Monthly Labor Review June 2000 33

Flexible Schedules

Flexible schedules and shift work:

replacing the ‘9-to-5’ workday?

Flexible work hours have gained in prominence,

as more than a quarter of all workers

can now vary their schedules;

however, there has been little change in the proportion

who work a shift other than a regular daytime shift

Traditionally, much of the American labor

force has worked in a structured environment, with the work schedule following a

set pattern—what many people have termed the

“9-to-5” workday. Recent studies show that employers are beginning to recognize that many

workers prefer schedules that allow greater

flexibility in choosing the times they begin and

end their workday. Consequently, increasing

numbers and proportions of full-time workers

in the United States are able to opt for flexible

work hours, allowing workers to vary the actual times they arrive and leave the work place.

For some workers, however, the nature of their

jobs requires that they work a schedule other

than a regular day shift, what may be termed

an “alternative shift.”1 Examples of such alternative shift workers are police officers, emergency room physicians, and assembly-line

workers at a factory.

In contrast to the increasing proportion of

workers with flexible work schedules, the incidence of shift work has not changed since the

mid-1980s. If not for the sizable job gains in

service occupations, the overall proportion of

workers on shift work would have edged down

in recent years.

Recent data on flexible work hours and shift

work are from information collected in the May

1997 supplement to the Current Population Survey (CPS).2 This article uses that supplement to

examine both the incidence and trends in flexible

work hours and alternative shift work and, also,

the relationship between the jobs in which people

work and the prevalence of these digressions

from the more traditional “9-to-5” workday.

Flexible work schedules

In 1997, more than 25 million workers, or 27.6

percent of all full-time wage and salary workers varied their work hours to some degree.

Note that flexible schedule arrangements for

many workers are probably informal, as indicated by data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Employee Benefits Survey (EBS), in which

employers provide information about employee access to various types of work-related

benefits. The latest EBS data, from 1994–97, show

that less than 6 percent of employees have formal flexible work schedule arrangements.3

CPS data show that the proportion of workers on flexible work schedules—either formal

or informal—has more than doubled since

1985, when such data were first collected.4

The increase in flexible work schedules since

then has been widespread across demographic

groups. The following tabulation shows the

percent of workers, by age and race and Hispanic origin, who work flexible schedules:

Thomas M. Beers

Thomas M. Beers

is an economist

in the Division of Labor

Force Statistics,

Bureau

of Labor Statistics.
34 Monthly Labor Review June 2000

Flexible Schedules

.......................................... 1985 1991 1997

Total, 16 years and older .... 12.4 15.1 27.6

Men ............................... 13.1 15.5 28.7

Women .......................... 11.3 14.5 26.2

Hispanic origin .............. 8.9 10.6 18.4

Race and Hispanic origin:

White ............................. 12.8 15.5 28.7

Black .............................. 9.1 12.1 20.1

Hispanic origin ............... 8.9 10.6 18.4

Although there has been relatively little difference in the proportions of men and women with flexible schedules during

the 1985–97 period, whites have been more likely than blacks

or Hispanics to have flexible work schedules. (See table 1.)

Occupations. To some degree, these differences reflect the

varying occupational distributions of each of the worker

groups. Generally, jobs with higher frequencies of flexible

hours are those in which work can be conducted efficiently,

regardless of the workers’ start and end times. For instance,

flexible work hours are most common among workers in executive, administrative, and managerial occupations, and for

those in sales occupations—42.4 percent and 41.0 percent,

respectively. (See table 2.) The incidence of flexible work

hours is lower for groups of workers in occupations in which

the nature of the work dictates that it begin and end at set

times, for example, nurses, teachers, police, firefighters, and

certain manufacturing operations.

As stated, the unique occupational distributions of the

various demographic groups affect the overall proportion of

workers on flexible work schedules within these respective

groups. For example, as can be seen above, flexible work

hours are considerably more prevalent among whites than

either blacks or Hispanics. At first glance, this is not surprising because whites are most likely to be in managerial and

professional specialty occupations, in which flexible hours

are most common. Furthermore, blacks and Hispanics are

highly represented in the category of operators, fabricators,

and laborers. Because of the nature of the work, historically,

this category is one that fails to lend itself to the practice of

flexible schedules.

