American and Australian 

oil and mining industries, with little information about its use in the former Soviet Bloc and developing 

countries such as Angola, Brazil, China and Nigeria; 

• larger, long-life operations and permanent long-term employees, with little information on small, shortterm and near-shore operations and contractor personnel; 

• regular employment schedules, rather than irregular and ‘call-out’ work; 

• the effects on white heterosexual male workers and their families, with little study of unmarried, 

female, homosexual, ethnic and native employees and their families, or of the effects on extended, 

blended and other family forms; and 

• current workers and their families, rather than those who have for various reasons quit commute 

employment. 

The data used in the research reviewed are often limited and commonly qualitative or anecdotal. Where 

quantitative research has been undertaken, different variables may confound each other and make it 

impossible to separate cause and effect. Studies not uncommonly also fail to distinguish between the 

situations and experiences of different groups of employees in any one setting, or the differences 

between work on rigs, platforms and supply vessels. 

Some important studies are also old and particular to specific operations and temporal and geographic 

contexts. It is not clear to what degree their findings and conclusions are still relevant or can be 

generalized to other settings. This problem may be exacerbated by the rapid pace of change in both the 

oil industry and in the attitudes and expectations of workers and their spouses. 

In the former case, new technologies (e.g. deepwater production systems, long-range helicopters, 

automated drilling systems, directional drilling and sub-sea completions) have changed the industry’s 

modes of operation and labor requirements. This is especially the case in the Gulf of Mexico, given the 

Page 3 
slow shift from myriad small near-shore operations to larger deep-water projects. At the same time, new 

business arrangements (e.g. corporate mergers and downsizing), cost-reduction initiatives (e.g. the UK 

Cost Reduction for the New Era (CRINE) initiative, and its Norwegian counterpart, NORSOK) and 

associated practices (e.g. multi-skilling, the use of flexible teams, asset sharing and contracting) have 

changed the nature of offshore work worldwide. Not least, there has been: a reduction in crews and the 

total offshore labor requirements; a fragmentation of work teams, a casualization of the labor force 

through an increased use of contractor personnel and flexible, irregular and ‘call-out’ work schedules; 

and, an intensification of work activity and pressures.2

At the same time, the characteristics, experiences and expectations of younger workers and spouses, 

both generally and with respect to offshore work and family life, are different from workers and spouses in 

their late 40s and 50s. There is evidence that younger offshore employees, described by McGuire (pers. 

com. 2000) as ‘new outlookers’ as compared to the ‘old school’ workers, primarily define themselves in 

terms of their personal and family, rather than work, lives. Exacerbated by the changes in business 

arrangements and practices, this has led to a decline in loyalty by and to employers. These younger 

couples also more commonly share domestic responsibilities, including decision-making, and female 

spouses are more likely to want and hold paid employment. 

Lastly, it had originally been intended that this report would serve as a best practice guide. However, 

there is also a paucity of best practices information in the literature. Most of the discussion is of commute 

logistics (schedules, transportation arrangements, etc.) and the effects of such work on workers, families 

and others. Some material, such as Parkes and Clark’s comparison of 2/23

 and 3/3 rotations (Parkes and 

Clark 1997), also examines the differential effects of system alternatives. However, there is little 

systematic information about initiatives designed to optimize the system’s effects. 

Part of the problem is that the commute system increases the importance of issues that are of little 

concern re conventional work arrangements. Involving as it does the alternating absence and presence 

of one spouse and parent from the home, it challenges families, employers, governments and others to 

think about and respond to the relationships between paid employment and families. These have not 

traditionally been areas of concern to the industry and regulators, and this is reflected in the limited 

availability of data and analysis relating to these issues. 

For example, while the employee databases of oil companies contacted contain considerable amounts of 

conventional management information (e.g., about seniority, years of service and rates of remuneration), 

they contain little information on such things as the numbers and ages of children. Similarly, regulatory 

authorities, including those concerned with occupational health and safety, have traditionally been more 

concerned with such ‘hard’ safety issues as permitting and protective clothing than with human factors 

considerations. As a result, they too know little about the numbers and characteristics of, let alone the 

effects on, offshore employees and their families and communities. 

1.4 Report Format 

Following this introductory section, Sections 2 and 3 review and discuss the social issues arising from 

offshore employment. Section 2 reviews human resources and family issues and Section 3 discusses 

community and regional issues. Section 4 then examines responses to these issues, which are divided 

into seven major groups dealing with: work schedules; accommodations; transportation; communications; 

hiring and orientation; counseling; and family policies and services. The final section (Section 5) provides 

a review of the findings and makes a number of recommendations with regard to research requirements. 

 2 This is consistent with broader economic and employment trends; see, for example, Sennett (1998:22-27) on the growth 

in flexible capitalism and the flexible work-place, and their effects. Sennett notes that while flexible capitalism has many apparent 

benefits for corporations, it also corrodes trust, loyalty and mutual commitment. 3 Throughout this report, regular rotation patterns are expressed in terms of the numbers of weeks spent at the workplace 

followed by the number spent away from it; for example, in this case, the employee spends two weeks at each.

Page 4 
2.0 HUMAN RESOURCES AND FAMILY ISSUES 

Commute work has implications for a wide variety of interrelated work and family life issues. These 

include the effects on: health and safety; the employment of women, minorities and older workers; and 

family life. Each of these is discussed below. 

2.1 Health and Safety 

An ILO Working Paper (1995) provides a typology of the health and safety issues associated with 

commute work. They include those relating to operating in a hazardous environment, because the 

physical environment can be dangerous to individual workers or threaten the integrity and safety of the 

whole operation, while the difficulties of operating in such places may place workers in close proximity to 

hazardous processes. The remoteness of commute operations may also limit or delay access to 

emergency services, and limit regulatory and union access4

, with potential health and safety 

consequences. 

The other health and safety issues identified arise directly from the work system itself. These include the 

use of extended shifts and rotations, and what may be a hazardous and stressful commute. In the first 

case, all commute operations require employees to spend extended periods at the workplace working 

long (usually 11 or 12-hour) shifts, perhaps including night shifts, split shifts and overtime. This raises 

safety issues related to both fatigue, resulting from the combined effects of the shifts and rosters, and the 

exchange of safety-related information between managers, supervisors and workers on different work 

schedule5

. Lastly, a number of aspects of the work system may be stressful, including the social 

environment of the workplace as a ‘total institution’ (Goffman 1968) and the separation of the worker from 

his or her home, family and community. 

Commute operations commonly use helicopters, often operating in challenging physical environments. 

Where this is the case, helicopters are generally perceived to be relatively unsafe, and hence can be a 

source of stress. There have been numerous helicopter accidents associated with offshore operations, 

with the world’s worst such accident, off the Shetland Islands in 1986, killing 45 oil workers and flight crew 

(Woolfson, Foster and Beck 1996:105). 

Parkes (1998) reviewed the literature on psychosocial aspects of stress, health and safety on North Sea 

oil installations. She notes how the industry has been subject to widespread change during the 1990s, 

including organizational re-structuring, downsizing and increased safety regulation, and that this has 

consequences for stress and health and safety among offshore personnel. She finds that: 

Few studies directly compare onshore and offshore populations; the available data 

suggest that, relative to their onshore counterparts, offshore personnel experience 

greater anxiety, more sleep problems, and higher workload. Within the offshore 

population, objective factors (e.g. size, age, and type of installation, work patterns, and 

occupational differences), subjective work perceptions (job characteristics, perceived risk, 

job insecurity, and work/family interaction), individual differences (age and personality), 

and health behaviors (smoking, alcohol use, and diet), and all play significant roles in 

relation to health and safety outcomes. However, much of the research in stress and 

health offshore has methodological limitations, and does not allow causal interpretation. 

The need for prospective studies of the long-term mental and physical health of offshore 

personnel, and for research in several specific areas is noted (Parkes 1998, i). 

 4

 For recent discussion of the constraints commute work poses for unionization in the Gulf of Mexico offshore oil industry, 

see Gramling (1996:78-80) and James (2000:45-46). On the UK North Sea, see Woolfson, Foster and Beck (1996:437-440); 

however, despite these constraints and in contrast with the US, more than half of all UK offshore oil worker safety representatives 

are unionized personnel (Miles, pers. com., 2000) 5

 On the challenges this poses for Offshore Installation Managers and other offshore employees, see Flin, Slaven and 

Carnegie (1996:49-51) and Burnett and Tait (1996:118), respectively.

Page 5 
However, while offshore workers generally experience more sleep problems, when Parkes (1993) looked 

at onshore and offshore oil and gas personnel workers who worked night shifts, she found that the former 

reported shorter night-shift sleep durations than the latter. In subsequent research using a larger sample 

size, Parkes and Byron (2001:96) found that onshore personnel averaged 5.7 hours sleep a night, while 

offshore workers averaged 6.6 hours. Job satisfaction was also disproportionately low among the 

onshore shift workers. Parkes and Byron attribute these findings, in part, to the fact that ‘offshore 

personnel live and work in a remote setting that routinely operates round-the-clock, whereas onshore 

personnel return to a normal diurnal lifestyle after each shift’ (104). 

Specific health and safety concerns are discussed in greater detail, in the context of response options, 

below. 

2.2 Employment of Women, Minorities and Older Workers 

The commute workplace and system raise particular issues respecting the employment of women, 

minorities and older workers. Management approaches, human resource policies and the social 

environment of the workplace, including the accommodations, are important intervening variables. 

Women have long been a minority, and concentrated in ‘traditional’ women’s occupations, at offshore 

petroleum and commute mining operations. Surveys of the petroleum commute labor forces in the North 

Sea, Canada and Australia show that overall only 0.1% to 5% are women, although the number working 

in the Norwegian workforce has seen slow increase (ILO 1995:20). Hellesøy (1985:21) found that women 

comprised 17% of workers on the Statfjord platforms, while Parkes (1998) cites more recent data that 

show that 3% of United Kingdom workers, but 16% of those in Norwegian waters, are women. Mearns 

and Wagstaff (1996:249) note that, while only 2% of the applicants to work on Norske Shell’s Draugen 

platform were women, they made up 13% of new recruits and occupied such positions as production 

manager, computer operator, electrician, administrative assistant, radio operator and nurse. No data 

available on women’s participation in the US offshore workforce, but informants indicate that the numbers 

are small. For example, it is estimated that only about 2% of Shell workers in the Gulf of Mexico are 

women. 

Women are also in a minority at commute mines. A survey of 14 Canadian mines found that they had a 

mean of 11% women employees, with a range from 2% to 19% (Community Resource Services Ltd. 

1996). Seven Australian mines had a mean of 14%, and a range of 7% to 18%, women workers (ILO 

1995:20). 

In terms of occupational groups, Karlsen and Rattner (1989:11) found that over half of Norwegian women 

working offshore are in catering, while at a sample of Australian offshore petroleum operations, women 

held 19% of administrative, 11% of catering and cleaning, but only 0.5% of extraction and processing, 

positions (Shrimpton and Storey 1991b:6). A more recent study of 15 offshore oil and gas operations 

(Australian Mines and Metals Association 1998) found that women held 25% of administrative positions 

but only 0.2% of extraction and processing jobs. However, women have been Offshore Installation 

Managers on both the Frigg and Ekofisk fields. In the Canadian mining industry, female workers were 

concentrated in traditional occupations, including secretarial, cleaning and catering work, with 26% in 

administration and 40% in ‘other’ work; however, 19% were in mill production and 10% in the mine itself 

(Community Resource Services Ltd. 1996). 

A wide variety of factors explain the variations in the numbers of women working offshore and, especially, 

the differences between the United Kingdom (UK) and Norwegian sectors of the North Sea. They include 

industrial, workplace and national cultures and the associated regulatory regime (Lewis, Porter and 

Shrimpton 1988). Operating and contracting companies are noted for a culture that is unsupportive of 

women in non-traditional occupations. Exploration rigs in particular have been described as having harddriving, ‘macho’, work cultures, with the effects of this amplified by the fact that the employees work and 

live together in close quarters (Fuchs, Cake and Wright 1983:96-106). 

Page 6 
In this connection, Storey et al. (1989) found Canadian rig operating company representatives were much 

more concerned about women’s and family life issues than were their US counterparts. Similarly, the 

contrast between the numbers and occupations of women working in the UK and Norwegian offshore 

generally reflects differences in company and national cultures. In the latter regard Moore (1985:211) 

notes that the UK offshore ‘is immediately identifiable as a rather traditional British male work culture’, 

and more recently Collinson (1998:320-321) found ‘the independent male breadwinner and dependent 

female homemaker... embedded in many (UK sector workers’) discourses and practices’; in contrast, the 

Norwegian culture is reflected in their application of equal opportunities legislation to offshore workplaces. 

Lastly, there are difficulties accommodating women on small inshore rigs and platforms in the Gulf of 

Mexico; these commonly have a small number of cabins, with considerable sharing of cabins and 

bathroom facilities. 

The above-noted barriers constrain the hiring and retention of women. However, as is discussed below, 

a number of managers and others involved with commute operations have noted the advantages to the 

company of having women at the workplace, while diverse workforces are also thought to reduce the 

contrast between the cultures of the workplace and home. 

There are few data on the participation of African Americans active on the US OCS, although key 

informants interviewed indicated that they comprise 15% to 25% of the total labor force in the Gulf of 

Mexico. There are also very small numbers of Hispanic workers employed in the Gulf. In regards to 

other minorities, a survey of Australian offshore operations found that aborigines made up only 0.3% of 

the workforce, although Canada’s Beaufort Sea exploration employed significant numbers of residents of 

some native communities (Hobart 1989:32). Approximately 18% of the labor force at Canadian commute 

mines is aboriginal, with a high of 42%. At Red Dog, Cominco’s mining operation in Alaska 191 (51%) of 

the 1993 labor force were aboriginal shareholders (McLean and Hensley 1994). However, aboriginal 

workers only make up 2% of the labor force at a sample of Australian mines (ILO 1995:24). 

When it comes to the age distribution of commute workers, Parkes (1998) cites studies that indicate 70% 

of United Kingdom offshore workers are in the 30 to 50 year age range. However, over the last 30 years, 

the North Sea oil and gas industry has shifted from a new to a mature industry, with associated changes 

in the age profile. More generally, offshore and other commute workforces increased rapidly during the 

1970s and 1980s and these workers are now aging. In the oil industry, this trend has been accentuated 

by economic changes that have limited recruitment and reduced the opportunities for offshore personnel 

to transfer onshore. Recruitment has also been reduced by fluctuations in employment opportunities 

(with the more recently hired being the first to be laid-off), alternative onshore opportunities, limited 

onshore/offshore wage differentials and the poor image of the industry in the eyes of school-leavers, 

especially compared to high-technology companies. These aging and succession problems are seen as 

presenting challenges from a health and safety perspective and respecting employee motivation. 

2.3 Family Life 

Reflecting the middle-aged character of much of most offshore labor forces, married individuals form the 

majority of commute workers in almost all industries and regions. They comprised 61% of the labor force 

of British and Dutch offshore petroleum operations in the mid-1980s, with 32% single (never married) and 

6% widowed, divorced or separated (Sutherland and Cooper 1986:125). The equivalent statistics for 

exploration workers in Newfoundland in the early 1980s were 55%, 37% and 8% respectively (Fuchs, 

Cake and Wright 1983). These are similar to the figures for Australian offshore workers in the early 

1990s (Shrimpton and Storey 1991b, 6), although the more recent Australian Mines and Metals 

Association study (AMMA 1998) found 68% of workers at 15 offshore operations were married, 17% 

single and 18.5% widowed, separated or divorced. The higher proportion of married workers in Europe 

and Australia likely reflects the older and more mature nature of the industry in those regions; further 

support for this hypothesis comes from the higher proportion of married workers (67%) on Norway’s 

Statfjord production platforms, which also has a high proportion (10%) of separated/divorced workers 

compared to the above examples (Hellesøy 1985:101). 

Page 7 
Approximately 67% of the Canadian commute mine labor force is married, with a further 27% single 

(never married) and 6% widowed or divorced. These figures show some differences from the 1981 

Canadian metal mines labor force (76%, 21% and 3% respectively) (Canada 1984), with commute mines 

having more single, and widowed, divorced and separated, workers. A lower percentage (55%) of 

Australian commute mine workers are married, while the percentages of single, widowed, divorced and 

separated, are more than twice the Canadian figures. This is reflected in the high levels of Australian 

concern about the effects of commute work on married life, which may be a result of the numbers of 

operations using long asymmetrical work schedules (see below). 

The surveys of Newfoundland rig workers and spouses (Storey et al. 1989) found that married workers 

had lived together for an average of nine years, with the oil worker having been employed offshore for five 

of them. Only 16% did not have children at home, with the rest having an average of 1.75 children, with a 

mean age of eight years, at home. A survey of workers at two Canadian commute mines (Key Lake, 

Saskatchewan, with a 1/1 roster, and Polaris, Northwest Territories, with, at that time, a 9/3 schedule) 

found that married workers had been living together for 12 and 15 years respectively. The Polaris 

workers, however, had slightly fewer children: 25% had no children, and the others had an average of 1.6 

children at home, compared to 23% and 1.7 in the case of the Key Lake personnel (Storey and Shrimpton 

1989:180). 

From the outset, people writing about the work system have problematized its effects on workers and 

families, with little consideration of potential advantages or the dynamics of work/family relationships. 

Indeed, some early writers (e.g., Douglas 1984:17) assumed that most commute workers would be single 

as a result of the system's supposed incompatibility with family life. Others drew on the earlier literature 

on military families, including analyses of the effects of absences of submariners (e.g., Beckman 1976, 

and Isay 1968), with the latter concluding that some wives who failed to adapt suffered from a 

‘submariner’s wives syndrome’. In the late 1970s a group based at the Institute of Medical Sociology, 

Aberdeen, sought to confirm and investigate the dimensions of an ‘intermittent husband syndrome’ which 

Dr. Ken Morrice, a consultant psychiatrist, believed characterized the behavior of many offshore oil 

workers’ wives (Morrice and Taylor 1978). As recently as 1991 Forsyth and Gauthier noted ‘the near 

universal finding from (our) research... that non-traditional work scheduling is problematic for families’ 

(Forsyth and Gauthier 1991:197). 