Because flexible schedules appear to be closely associated with particular occupations, it is worth investigating

whether the recent increases in the proportion of workers

with flexible work schedules reflect an increase in employment in occupations with high occurrences of flexible work

schedules or an increase in the availability of flexible work

hours across occupations. A shift-share analysis was applied to determine the portion of the increase that was due to

changes in occupational employment and the portion that

was due simply to an increased incidence of flexible work

hours. Less than 3 percentage points of the total increase

were a result of shifts in occupational employment. This

suggests, therefore, that the majority of the increase was

spurred by the increased incidence of flexible work schedules within occupations; indeed, this phenomenon occurred

in nearly every occupational category.

Race. In order to estimate how much of the difference in the

rate of flexible work schedules between blacks and whites is

accounted for by differences in occupations, a standardization was performed. This process showed that if blacks had

the same occupational distribution as whites (at the most

detailed level of occupational classification), then the rate of

black workers on flexible work schedules would have been

20.5 percent, instead of 20.1 percent; the difference between

the rates for whites and blacks would have been 7.9 percentage points instead of 8.6 percentage points. A similar analysis was performed in which the white rates of flexible work by

occupation were applied to the black occupational distribution. Results show that, in each job category, if blacks were

as likely as whites to be able to vary hours, then the overall

black rate would rise to 24.4 percent, or 4.3 percentage points

higher. This would have reduced the overall difference between blacks and whites to 4.3 percentage points. While

even at the detailed level there may be differences in jobs

held by blacks and whites, these findings suggest that factors other than occupational employment contribute to the

disparity in access to flexible schedules.

A brief description of flexible work arrangements

There are several types of formal flexible work arrangements. One type is a “gliding schedule” that requires a

specified number of hours of work each day but allows

employees to vary the time of their arrival and departure,

usually around an established set of mandatory “core

hours.” Other types of flexible work arrangements include

variable-day and variable-week schedules that usually

require a specified number of hours per pay period. These

types of work schedules frequently are grouped under

the umbrella term “flexitime.” Under these plans, employees are permitted to choose the number of hours they

wish to work each day or each week. Credit or compensatory time arrangements allow employees who accumulate overtime hours to apply those hours to future time

off from work, rather than receiving the overtime rate for

those hours. The presence of one or more of these arrangements in the workplace does not necessarily exclude the others; many can be used in conjunction with

other flexible work arrangements. (For more information,

see Atefah Sadri McCampbell, “Benefits Achieved

Through Alternative Work Schedules,” Human Resource

Planning, 1996, Vol. 19.3.)
Monthly Labor Review June 2000 35

Flexible schedules of full-time wage and salary workers by selected characteristics, May 1997

All workers Men Women

Age

Total 16 years and older ............ 90,549 25,031 27.6 52,073 14,952 28.7 38,476 10,079 26.2

16 to 19 years .......................... 1,640 339 20.7 1,050 177 16.9 590 161 27.4

20 years and older ................... 88,909 24,692 27.8 51,023 14,774 29.0 37,886 9,918 26.2

20 to 24 years ....................... 8,462 1,923 22.7 4,968 1,111 22.4 3,494 812 23.2

25 to 34 years ....................... 25,208 7,161 28.4 14,721 4,231 28.7 10,486 2,931 27.9

35 to 44 years ....................... 26,755 7,781 29.1 15,434 4,730 30.6 11,321 3,051 26.9

45 to 54 years ....................... 19,596 5,355 27.3 10,806 3,118 28.9 8,790 2,237 25.4

55 to 64 years ....................... 7,778 2,129 27.4 4,431 1,334 30.1 3,347 796 23.8

65 years and older ................ 1,110 344 31.0 662 251 38.0 448 93 20.7

16 to 24 years ......................... 10,102 2,262 22.4 6,018 1,288 21.4 4,084 973 23.8