One of the reasons for this assumption is that commute workers often believe there are high levels of 

marital discord among their colleagues. This has been expressed as a particular concern at Australian 

commute operations and appears to be reflected in data such as was collected by the 1998 Australian 

Mines and Metals Association study of 15 oil and gas and 19 mining operations, which found that 18.5% 

and 12% respectively were widowed, separated or divorced (Australian Mines and Metals Association 

1998:44). However, cause and effect relationships are not easily determined. These workplaces are 

‘total institutions’ where employees spend large amounts of time working and living together. Rumor and 

gossip are rife, with much of it focussing on personal relationships. But while research has shown that 

commute operations have somewhat higher proportions of separated and divorced workers than do 

conventional ones, it is not clear that this is a direct consequence of the work system. In some cases, a 

‘foreign legion syndrome’ seems to play a role, with this type of work attracting separated and divorced 

employees. For example, while 6.5% of Key Lake miners were divorced or separated, only 4% had 

divorced or separated subsequent to starting work at the mine and only half of these held the commute 

system wholly or partly responsible (Storey and Shrimpton 1989:167-169). 

This is not to deny that commuting work presents challenges to family relationships and indeed may, in 

some cases, contribute to separation and divorce. However, it is important to assess this in the context of 

an understanding of the range of advantages and disadvantages that the system can present and 

consideration of the dynamics of work/families relationships. A number of analyses (Morrice et al. (1985); 

Clark et al. (1985a and b); and Storey et al. (1989)) have failed to find evidence of the ‘intermittent 

husband syndrome,’ and they and subsequent studies have not presented a uniformly negative picture of 

family effects. They instead demonstrate the complexities of these relationships, and show that commute 

work is largely positive for many families and has positive aspects for most. 

Page 8 
The main potential advantages and disadvantages, as identified by workers and members of their 

families, are summarized below, based on Shrimpton and Storey (1991c)6

. However it is important to 

recognize that different families and family members experience and react to them in different ways. 

Furthermore, these experiences and reactions may change over the course of the family life cycle. 

Income from Commute Work 

Incomes from offshore employment vary greatly. In most places, as in the UK sector of the North Sea, 

they receive higher than average earnings (Collinson 1998:307) although in some places, such as rural 

areas around the Gulf of Mexico, this may largely be a reflection of the low incomes associated with most 

onshore work. Highly skilled workers may receive very high incomes, based on high wages rates, long 

hours of work and considerable amounts of overtime. However, most less-skilled workers have much 

lower wage rates, irregular work-hours and receive no overtime payments. The terms and conditions of 

employment commonly also commonly vary between operator and contractor, and union and non-union, 

personnel. 

The disposable incomes of commute workers also benefit from the fact that they generally have few 

expenses or opportunities to spend money during their periods at the workplace (for example, all meals 

and laundry service are normally provided gratis by the employer). This is especially the case in the 

offshore oil and gas industry, since virtually all platforms and rigs (unlike many commute mining and 

onshore petroleum camps) are ‘dry’, with no opportunity to buy alcohol. As a result, commute workers 

generally have relatively high disposable incomes; however, there is very little information on the 

expenditure patterns of commute workers and families. 

Secondary and Family Employment 

As is also discussed below, commute work allows workers to hold second jobs, although the absences 

from home mean that this work must have a flexible schedule, with self-employment being common. 

Some commute workers' spouses also have paid jobs, and they may see the system as advantageous 

because it permits them to live in larger urban centers that can provide a greater range of employment 

opportunities. As discussed in McKee, Galilee and Mauthner (2000:10), such forms of employment are 

scarce in some, especially rural and bedroom communities. In one case, women have ‘to travel the 

twenty miles into Aberdeen to find suitable work... the inconvenience and costs in doing so would 

undoubtedly put (off) a lot of women travelling such a distance, particularly as they had primary 

responsibility for looking after the children’. 

Such paid employment is often described as being a constructive use of the time when the spouse is 

away and of maintaining an independent existence, although childcare requirements may constrain 

employment options and choices during some parts of the family life-cycle. The employment patterns of 

commute spouses are distinctive, with large numbers in temporary, replacement, and self-employment, 

reflecting the desire of couples to reconcile their schedules. However, this is seldom possible when the 

offshore worker has an irregular schedule, and the spouses of such workers are least likely to take paid 

employment (McKee, pers. com. 2000). Lastly, in the Gulf of Mexico the spouses’ choice of work may be 

strongly influenced by a concern that the family have access to employment benefits, and especially 

health benefits, given the cyclical patterns of employment that have characterized the offshore oil industry 

(Austin, pers. com. 2000). 

Separation of Work and Family Life 

Some, especially managerial and professional, commute workers value the opportunity to separate the 

worlds of work and family. The latter can be ‘out of sight and out of mind’ during periods at work, while 

 

6

It should be noted that there has been little study of these issues from the perspectives of commute workers’ children, 

although this topic is currently being addressed by a study of the oil and gas industry in Scotland (see, for example, Mauthner, 

Maclean and McKee, 2000). 

Page 9 
the time at home normally sees a total escape from work concerns and relationships. In the words of one 

UK platform worker, “It’s like having two separate lives. That’s a very good thing here, we never talk 

about our personal lives at all” (Collinson 1998:308). Most workers and spouses also value the 

opportunity the extended periods of ‘quality time’ at home provide for shared recreational and other 

interests; for some these times are ‘periodic honeymoons’. Furthermore, many male commute workers 

express pleasure at being able to spend long periods with children, although this may take the form of 

camping trips and similar outings, rather than day-to-day child-care. 

Collinson’s interviews with 98 workers on UK platforms found that ‘most male and female respondents 

valued the economic and temporal compensations of offshore work. These comments from a driller were 

typical: “The attraction out here is the two weeks off. The thought of nine to five is not very appealing”’ 

(1998:307). Similarly, a secretary on another platform commented, “I’m only doing this job for the time off 

and the money. When I first started, being the first female secretary was a real buzz. If people ask now I 

just say there’s nowhere else I could get two weeks off a month.” (308) In a survey of 214 workers at 41 

Australian commute mines, Jenkins (1997) found that they thought ‘quality time with family and friends’ 

the biggest single advantage of the work system. 

Access to Services and Facilities 

Commuting work allows workers and their families some, and often considerable, choice of residential 

location (see Section 3.1). Some families choose to live in urban centers, primarily because they provide 

a wider range of services and facilities available for use by the worker (when away from the workplace) 

and his or her family members. (Others, especially in the Southern US, prefer to stay near family and 

friends in smaller rural communities.) The long periods at home also facilitate participation in leisure 

pursuits which require such periods (e.g. wilderness hiking and foreign travel) or for which access to 

facilities (such as golf courses and tennis courts) may be difficult during peak evening and weekend 

hours. 

Independence and Decision-Making

This work system affords the spouses of commute workers considerable independence, but while this is 

valued by many of them, it may be necessary to ‘learn to be independent’ and spouses and commute 

workers often find this independence problematic. Decision-making is often a central concern in this, 

especially as it relates to parenting. In most two-parent families, such decisions are made jointly or by the 

male parent. The periodic absence of the commuting spouse (usually the male) disrupts this, especially 

when a crisis or other development requires a rapid decision. The spouse at home may make the 

decision herself or himself, perhaps in consultation with their partner, a friend or a relative. The net effect, 

though, is an adjustment and/or renegotiations of decision-making, which may be problematic for one or 

both spouses. For example, one Newfoundland offshore worker's spouse has noted how “when he's 

away I have to look after the whole family for a month. Then, when he comes back, I've got to drop being 

boss. That creates conflict sometimes.” (Fuchs, Cake and Wright 1983:122) Problems commonly relate 

to inconsistencies in child discipline, with one or other parent being thought to be too lenient7

. 

Inappropriate Worker Behavior 

To the degree that the workplace environment and culture at commute operations are non-familial, 

workers may have difficulty adjusting between it and home life. This can be reflected in inappropriate 

behavior when they bring home workplace standards of language, noisiness, untidiness, 

inconsiderateness and authoritarian decision-making. 

 

7

 See James (2000:24) for discussion of this issue in New Iberia, Louisiana. 

Page 10 
Family Separation 

The absence of the commuting worker commonly creates feelings of loneliness for all concerned, and this 

is especially the case at the time of major holidays such as Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Years, and 

such family events as birthdays, anniversaries and graduations. For the Australian commute miners 

surveyed by Jenkins (1997) ‘absence from family and friends’ was the main disadvantage of the system. 

Isolation from and within the Community 

The periodic absence of workers from their homes also limits their participation in community activities. 

This includes both activities requiring regular attendance (e.g. team sports, church groups and 

membership of a local council, school board or a service club) and occasional community events and 

festivities. 

The system may also isolate commute workers' spouses in and from the communities they live in, 

especially where there is a wide dispersion and low density of oil workers. For example, Solheim has 

described high levels of social isolation among the wives of Norwegian offshore workers: “The period of 

absence [of the commuting worker] is characterized by isolation and lack of social contact. This is most 

pronounced in rural communities, where... it is the family rather than the individual which is the core of the 

social network... With the exception of very close kin, many rural women state that they cannot normally 

visit friends and neighbors when their husbands are away, unless the other woman is alone too” 

(1988:155-6). However, while these impacts are very clear to the wife, and have effects on the 

community as a whole, they may not be widely recognized or understood by other members of the 

community (especially when few commute workers live there). 

The degree of isolation within the community may also be a function of attitudes towards oil workers and 

their families. For example, there appear to be differences in community perceptions of oilfield work in 

Southern Louisiana and Northeast Scotland. In the former case reference is sometimes made to ‘oilfield 

trash’ (see James 2000:11-15). These attitudes are likely a reaction to an influx of non-locals seeking 

offshore employment, especially in the early days of such activity, and they may result in oil workers and 

their families being marginalized from the rest of the community. In Northeast Scotland, Galilee (2000) 

and others have shown that oil workers are generally respected and valued members of the community, 

many of them locally hired. 

The above potential advantages and disadvantages are not always experienced in the same ways and to 

the same degree. The studies of families involved in Newfoundland offshore oil exploration (Storey et al. 

1989) and Canadian commute mining work (Storey and Shrimpton 1989) have shown that there are very 

large variations in workers' and spouses' reactions to the system and its impacts on their lives. 

Overall, most workers and spouses are generally positive about the system and its impacts. The main 

measure of reactions used in the above studies were vignettes describing hypothetical individuals with 

negative, neutral and positive responses to the system and its impacts. About three-quarters of the oil 

workers, the mineworkers, and the mineworkers’ spouses, self-identified most closely with the positive 

figure. A smaller proportion, but still more than half, of oil workers' spouses felt they were most like the 

positive vignette. Other questionnaire and interview data show that, for some of these individuals, the 

system was making a very positive contribution to their lives and family relationships. This was 

particularly the case with the supply boat workers and their spouses (Storey et al. 1989; Storey and 

Shrimpton 1989). 

However, while many workers and spouses responded positively, almost all of them also felt some level 

of self-identification with the negative vignette figure, while about one-fifth of the oil and mine workers 

identified most strongly with it. Other questionnaire and interview data show that some offshore rig 

workers in particular felt almost wholly negatively about the impacts of the work on their lives. And, 

compared with the offshore workers, their spouses (mostly women) were significantly more likely to selfidentify with the negative vignette (Storey et al. 1989; Storey and Shrimpton 1989). 

Page 11 
Various factors related to work and family seem to underlie these variations in reactions. They may be 

summarized as being differences: in the availability of alternative employment; in the work environment 

and workers' experience of it; in the regularity and security of employment; in family members' experience 

and expectations of family life; and between workers' and spouses' perceptions of the impacts on the 

family. In the last case, it has been suggested that parental perceptions of the effects on children may be 

particularly important (Mauthner, pers. com. 2001). 

Alternative Employment Opportunities 

As is noted above, almost all research into the effects of commute work on families is based on 

examination of families that have ‘survived,’ and perhaps adjusted to or learned to cope with, the system. 

Others will have quit such work because of its negative aspects. However, there are differences in the 

degree to which this is possible. For example, very high unemployment in rural areas of Newfoundland 

and Louisiana makes it difficult for people to leave jobs that pay well, whatever its negative impacts. 

Certainly, some of the Newfoundland rig workers and spouses who had been involved with the system for 

more than ten years still felt very negatively about it. This is a problem which families in many parts of the 

world confront; some Canadian miners describe the work and its income as the ‘golden handcuffs,’ while 

in Australia this is known as ‘driller’s disease’. 

Work Environment and Experience 

The Newfoundland offshore oil employment study (Storey et al. 1989) showed the role that the work 

environment and workers' experience of it could play in determining reactions to commuting. As was 

noted above, the supply boat crew reacted much more positively to it, even though they were on a longer 

(4/4 vs 3/3) schedule. The great majority of them primarily self-identified with the positive vignette, and 

only one supply boat worker identifying with each of the neutral and negative responses. In contrast, 

37% of the rig workers self-identified most strongly with the negative vignette. And while the spouses 

were generally much more ambivalent about the impacts, supply boat workers' spouses more commonly 

self-identified with the positive vignette than did rig workers spouses, mirroring their husbands’ reactions. 

Adjectival checklists confirm the patterns revealed by the vignettes; both workers and spouses used 

mostly positive and few negative adjectives to describe their mood when the worker was onshore, while 

the pattern was reversed when describing feelings during the periods offshore. The average mood swing 

was smaller for supply boat workers and spouses than for those involved with rig work, and the offshore 

workers generally experienced smaller mood swings than did the spouses. 

Other survey and interview data showed that these differences in the reactions to rig and supply boat 

work were largely a consequence of the differences between the workplaces as physical and social 

environments, and between the workers' levels of experience of those environments. In the former case, 

the supply boats were generally seen as less alienating, more familiar and more familial work places than 

the rigs. Supply boat crew were commonly former trawler crew, often drawn from one or two rural 

communities, sometimes related to each other, and who generally respected and had a positive 

relationship with “the skipper” and other crew. Workers and families also had opportunities to spend time 

together on these vessels when they were in harbor. 

In contrast, Hellesøy (1985), Heen (1988) and others have shown that rig and platform crews are divided 

into a number of work groups, often from different cultures, working different schedules, and with 

different, and sometimes conflicting, priorities. The increased use of contract labor in the early 1990s saw 

a widening of inequalities respecting accommodations, transportation and other arrangements, leading 

one chaplain ministering to the UK North Sea offshore labor force to describe the contrast between 

operator and contract personnel as “industrial apartheid” (Collinson 1998:311)8

. As described by Burnett 

 

8

However, Parkes and Clark (1997:82) argue that some companies and installations have subsequently made deliberate 

attempts to reduce such distinctions, and interviews in Houston and New Orleans suggest that some contractor workers essentially 

function, and are treated, as operator employees. 

Page 12 
and Tait (1996:119-120) and others, the industry has long had, and largely continues to have, an 

individualistic, hierarchical and highly authoritarian work culture. This is especially the case on 

exploration rigs. Fuchs, Cake and Wright (1983:71-106) recount the cultural conflicts experienced by 

Newfoundland rig workers in the early 1980s, and the tensions and feelings of alienation they produced. 

In the words of one of the interviewees for the Newfoundland family life study (Storey et al. 1989): “it's not 

like going to work any more, it's like going to war.” 

In addition, the experience in the North Sea and Atlantic Canada is that far fewer rig and platform than 

supply boat workers have marine experience. They are typically onshore industrial workers with neither 

the aspirations nor training to be seamen. As a consequence, the physical as well as the social 

environment is commonly alien and a source of tension. In questionnaires and interviews, safety was 

often described as a particular concern. Newfoundland rig workers wrote that: “money doesn't mean 

much on a stormy night in February” and, when asked to provide advice to a hypothetical friend 

considering offshore petroleum employment, “never go offshore because it isn't meant for humans” 

(Lewis, Shrimpton and Storey 1988:168). 

It should however be noted that the above discussion is primarily based on ethnographies of offshore oil 

workplaces that are from the early to mid 1980s. Subsequent changes in both offshore technologies and 

business practices are likely to have affected the work environment. For example, more recent rigs and 

platforms provide better accommodations and recreation facilities. However, increased contracting and 

cost-reduction strategies have also reduced job security and increased the number of employers involved 

in any operation, although the labor force may also include some workers with considerable experience of 

offshore work. 

It has also been suggested that the problems ‘landsmen’ experience working in a marine environment are 

diminished for workers on large fixed production platforms, which provide a much more stable work 

environment. However, this is not the case for those working on Floating Production Storage and 

Offloading vessels (FPSOs). This increasingly popular production option uses facilities that are based on, 

and behave like, conventional ships. More so than even semi-submersible rigs, they roll, pitch and 

‘weathervane’ in response to wave and wind action, and there is evidence that even seasoned production 

workers find this problematic. Some Norwegian FPSO operators have responded to this by only hiring 

crew with marine experience (Miles, pers. com. 2000). 

Employment Irregularity and Insecurity

Many offshore workers and their families experience considerable employment irregularity and insecurity. 

For example, James (2000:21) has made clear that the problems with commute work for workers and 

families in New Iberia, Louisiana, can in part be attributed to being ‘on-call’, as is the case for many 

offshore employees, or insecurity in respect of offshore oil work in recent times. The potential effects of 

being ‘on-call’ are summarized thus by a contractor employee: 

There is NO schedule. That was the problem. I had no schedule. And the strange thing 

is, uh, you get used to it. It normalizes and you forget you have options... I didn’t have a 

life, and I woke up one day without a wife, alienated from my kids, and I said: ‘Gee, you 

haven’t had much of a life at all.’ (James 2000:30) 

In respect of work insecurity, James quotes a production operator: 

If I’ve had problems when I’m at work, I try not to bring them home with me, but 

sometimes I can’t help it. I take out my frustrations on (my wife)... I can control part of it, 

but I might just snap for no reason and start hollering. We’ve gone through several 

restructuring plans, or whatever they want to call it, which is just a common way of saying 

‘I’m going to lay you off’. It’s a fancy way of saying that, which I weathered three or four 

of them. You get aggravated (James 2000:14). 