25 to 54 years ......................... 71,559 20,296 28.4 40,961 12,078 29.5 30,598 8,218 26.9

55 years and older .................. 8,888 2,473 27.8 5,094 1,585 31.1 3,794 888 23.4

Race and Hispanic origin

White .......................................... 75,683 21,698 28.7 44,495 13,186 29.6 31,188 8,512 27.3

Black .......................................... 10,884 2,191 20.1 5,323 1,068 20.1 5,561 1,123 20.2

Hispanic origin ........................... 9,635 1,769 18.4 6,283 1,147 18.3 3,352 622 18.5

Marital status

Never married ............................. 21,721 5,523 25.4 12,746 3,180 24.9 8,975 2,343 26.1

Married, spouse present ............ 53,369 15,358 28.8 32,756 10,077 30.8 20,613 5,281 25.6

Other marital status ................... 15,459 4,150 26.8 6,571 1,695 25.8 8,888 2,456 27.6

Presence and age of children

Without own children under 18 .... 55,251 14,824 26.8 31,266 8,596 27.5 23,985 6,228 26.0

With own children under 18 ........ 35,298 10,208 28.9 20,807 6,356 30.5 14,491 3,851 26.6

With own children 6 to 17 ........ 19,852 5,542 27.9 10,820 3,211 29.7 9,032 2,331 25.8

With own children under 6 ....... 15,446 4,666 30.2 9,986 3,146 31.5 5,459 1,520 27.8

Total

Characteristic

Number Percent

Total

With flexible schedules With flexible schedules

Number Percent

Total

With flexible schedules

Number Percent

NOTE: Data relate to the sole or principal job of full-time wage and salary

workers who were at work during the survey reference week and exclude all

self-employed persons, regardless of whether or not their businesses were

incorporated. Data reflect revised population controls used in the Current

Population Survey effective with the January 1997 estimates.

Table 1.

Industry. To a lesser degree, the prevalence of flexible work

schedules also varied by industry. These schedules were

more common among private sector employees than among

those in the public sector (28.8 percent versus 21.7 percent)

in 1997. In the public sector, Federal government employees

(34.5 percent) were more likely than their counterparts in State

government (29.4 percent) or local government (13.1 percent)

to have a flexible schedule. The rate for local government

workers reflects the fact that local governments provide services that are often rigidly scheduled. More than half of

those employed in local governments work in the field of

education, in which the nature of the work for most employees prohibits flexibility (only 7.6 percent of workers in education, the largest component of local government employment,

could vary work hours). Within private industry, the proportion of workers with flexible schedules was higher in serviceproducing industries (31.7 percent) than in goods-producing

industries (23.3 percent), reflecting the more rigid work hours

in manufacturing, construction, and mining.

Shift work

Although most workers report usually working between the

hours of 6 a.m. and 6 p.m., more than 15 million, or 16.8 percent of all full-time wage and salary workers, worked alternative shifts. The most prevalent alternative shifts were the

evening shift (accounting for 4.6 percent of all full-time wage

and salary workers), for which work hours typically fall between 2 p.m. and midnight, and irregular shifts (3.9 percent)

for which employers schedule shifts to fit the needs of the

business for a particular time. Other shifts worked included

night shifts (3.5 percent) for which work hours fall between 9

p.m. and 8 a.m., and rotating shifts (2.9 percent) that change

periodically from days to evenings or nights. (See table 3.)

As with flexible work schedules, the nature of the work is

a major determinant of whether the worker is scheduled on an

alternative shift. Hence, shift work is highly prevalent within

certain occupations and industries and almost entirely absent from others. Alternative shifts were most common among
36 Monthly Labor Review June 2000

Flexible Schedules

Flexible schedules of full-time wage and salary workers by occupation and industry, May 1997

[Numbers in thousands]

All workers Men Women

With flexible schedules

Occupation

Managerial and professional specialty ............. 27,384 10,651 38.9 13,882 6,407 46.2 13,502 4,245 31.4

Executive, administrative, and managerial ..... 13,469 5,705 42.4 7,213 3,251 45.1 6,255 2,454 39.2

Professional specialty .................................... 13,915 4,947 35.5 6,668 3,156 47.3 7,247 1,791 24.7

Mathematical and computer scientists .......... 1,308 772 59.0 887 549 61.9 421 223 53.0

Natural scientists .......................................... 507 327 64.5 353 240 68.0 154 87 56.2

Teachers, college and university ................... 494 320 64.7 330 224 68.0 164 95 58.2

Technical, sales, and administrative support ... 25,779 7,828 30.4 9,992 3,613 36.2 15,787 4,215 26.7

Technicians and related support ..................... 3,376 1,040 30.8 1,724 611 35.4 1,651 429 26.0

Sales occupations .......................................... 9,001 3,687 41.0 5,106 2,315 45.3 3,895 1,372 35.2

Sales workers, retail and personal services .. 3,165 951 30.0 1,428 464 32.5 1,737 487 28.0

Administrative support, including clerical ....... 13,402 3,101 23.1 3,162 687 21.7 10,240 2,414 23.6

Service occupations ........................................ 9,313 1,906 20.5 4,754 831 17.5 4,559 1,075 23.6

Private household ........................................... 308 125 40.5 21 16 1 287 109 37.8

Protective service .......................................... 1,891 314 16.6 1,619 254 15.7 272 60 22.2

Service, except private household

and protective ............................................... 8,855 1,934 21.8 4,665 986 21.1 4,190 947 22.6

Food service .................................................. 2,777 630 22.7 1,441 263 18.3 1,336 366 27.4

Health service ............................................... 1,466 258 17.6 205 26 12.9 1,261 232 18.4

Cleaning and building service ........................ 2,000 326 16.3 1,252 208 16.6 749 117 15.7

Personal service ............................................ 871 254 29.1 216 63 29.0 655 191 29.2

Precision production, craft, and repair ............. 11,519 2,023 17.6 10,506 1,861 17.7 1,013 162 16.0

Mechanics and repairers ................................ 3,863 708 18.3 3,672 658 17.9 192 50 26.3

Construction trades ........................................ 4,069 718 17.7 3,996 707 17.7 74 12 1

Other precision production, craft, and repair .. 3,587 596 16.6 2,839 497 17.5 748 99 13.3

Operators, fabricators, and laborers .............. 14,812 2,156 14.6 11,388 1,815 15.9 3,424 342 10.0

Machine operators, assemblers, and

inspectors ..................................................... 6,813 702 10.3 4,359 521 12.0 2,454 181 7.4

Transportation and material moving ................ 4,351 961 22.1 4,064 914 22.5 287 47 16.3

Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers,

and laborers .................................................. 3,648 494 13.5 2,965 379 12.8 683 114 16.7

Farming, forestry, and fishing .......................... 1,742 466 26.8 1,552 426 27.4 190 41 21.6

Industry

Private sector .................................................. 75,612 21,795 28.8 45,023 13,284 29.5 30,589 8,511 27.8

Goods-producing industries ............................ 25,925 6,033 23.3 19,458 4,640 23.8 6,466 1,393 21.5

Agriculture ..................................................... 1,492 448 30.0 1,265 373 29.5 227 74 32.8

Mining ............................................................ 541 122 22.6 473 106 22.4 68 16 1

Construction .................................................. 5,389 1,218 22.6 4,974 1,086 21.8 415 132 31.8

Manufacturing ................................................ 18,503 4,245 22.9 12,747 3,074 24.1 5,756 1,170 20.3

Durable goods ............................................... 11,179 2,572 23.0 8,148 1,944 23.9 3,031 629 20.7

Nondurable goods .......................................... 7,324 1,673 22.8 4,599 1,131 24.6 2,725 542 19.9

Service producing industries ............................ 49,687 15,763 31.7 25,565 8,644 33.8 24,122 7,118 29.5

Transportation and public utilities ................... 6,088 1,669 27.4 4,518 1,215 26.9 1,570 454 28.9