Page 13 
Cost-reduction initiatives have likely had similar effects in the North Sea and elsewhere. For example, 

Collinson (1998:309-312) described at length, on the basis of research on two UK sector platforms, the 

problems of on-call and contract work. This included: difficulties in making plans and getting mortgages; 

tensions resulting from income insecurity, limited health and vacation benefits; and the uncertainties 

associated with the ‘NRB’ system and ‘bumping’ from flights. Supervisors will write the initials ‘NRB’, 

standing for Not Required Back, on an employee’s work report when they do not want to see him or her 

work again on that rig or platform, and is therefore tantamount to a dismissal. Bumping occurs when 

workers have to give up their helicopter seat for a higher-priority individual or freight, thus delaying the 

workers’ return home. 

Expectations of Family Life 

The reactions of family members to commute work also often reflect their normative models of family life 

including, in particular, relationships between it and employment. This was demonstrated by study of the 

labor mobility of miners living in Leaf Rapids, a small town in Northern Manitoba (Shrimpton and Storey 

1991a). A questionnaire survey asked about preferences given a hypothetical choice between moving to 

employment in another small mining town or at a commute operation. Most of those expressing an 

unequivocal preference for the first option explained this in terms of the superiority of small towns from a 

family life perspective. However, most of those preferring the commute option also did so because they 

thought it better for the family. 

Other questionnaire and interview data show that this reflected differing normative concepts of family life. 

Those favoring the small town option held to a male-breadwinner model of the family, with the husband 

and principal earner being home every night and easily accessible to care for the wife and children. 

These workers commonly disliked the commute option because it would make it impossible to have a 

‘normal’ family life. Those preferring the commute option generally held to a more consensual and 

egalitarian family model, emphasized the benefits for the family of living in a larger community and the 

merits of periodic extended periods of ‘quality time’ with families. 

In part, these differences reflected the respondents' past experience of family life. Those responding 

negatively to the commute option mostly had many years experience of family and community life in Leaf 

Rapids, came from mining families and had been raised in one or more such towns. Conversely, there is 

evidence that commute work is much more acceptable for those with previous experience of 

unconventional work schedules and those who establish a family subsequent to, or at the same time as, 

involvement with commute work. The last allows the new family to develop its modes of operation around 

the unconventional schedule. 

Workers and Spouses

The above differences in work environments, experience and opportunities, and in expectations of family 

life, are often common to, and hence reflected in the reactions of, both spouses. Indeed, there is a clear 

reciprocal process at work here, as is evident in analyses of stress associated with offshore oil 

employment. These show that the home life problems of many workers are in reality work problems, that 

domestic problems have impacts in the workplace, and that these interact. The worker brings home 

work-related fatigue, concerns and stress, the alternating presences and absences generate their own 

tensions in domestic and personal life, and the time at home may therefore compound, rather than 

resolve, the tensions. They are then brought back to the workplace, where isolation further amplifies the 

problem.9

 An early major study of the North Sea oil industry concluded that ‘family-related job 

dissatisfaction ultimately leads to reduced mental well-being, physiological ill health and possibly 

increased vulnerability to accidents. In organizational terms it results in poor performance and reduced 

productivity’ (Sutherland and Cooper 1986:44). 

 

9

 This reciprocal process of ‘work - non-work conflict’ has been conceptualized in detail by Frone and others (see, for 

example. Frone, Yardley and Markel, 1997, and Frone, Russell and Cooper, 1992 and 1997). 

Page 14 
Conversely, ‘job-related family dissatisfaction’ can have a range of consequences for all family members, 

and levels of satisfaction with the commute system are normally communicated between and shared by 

husbands and wives. However, there are also patterns of difference in the reactions of workers and 

spouses, with the Newfoundland exploration activity study showing the spouses to be more likely to be 

ambivalent or negative about the impacts of commute work, and to experience larger mood swings. The 

work pattern generally seems to be less problematic for the commute workers. 

In part, this seems to be because family life issues are of less concern to them. For example, while the 

Newfoundland study questionnaires and interview schedules were designed to focus on the relationship 

between work and the family, male respondents responded mainly about the work itself and especially 

safety and pay. When asked what advice they would give a hypothetical married friend who was taking 

an offshore job, all but two respondents only discussed the work itself. The impacts on other family 

members were rarely acknowledged by such men who, while listing some of the adjustments needed as a 

result of their intermittent absence, saw them as incumbent on the spouse and children. The women and 

children were expected to adjust to the returning worker, rather than vice versa (Lewis, Shrimpton and 

Storey 1988:171). 

These low levels of concern about the impacts on the spouse and children were mirrored in joint 

interviews with workers and spouses. A number of the men expressed amazement when their wives 

described how the schedule affected their lives, whether in terms of issues and concerns or their 

emotional responses to these. Reciprocally, many wives had only very vague ideas about the lives of 

their husbands between the times when they left home and when they returned. To the degree that this 

is the case, or that these workers are unwilling to confront or deal with the situation, no attempt will be 

made at amelioration. Instead, it is left to the spouses to adjust to or cope with the system. 

The underlying point here is that most commute workers do not see, and are uncomprehending of, the 

two social realities at home; that when he (or, rarely, she) is present and that when absent10. The family 

at home has to deal with the changes between them on a periodic and ongoing basis in a single setting: 

‘In a certain sense the wife is also commuting back and forth between a single and a married state; a shift 

which entails different forms of behavior, different social networks and activities, and different values’ 

(Solheim 1988:159). 

The Newfoundland study identified three ways in which workers' wives dealt with these shifts: 

Some women seem simply to “carry-on”, trying wherever possible to prevent... spousal 

absence from interfering with their routines and concerns, perhaps with the support of a 

close friend or relative. A second option is to try to “do everything” during the period the 

spouse is away, including all aspects of “his” role which require attention; many of these 

women then go “into reverse” on their partners' return - passing back to him the various 

duties and responsibilities which in their view are rightly and properly his. The third 

option is to place life “on hold”, to minimize all activities and concerns during the 

husband's period offshore in order to activate them fully when the spouse is at home 

(Lewis, Shrimpton and Storey 1988:186). 

However, these patterns are by no means distinct and simple: 

The woman's internal conflicts cannot be separated from those of her spouse, or from 

those that may be present within the family as a whole. She may, therefore, be pulled in 

several directions at once by forces that vary in strength and persistence. This is not to 

deny that other members of the family are placed under similar strains, but the evidence 

suggests that it is the female spouse/mother who is most active in conflict management 

of various kinds. Of course, we know that this is a feature of wives in many family 

 

10An exception here is multi-generational oil families in the Gulf of Mexico, where offshore workers may have experienced 

the effects at home when growing up as the child of a commuting father (Austin, pers. com., 2000). 

Page 15 
settings within our culture... [but] we argue here that it is particularly marked (Lewis, 

Shrimpton and Storey 1988:186). 

Children also experience similar changes between the family with the offshore worker present and 

absent. They too have to move between different worlds, modes of being, rules and ways in which family 

time is spent. The ways in which children react depend on their age, personality and adaptability 

(Mauthner, pers. com. 2001). 

The fact that the spouse of a commute worker is a part-time single parent has also been recognized by 

Forsyth and Gramling. Using a construction of reality approach, they argue this leads to the exclusion of 

the commuting worker from the ‘traditional’ nuclear family because ‘it becomes impossible to maintain the 

absent member’s active role in the construction process.’ However, they too argue that new interaction 

patterns are available, which ‘while quite different from the “traditional” nuclear family, are patterns of 

adaptation rather than pathology’ (Forsyth and Gramling 1987:57). 

Forsyth and Gauthier (1991) extend this analysis, developing a typology of six adaptations/familial 

structures among two-parent Louisiana oil families: alternate authority, marginal father, contingent 

authority, conflict, replacement father and egalitarian. However, as was noted above, they conclude that 

working offshore is always problematic for families. In particular, they identify difficulties related to: 

disagreements with the rules associated with the chosen strategy, dissatisfaction resulting from the 

strategy being imposed by the power of one family member, and a failure to agree on a strategy. They 

believe these problems are exacerbated by the limitations the schedule places on opportunities for 

negotiation (198-199). 

It should again be noted that there are two further options available to families that find impacts of the 

work pattern highly problematic. The first is for the commute worker to give up his or her job but, as has 

been seen, this can be problematic in areas with high unemployment rates. There may be few alternative 

employment opportunities, and most may involve a loss of income and status. The second option is for 

one or other partner to quit the relationship; however, as has been noted above, there is little evidence in 

support of the common view that commute employment results in large numbers of separations and 

divorces. 

Page 16 
3.0 COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL ISSUES 

The system also has a number of related effects on the communities and regions where the workers live 

and employers do business. These include the effects on: residential patterns, expenditures, noncommute employment, local investment, community life and social and recreational services. Each of 

these is discussed below. 

3.1 Residential Patterns 

The spatial distribution of the workers’ homes is a critical factor in the location and nature of these issues. 

The commute schedule and transportation arrangements (especially in the mining industry, where 

multiple pick-up points are more common) can give workers and their families considerable flexibility as to 

where they live. Depending largely on the schedule, transportation systems and employee preferences, 

they may live close to, or distant from, the workplace. 

This section is based on a review of the literature on this issue (Shrimpton 1994) that examined studies of 

the petroleum industry in Louisiana (Gramling and Brabant 1984; Centaur Associates 1986), Scotland 

(Grampian Regional Council 1992), Norway (Aase 1990), Newfoundland (Fuchs, Cake and Wright 1983; 

Storey et al. 1989) and Australia (Storey and Shrimpton 1991). It also reviewed the residential patterns of 

commute miners in Canada (Storey and Shrimpton 1989) and Australia (Stedman 1991; Storey and 

Shrimpton 1991). It concluded that the residential patterns of commute workers reflect the specifics of 

the system used. 

Generally speaking, the dispersal is greatest when the rotation is long, when the company provides 

transportation between the workplace and multiple ‘pick-up’ points, and when the employer defrays a 

major part of the commute costs. These may vary, especially in the petroleum industry, with the seniority 

of the employee. For example, senior managers and drilling crew may work longer rosters and be flown 

to and from their homes far from the workplace. Such personnel may commute from homes in the United 

States to operations in other parts of the world. 

However, extreme distributions need not be limited to senior employees. For example, workers at the 

Polaris mine in Canada’s Northwest Territories, with its relatively long roster (9/3 at that time) and the 

employer paying for commute travel to and from any airport in Canada, have their homes in virtually every 

part of the nation, while some live as far away as the Caribbean, Venezuela and England. 

These patterns mean that, while there are some concentrations of offshore petroleum commute workers 

(e.g. in East St. Mary Parish, Louisiana, and in the Aberdeen area, Scotland) and commute mine workers 

(e.g. in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, and Perth, Western Australia), many workers live a considerable 

distance from others at the same operation or even in the same industry. In the former case, living in a 

center of commute activity gives workers increased job flexibility in that they may be able to move from 

work at one commute operation to work at another without having to change their residential location. 

Commute employment may also be used to sustain a rural lifestyle. For example, some Gulf of Mexico 

offshore oil workers use offshore oil employment to continue to live in rural communities in depressed 

economic areas, sometimes far from the coast. This has contributed to cultural continuity, “because 

(commute work) does not interrupt the local fabric to the very great extent that industrialization that is... 

factory-based would do to a society.... People didn’t have to all move to Baton Rouge (to get the jobs 

offshore)... they are still in their same communities” (quoted in Freudenburg and Gramling 1994:42). 

Similar patterns have been observed in Newfoundland (Fuchs, Cake and Wright 1983), and a number of 

remote and aboriginal communities involved in the mining industry (Hobart 1989), although in the latter 

case this is often a result of government and company policies rather than individual initiative. 

However, there is evidence that the commute system may also encourage workers and their families to 

change where they live. For example, Storey et al. (1989) found that one-fifth of Newfoundland 

exploration study respondents (workers and spouses, contacted independently) had moved since the 

start of work offshore, albeit with only 8% of all workers and 3% of all spouses attributing the move to the 

Page 17 
work. These migration effects can be more dramatic in the mining industry, where multiple pick-up points 

are common. For example, as of 1987, 54% of the Polaris mine workers who had been hired in Northern 

Canada had subsequently relocated to the South (Storey and Shrimpton 1989:43). In this and other 

cases, hiring policies designed to benefit northern and peripheral centers were largely counter-productive, 

confounded by commute arrangements which allow the commonly well-educated ‘northern hires’ to 

relocate to southern metropolitan regions. This benefits these regions but causes proportionately greater 

losses of income and capabilities from northern communities (see Shrimpton and Storey 1992; McBain 

1995, McLean and Hensley 1994). 

The review of the demographic implications of commute work (Shrimpton 1994) found that a number of 

economic factors had prompted such relocation: seeking commute employment, maximizing employment 

opportunities for other family members, reducing commute times and costs and reducing living costs. 

There were also a number of social factors: moving to a better physical environment, moving to a different 

social milieu (mostly moves between urban and rural settings), improving access to community services 

and leisure opportunities, moving to be closer to family and friends and moving because of increasing 

family exclusivity. The last, as identified by Solheim (1988), sees workers and their spouses 

progressively withdraw from community into family life as a result of commute work. 

It is likely that the dispersion of workers’ places of residence has increased over time. The last twenty 

years have seen relative declines in transportation and communications costs, and hence the costs of 

living at considerable distances from the workplace and pick-up points. Furthermore, the Gulf of Mexico 

and North Sea have seen an increase in deep water operations using longer rosters, permitting a yet 

wider dispersion of workers’ places of residence. However, for the reasons outlined above, they may also 

lead to the further development of concentrations of workers in centers of commute activity and hence 

employment choice. 

3.2 Expenditures 

The expenditure patterns of offshore workers, including payment of local and state taxes, are largely 

dependent on where they live, and can make a significant contribution to the economy of those 

communities and regions. However, as was discussed above, they may be at a considerable distance 

from the workplace. Thus, for example, 1984 data on employment in Louisiana’s offshore oil and gas 

industry showed that, of a total of 21,847 person-years of employment, 2167 (10%) went to residents of 

other states. If this is multiplied by the average income for all jobs directly related to offshore activities, 

the total loss of wages and salaries to other states is about $70 million (Gramling 1989:60). This is in fact 

likely to be an underestimate given that out-of-state workers commonly have higher than average 

incomes. Furthermore, as was noted above, a number of factors suggest an increasing dispersion of 

workers’ places of residence. 

It should also be noted that some commute workers take advantage of the extended periods away from 

the workplace to spend relatively large amounts on travel and recreational activity. In particular, some 

single workers, young couples without children and older ‘empty-nest’ couples engage in considerable 

amounts of recreational travel, spending significant amounts away from their home communities and 

regions, reducing local and regional economic benefits. 

However, there are some exceptions to this pattern of dispersed expenditures. For example, McLean 

and Hensley (1994) report that the Red Dog mine brings substantial economic benefits to Alaska, in part 

because it is a joint venture with the local Inupiat Eskimo community. The local benefits from the 

operation included, every year, about $5 million in wages, $9.8 million in payments to a larger area 

membership, royalties of $3 million (1992) and payments to the Northwest Arctic Borough of $2 million. 

Page 18 
3.3 Non-Commute Employment 

Some commute workers have secondary paid employment while in their home communities. This may 

include the use of their commute employment skills (for example, electricians and welders at commute 

operations will also use these capabilities in their secondary, home community, employment) and/or 

involvement in traditional local farming or fishing activity. However, there is only limited information about 

secondary non-commute employment because much of this work is undertaken on an informal basis, as 

part of the underground economy, with the income undeclared so as to avoid taxes. 

There is evidence that the likelihood of engaging in secondary paid employment increases with the 

proportion of time spent at home. Thus, for example, Aase (1990:13) found that ‘19% of the households 

[of Norwegian platform workers, who spend only four weeks in eleven offshore] run some sort of private 

business in addition to wage labor in the North Sea.’ However, only 10% of Newfoundland exploration 

workers, on a 3/3 schedule, engaged in such secondary work (Storey and Shrimpton 1989), while only 

3% of Polaris mine workers, who after travel is included only spent three and a half weeks at home for 

every eight at the mine, did so. 

The numbers with second jobs may also be a function of the worker’s skills and experience and the 

amount and type of work available locally, especially when the latter calls for periodic bouts of labor. For 

example, commute work has been shown to complement agricultural activity, in both the petroleum (Aase 

1990:16) and mining (Storey and Shrimpton 1989; Dunlop, pers. com. 1991) industries. In 

Saskatchewan, as in Western Australia, commute mining has been described as ‘a de facto agricultural 

support program,’ since mine workers can contribute both capital and periodic labor to help support family 

farms. However, in many cases, this contribution to the family farm or other family business does not 

take the form of paid employment. Similarly, some workers spend some of their time at home in hunting, 

fishing, collecting firewood for home heating and other activities, either to help supplement the household 

income (see, for example, Fuchs, Cake and Wright 1983:126-127, and Hobart 1989:32) or, through sales 

to others, contribute to it. 

There is also evidence that the employment patterns of the spouses of commute workers are distinctive. 

Some see paid employment as a constructive use of time and a means of maintaining an independent 

existence, while for others, and especially parents, the partner’s absence is a constraint on taking 

employment. Furthermore, the desire of many couples to maximize the compatibility of their work 

schedules often sees commute workers’ spouses seeking work that has a flexible schedule; i.e. part-time, 

temporary, supply or self-employed work (Storey and Shrimpton 1989, Solberg 1988). 

In preliminary analysis of a small (N=156) sample of UK North Sea oil workers' spouses, that is biased 

towards those of ‘white collar’ employees, Parkes and Carnell found that 36.5% were not in paid 

employment, 40.4% worked part-time, and 23.1% worked full-time. These are similar to the figures for 

married women in general in the UK labor force, with about 34% not in paid work, 44% in part-time work 

and 22% in full-time work (Lewis, pers. com. 2000). While 32.2% of those in part-time work reported their 

hours were flexible, this was only the case for 16.7% of those working full-time. The presence of children 

in the home was a major factor in employment decisions; whereas 63.2% of those with no children 

worked full-time, only 17.5% of those with children did so. Those who did not hold paid jobs mostly 

indicated that this was for family reasons and to be with their partner, while those in employment cited 

career and financial reasons (Parkes, pers. com. 2001). 

3.4 Local Investment 

Some commute employees invest their earnings and time onshore in setting up new, typically small, 

family businesses. This form of entrepreneurship can make a valuable contribution to the local economy. 