Wholesale trade .............................................. 3,969 1,281 32.3 2,854 979 34.3 1,115 302 27.1

Retail trade ..................................................... 12,111 3,745 30.9 6,812 1,988 29.2 5,299 1,757 33.2

Eating and drinking places ............................ 3,135 987 31.5 1,758 497 28.2 1,377 490 35.6

Finance, insurance, and real estate ............... 5,857 2,096 35.8 2,288 1,028 44.9 3,569 1,068 29.9

Services ......................................................... 21,662 6,971 32.2 9,094 3,434 37.8 12,568 3,537 28.1

Private households ........................................ 391 148 37.7 42 27 1 350 120 34.4

Business, automobile, and repair .................. 5,060 1,607 31.8 3,319 1,118 33.7 1,740 489 28.1

Personal, except private household .............. 1,627 522 32.1 749 227 30.3 878 295 33.7

Entertainment and recreation ........................ 1,051 397 37.8 619 231 37.3 432 167 38.5

Professional services .................................... 13,497 4,286 31.8 4,336 1,820 42.0 9,161 2,465 26.9

Forestry and fisheries ................................... 36 11 1 29 11 1 7– –

Government ..................................................... 14,937 3,236 21.7 7,050 1,668 23.7 7,887 1,568 19.9

Federal ............................................................ 2,828 977 34.5 1,621 535 33.0 1,208 442 36.6

State ............................................................... 4,125 1,214 29.4 1,856 606 32.7 2,270 608 26.8

Local ............................................................... 7,983 1,046 13.1 3,573 527 14.8 4,410 519 11.8

Occupation and Industry With flexible schedules

Number Percent Percent

Total

Number

Total Total

Number Percent

With flexible schedules

1 Percent not shown where base is less than 75,000.

NOTE: Data relate to the sole or principal job of full-time wage and salary

workers who were at work during the survey reference week and exclude all

self-employed persons, regardless of whether or not their businesses were

incorporated. Data reflect revised population controls used in the Current

Population Survey effective with the January 1997 estimates. Dashes

represent zero.

Table 2.
Monthly Labor Review June 2000 37

Shift usually worked by full-time wage and salary workers by selected characteristics, May 1997

[Percent distribution]

Age and sex

Total 16 years and older ................... 90,549 82.9 16.8 4.6 3.5 2.9 0.4 3.9 1.4

16 to 19 years ................................ 1,640 66.4 32.9 12.5 5.0 4.0 .9 8.8 1.6

20 years and older ......................... 88,909 83.2 16.5 4.5 3.5 2.9 .4 3.8 1.4

20 to 24 years .............................. 8,462 75.7 23.7 7.6 5.3 3.3 .3 6.3 .9

25 to 34 years .............................. 25,208 82.8 16.7 4.7 3.5 3.2 .4 3.6 1.3

35 to 44 years .............................. 26,755 84.0 15.8 3.9 3.4 2.9 .4 3.7 1.4

45 to 54 years .............................. 19,596 85.2 14.6 3.9 3.1 2.6 .3 3.3 1.4

55 to 64 years .............................. 7,778 84.8 15.0 3.8 2.7 2.5 .6 3.3 2.1

65 years and older ....................... 1,110 83.8 16.2 3.8 2.1 2.0 .3 4.7 3.3

16 to 24 years ................................ 10,102 74.2 25.2 8.4 5.3 3.4 .4 6.7 1.0

25 to 54 years ................................ 71,559 83.9 15.8 4.2 3.3 2.9 .4 3.6 1.4

55 years and older ......................... 8,888 84.7 15.1 3.8 2.6 2.4 .6 3.5 2.2

Men ................................................. 52,073 80.5 19.1 5.0 4.0 3.5 .4 4.4 1.7

Women ............................................ 38,476 86.1 13.7 4.1 2.8 2.2 .3 3.1 1.0

Race and Hispanic origin

White ................................................. 75,683 83.6 16.1 4.3 3.2 2.9 .4 3.9 1.4

Black ................................................. 10,884 78.5 20.9 6.5 5.5 3.2 .4 4.0 1.4

Hispanic origin .................................. 9,635 83.6 16.0 5.4 3.2 2.1 .3 3.8 1.2

Marital status and presence

and age of children

Men:

Never married ................................. 12,746 77.1 21.9 7.0 4.4 3.2 .4 5.9 1.1

Married, spouse present ................. 32,756 82.5 17.3 3.9 3.6 3.6 .4 3.9 1.9

Other marital status ........................ 6,571 77.3 22.1 6.6 5.1 3.6 .5 4.2 2.0

Without own children under 18 ....... 31,266 79.8 19.6 5.5 4.0 3.3 .4 4.6 1.6

With own children under 18 ............ 20,807 81.6 18.3 4.2 4.0 3.7 .5 4.1 1.8

With own children 6 to 17 ............. 10,820 82.8 17.1 3.5 3.7 3.9 .3 3.8 1.8

With own children under 6 ............ 9,986 80.3 19.7 5.0 4.3 3.5 .6 4.5 1.8

Women:

Never married. ................................ 8,975 79.8 19.8 6.2 4.0 3.2 .2 4.6 1.3

Married, spouse present ................. 20,613 89.2 10.7 3.1 2.3 1.8 .3 2.3 .9

Other marital status ........................ 8,888 85.4 14.5 4.5 2.9 2.0 .3 3.6 1.1

Without own children under 18 ....... 23,985 85.0 14.7 4.6 2.6 2.4 .3 3.6 1.2

With own children under 18 ............ 14,491 87.9 12.0 3.4 3.2 1.8 .4 2.4 .8

With own children 6 to 17 ............. 9,032 88.4 11.4 2.7 3.4 1.9 .4 2.3 .7

With own children under 6 ............ 5,459 87.1 12.9 4.5 2.8 1.6 .3 2.6 1.0

Characteristic

Total workers

 (in thousands)

Regular

daytime

schedule Total Evening

 shift

Rotating

shift

Employerarranged

 irregular

schedules

Night shift Split shift Other shifts

Alternative shift workers

NOTE: Data relate to the sole or principal job of full-time wage and salary

workers who were at work during the survey reference week and exclude all

self-employed persons, regardless of whether or not their businesses were

incorporated. Data reflect revised population controls used in the Current

Population Survey effective with the January 1997 estimates.

Table 3.

occupations that provide services that are needed at all hours—

such as protective service (55.1 percent) and food service

(42.0 percent)—and among those employed as operators,

fabricators and laborers (27.0 percent). (See table 4.) In contrast, teachers, construction workers, and executives and administrators were among the least likely to work an alternative shift.

Similarly, the incidence of shift work was much greater

among industries providing services used at all hours of the

day as opposed to “9-to-5” industries. For instance, about

47.2 percent of the total labor force employed in eating and

drinking places worked an alternative shift, as did 35.9 percent in transportation, and 25.8 percent in hospitals. Conversely, shift work was much less common in industries such

as finance, insurance, real estate, construction, and agriculture—industries in which most work is done during the

daytime.

Some goods-producing industries operate on extended

production schedules and therefore had high proportions of

workers on alternative shifts. In many of these industries, it

is more costly to shut down the production process at the

end of the day and restart the next morning than it is to simply operate on extended, and in some cases, around-the-clock

production cycles.4 Among industries with a high frequency

of shift work were paper products (33.3 percent), automobiles (31.3 percent), and mining (24.8 percent).