For example, about half of Norwegian offshore oil households which had set up businesses had done so 

in the agriculture sector, while a quarter were in retailing and the rest in personal services, transportation, 

engineering and small-scale manufacturing (Aase 1990). This is commonly an extension of commute 

workers’ secondary employment, involving the use of the same skills employed in their commute work. 

Page 19 
Offshore incomes can also provide ‘venture capital’ to start and develop these business, with the periods 

onshore also allowing the commute workers to invest his or her ‘sweat equity’ during these crucial initial 

years. For some young workers, commute work is seen as a short-term venture employment strategy 

designed to ‘set them up’ by establishing a non-commute business. However, little is known about how 

many seek to do this or what proportion of them escape the ‘golden handcuffs’ associated with high 

commute work incomes (Shrimpton 1994:73). 

3.5 Community Life and Social and Recreational Services 

As has been discussed above, commute work removes some citizens from communities on a part-time 

basis. This affects their ability to participate in, and contribute to, formal and informal social events and 

networks and poses particular challenges for those responsible for or involved with providing those 

services. 

Workers may not be able to participate in activities which require regular attendance, such as team 

sports, jury duty, and meetings of church groups, local government councils and committees, school 

boards and business groups. They may also be absent from occasional local or community events, such 

as parent-teacher meetings, school graduation ceremonies and church fetes. For example, James 

(2000:29) quotes an offshore oil worker living in New Iberia, Louisiana, who is on a 2/2 schedule: 

You don’t get a whole lot of softball dads or t-ball dads or whatever, with that scheduling. 

It’s so hard to do. My little girl is in the girls’ basketball league. There’s no way I could 

help coach that. I could help when I come in but, you see, that’s one other thing, they try 

to throw into that 14 days. Your schedule is pretty full as it is. 

Depending on the numbers of local residents involved in such work, community groups or organizations 

will first need to appreciate the problems and then find locally appropriate ways to address them to try to 

retain commute workers, and sometimes also their families, as active community participants. This is 

neither easy, nor always successful. In Kalgoorlie, Western Australia, for example, much of the younger 

male labor force is engaged in mining, with many involved in commute work or locally based extended 

workday operations. These time constraints have resulted in difficulties in finding sufficient players for 

local Australian Rules football teams. No immediate solution to the problem has been found (Storey, 

2001b). 

As was discussed above, research into the implications of commute work for health and safety, including 

employee assistance program referral information, also indicate that commute work generates particular 

types of demands for a wide variety of counseling and health care services. These data primarily focus 

on the commute workers, but research into the effects on their spouses and children also suggest 

particular patterns of demand. 

Page 20 
4.0 RESPONSES TO COMMUTE EMPLOYMENT ISSUES 

4.1 Introduction 

It is clear that employer initiatives in such areas as work schedules, accommodations, transportation, 

communications, hiring, orientation, counseling and family policies and services can optimize the effects 

of the offshore and other commute employment in respect of all of the above issues. Regulatory 

authorities, trade unions, local government agencies, community groups and others, including the 

workers and families themselves, may also have an important role to play. Such optimization can have 

benefits for employers, workers, their families, their communities and, more generally, local society. 

These are discussed in detail below. 

4.2 Work Schedules 

The work schedule at commute operations commonly brings together a roster arrangement, whereby 

employees work one or more weeks and then have a similar period at home, with shift work, likely 

involving the use of extended work days. However, as has been discussed above, the oil industry in 

particular has seen an increase in the number of workers on irregular or ‘call-out’ schedules. This section 

of the report discusses these different schedules, their effects, and employee and family preferences, 

primarily based on Parkes (1998). 

Roster and Shift Arrangements

Where regular rosters or rotations are used by the oil industry, they vary for different types of workers, 

different employers and in different parts of the world, and change over time. The stay offshore is 

commonly a multiple of seven days, with 7, 14 and 21 being most common, but workers involved in 

offshore construction and hook-up work extended and irregular schedules, while contract and other 

personnel who provide short-term specialist assistance have very irregular schedules, or are ‘on-call’, 

depending on operational requirements. Cost reduction initiatives have seen a widespread trend to 

longer and more irregular roster patterns. 

Most workers with a regular roster are on a symmetrical pattern; that is, they spend the same number of 

days away from, as at, the offshore workplace. For example, Parkes and Clark (1997) found that 72% of 

a sample of UK offshore workers was on a 2/2 schedule, 14% on a 3/3 pattern and 10% on ‘equal sixes’ 

(five 2/2 rosters followed by six weeks of vacation). Only 5% were on an asymmetrical pattern (2-3). 

However, most workers in the Norwegian, Danish and Dutch offshore, where labor legislation which 

conforms to the European Social Charter limits the number of hours that can be worked in a year11, are 

on asymmetrical rosters. They work two-week periods of work offshore, alternated with periods of three 

and then four weeks away from the workplace. 

In the case of both symmetrical and asymmetrical patterns, it would be a mistake to equate the non-work 

period with time at home, since some of it is taken up with the work-related commute to and from the 

offshore. This can be especially the case for those workers commuting internationally. Installations in 

particularly remote locations tend to use longer rotations; the International Labor Office give examples of 

US nationals working 4/4 in Asia, and Europeans and Filipinos working 6/6 and 3 months on/2 months off, 

respectively, in Nigeria (ILO 1993, quoted in Slaven, Stewart and Flin 1996). 

 

A variety of rotations are used at commute mines. A 1996 inventory found the majority of Canadian 

mines using the shorter patterns, with a 1/1 schedule (i.e. seven days at the mine, followed by seven 

away from it) being the most common, worked by 45% of all commute miners. The 2/2 pattern had 

shown recent growth, and accounted for 36% of the commute workforce. Very short rotations (4/3 days 

and 5/2 days, mostly used by management personnel) also seemed to be increasing, while longer and 

asymmetrical rotations were in decline (Community Resource Services Ltd. 1996) 

 11 The UK implemented this 1993 Directive (93/104/EC) in November 1998, but has exempted offshore workplaces until 

August 2003. 

Page 21 
The longest Canadian rotation is used by an operation that is exceptional in many ways. Polaris, a 

lead/zinc mine on Little Cornwallis Island in the High Arctic, is the most northerly base metals mine in the 

world. As was noted above, its workers have their homes in all regions of Canada, with a few commuting 

on an international basis. This is made possible by the transportation policies (the company provides a 

chartered shuttle between the mine and Resolute, on nearby Cornwallis Island, and pays air travel costs 

between there and any commercial airport in Canada) and the long, asymmetric, rotation. The longest 

pattern at Polaris (in fact there is considerable flexibility) now involves eight weeks at the mine and three 

or four at home. 

Growth in commute mining in Australia has been even more recent and dramatic; some 64 mines are 

known to have opened since 1980, more than 50 of them since 1987 (Storey 2001a). A range of different 

rotation patterns is used between and in different mines, but data are not available on the numbers using 

the various patterns. However, unlike Canada, asymmetrical schedules are the norm, with most 

employees spending longer at the workplace than away from it. Of 35 operating mines for which work 

pattern data were available, only twelve use a symmetrical system (seven using 1/1 and six using 2/2) for 

all or some of their labor force. (However, this includes the huge Argyle diamond mine, where the over 

eight hundred workers are on 1/1 or 2/2 rotations.) The most common patterns are 2/1 and 3/1. 

Some Australian mines use highly asymmetrical patterns, primarily for contractor rather than operator 

personnel. A 1991 survey found seven using a 6/1 pattern, and two each using 7/1 and 13/1 schedules. 

These work/non-work ratios of 6/1, 7/1 and 13/1 compared with ratios of only 2/1 and 3/1 at Canadian 

mines with asymmetrical patterns (Storey and Shrimpton 1991). There have been serious concerns that 

Australian contracting companies, in Western Australia in particular, have been significantly extending the 

work schedule of their employees. In a notice to mine managers in June 1996, the State Mining Engineer 

for Western Australia pointed out that mine managers, as principal employers would, under Duty of Care 

regulations, have to be able to justify allowing their contractor's employees to work twelve hours per day 

on extended work cycles, in some cases up to thirteen weeks on and one off (Storey, 2001b). 

Canada and Australia, given their large unpopulated areas and important minerals sectors, are the largest 

global users of commute mining. The United States has one mine (Red Dog) operating, and others 

planned or under development, in Alaska. Red Dog uses a 4/2 schedule, combined with liberal leave 

policy, in order to facilitate the maintenance of subsistence lifestyles by the Inupiat eskimo workers 

(McLean and Hensley 1994). The only other US commute operation is a sulphur mine in Louisiana; this 

is interesting primarily because it is located offshore and functions in essentially identical fashion to 

nearby oil platforms. However, both its managers and workers regard themselves as being in the mining 

industry, with its distinctive management and work cultures. 

Commute mines have also been identified in Columbia, Chile, Indonesia and Papua-New Guinea. Very 

little is known about the distribution of the places of residence of the workers at these mines, or other 

aspects of their operations. However, there is evidence of different rotation and transportation policies 

being used for ‘locals’ and ‘expats’, with the latter spending extended periods in a major regional city or 

their country of origin. Such a system is also used for the expatriate management personnel at third 

world mines that do not otherwise use a commute system. 

Twelve hour shifts are the norm in the oil industry, although some specialized employees may be on other 

schedules or on-call 24 hours a day, and some UK North Sea construction workers are reported to 

consistently work 15-hour days (Oil Industry Liaison Committee 1991). Collinson (1998:311) indicates 

that some UK contract employees work longer hours than are prescribed by management so as to protect 

their income and employment. Parkes and Clark (1997) found that nearly 40% of UK offshore personnel 

report working more hours than the standard week, with 13.8% (mostly management personnel) reporting 

in excess of 100 hours of work in seven days. 

Page 22 
While some positions (especially on Gulf of Mexico production platforms, where there are generally few 

workers on night-shift) normally only require work during a day shift, others involve day and night shifts; in 

the case of fourteen day and longer work patterns there is commonly a mid-rotation split shift when 

employees change from night to day shifts, or vice versa. Similarly, most Canadian, Australian and 

United States commute mines use extended, commonly 11 or 12-hour, workdays. Shift work is common, 

although the numbers working night and, especially, split shifts appears to be less than in the oil industry. 

Health and Safety Effects

There is a large literature on shift arrangements, health and safety. Offshore oil and mining operations 

are only two of many work settings using extended and changing shifts, and the findings of that research 

are applicable in terms of the implications of different shift patterns and arrangements. What is unique 

about commute work is the combination of these shifts with commute patterns. In this connection, it is 

interesting that a Saskatchewan commute uranium mine had a significantly higher rate of employee 

assistance program use than did a non-commute potash mine, even though both used 12-hour shifts. 

The rates of use were particularly high in respect of sleep and emotional problems (Coates 1991). 

Despite the diversity of commute patterns, Parkes (1998:9) notes that: 

almost all the existing literature on health and psychosocial factors among North Sea 

personnel, relates to individuals working 2/2 schedules; only rarely have different offshore 

work/leave patterns been compared in terms of the health and performance of personnel. 

One such study, carried out on drilling rigs in the Caspian Sea (Alekperov, Melkumyan 

and Zamchalov 1988), examined the physiological effects of work/leave patterns; on the 

basis of the results the authors recommended one-week, rather than two-week, work/rest 

cycles. 

Parkes and Clark (1997) also found that personnel working a 3/3 schedule were significantly less satisfied 

with their work/leave pattern than those working a 2/2 schedule, and an anticipated change from 2/2 to 

3/3 schedules was perceived very negatively by those concerned. Interviews with workers’ wives 

revealed unease about a 3/3 pattern, although this topic was only one of a number of issues of concern to 

them. However, a small proportion of workers (mostly on drilling rigs) preferred the longer work/leave 

cycle12, and data from a pilot study provided no clear evidence of adverse effects on mood and sleep of a 

third week offshore. 

Shrimpton and Storey (1993:12) found that a majority (52%) of Newfoundland exploratory rig crew, 

working a 3/3 pattern, would prefer a shorter rotation. However, only 6% of supply boat crew and 14% of 

their spouses wanted a shorter rotation, despite the fact that they worked a 4/4 schedule.13 This likely 

reflects difference in the labor force, work and work cultures. The rig crew, most of whom had only a 

relatively short-term involvement in the industry or other marine occupations, viewed the rigs as alien, 

individualistic, hierarchical and authoritarian workplaces. The supply boat crew, in contrast, were mostly 

long-term marine crew with a positive, familial, relationship with fellow workers and ‘the skipper’. Their 

time loading and unloading in harbor also facilitated contact with family and friends. 

Canadian commute mining research (Storey and Shrimpton 1989) found that, given a choice, 76% of 

married Key Lake mine workers wanted to continue on the current 1/1 schedule. Only 18% wanted a 

shorter schedule and 6% a longer one. Workers spouses were even more likely to want the current 

schedule; that was the preference of 89% of respondents, with only 9% and 2% respectively wanting a 

shorter or longer roster. However, 60% of Polaris workers wanted a roster shorter than the 9/3 pattern 

then in effect. (It should be noted that respondents were only asked about changes to the work pattern, 

with no change in the total number of days worked per year.) 

 12One reason for such a preference is that workers and their families on a 3/3 schedule can take two-week vacation 

packages during their periods onshore (Parkes, pers. com., 2000). 13This contrasts with James’ finding, on the basis of research in New Iberia, Louisiana, that ‘the longer schedules – 28-

and-28 (days) in particular – are much more disruptive of families’ (James, 2000:28).

Page 23 
However, while there has been little systematic research into the effects of an irregular or flexible 

schedule, the evidence that is available indicates that it is the most unpopular pattern of all. For example, 

a study of 20 UK offshore workers concluded that those on uncertain schedules were the most negative 

group, given “their lack of control over their personal and professional lives” (Mauthner, pers. com. 2000). 

Similarly, James (2000:29) describes how this schedule is the “most problematic of all... for a worker’s 

involvement in home and community.” 

The uncertainty and conditions associated with some contract work can also be highly problematic. 

Collinson (1998:321) describes how many North Sea contract workers he surveyed acknowledged that 

the economic and time-space pressures of offshore employment had: 

considerable negative consequences for their ‘free-time’ and the quality of their onshore 

relationships. On the platforms asymmetrical power relations and various inequalities 

subordinated contract workers. Their lack of stable employment, sickness benefit, 

holiday provision and employment protection, the practices of ‘NRB’ and ‘bumping,’ the 

working of longer hours and shifts than formally prescribed and the absence of platform 

privacy all had significant effects on workers’ lives, both offshore and onshore. 

However, Parkes and Clark (1997:81-82) found few differences between the psychosocial survey 

responses of UK North Sea operating company and contractor personnel, with the latter in fact being less 

pessimistic about future job prospects. Parkes and Clark (1997:82) believe this reflects in the structure of 

offshore employment in the mid-1990s, because: 

the transfer of a significant proportion of those who were previously operator personnel to 

contracting companies, and the tendency to impose work conditions on operating 

company personnel that are less favorable than they enjoyed previously, has had the 

effect of eroding differences between the two groups. In addition, some companies and 

installations have made deliberate attempts to reduce distinctions between the two 

groups in order to promote effective teamwork. 

Parkes (1998) provides a comprehensive review of the literature on the effects of commute work on 

stress, health and safety on North Sea offshore petroleum installations. This includes examination of the 

evidence as to the effects of long work hours in conventional work settings. For example, she reports that 

Proctor et al. (1996) found that, controlling for possible confounding variables, overtime hours predicted 

impaired performance on several tests of attention and visual-motor skills: 

The results showed that 20 hours overtime (i.e. a total of 60 hours work in seven days) 

gave rise to substantial performance decrements, ranging from 9-46% for the various 

tasks examined. Furthermore, measures of negative mood were directly related to 

overtime hours and to the number of consecutive days worked. These findings should be 

seen in the context of the standard 84-hour week worked offshore (Parkes 1998). 

She concludes that these long hours raise serious questions about cumulative fatigue, reduced 

performance and impaired well-being among offshore management personnel. 

Parkes (1998) also discusses the health effects of shift work, and notes that onshore research indicates 

that prolonged shift work over a period of years appears to have cumulative adverse effects on sleep 

patterns and health, not accounted for solely by increasing age. However, the pattern at commute 

operations can be more complicated, with workers involved in round-the-clock activities (e.g. production, 

maintenance, and drilling) being exposed not only to extended shifts and demanding work, but also to the 

need for adjustment to day/night shift changes. The scheduling of shifts poses particular difficulties 

offshore as rotation patterns are constrained by the transportation schedules and limited availability of 

accommodations. 

Page 24 
The most common pattern in the North Sea sees a shift change at the mid-point of the two-week period 

offshore, with night work usually being scheduled for the first week. 

Consequently, personnel have to adapt to night work on arrival offshore, and to re-adjust back to day 

work after seven night shifts, in some cases with no more than five hours break between the last night 

shift and the first day shift. A potentially more favorable pattern in which shift rotation takes place on 

alternate tours (either 14 days or 14 nights being worked on any one tour), although successfully 

implemented on some installations, has not been widely adopted in the UK sector.14 

Lauridsen et al. (1991) used a wide range of self-report health indicators, including 

measures of sleep disturbance, use of sleeping medication, headaches, muscular 

tension, and stomach problems, to examine the health implications of North Sea shift 

patterns. Shift patterns involving rotation tended to show a poorer profile on the healthrelated measures than non-rotating patterns, the least favored rotation pattern being 

00.00 – 12.00/12.00 – 24.00. Many of the personnel working this pattern experienced 

problems associated with the demanding circadian adjustment required. A recent study 

of offshore personnel (Parkes and Clark 199715) compared day work and day/night 

rotating shift work in terms of minor health problems, taking into account the fact that 

work patterns tend to be confounded with job types (e.g. production and drilling often 

involve rotating shifts, whereas other jobs, e.g. administration, typically involve only day 

work); sleep disturbance and gastric problems were found to be predicted by day/night 

shift work, but not by job type, whereas the opposite was true of musculo-skeletal 

problems and headaches. 

However, health is not the only important aspect of shift scheduling; alertness and 

performance are equally crucial issues. The effects of shift rotation on mood and 

cognitive performance (reaction time, memory, and reasoning) changes over the offshore 

work cycle have also been examined. In this study (Parkes, Clark and Payne-Cook 

1997), personnel were assessed (using computer-based tests) three times during each of 

nine 12-hour shifts spaced over the two-week period. The shift rotation conditions 

examined were 14 days, 14 nights, 7 days followed by 7 nights, and 7 nights followed by 

7 days. Consistent with other data (Lauridsen et al. 1991), shift patterns that involved a 

mid-cycle shift-change showed significantly poorer profiles of subjective alertness, sleep, 

and performance during the second week as compared with the corresponding ‘fixedshift’ (i.e. 14 days or 14 nights) patterns. 

 

Further evidence of the effects of shift rotation among offshore personnel comes from a 

recent study in which levels of excreted melatonin were compared over a two-week dayshift sequence and a two-week night shift sequence (Barnes et al. 1998). The results 

showed that adjustment to night work occurred within the first week, but the authors note 

the potential for increased accident risk during this adaptation period. The implications 

for shift schedules that impose a mid-cycle shift change, thus requiring further circadian 

adaptation at the end of the first week, are clear. From a health and safety viewpoint, 

therefore, a strong argument can be made for implementing ‘fixed-shift’ rotation patterns; 

however, offshore personnel strongly prefer the 7 nights/ 7 days pattern, which allows 

them to go on leave adjusted to a normal circadian cycle at the end of each tour (Parkes 

1998:8-9). 

 

14This is in large part because workers would rather adjust their sleep patterns at the workplace than upon their return 

home, where it is disruptive of their social and family life (Miles, pers. com., 2000). 

15See Parkes, 1999, for a fuller discussion of this research.

Page 25 
Changes in Work Schedules 

Some employers have modified work patterns over time. Most cases cited in the literature have seen 

reductions in rotation durations; for example, Alvarez (1986:28) notes that Shell Expro UK cut back their 

pattern from 2/2 to 1/1 in response to evidence that accident rates increased after ten days. Sutherland 

and Cooper (1986:15) report that Dutch government legislation led to a change from 4/4 to 2/2 patterns. 

Similarly, most Gulf of Mexico production workers changed from a 2/1 to a 1/1 pattern in the mid-1970s, 

followed by drilling workers in the early 1980s. However, as has been noted above, some UK operators 

have moved from a 2/2 to a 3/3 pattern, while the Gulf of Mexico has seen the adoption of increasing 

roster lengths (Austin, pers. com. 2001) associated with the shift to larger deep-water operations. This 

has included Shell Oil, which originally used a 2/2 pattern for deep-water platforms, but in 1998 adopted it 

for all platforms, including ones previously using a 1/1 schedule. Such increases in roster lengths are 

commonly associated with cost reduction initiatives. 

The trend at commute mines has been to reduce roster lengths. Surveys of Canadian and Australian 

mining industry human resources personnel identified various examples of reductions because ‘the 12/9 

(day) pattern was too long and... a possible cause of injuries,’ because superintendents ‘found 2 weeks 

away was too long for them to feel they had effective control of their area’ and ‘because the cycle was too 

long and provided too many admin difficulties’ (Shrimpton and Storey,1991b:13). 

The trend at commute mines has been to reduce roster lengths. Surveys of Canadian and Australian 

mining industry human resources personnel identified various examples of reductions because the 12/9 

(day) pattern was too long and... a possible cause of injuries, because superintendents found 2 weeks 

away was too long for them to feel they had effective control of their area and because the cycle was too 

long and provided too many admin difficulties (Shrimpton and Storey 1991b:13). 

In her study of a Queensland, Australia, mine where contractor employees were working a 4/1 schedule, 

Beach found that fatigue from the long roster was a major source of physical and emotional conflict. 

Miners and their wives identified this as a difficulty that had to be managed when the miner returned 

home. Both groups also expected that this conflict would result in miners quitting the work (Beach 

2000:132). Clearly many workers did so, as the company reported a 1999 turnover rate of 120%. A 

subsequent reduction of the roster to 3/1, albeit in combination with other organizational changes, saw 

the turnover fall to 20% in 2000. The company is now considering a further reduction to a 2/1 schedule 

(Storey 2001a). 

Reductions in rotation lengths are not without their costs, both for employers and workers. Transportation 

costs increase for the former group. For the latter, more time is spent travelling; this is seen as wasted 

time and, as is described above, air (and especially helicopter) transportation is a major source of stress 

in some regions.16 Furthermore, a shorter rotation means more partings and reunions, which have been 

shown to be stressful for all family members. It may also mean that a greater proportion of the period at 

home is spent recovering from the combined effects of the work and commute.17 However, it is not clear 

to what degree the greater frequency of contact reduces these stresses, counter-balancing the increased 

numbers of partings and reunions. 

On the other hand, as was seen above (Section 3.1), longer rotations encourage longer commute 

distances and time, increasing travel-related fatigue. For example, even in the mid-1980s, Centaur 

Associates (1986) found that 9.9% of workers employed off the State of Louisiana lived in another state, 

and Gramling (1980) noted that the offshore workers working out of St. Mary Parish lived in 18 different 

states. Gramling and Brabant (1986) found that only 30% of a sample of Gulf of Mexico workers lived 

 16 Workers may also see their incomes fall, if there is a reduction in the total work-hours. In the case of the Queensland 

mine referred to above, while a roster reduction from 4/1 to 3/1 was almost universally welcomed by workers, a survey found that 

almost equal numbers were for and against a further change to 2/1, with those against it concerned about the income loss (Storey, 

2001). 17 See also James (2000:28-29) on the relative advantages and disadvantages of different schedules, from the 

perspective of Louisiana workers and family members.

Page 26 
within 100 miles of their pick-up point, with 11.5% living more than 500 miles away. Preliminary analysis 

found that 20% of a sample of UK offshore workers spent more than five hours getting between their 

homes and the heliport, with 3% spending more than ten hours (Parkes, pers. com. 2000). This, 

combined with the helicopter travel time and the often early hours at which such travel starts, means that 

many workers are very fatigued when they arrive at the workplace and when they return to their homes. 

In the case of workers who drive home from the heliport, this increases safety concerns. 

In response to concerns about the work schedule, some mine managers modify performance 

requirements rather than the work schedule. For example, the manager of a Canadian mine using a 1/1 

pattern argued that even with that short roster ‘you have to start scheduling the work differently because 

you know and experience that you get mentally drained... you put your main emphasis in the (early) days 

because... your fifth, sixth and seventh days see (productivity) getting rapidly down.’ Particularly difficult 

and dangerous tasks were scheduled for times when attention levels were thought to be high (Storey and 

Shrimpton 1989:88). At the other extreme of roster length, the original manager at Polaris (with its 

notional 9/3 schedule) attributed its very good safety record to his open-door, non-‘hard-driving’, 

management style. 

4.3 Accommodations 

Parkes (1998:7), in her review of the literature on stress, health and safety on North Sea installations, 

finds evidence that location, size, and type of rigs and platforms are associated with psychosocial 

outcomes among offshore personnel. For example, Sutherland (1993) reports that Southern North Sea 

facilities (as compared with those in the more remote Central and Northern sectors), fixed platforms (as 

compared with rigs) and smaller installations, are associated with more favorable mental health. Iversen 

et al. (1986) find that the age of installations is also related to satisfaction among offshore employees, 

with personnel working on the newest of the three Statfjord platforms reporting greater satisfaction than 

those on the older ones. Parkes concludes that, while these findings can be attributed in part to the fact 

that newer platforms have improved design standards, recreational facilities, accommodations, 

emergency alarm systems and escape equipment (the last two of which may reduce anxiety), they do not 

allow causal interpretation because new installations can attract highly motivated and adaptable 

personnel, contributing to the favorable responses by employees on these newer platforms. 

Parkes goes on to observe that: 

Interpreting findings from univariate analyses poses further problems if the predictor 

variables are correlated; for example, recently-commissioned platforms tend to be 

smaller than those designed in the 1980s, thus potentially confounding age and size. 

Multivariate methods in which installation size, age, and type are examined 

simultaneously allow more precise interpretation. One such analysis (Parkes and Clark 

1997), based on data from male offshore personnel (N=1462), showed that physical 

installation characteristics were significant independent predictors of perceived stressors, 

and health- and safety-related outcomes. On production installations, age and size were 

significant related to satisfaction with safety measures, newer/larger installations being 

more favorable than older/smaller ones. Platform age was also significant in relation to 

physical stressor scores (older platforms having higher levels of physical environment 

stressors), while platform size predicted perceived workload, levels being higher on larger 

platforms than on smaller ones. However, in general, the physical characteristics of 

installations accounted for less variance in outcome than psychosocial factors (Parkes 

1998:7). 

Parkes (1998) also notes that offshore workers are exposed to physical stressors such as noise, 

vibration, poor lighting and/or ventilation, confined living accommodation and workspace, and adverse 

weather conditions. Ratings of noise and other environmental stressors correlate with measures of 

psychological well-being and that the perceived workload may mediate these relationships. However, the 

extent of exposure to adverse physical conditions differs across occupational groups, with construction 

and drilling crew reporting the highest exposure levels. Parkes and Clark (1997) found that exposure to 

Page 27 
physical stressors partially explained the incidence of minor health problems, especially headaches, in 

different job groups. Physical stressor ratings also varied with job level, with those in the higher grades 

reporting less exposure than those in basic grades. In particular, managers generally worked in office 

accommodation were removed from the physical stressors experienced by operating personnel. 

Qualitative research into commute operations in the petroleum and mining industries led the authors on 

an ILO working paper (1995:56) to conclude that the physical and social environment of the 

accommodations can make an important contribution to the quality of life and stress-levels of workers. 

Two factors appeared to be particularly important: privacy and recreational facilities. In the former case, 

privacy was seen as a key element in coping with the extended work schedule and isolated setting, with 

shared accommodation placing a strain on workers in this regard. Offshore cabins are normally small and 

sharing is not uncommon; on older rigs and platforms this may see four-berth cabins and, in times of peak 

labor requirements, ‘hot-bunking’. Commute mines more commonly allow each worker his or her own 

room, either while at the workplace or (at mines using asymmetrical rosters) at all times.18

The Health and Safety Executive Offshore Installations and Wells (Design and Construction, etc) 

Regulations 1996, which came into effect in 1999, address a number of these issues in respect of UK 

installations. They require that there be: no overcrowding: reasonable privacy and comfort; sufficient 

showers, washing facilities and lavatories; and, adequate space for workers to store their clothes. They 

also state that it is desirable to have double-occupancy cabins with toilet and shower facilities shared 

between two cabins, and a maximum of double occupancy at all times, including when there are peak 

labor requirements. ‘Hot-bunking’19 and six-person cabins are prohibited; however, the regulations 

regarding accommodations design and occupancy are otherwise flexible in that exceptions may be made 

for older installations. 

Accommodations arrangements may vary between classes of workers. For example, construction and 

other contract workers may be allocated inferior rooms, often containing six or more bunks. Collinson 

(1998:318-319) notes that the contractor accommodations on one of the two UK sector platforms he 

studied in the early 1990s were nicknamed ‘skid-row’ because of their dilapidated state. In contrast, a 

company production worker noted that he was ‘lucky, I have a cabin to myself so I can relax and cut 

myself off’, while senior managers had the additional advantages of their own television and telephone. 

Privacy may also have a gender dimension: Collinson also notes that, in interviews with UK platform 

workers, ‘while men complained about the lack of privacy in the cabins, women were much more 

concerned about the lack of privacy in the male-dominated public spaces of the platform’20 (320). 

The increased privacy provided by having one’s own room can, however, reduce off-duty social 

interaction between workers. This can be exacerbated when employees have televisions in their cabins. 

One Norwegian Offshore Installation Manager countered this, and improved the social atmosphere on 

Statoil’s Statfjord A platform, by installing a bar which served only non-alcoholic drinks (Flin 1996:77). 

However, space constraints mean that the provision of active and passive facilities offshore is usually 

limited, especially on rigs and older platforms, and Collinson (1998:318) notes that production workers 

have preferential access to facilities on some platforms. As discussed above, modern platforms may 

have more and better facilities, including cinemas, gymnasium, weight rooms and saunas. Commute 

mines are able to provide better recreation facilities, and there is also normally an opportunity for workers 

to spend time away from the mine site (for instance, fishing or canoeing on local lakes and ponds). Some 

mines offer baseball diamonds, tennis courts, swimming pools, running tracks, golf courses and 

cricket/football fields. 

However, the recreation facilities are necessarily much more limited in the case of small platforms. For 

example, the Gulf of Mexico contains large numbers of near-shore operations with single-figure crewing. 

 18Recent European Union regulations require that even construction camps provide each worker his or her own room, 

equipped with an en suite toilet, shower and sink. (Arnalds, pers. com., 2000) 19Hot-bunking is also forbidden by the US Coast Guard regulations governing mobile units. 20This is consistent with the findings of research into the experiences of women working at a Newfoundland oil platform 

construction site work-camp, who described the accommodations as ‘a refuge’ from the male-dominated public areas (Grzetic, 

Shrimpton and Skipton, 1996:39-46)

Page 28 
Such platforms commonly provide only a television, VCR, exercise bicycle and weights, and perhaps 

table tennis or a pool table. They also seldom have dedicated catering crew, with the workers expected 

to share catering and cleaning responsibilities. These small platforms commonly engender close social 

relationships among the crew; however, any tensions can be highly problematic since there is limited 

scope for isolating oneself from other workers. 

There are differences between oil and mining industry operations in respect of the availability of alcohol. 

With very few exceptions, the oil industry forbids alcohol at its offshore operations, with its possession 

being grounds for immediate dismissal. Some Canadian commute mines and the Red Dog mine in 

Alaska have the same policy; however other Canadian commute mines, and all Australian commute 

operations (including onshore gas fields), allow alcohol in the private possession of employees and/or 

restricted to a bar. Such bars are commonly operated by worker social clubs, have set hours, a perperson quota and serve only wine and beer. 

There has been little study of the joint effects of commute work and alcohol. Certainly, a ban or strict 

controls on workplace alcohol consumption increases the contrasts between the work and 

home/community cultures. Such contrasts are seen as problematic in that some workers have difficulty 

adjusting from one to the other, with negative consequences for workers and their families. Sutherland 

and Cooper (1986:309) concluded that ‘problems with alcohol in connection with the transition from the 

last onshore period to work period’ are an important stressor for offshore oil workers. There is also 

evidence of offshore workers engaging in drinking ‘binges’ upon return ashore (e.g., Aitken and McCance 

1982 and Collinson 1998:317) which may be more harmful than more consistent moderate consumption. 

It is reported that some workers who have worked two weeks of night shifts offshore use excessive 

drinking when they arrive onshore as a means to ‘kick’ their bodies to a normal circadian cycle (Miles, 

pers. com. 2000). 

While the design of accommodations, together with policies respecting room allocations, alcohol and the 

like are important, there is evidence that the overall social environment is of particular significance when it 

comes to worker stress. This encompasses aspects of all of the above, but is also an independent 

reflection of the management approach to the accommodations and related arrangements. This includes 

the need, especially given longer rosters, for the workers to create a ‘home’ at the work site. At the 

Polaris mine, with its original 9/3 and later 8/4 patterns and harsh Arctic location, this includes attempting 

to provide single room accommodations, encouraging the employment of couples (who are provided 

adjacent, linked, rooms), allowing workers to personalize their rooms and have small pets, and giving 

workers (through the social club) a say in all decisions relating to life in the mine accommodations. 

Separating work and non-work life at the workplace, in so far as it is possible, is important. A clear 

separation of work from accommodations areas, and interior decoration that differentiates the latter from 

the functionality of the former, encourages this. However, the social environment is also a function of the 

overall work culture and the full range of management approaches and personnel policies. 

4.4 Transportation 

While there are or have been commute operations using boats, buses and hovercraft, with crew-boats 

being used for many near-shore operations in the Gulf of Mexico, most remote petroleum and mining 

industry operations use air transportation, with the former commonly using helicopters. While some 

companies have their own transportation system (for example, Taylor Energy of New Orleans operates its 

own helicopters, and Echo Bay Mines owned and operated a Boeing 727 to service the Lupin mine in 

Canada’s Northwest Territories), some or all of these requirements are usually contracted. 

Transportation arrangements have two major effects on employees and their families. First, 

transportation schedules can be inconvenient from a family perspective, and disruptions can delay the 

worker’s arrival home and departure to the workplace, creating stress for all family members. Second, in 

the case of harsh environments and remote locations, safety concerns related to helicopter travel are 

commonly a major cause of employee stress, with implications for both the worker and his or her family. 

Page 29 
Transportation schedules, delays and disruptions can also be a considerable concern to workers and 

their families. Parkes and Clark (1997:29) note that inconvenient crew change times can be disruptive. 

Storey et al. (1989:151) found that delays and the ‘bumping’ of workers because of other passenger or 

freight requirements were a particular stressor for employees and their families, whether they affected the 

departure or arrival.21 This requires that companies and their transportation contractors provide prompt 

and accurate information about travel delays. 

While helicopter travel appears to be largely unproblematic for most Gulf of Mexico workers, British and 

Norwegian research has shown it to be a significant stressor in the North Sea, sometimes leading to 

workers quitting the industry (Sutherland and Cooper 1986:138; Hellesøy 1985:119). Sutherland and 

Cooper (1991:58) found that helicopter-related concerns were three of the top ten sources of stress for a 

sample of North Sea workers. These were: landing and taking off in poor weather, increased numbers of 

mechanical failures on helicopters, and flying in poor weather. Normal government safety regulations 

address the need for safe movement of personnel between commute operations and their home 

communities. In the case of helicopters flying over water, these may include requirements to wear life 

jackets or survival suits, and crew and passengers may have to undertake related training, including a 

simulated helicopter ditching. These requirements can themselves be stressful and there may be a need 

to provide counseling and information to reduce stress levels. 