Shift work occurred less frequently in the public sector

than in the private sector, and varied little across Federal,
38 Monthly Labor Review June 2000

Flexible Schedules

[Percent distribution]

Alternative shift workers

Occupation

Managerial and professional specialty ........ 27,384 90.4 9.4 1.7 1.3 1.7 0.3 2.9 1.6

Executive, administrative, and

 managerial .............................................. 13,469 91.7 8.1 1.4 .7 1.7 .2 2.7 1.3

Professional specialty ............................... 13,915 89.1 10.7 2.0 1.7 1.6 .4 3.0 1.9

Mathematical and computer scientists ..... 1,308 94.9 4.6 .2 .3 .6 – 1.8 1.6

Natural scientists ..................................... 507 94.0 6.0 .9 1.0 – – 1.5 2.5

Teachers, college and university .............. 494 86.1 13.9 .6 .5 1.0 2.9 4.0 4.9

Technical, sales, and administrative

 support ................................................... 25,779 86.2 13.5 3.5 2.1 2.6 .3 3.8 1.1

Technicians and related support ................ 3,376 80.4 19.2 5.6 3.8 3.7 .2 4.2 1.5

Sales occupations ..................................... 9,001 81.4 18.4 3.6 1.1 4.4 .3 7.0 1.9

Sales workers, retail and personal

 services ................................................. 3,165 70.9 28.5 6.7 1.7 7.3 .6 10.6 1.5

Administrative support, including clerical .. 13,402 91.0 8.8 3.0 2.3 1.0 .2 1.6 .6

Service occupations ................................... 9,313 62.1 37.1 10.8 6.5 5.4 1.0 6.3 2.2

Private household ...................................... 308 83.2 16.8 1.4 .8 .7 1.5 8.2 4.3

Protective service ..................................... 1,891 44.4 55.1 11.3 13.2 16.3 .9 7.9 5.6

Service, except private household

 and protective ......................................... 8,855 71.4 28.0 11.0 5.3 3.3 1.0 5.9 1.4

Food service ............................................. 2,777 57.3 42.0 17.1 5.0 6.2 1.8 10.4 1.3

Health service .......................................... 1,466 69.5 30.1 10.8 9.4 3.3 .6 4.6 1.1

Cleaning and building service ................... 2,000 72.2 27.1 14.9 7.3 1.2 .6 2.2 .7

Personal service ....................................... 871 73.2 26.4 5.1 5 4.7 .8 6.3 4.5

Precision production, craft, and repair ........ 11,519 86.2 13.4 4.1 4.0 2.4 .2 2.1 .6

Mechanics and repairers ........................... 3,863 85.3 14.2 4.2 4.7 2.7 3 1.6 .6

Construction trades ................................... 4,069 95.3 4.4 .6 .9 .8 – 1.8 .3

Other precision production, craft,

 and repair ................................................ 3,587 77.0 22.8 7.9 6.7 4.0 .2 3.0 1.0

Operators, fabricators, and laborers ......... 14,812 72.5 27.0 7.7 7.4 4.3 .5 5.4 1.7

Machine operators, assemblers, and

 inspectors ............................................... 6,813 73.4 26.2 10.1 8.4 4.6 .2 2.0 .7

Transportation and material moving ........... 4,351 69.2 30.4 4.6 4.1 4.7 .9 12.3 3.9

Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers,

 and laborers ............................................ 3,648 74.8 24.6 7.0 9.3 3.4 .3 3.7 .8

Farming, forestry, and fishing ..................... 1,742 93.8 5.9 – – – .6 4.1 .8

 Industry

Private sector ............................................. 75,612 82.3 17.4 4.7 3.5 2.9 .4 4.3 1.4

Goods-producing industries ....................... 25,925 84.1 15.6 5.1 4.5 2.6 .2 2.1 .9

Agriculture ................................................ 1,492 93.1 6.7 .3 .3 .7 .5 4.1 .8

Mining ....................................................... 541 74.6 25.4 4.8 2.3 12.5 .2 5 .5

Construction ............................................. 5,389 95.9 3.7 .4 .2 .3 .1 2.1 .6

Manufacturing ........................................... 18,503 80.2 19.4 6.9 6.2 3.2 .3 1.9 1

Durable goods .......................................... 11,179 83.0 16.8 6.9 5 2.3 .2 1.6 .7

Nondurable goods ..................................... 7,324 76.0 23.5 6.9 7.9 4.5 .3 2.4 1.5

Service producing industries ...................... 49,687 81.3 18.3 4.5 3.0 3.1 .5 5.4 1.7