4.5 Communications 

Difficulties communicating between the workplace and home can cause commute workers and their 

families considerable stress. Petroleum industry policies with respect to this vary by company, location 

and type of activity. At one extreme, drilling companies may ban personal communications at times when 

commercial confidentiality is a priority. Employers may also allow different levels of access to different 

communications technologies, with levels of confidentiality varying according to the location of the 

telephone and the system used (e.g. the telephone may be in a semi-public location, and ship-to-shore 

links can easily be heard on other radios). Some links, especially at international locations, are 

expensive, and differential ease and cost of access by different classes of worker can cause considerable 

resentment. Lastly, in some cases only worker-initiated calls are permitted, denying other family 

members the opportunity of initiating contact. This ‘one-sided communication’ has been noted as a 

particular problem (Parkes and Clark 1997:30), with spouses onshore feeling that important decisions are 

delayed or impeded by having to wait for the commute worker to call or return home. 

However, there have been major improvements in communications in the last few years. For example, 

North Sea production workers commonly have unlimited use of links with their homes, using a telephone 

located in their cabin or e-mail22. Preliminary analysis of surveys of a small sample of UK sector workers 

and spouses indicated that 65% were in daily contact. In more than half of the cases, either partner could 

initiate this contact, while in nearly half the cases both partners had e-mail access (Parkes, pers. com.

2000). In the Gulf of Mexico, it is not uncommon for children and teachers to fax or e-mail homework and 

school reports to offshore parents (Austin, pers. com. 2000), and there is a limited experimental use of 

Internet video. However, the use of e-mail varies with the age of workers and hence their familiarity and 

comfort with the technology. The increased capabilities and reduced cost of mobile phones provides 

another communications option for some workers, although this is limited in some settings by fire safety 

concerns related to battery-powered devices. Workers and families value such high-quality, low-cost and 

confidential links whether or not they are used with any frequency; their availability reduces tensions 

because family members know the links can be used if circumstances warrant. 

 21 Collinson (1998:316) indicates that this problem was intensified for some UK North Sea contract employees, who 

received a lower flight priority than operator personnel and might not be paid for waiting time resulting from delays 22Some offshore production platforms, remote mines and commute construction sites are making an increased provision 

of internet links which workers can use for both personal communications and to access training sites and programs.

Page 30 
4.6 Hiring and Orientation 

There is obvious merit in screening out job applicants who would find commute work highly problematic 

and providing effective an effective orientation program to newly hired employees. Indeed, Lightfoot 

(1990:1) believes the success of commute systems is ‘dependent on the resources committed to, and the 

sophistication of, the recruitment process.’ Certainly, some oil and mining companies think these factors 

are important in selecting employees. Some prefer to hire people with previous experience of 

unconventional work schedules or young unmarried or newly married workers. For example, there is a 

history of hiring individuals with a military background for work in the UK sector of the North Sea (Alvarez 

1986, 28), while Santos is reported to favor young men with a naval background in hiring for their 

commute onshore gas operations in Eastern Australia (Lightfoot 1990:28). However, overall, Slaven 

concludes that ‘it is difficult to screen personnel for the possession of qualities which would suggest a 

propensity for adaptability to (the offshore work pattern and environment)’ (1996:13). 

As was mentioned above, researchers have noted the advantages of having women in the commute 

workforce, and some companies (especially in the mining industry) make special attempts to hire and 

retain them. For example, Polaris mine sought to hire couples and female employees, while for John 

Willson, former President and CEO of Placer Dome, a major gold-mining company, ‘the industry’s 

acceptance of, first, female workers and, second, working partners’ (i.e. couples working together at 

commute operations) ‘has been a great success. The presence of women has enhanced all aspects of 

life at remote mines, improving morale, safety, productivity, cleanliness and language, and opening up a 

whole new qualified labor force’ (Willson 1991:13). 

Many oil companies now seek to facilitate the hiring and retention of women, both onshore and offshore. 

For example, Statoil has set a goal of 20% women’s participation in management positions, and 50% 

candidates in management competitions, by the end of 2000 (Women in Resource Development 2000:2). 

Heen (1988:81) notes the benefits of having women offshore: ‘the positive effect on the social 

environment of having women on platforms is considerable... (it) “normalizes” the atmosphere and this 

also lessens the differences between onshore and offshore life, which in turn makes the transitions 

between these two periods easier, lessening the degree of psychological change and making commuting 

somewhat less of a burden... Women have also (through their influence) had an impact on the material 

quality of the work environment’. However, it is reported that some workers’ wives have concerns about 

having women offshore. 

Given the particular implications of commute work for all family members, it has been recommended that 

hiring and orientation involve both the potential workers and their immediate family members. Some 

companies involve other family members and include discussion of the family life impacts in the 

recruitment process. Sutherland and Cooper conclude that it is important for companies that ‘screening... 

identify mental well-being and include an assessment of issues such as “social support” and stability of 

home/family background. It is... necessary to consider the individual's suitability in terms of the interactive 

product of private and career worlds’ (1986:7). Storey et al. (1989:153) found that such programs, ‘are 

very favorably described by respondents to our surveys...(they) serve not only to provide information but 

foster good employee morale...(and) dispel myths about offshore work and thereby better prepare the 

worker and his or her family for what is to come.’ 

4.7 Counseling 

As has been noted above, offshore work challenges employees and their families in various ways and 

leads some to experience psychosocial problems. Most will deal with these problems themselves or use 

informal coping strategies. However, North Sea research indicates that offshore workers derive only 

limited social support from other workers: ‘In one study, 8% of workers on large platforms reported that a 

source of stress was “not having anyone to talk to”. Service company personnel who travel to different 

platforms and rigs can feel especially isolated and lonely on unfamiliar installations where they do not feel 

part of the crew’ (Flin 1996:77). 

Page 31 
Male workers are likely to confide in any female colleagues and, in particular, health professionals. The 

latter group commonly considers such informal counseling to be one of the largest consumers of their 

time. In this connection, Flin (1996:79-80) notes that ‘since offshore rig medics are often the first to 

detect or to be told of an employee’s problems, then they should be provided with appropriate training in 

counseling. They are very conscious of their support role and are already involved in physical health 

promotion campaigns on their installations.’ 

The spouses and close friends of commute workers may also serve as onshore confidantes, although the 

spatial dispersal and social exclusivity of commute workers may limit this option. Offshore and industrial 

chaplains may provide additional assistance. Offshore chaplains are found in the UK and Atlantic 

Canada and are primarily concerned with the spiritual life of offshore employees. They commonly 

perform christenings, weddings and funerals for workers and their families, and they periodically visit and 

hold religious services on platforms, rigs and flotels. Industrial chaplains work at many types of 

workplace, including commute operations, in Australia. They are charged with addressing both the 

spiritual and psychological needs of workers and receive training appropriate to them both. 

There are formal counseling procedures at some commute operations. For example, the Lupin Mine in 

Canada’s Northwest Territories had a referral system to local social workers and support groups, although 

there are no clear policies regarding eligibility for financial assistance in accessing help. Increasing 

numbers of companies use a more comprehensive approach, in the form of employee assistance 

programs (EAPs). These were first developed in North America to provide employees and their families 

confidential access to a range of emotional, marital, financial and alcohol and drug related counseling 

services. 

Most UK sector operators, and some in the Gulf of Mexico, now have such programs. In deciding to 

introduce one in 1989, Mobil North Sea recognized ‘ample evidence of unique stress factors which can 

effect psychological well-being and potentially therefore mental health...(and which also represent) a 

potential threat to performance and productivity as well as to mental health and safety.’ It also concluded 

that these concerns could not be addressed through the existing occupational health and safety system 

since ‘few doctors or medics are trained in counseling skills, and employees may be reluctant to confess 

their anxieties to company staff in case they are deemed unfit to be offshore or in employ’. Mobil North 

Sea found its EAP both effective and ‘excellent value for money’ (Cooper 1991:211-212). Chevron and 

Conoco not only use their EAPs for routine counseling, but also for critical incident debriefing following an 

emergency (Flin 1996:80). Employee assistance programs can also have the incidental merit of providing 

a measure of fluctuations in the psychological well-being of the labor force. 

However, all of this requires that employees be familiar with and willing to avail of such programs. This 

may not be the case with certain employers and in some cultures. For example, according to James 

(2000:14), a New Iberia, Louisiana, family counselor ‘thought that few workers knew their health plan 

included counseling, and even if they did, he doubted many of them would seek help.’ The use of such a 

program will be particularly low if there is doubt about its confidentiality. 

4.8 Family Policies and Services 

As has been described above, there is clear evidence both that the home life problems of many commute 

workers are in reality work problems, and that domestic problems have reciprocal effects in the 

workplace. The worker brings home work-related concerns and stress, and the commute system 

generates its own tensions in domestic and personal life. These tensions are in turn brought back to the 

workplace, where they may affect productivity, safety, retention and other management concerns. 

Furthermore, married commute workers certainly see the family life impacts as being the primary 

determinant of satisfaction with the system (see Shrimpton and Storey 1987; Lewis, Porter and Shrimpton 

1988). 

Page 32 
In reviewing this issue, Mearns and Wagstaff (1996:252) concluded that: 

It would appear that insufficient research has been directed at understanding the 

work/home interface for long distance commuters in general and offshore workers in 

particular... The work/home interface provides a major source of stress for the offshore 

workforce. Management therefore has a responsibility to understand and manage this 

aspect of offshore workers’ lives. Without understanding and appropriate management 

support such stresses and strains may impact workers’ performance offshore. 

However, the research on commute employment indicates the types of responses and interventions that 

may be appropriate in addressing the challenges for family life. Drawing on many of the responses and 

interventions already described above, they may broadly be placed in four categories (based on 

Shrimpton and Storey 1991c:42-43): 

• Those that improve the compatibility of the work organization and family life. This includes 

such things as improved telecommunications and transportation arrangements between work 

and home, and optimizing the rotation pattern from a family life perspective. As is discussed 

above, this includes providing cheap, inexpensive and confidential phone links, prompt, 

accurate, information about travel delays, and clear and generous policies respecting 

emergency leaves and transportation arrangements in the case of family crises. 

• Those that improve the compatibility of the work culture and home life. This involves making 

the workplace and accommodations more familial and less alienating, thereby decreasing the 

contrast between the two, and includes changes to both the physical and social environment. 

This includes: the hiring of women, minorities and couples and otherwise making the commute 

workforce representative of the population as a whole; special arrangements to keep the 

family together at major holidays; social events for families where there is a concentration of 

workers’ homes; and, when feasible, site visits so that family members are familiar with the 

work setting. 

• Those that improve self-selection during hiring and help new-hires and their families get used 

to a new work pattern. Despite the types of initiatives described above, there will always be 

families that find a particular commute schedule or commute work in general highly 

problematic. Many effects, positive and negative, are not immediately apparent and 

appropriate education and orientation initiatives help family members know what to expect, 

allowing them to make a better informed decision as to whether to take the job. Such 

initiatives also reduce the stress new-hires and their families experience in dealing with the 

new, alien, work pattern, help them identify and understand the positive and negative effects, 

and let them know how others have dealt with the latter. 

• Those that provide assistance, perhaps through an EAP, other counseling program, or support 

group, to employees and family members requiring them. This includes self-help groups, such 

as the UK Offshore Women’s Link Support (OWLS) that has as its prime objective ‘the relief of 

distress for family members and friends of offshore workers who have fallen victim to 

tragedies, accidents or any other situation in their work or domestic life’. It operates a 

telephone help-line and organizes education days for wives to visit onshore facilities to give 

them insight into, and understanding of, the environment in which their husbands are 

employed (Mearns and Wagstaff 1996:251). Most spouses have only a very limited 

understanding of their partners’ workplace and work life, and learning about them commonly 

reduces anxieties associated with this unknown environment. 

Page 33 
McKee, Mauthner and McLean (2000) have examined oil industry employers’ perspectives on ‘family 

friendly’ policies and practices. They report a heightened awareness of family issues, reflected in 

initiatives in such areas as day care, workplace nurseries, enhanced maternity and parental leaves, and 

concentrated work-weeks, although there are inter-company variations in willingness to adopt family 

friendly initiatives. Industry and corporate image concerns, new EU and UK legislation, increased 

numbers of female managers and examples from international parent companies are seen as drivers of 

this interest. However, none of this discussion specifically examines issues related to commute 

employment. 

Page 34 
5.0 CONCLUSION 

5.1 Introduction 

Offshore oil employment has long been of interest to academics and others, primarily because it is seen 

as challenging relative to ‘normal’ work systems. In particular, considerable attention has been paid to 

the effects on family life, given the periodic absences of the worker. In studying this, as in looking at other 

aspects, much of the research has assumed the system is inherently problematic, with work-related 

tensions leading to conflict, the emergence of psychiatric syndromes, separations, divorces and the like. 

For example, Collinson (1998:306) concludes that ‘research in the UK oil industry has focused on the 

turbulent effects of offshore work on families and on the high levels of alcohol consumed by offshore 

workers during their two weeks at home.’23 Such discussion often explicitly or implicitly contrasts offshore 

work with ‘traditional’ or ‘normal’ work patterns. 

However, ‘normal’ work patterns are now in fact relatively uncommon, given the increasing prevalence of 

compressed work schedules, shift-work, part-time work and self-employment in all industries. Just as 

there is now a great diversity in family forms, so there is a range of work systems that further calls into 

question the assumption that any one of them is ‘normal’, let alone ‘ideal’. Each has its own mix of 

advantages and disadvantages, which may be particular to different individuals or families. For example, 

while some see self-employment as problematic because the hours of work are ‘uncertain’, others find it 

beneficial because of its ‘flexibility’. Part-time work and compressed workweeks are disruptive for some, 

while others value them because they provide larger blocks of time for family or other interests. Lastly, as 

was seen from the Leaf Rapids study, different types of family may each prefer two very different work 

systems primarily for family life reasons. 

Such preferences are seldom either absolute or fixed for all time. In the former case, most people are 

ambivalent about different work patterns. In the latter case, families and their preferences change as they 

move though the family life cycle or for other reasons. They are dynamic entities that are constantly 

adjusting and adapting to, or coping with, changes in family, work and broader social circumstances. This 

includes periodic re-evaluations of the balance of advantages and disadvantages received from the 

employment held by the different family members. Furthermore, the values and priorities of today’s 

young families are often quite different from those of earlier generations; for example, McGuire’s (pers. 

com. 2000) ‘new outlookers’ differ from ‘old school’ workers in terms of the ways they define themselves, 

the place of work in their lives, their loyalty to employers, and gender roles. 

This suggests that commute work in general, and particular work schedules, will suit some individuals and 

families better at some, but not necessarily all, times. It also suggests there is an ongoing pattern of 

adjustment, adaptation and coping as individuals and families seek to optimize their work and family 

circumstances. However, these are not very profound or useful conclusions since they are valid with 

respect to all work systems. What is important, instead, is that those involved with the commute work 

system used by the offshore oil industry recognize and respond to its general and particular effects. The 

challenge in this is that commute work makes more explicit and central the work-family relationship and 

requires all stakeholders, and especially employers, to recognize and respond to it. 

The literature cited in this report also suggests that it is exogenous change that presents the greatest 

challenges. For example, most Leaf Rapids families reacted very negatively to the thought that they 

might have to move from living in a small mining town to commute work. Similarly, Shell’s Gulf of Mexico 

workers were very unhappy when some were required to change from a 1/1 to 2/2 schedule, and UK 

North Sea workers and spouses strongly objected when they had to change from a 2/2 to a 3/3 rotation. 

Such change is problematic both because it is imposed, with the worker and family having little or no 

 

23Collinson’s paper itself reinforces this problematization of offshore employment. For example, the section of onshore 

leisure (317-318) only contains discussion of the problems offshore work poses re alcohol abuse and maintaining onshore social 

relationships. 

Page 35 
participation in the decision, and because it threatens the status quo, the patterns of personal and family 

behaviors and relationships that have been built up around the existing work arrangements. The latter 

interpretation is supported by the evidence that, all other things being equal, it is newly-married couples 

who cope best with commute work, presumably because they construct their family life around the work 

pattern, rather than having to change some pre-existent behaviors. 

Offshore workers and their families also have difficulty anticipating the effects of change. For example, 

as was discussed above, a shift to offshore work can provide blocks of time for parenting or to engage in 

recreational activity, while moving from a 2/2 to a 3/3 pattern means that less time is spent in travel, fewer 

helicopter journeys, fewer partings and reunions, and larger blocks of time for vacations and other family 

activities. However, as with all changes in work pattern, it is difficult for those involved to anticipate the 

full range of such effects, both positive and negative. An informed choice requires a timely availability of 

accurate information about the change and its prospective effects; however, the logical provider of such 

information, the employer, commonly is unaware of this requirement or believes it is beyond its mandate. 

If change, and especially exogenous change, can be problematic, so all the more so can its extreme 

form, uncertainty. As has been described above, worker morale has been undermined by recent 

industry-driven changes in offshore operations, with mergers, cost-reduction initiatives, multi-skilling, 

flexible work, crew reductions, the fragmentation of work teams and, in particular, an increased use of 

contract personnel and irregular and call-out schedules. The threat of such changes creates an 

environment of uncertainty, and contract work and irregular schedules make it a day-to-day reality for 

many workers and families. 

5.2 Limitations of the Literature 

This research identified a large literature related to the social effects of offshore employment, and 

responses to the issues arising. However, the relevance of most of these studies to present 

circumstances is unclear, given the complexity and dynamic nature of offshore employment, its social 

context, and its consequences. As has been discussed above, most major studies of offshore 

workplaces and their effects were completed in the 1980s. Since that time, new technologies have 

changed the industry’s modes of operation and labor requirements. This is especially the case in the Gulf 

of Mexico, given the slow shift from myriad small near-shore operations to larger deep-water projects. At 

the same time, new business arrangements and practices have profoundly changed the nature and 

effects of offshore work. In particular, contracting and flexible work arrangements appear to be having 

very negative effects on some workers and families. 

Furthermore, much primary research consists of case studies that are dated and allow little understanding 

of the complexity and evolution of issues and industry practice in particular settings. Any synthesis of 

issues is further limited by the fact that most studies examine particular demographic groups, activity 

types and locations. For example, there has been limited research into the effects on single workers or 

minorities, little attention has been paid to the differences between exploration, development, operations 

and decommissioning activity, and not much is known about commute work in developing countries. 

There has, generally, been very limited longitudinal analysis. 

In some cases, the literature is suggestive of best practice responses to the effects of offshore 

employment. For example, while the information on work schedules is often unclear or inconsistent, there 

is compelling evidence that mid-rotation shift changes have a variety of negative effects. There is also 

obvious merit in improving accommodations arrangements, upgrading onshore/offshore transportation 

and communications systems, ensuring hiring and orientation directly address personal and family life 

concerns, and implementing effective counseling and other family policies and services. However, the 

literature generally contains only limited amounts of systematic information about response initiatives and 

their success. 

Page 36 
5.3 Research Requirements 

Because of these limitations of the literature on offshore employment, this project has not, as was 

originally planned, been able to provide a comprehensive identification and description of best practices 

and responsibilities for them. Instead, this final section of the report describes a range of research 

requirements if the effects of offshore work are to be fully understood and best practices identified and 

implemented. 

The literature does provide insights into the options for implementing best practices, with there being both 

a scope and a need for action on the part of industry, governments, organized labor, professional 

associations and the community, and for self-help. It also indicates that the beneficiaries of such 

initiatives include workers, families, governments and, not least, the oil industry; in respect of the last, it is 

clear that best practice responses can increase employee retention, safety and productivity, and that the 

costs are commonly modest. As such, the research described below would both allow a better 

understanding of offshore employment and assist the oil industry, governments, workers, families and 

others in optimizing, in an efficient, timely and cost-effective manner, the effects of offshore employment. 

These research topics are not mutually exclusive, but may overlap, not least because difficulties in getting 

access to the offshore labor force may constrain the design of particular studies. These workplaces are 

often remote and have an increasingly wide range of employers. In the former case, the limited 

availability of accommodations and transportation facilities, allied to safety concerns, commonly limit 

access, while identifying (let alone contacting) the labor force at any facility now usually requires the 

cooperation of large numbers of operating, contracting and sub-contracting companies. 

In the case of most of these topics, no indication is provided as to the appropriate jurisdiction or 

jurisdictions for any study. However, this review and, in particular, the December 2000 New Orleans 

workshop, have indicated the merits of international comparative research, and every effort should be 

made to encourage further such work. It should also be noted that in almost all cases there is a need for 

longitudinal studies so as to identify trends and throw light on causal processes. 

Labor Force Demography. There is a need for secondary, and in some cases primary, data on the 

offshore labor forces in major jurisdictions. Variables of interest include age, gender, race, marital status, 

family structure, numbers and ages of children at home, years of commute work experience, occupation, 

employment-status, income, commute schedules and place of residence. 

Offshore Workplace Ethnographies. Most ethnographies of offshore workplaces are from the early 

1980s. Given the rapid pace of change in industry technologies and business practices, as well as in the 

offshore labor force and their values and expectations, there is a need for further such research. This 

should give separate consideration to: drilling rigs, fixed production facilities and FPSOs; the size and age 

of facilities; different work schedules; and the experience of company and contractor personnel, male and 

female workers, and offshore workers and, where married, their families. There is a particular need for 

such research in the US OCS given that there have been no such ethnographies in this, the world’s 

largest offshore sector; and any current understanding of these workplaces and related issues largely 

comes from onshore research or is inferred from studies in other jurisdictions. This may be particularly 

inappropriate to the myriad platforms with small, often single number, crews. 

The Effects of Offshore Work on Minorities. There has been little study of the effects of commute work on 

unmarried, homosexual, ethnic and aboriginal employees and their families, or extended, blended and 

other family forms. Research is needed to investigate the effects on these groups. Special attention 

might be paid to the experiences of the small numbers of Hispanic workers in the Gulf of Mexico, given 

that many view the hiring of more such workers as critical to addressing current labor shortages. 

The Effects of Offshore Work on Women Employees. While there is a considerable literature on women 

working offshore, most of these studies come from the 1980s and are based on very small samples. 

There have been major industry and social changes since that time, and there are more women working 

Page 37 
offshore in some jurisdictions. As a result, there is a need for new study of the particular issues women 

face at the workplace and in reconciling their work and family lives. 

The Effects of Irregular Schedules. Call-out and other irregular work schedules are increasingly common, 

and unpopular with workers and their families, and they have been subject to very little systematic study. 

There is a need for studies of this phenomenon and its effects. Research methods might include key 

informant interviews to establish the employers using it and the types of work involved, the trends in its 

use, and the reasons it is increasingly common. Such interviews could also serve to investigate the 

effects of its use, and possible responses, from the employers’ perspectives. Employee and family 

surveys are needed to establish the effects on them and possible responses. 

The Effects of Contract Employment. Like irregular schedules, contract employment is increasingly 

common, and has been the subject of little study. There is need for research into it and its effects. Such 

research might use key informant interviews to find out about its use, effects and possible responses, 

from the employers’ perspectives, while employee and family surveys could establish their views as to 

effects and possible responses. 

Differences between FPSOs and Fixed Platforms. There is evidence that, relative to fixed platforms, the 

work environment on FPSOs provides a specific set of human factors challenges. In particular, a shipbased workplace is much more subject to wave, wind and other environmental effects. Given this, there 

is a need for studies of the human factors-related effects of the introduction of FPSOs. Such studies 

might use interviews or surveys of workers, including some who have transferred to FPSOs from fixed 

platforms, and the families of married workers. An issue of particular interest is the appropriate training 

and prior experience of FPSO crew. 

 

Gulf of Mexico Labor Mobility. The last few years have seen an increasing use of deep-water platforms in 

the Gulf of Mexico. These provide a very different work environment from the types of platform that have 

historically dominated operations in the region. This raises questions about ability and willingness of the 

existing labor force to move to work on these new platforms, and the consequences of such a change for 

them and, where married, their families. The main research tool in any research might again be 

interviews or surveys of workers, including some who have transferred from conventional to deep-water 

facilities, and with members of the families of married workers. 

Best Practices: Regulator, Oil Company and Contractor Perspectives. This report has shown the paucity 

of systematic information on government approaches and regulations, and industry policies and practices, 

respecting responses. There is a need to address this with the main goal of identifying best practice 

responses from an industry perspective. The issues investigated should include work schedules, 

accommodations, transportation, communications, hiring, orientation, counseling and family policies and 

services. Specific consideration should be given to recent and likely changes in industry technologies 

and business practices, since they are known to influence requirements and options with respect to these 

issues. The research should also seek to collect information on the costs and benefits of such practices. 

Best Practices: Employee and Family Perspectives. It is also highly desirable that best practices be 

assessed from the perspectives of offshore employees and their family members, probably through 

interviews and focus groups that would see a structured discussion of offshore work and related issues 

and best practices. 

Accommodations Design and Policies. There is evidence that the offshore accommodations design and 

policies have significant effects on workers. Accommodations-related regulations commonly also cause 

problems and costs for companies transferring mobile equipment (e.g. drilling rigs and floating production 

platforms) between jurisdictions, when different regulatory standards require the modification of the 

accommodations design and/or arrangements. Such research should use structured interviews of 

selected key informants to collect and analyze information about the design of offshore accommodations 

and related regulations and policies. This might lead to a small international workshop on best practice 

design regulations, policies and practices respecting accommodations issues. 

Page 38 
Offshore Employment in Underdeveloped and Developing Countries. While a number of such countries, 

including Angola, Brazil, China, India, Nigeria and Thailand, are known to have large numbers of offshore 

oil workers, little is known about their numbers, characteristics and working conditions, or the effects on 

their lives, families and communities. These issues are of international concern given the global nature of 

the industry, with many of the operators and contracting companies, and some of the labor force, likely to 

be based in the US and other major economic powers. 

Research Workshops. It was clear to the New Orleans workshop participants that there would be great 

value in holding further such international meetings on a regular basis. They should again bring together 

regulators, consultants, academics and industry representatives from various jurisdictions, preferably 

including Norway given that country’s different onshore culture and regulatory approaches. Such 

workshops should discuss emerging issues, new and ongoing research, data availability and 

requirements, and other offshore employment topics. Each might also focus on one or two particular 

issues identified, in advance, as being of special interest. One option would be to hold such workshops in 

conjunction with the Society of Petroleum Engineers’ biennial international conferences on Health, Safety 

and Environment in Exploration and Production. These have increasingly been concerned with human 

factors and community issues. 

Page 39 
6.0 PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS AND REFERENCES 

6.1 Personal Communications 

Arnalds, S.S., Senior Project Engineer, Honnun hf, Reykjavik, Iceland, November 2000. 

Austin, D., Assistant Professor, Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology, Department of 

Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, discussions at the Commute Workshop, 

New Orleans, Louisiana, December 2000. 

Austin, D., Assistant Professor, Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology, Department of 

Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, e-mail to M. Shrimpton,1st March 2001. 

Broom, T., Shell Exploration and Production Company, Reputation and Public Affairs, New Orleans, 

Louisiana, discussions at the Commute Workshop, New Orleans, Louisiana, December 2000. 

Dunlop J., General Manager, Operations, Bounty Mine, Aztec Mining Company Ltd., Forrestania, Western 

Australia, Australia 1991. 

Lewis, J., Professor of Social Policy and Social Work, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, e-mail to M. 

Shrimpton, 21st December 2000. 

Mauthner, N., Senior Research Fellow/Deputy Director, Arkleton Centre for Rural Development Research, 

University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, discussions at the Commute Workshop, New 

Orleans, Louisiana, December 2000. 

Mauthner, N., Senior Research Fellow/Deputy Director, Arkleton Centre for Rural Development Research, 

University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, e-mail to M. Shrimpton, 23rd January 2001. 

McGuire, T., Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology, Department of Anthropology, University of 

Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, discussions at the Commute Workshop, New Orleans, Louisiana, 

December 2000. 

McKee, L., Director of Research, Department of Management Studies, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, 

Scotland, discussions at the Commute Workshop, New Orleans, Louisiana, December 2000. 

Miles, R., Research Manager, Offshore Division, Health and Safety Executive, London, England, 

discussions at the Commute Workshop, New Orleans, Louisiana, December 2000. 

Parkes, K., Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, discussions 

at the Commute Workshop, New Orleans, Louisiana, December 2000. 

Parkes, K., Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, memo to M. 

Shrimpton re ‘Offshore Spouse Study’, 19th January 2001. 

Zatarain, V., Economist, Minerals Management Service, New Orleans, Louisiana, e-mail to C. Rogers, 

Social Scientist, Minerals Management Service, 20th December 2000. 

6.2 References 

Aase, T.H., 1990, Oil and Decentralization: Offshore Petroleum Commuting and Local Spin-Offs in Rural 

Norway, ISER Research and Policy Paper No.11, Institute of Social and Economic Research, St. 

John's, Newfoundland, Canada. 

Aitken, G.J.M. and C. McCance, 1982, “Alcohol consumption in offshore oil rig workers’, The British 

Journal of Addiction, 305-310. 

Page 40 
Alekperov, I.I., A.N. Melkumyan and A.I. Zamchalov, 1988, “Some peculiarities of the physiological 

validity of shift work schedules for the crews of floating oil drilling platforms”, Journal of Hygiene, 

Epidemiology, Microbiology and Immunology, 32, 385-96. 

Alvarez, A., 1986, Offshore, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, Mass. 

Australian Mines and Metals Association, 1998, “Long Distance Commuting: A Road Well Travelled – 

Survey on Long Distance Commuting in the Resources Sector”, Australian Mines and Metals 

Association, Melbourne, Australia. 

Anaconda, 2000, “Mt. Margaret Nickel-Cobalt Project Public Environmental Review”, report prepared for 

Anaconda Nickel Limited, Perth, Western Australia, Australia. 

Barnes, R.G., S.J. Deacon, M.J. Forbes, J. Arendt, 1998, “Adaptation of the 6-sulphatoxymelatonin 

rhythm in shiftworkers on offshore oil installations during a 2-week 12-h night shift”, Neurosci Lett 

241, 9-12. 

Beach, R., 2000, “Mining at a Distance: An Investigation of the Work/Non-Work Conflict Experienced by 

Miners on a 4:1 Long Distance Commute Schedule”, Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Graduate 

School of Management, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 

Boynton, K.R. and W. Barnett Pearce, 1978, “Personal Transitions and Interpersonal Communication 

among Submariners’ Wives”, in E.J. Hunter and D.S. Nice (eds.), Military Families: Adaptation to 

Change, Praeger, New York, NY. 

Burnett, J., and R. Tait, 1996, “Motivation”, in R. Flin and G. Slaven (eds.), Managing the Offshore 

Installation Workforce, PennWell Books, Tulsa, OK. 

Canada, 1984, 1981 Census of Canada: Labour Force - Industry by Demographic and Educational 

Characteristics, Catalogue 92-921, Statistics Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 

Centaur Associates, 1986, “Implications of Direct Economic Impacts due to Oil and Gas Development in 

the Gulf of Mexico - Executive Summary”, Minerals Management Service, US Department of the 

Interior, Washington, DC. 

Clark, D., K. McCann, K. Morrice and R. Taylor, 1985a, “Oil Wives and Intermittent Husbands”, British 

Journal of Psychiatry, 147. 

Clark, D., K. McCann, K. Morrice and R. Taylor, 1985b, “Work and Family in the Offshore Oil Industry”, 

Journal of Social Economics, 12, 2. 

Coates, D., 1991, “Counselling Requirements at Long Distance Commuting Mines”, in M. Shrimpton and 

K. Storey (eds.), Long Distance Commuting in the Mining Industry: Conference Summary, Centre 

for Resource Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. 

Collinson, D.L., 1998, “Shift-ing Lives: Work-Home Pressures in the North Sea Oil Industry”, Canadian 

Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 35, 301-324. 

Community Resource Services Ltd., 1996, “Long Distance Commute Mines Survey”, 1996, mimeo, St. 

John’s, Newfoundland, Canada. 

Cooper, J.R.B., 1991, “Employee Assistance Programme in the Offshore Environment”, in Proceedings: 

Society of Petroleum Engineers First International Conference on Health, Safety and 

Environment, SPE, Richardson, TX. 

Page 41 
Douglas, R.P., 1984, “The Industry Perspective”, in Mining Communities: Hard Lessons for the Future, 

Proceedings No. 14, Centre for Resource Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, 

Canada. 

Flin, R., 1996, “Occupational Stress: Identification and Maintenance”, in R. Flin and G. Slaven (eds.), 

Managing the Offshore Installation Workforce, PennWell Books, Tulsa, OK. 

Flin, R., G. Slaven and D. Carnegie, 1996, “Managers and Supervisors on Offshore Installations”, in R. 

Flin and G. Slaven (eds.), Managing the Offshore Installation Workforce, PennWell Books, Tulsa, 

OK. 

Forsyth, C. and R. Gramling, 1987, “Feast or Famine: Alternative Management Techniques among 

Periodic-Father Absence Single Career Families”, International Journal of Sociology of the 

Family, 17, 183-195. 

Forsyth, C. and D. Gauthier, 1991, “Families of Offshore Oil Workers: Adaptations to Cyclical Father 

Absence/Presence”, Sociological Spectrum, 11, 177-201. 

Freudenburg, W. and R. Gramling, 1994, Oil in Troubled Waters: Perceptions, Politics, and the Battle 

Over Offshore Drilling, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY. 

Frone, M.R., M. Russell and M.L. Cooper, 1992, “Prevalence of Work-family Conflict: Are Work and 

Family Boundaries Asymmetrically Permeable?”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 723-

729. 

Frone, M.R., M. Russell and M.L. Cooper, 1997, “Relation of Work-family Conflict to Health Outcomes: a 

Four-year Longitudinal Study of Employed Parents”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational 

Psychology, 70, 4, 325-336. 

Frone, M.R., J.K. Yardley and K.S. Markel, 1997, “Developing and Testing an Integrative Model of the 

Work-family Interface”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 4, 145-167. 

Fuchs, R., G. Cake and G. Wright, 1983, “The Steel Island: Rural Resident Participation in the 

Exploration Phase of the Oil and Gas Industry, Newfoundland and Labrador, 1981”, Department 

of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. 

John's, Newfoundland, Canada. 

Galilee, J., 2000, “From White-Collar Workers to ‘Roughnecks’ – An Historical Account of Popular 

Representations of North Sea Oil Workers”, unpublished paper, Department of Management 

Studies, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland. 

Goffman, E., 1968, Asylums, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, England. 

Gramling, R., 1989, “Concentrated Work Scheduling: Enabling and Constraining Aspects”, Sociological 

Perspectives, 32, 1, 47-64. 

Gramling, R., 1980, “The Economic History of East St. Mary Parish”, in R. Gramling (ed), East St. Mary 

Parish, Economic Growth and Stabilization Strategies, Louisiana Department of Natural 

Resources, Baton Rouge, LA. 

Gramling, R., 1996, Oil on the Edge: Offshore Development, Conflict and Gridlock, State University of 

New York Press, Albany, NY. 

Page 42 
Gramling, R. and S. Brabant (eds.), 1984, “The Role of Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Activities in 

the Growth and Modification of Louisiana’s Coastal Zone”, report to the US Department of 

Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, University of Southwest 

Louisiana, Lafayette, LA. 

Gramling, R. and S. Brabant, 1986, “Reply to Richard Gale”, Sociological Perspectives, 29, 511-515. 

Grampian Regional Council, 1992, unpublished memo, Economic Development and Planning 

Department, Aberdeen, Scotland. 

Grzetic, B., M. Shrimpton and S. Skipton, 1996, “Women, Employment Equity and the Hibernia 

Construction Site”, Women in Trades and Technology, Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John’s, 

Newfoundland, Canada. 

Heen, H., 1988, “Making Out in a Man's World: Norwegian Women Workers Offshore”, in J. Lewis, M. 

Porter and M. Shrimpton (eds.), Women, Work and Family in the British, Canadian and 

Norwegian Offshore Oilfields, Macmillan, London, England. 

Hellesøy, O.H. (ed), 1985, Work Environment Statfjord Field: Work Environment, Health and Safety on a 

North Sea Platform, Universitetsforlaget, Oslo, Norway. 

Hobart, C. 1989, “Company Town or Commuting: Implications for Native People”, in R. Robson (ed), Flyin and the Future of Canadian Northern Development, Northern Studies Series No. 1, Institute of 

Urban Studies, University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. 

Hogan, L. and P. Berry, 2000, “Mining and Regional Australia: Some Implications of Long Distance 

Commuting”, Australian Commodities, 7, 4, 648-659. 

International Labour Office (ILO), 1993, “Safety and Related Issues Pertaining to Work on Offshore 

Petroleum Installations”, report of the Tripartite Meeting, International Labour Office, Geneva, 

Switzerland. 

International Labour Office (ILO), 1995, “Workers in Remote Areas: The Petroleum, Mining and Forestry 

Industries”, M. Shrimpton, K. Storey and W. Husberg, Working Paper, Occupational Health and 

Safety Branch, International Labour Office, Geneva, Switzerland. 

Isay, R.A., 1968, “The Submariner’s Wives Syndrome”, Psychiatric Quarterly, 42, 4, 647-652. 

Iversen, E, J. Marek and O.H. Hellesøy, 1986, Work environment Statfjord field: physical work 

environment, Report No. 4., Research Center for Occupational Health and Safety, University of 

Bergen, Bergen, Norway. 

James, J.S., 2000, “Offshore Employment as Lifestyle and Culture: Work and Family in New Iberia”, 

unpublished paper, Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson, 

AZ. 

Jenkins, R., 1997, “Job satisfaction - its effect on safety and turnover on a FIFO operation”, The AusIMM 

Bulletin, 4 June 1997. 

Karlsen, J.E. and H. Rattner, 1989, “Training and Technological Development in the Petroleum Sector: 

the Cases of Norway and Brazil”, Working Paper, Sectoral Activities Program, International 

Labour Office, Geneva, Switzerland. 

Lauridsen, O., S. Tronsmoen, J. Berland, J.P. Gitlesen, A.J. Ringstad, T.H. Pedersen, et al., 1991, “Shiftwork and health: shift-work, sleeping difficulties, psychosocial work environment and 

psychosomatic complaints”, Rogaland Research/Phillips Petroleum, Stavanger, Norway. 

Page 43 
Lewis, J., M. Porter and M. Shrimpton (eds.), 1988, Women, Work and Family in the British, Canadian 

and Norwegian Offshore Oilfields, Macmillan, London, England. 

Lewis, J., M. Shrimpton and K. Storey, 1988, “Family Members' Experiences of Offshore Oil Work in 

Newfoundland”, in J. Lewis, M. Porter and M. Shrimpton (eds.), Women, Work and Family in the 

British, Canadian and Norwegian Offshore Oilfields, Macmillan, London, England. 

Lightfoot, R.N., 1990, “Air Commuting Impact on Industrial Organization and Management for Argyle 

Diamond Mines and the Implications of the Kensington Project”, unpublished report prepared for 

Echo Bay Mines Ltd., Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 

Mauthner, N.S., C. Maclean and L. McKee, 2000, “My Dad Hangs Out of Helicopter Doors and Takes 

Pictures of Oil Platforms: Children’s Accounts of Parental Work in the Oil and Gas Industry”, 

Community, Work and Family, 3, 2. 

McBain, L.A., 1995,“An Analysis of the Spatial Distribution of the Northern Labour Force Employed in 

Uranium Mining in Northern Saskatchewan”, M.A. thesis, Department of Geography, University of 

Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada. 

McKee, L., N. Mauthner and C. Maclean, 2000, “‘Family Friendly’ Policies and Practices in the Oil and 

Gas Industry: Employers’ Perspectives”, Work, Employment and Society, 14, 3. 

McKee, L., J. Galilee and N. Mauthner, 2000, “‘Blasts from the Past’: Children’s and Mother’s 

Perspectives on the Gendering of Middle Class Work/family Relationships”, paper presented at 

the British Sociological Association Annual Conference, University of York, York, England, April 

2000. 

McLean, R. and W. Hensley, 1994, “Mining and Indigenous Peoples: The Red Dog Mine Story”, 

International Council on Metals and the Environment, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 

Mearns, K. and T. Wagstaff, 1996, “Women in the Offshore Workforce”, in R. Flin and G. Slaven (eds.), 

Managing the Offshore Installation Workforce, PennWell Books, Tulsa, OK. 

Moore, R., 1985, “Afterword”, in J. Lewis, M. Porter and M. Shrimpton (eds.), Women, Work and Family in 

the British, Canadian and Norwegian Offshore Oilfields, Macmillan, London, England. 

Morrice, J.K.W. and R.C. Taylor, 1978, “The Intermittent Husband Syndrome”, New Society, 43, 796. 

Morrice, J.K.W., R.C. Taylor, D. Clark and K. McCann, 1985, “Oil Wives and Intermittent Husbands”, 

British Journal of Psychiatry, Vol 47. 

Oil Industry Liaison Committee, 1991, Striking Out! New Directions for Offshore Workers and their 

Unions, Offshore Information Centre, Aberdeen, Scotland. 

Parkes, K.R., 1993, “Human Factors, Shift Work, and Alertness in the Offshore Oil Industry”, Offshore 

Technology Report, OTH 92 389, Health and Safety Executive, London, England. 

Parkes, K.R., 1998, “Psychosocial Aspects of Stress, Health and Safety on North Sea Installations”, 

Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, 24, 5, 321-333. 

Parkes, K.R., 1999, “Shiftwork, job type, and the work environment as joint predictors of health 

outcomes”, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 256-268. 

Parkes, K.R. and Byron, J., 2001, Work, health, and safety in the UK oil and gas industry: A survey of 

onshore sites, and comparison with offshore installations, HSE Books, Sudbury, England. 

Page 44 
Parkes, K.R., and M.J. Clark, 1997, Psychosocial aspects of work and health in the North Sea oil and gas 

industry: Part IV. The offshore environment in the mid-1990's: a survey of psychosocial factors, 

HSE Books, Sudbury, England. 

Parkes, K.R. and M.J. Clark, 1997, Psychosocial aspects of work and health in the North Sea oil and gas 

industry: Part V. Offshore work/leave schedules: data analyses and review, HSE Books, Sudbury, 

England. 

Parkes, K.R., M.J. Clark and E. Payne-Cook, 1997, Psychosocial aspects of work and health in the North 

Sea oil and gas industry: Part III. Sleep, mood, and performance in relation to offshore shift 

rotation schedules, HSE Books, Sudbury, England. 

Proctor, S.P., R.F. White, T.G. Robins, D. Echeverria and A.Z. Rocskay, 1996, “Effect of overtime work 

on cognitive function in automotive workers”, Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and 

Health, 22, 124-32. 

Sennett, R., 1998, The Corrosion of Character, W.W. Norton, New York, NY. 

Shrimpton, M, 1994, “Rotational work systems: Community and regional development implications”, ISER 

Offshore Oil Project Report, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, Newfoundland, 

Canada. 

Shrimpton, M. and K. Storey, 1991a, “Labour Market Adjustments to Fly-In Mining”. Unpublished paper 

prepared for the Minerals Policy Division, Energy, Mines and Resources Canada, Ottawa, 

Ontario, Canada. 

Shrimpton, M. and K. Storey, 1991b, “Long Distance Commuting: Labour Force Issues in the Mining and 

Hydrocarbon Industries”, in Proceedings, Long Distance Commuting Conference, Australian 

Mines and Metals Association, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 

Shrimpton, M. and K. Storey, 1991c, “Work, Family and Commuting Systems: Implications of Recent 

Trends in Canadian Resource Industries”, unpublished paper prepared for The Family Research 

Program, Demographic Review Secretariat, Health and Welfare Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, 

Canada. 

Shrimpton, M. and K. Storey, 1992, “Fly-In Mining and the Future of the Canadian North”, in M. Bray and 

A. Thomson (eds.), At the End of the Shift: Mines and Single-Industry Towns in Northern Ontario, 

Dundurn Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 

Shrimpton, M. and K. Storey, 1993, “Work-Related Stress in the Newfoundland Offshore Oil Industry: 

Implications for Health and Safety”, in K. Storey and M. Shrimpton (eds.), Social, Psychological 

And Cultural Aspects Of Health And Safety In The Offshore Oil Industry, Institute of Social and 

Economic Research, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada. 

Slaven, G., 1996, “Selection and Training of the Offshore Workforce”, in R. Flin and G. Slaven (eds.), 

Managing the Offshore Installation Workforce, PennWell Books, Tulsa, OK. 

Slaven, G., K. Stewart and R. Flin, 1996, “Offshore Shiftwork and Rotation Patterns”, in R. Flin and G. 

Slaven (eds.), Managing the Offshore Installation Workforce, PennWell Books, Tulsa, OK. 

Solberg, A. K., 1985. “Dad's Working Offshore: Family Adjustment's to Working Offshore”, in Women and 

Oil: Papers Presented at the International Conference on Women and Offshore Oil, ISER 

Conference Papers No.2, Institute of Social and Economic Research, St. John's, Newfoundland, 

Canada. 

Page 45 
Solheim, J., 1988, “Coming Home to Work: Men, Women and Marriage in the Norwegian Offshore Oil 

Industry”, in J. Lewis, M. Porter and M. Shrimpton (eds.), Women, Work and Family in the British, 

Canadian and Norwegian Offshore Oilfields, Macmillan, London, England. 

Stedman, C., 1991, “The Demography of Long Distance Commuting in the Western Australian Mining 

Industry”, unpublished paper, Department of Mines, Government of Western Australia, Perth, 

Western Australia, Australia. 

Storey, K., 2001a, “Australia Commute Work Update”, unpublished research summary, Community 

Resource Services Ltd., St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada. 

Storey, K., 2001b, “Fly-in/Fly-out and Fly-over: mining and regional development in Western Australia”, 

Australian Geographer, 32, 2, 133-148. 

Storey, K. and M. Shrimpton, 1989, “Impacts on Labour of Long-Distance Commuting Employment in the 

Canadian Mining Industry”, ISER Report No. 3, Institute of Social and Economic Research, 

Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada. 

Storey, K. and M. Shrimpton, 1991, “Long Distance Commuting: Mining and Hydrocarbon Industry 

Management Issues”, in Proceedings, Long Distance Commuting Conference, Australian Mines 

and Metals Association, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 

Storey, K., M. Shrimpton, J. Lewis and D. Clark, 1989, “Family Life Impacts of Offshore Oil and Gas 

Employment”, ISER Report No.4, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Memorial University 

of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada. 

Sutherland, V.J., 1993, “Understanding individual differences in safety performance”, in K. Storey and M. 

Shrimpton (eds.), Social, Psychological And Cultural Aspects Of Health And Safety In The 

Offshore Oil Industry, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Memorial University of 

Newfoundland, St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada. 

Sutherland, V.J. and C.L. Cooper, 1986, Man and Accidents Offshore: An examination of the costs of 

stress among workers on oil and gas rigs, Lloyd's List, Dietsmann (International) NV, Colchester, 

Essex, England. 

Willson, J., 1991, “Long Distance Commuting in the Mining Industry: Lessons from Greenland and 

Northern Canada”, in M. Shrimpton and K. Storey (eds.), Long Distance Commuting in the Mining 

Industry: Conference Summary, Centre for Resource Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, 

Ontario, Canada. 

Women in Resource Development, 2000, “Women in Norway’s Oil Industry”, Women in Resource 

Development Committee Quarterly, St. John’s, Newfoundland, Vol 2, December 2000. 

Woolfson, C., J. Foster and M. Beck, 1996, Paying for the Piper: Capital and Labour in Britain’s Offshore 

Oil Industry, Mansell, London, England. 

Page 46 
APPENDIX 1 

Participants: 

Commute Employment Workshop
PARTICIPANTS: 

COMMUTE EMPLOYMENT WORKSHOP

New Orleans Airport Hilton Hotel 

New Orleans, LA 

December 7th and 8th 2000 

Dr. Diane Austin 

Assistant Professor 

Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology 

Department of Anthropology 

University of Arizona 

P.O. Box 210030 

Tucson, Arizona 85721-0030 

U.S.A. 

Ph: (520) 621-6282 

daustin@u.arizona.edu 

Tom Broom 

Shell Exploration and Production Company 

Reputation and Public Affairs 

701 Poydras Street 

New Orleans, LA 70139-6001 

U.S.A. 

Ph: (504) 728-4695 

twbroom@shellus.com 

Dr. Rodney Cluck 

Sociologist, Environmental Studies Branch 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Minerals Management Service 

381 Elden Street 

Herndon, VA 20170-4817 

U.S.A. 

Ph: (703) 787-1087 

Rodney.Cluck@mms.gov 

Stephanie Gambino 

Economist 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Minerals Management Service 

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region 

1201 Elmwood Park Boulevard, MS 5411 

New Orleans, LA 70123-2394 

U.S.A. 

Ph: (504) 736-2856 

stephanie.gambino@mms.gov 

Appendix A Page 1 
Dr. Bob Gramling 

Director, Center for Socioeconomic Research 

University of Southwestern Louisiana 

P.O. Box 43530 

Lafayette, LA 70504 

U.S.A. 

Ph: (337) 482-5375 

gramling@louisiana.edu 

Dr. Greg Kealey 

Dean of Graduate Studies 

Memorial University of Newfoundland 

St. John’s, NF, A1B 3X5 

Canada 

gkealey@mun.ca 

Ph: (709) 737-2478 

Fax: (709) 737-4702 

Dr. Linda L. Lampl 

Lampl-Herbert Consultants 

P. O. Box 10129 

Tallahassee, Florida 32302-2129 

U.S.A. 

Ph: (850) 222-4634, ext 23 

Fax: (850) 224-9952 

llampl@lampl-herbert.com 

Dr. Harry Luton 

Social Scientist, Social Science Unit 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Minerals Management Service 

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region 

1201 Elmwood Park Boulevard, MS 5411 

New Orleans, LA 70123-2394 

U.S.A. 

Ph: (504) 736-2784 

harry.luton@mms.gov

Dr. Natasha Mauthner 

Senior Research Fellow/Deputy Director 

Arkleton Centre for Rural Development Research 

University of Aberdeen 

St. Mary’s 

King’s College 

Aberdeen, AB24 3UF 

Scotland 

Ph: (1224) 273937 

Fax: (1224) 273902 

n.mauthner@abdn.ac.uk 

Appendix A Page 2 
Dr. Tom McGuire 

Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology 

Department of Anthropology 

University of Arizona 

P.O. Box 210030 

Tucson, Arizona 85721-0030 

U.S.A. 

Ph: (520) 621-6282 

mcguire@u.arizona.edu 

Dr. Lorna McKee 

Director of Research 

Department of Management Studies 

University of Aberdeen 

Dunbar Street 

Old Aberdeen 

Aberdeen, AB24 3QY 

Scotland 

Ph: (1224) 272715 

Fax: (1224) 273843 

l.mckee@abdn.ac.uk

Robert W. Miles 

Research Manager 

Offshore Division 

Health and Safety Executive 

Rose Court 

2 Southwark Bridge 

London, SE1 9HS 

England 

Ph: (20) 717-6000 

Fax: (20) 717-6678 

bob.miles@hse.gsi.gov.uk 

Dr. Katharine R. Parkes 

Department of Experimental Psychology 

University of Oxford 

South Parks Road 

Oxford, OX1 3UD 

England 

Ph: (1865) 271401 

Fax: (1865) 310447 

kathy.parkes@psy.ox.ac.uk 

Appendix A Page 3 
Dr. John Petterson 

President 

Impact Assessment, Inc. 

Suite F 

2166 Avenida de la Playa 

La Jolla, CA 92037 

U.S.A. 

Ph: (619) 459-0142 

Fax: (619) 459-9461 

iai@san.rr.com

Dr. Claudia Rogers 

Social Scientist, Social Science Unit 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Minerals Management Service 

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region 

1201 Elmwood Park Boulevard, MS 5411 

New Orleans, LA 70123-2394 

U.S.A. 

Ph: (504) 736-2532 

claudia.rogers@mms.gov 

Mark Shrimpton 

Principal 

Community Resource Services Ltd. 

P.O. Box 5936 

53 Long’s Hill 

St. John’s, NF, A1C 5X4 

Canada 

Ph: (709) 576-6946 

Fax: (709) 576-6946 

crs_ltd@nf.sympatico.ca 

Dr. Joachim Singelmann 

Department of Sociology/Rural Sociology 

Louisiana State University 

Baton Rouge, LA 70803 

U.S.A. 

Ph: (225) 388-1635 

joachim@lapop.lsu.edu 

Dr. Keith Storey 

Principal 

Community Resource Services Ltd. 

P.O. Box 5936 

53 Long’s Hill 

St. John’s, NF, A1C 5X4 

Canada 

Ph: (709) 576-6946 

Fax: (709) 576-6946 

crs_ltd@nf.sympatico.ca 

Appendix A Page 4 
Vicki Zatarain 

Economist 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Minerals Management Service 

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region 

1201 Elmwood Park Boulevard, MS 5411 

New Orleans, LA 70123-2394 

U.S.A. 

Ph: (504) 736-2779 

vicki.zatarain@mms.gov

Appendix A Page 5 
The Department of the Interior Mission 

As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has 

responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This 

includes fostering sound use of our land and water resources; protecting our fish, wildlife, 

and biological diversity; preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national 

parks and historical places; and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor

recreation. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to 

ensure that their development is in the best interests of all our people by encouraging 

stewardship and citizen participation in their care. The Department also has a major

responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island 

territories under U.S. administration. 

The Minerals Management Service Mission 

As a bureau of the Department of the Interior, the Minerals Management Service's (MMS) 

primary responsibilities are to manage the mineral resources located on the Nation's Outer

Continental Shelf (OCS), collect revenue from the Federal OCS and onshore Federal and 

Indian lands, and distribute those revenues. 

Moreover, in working to meet its responsibilities, the Offshore Minerals Management 

Program administers the OCS competitive leasing program and oversees the safe and 

environmentally sound exploration and production of our Nation's offshore natural gas, oil 

and other mineral resources. The MMS Minerals Revenue Management meets its 

responsibilities by ensuring the efficient, timely and accurate collection and disbursement of

revenue from mineral leasing and production due to Indian tribes and allottees, States and 

the U.S. Treasury. 

The MMS strives to fulfil its responsibilities through the general guiding principles of: (1) 

being responsive to the public's concerns and interests by maintaining a dialogue with all 

potentially affected parties and (2) carrying out its programs with an emphasis on working to 

enhance the quality of life for all Americans by lending MMS assistance and expertise to 

economic development and environmental protection.