Transportation and public utilities .............. 6,088 73.8 25.8 4.2 3.3 4.5 .6 10.3 2.8

Wholesale trade ......................................... 3,969 89.7 10.1 2.3 2.6 1.1 .1 2.7 1.3

Retail trade ................................................ 12,111 71.1 28.4 7.5 3.6 5.9 .8 8.8 1.6

Eating and drinking places ....................... 3,135 51.9 47.2 16.3 5.4 8.7 2.0 12.6 1.8

Finance, insurance, and real estate .......... 5,857 94.8 5.1 1.0 .7 .5 .0 1.5 1.4

Services .................................................... 21,662 83.9 15.6 4.3 3.3 2.1 .5 3.7 1.6

Private households ................................... 391 78.9 21.1 1.9 2.2 2.3 1.1 10.2 3.4

Business, automobile, and repair ............. 5,060 86.0 13.3 4.0 3.6 1.5 .2 2.7 1.3

Personal, except private household ......... 1,627 74.9 24.3 7.7 4.1 3.4 .4 6.6 2.2

Entertainment and recreation ................... 1,051 63.9 35.1 9.7 2.8 4.4 1.4 13.8 3.1

Professional services ............................... 13,497 86.0 13.7 3.6 3.3 2.0 .6 2.7 1.6

Forestry and fisheries .............................. 36 1 111 111 1

Government ................................................ 14,937 86.1 13.8 4.2 3.2 3.0 .3 1.9 1.3

Federal ....................................................... 2,828 85.4 14.4 4.3 5.3 1.8 .2 1.8 1.1

State .......................................................... 4,125 86.1 13.7 4.7 3.1 2.6 .3 1.8 1.2

Local .......................................................... 7,983 86.4 13.6 3.9 2.4 3.5 .3 1.9 1.5

Regular

daytime

schedule

Total workers

(in thousands) Total Other

shifts Night shift Rotating

shift Split shift

Employerarranged

 irregular

schedules

Occupation and Industry

1

 Percent not shown where base is less than 75,000.

NOTE: Data relate to the sole or principal job of full-time wage and salary

workers who were at work during the survey reference week and exclude all

Table 4. Shift usually worked by full-time wage and salary workers by occupation and industry, May 1997

Evening

shift

self-employed persons, regardless of whether or not their businesses were

incorporated. Data reflect revised population controls used in the Current

Population Survey effective with the January 1997 estimates. Dashes represent zero.
Monthly Labor Review June 2000 39

Shift usually worked on principal job by usual full-time wage and salary workers, by reason for working shift,

May 1997

[Numbers in thousands]

Total shift workers ............................................................. 15,183 4,192 3,156 2,649 350 3,523 1,313

Better child care arrangements ...................................... 633 279 257 31 3 35 28

Better pay ...................................................................... 920 350 330 81 14 105 41

Better arrangements for care of family members ........... 423 114 214 17 5 38 34

Allows time for school .................................................... 435 201 62 56 11 86 19

Easier commute, less traffic .......................................... 109 51 27 4 2 12 13

Could not get any other job ............................................ 866 383 237 75 12 138 20

Mandated by employer to meet transportation/

pollution program requirements .................................... 1,967 397 326 561 55 524 103

Nature of the job ............................................................ 7,767 1,710 1,084 1,610 204 2,354 805

Other reasons ................................................................ 1,912 661 581 195 41 224 211

Not reporting reasons ..................................................... 151 46 37 19 3 7 38

Employer

arranged

irregular

shift

Shift worked

Total

Employer arranged irregular shift

Evening shift Other shift

Reason for working shift

Night shift Rotating

shift Split shift

NOTE: Data relate to the sole or principal job of full-time wage and salary

workers who were at work during the survey reference week and exclude all

self-employed persons, regardless of whether or not their businesses were

incorporated. Data reflect revised population controls used in the Current

Population Survey effective with the January 1997 estimates.

Table 5.

State, and local governments. Within local government, however, the incidence of shift work varies widely by function.

Nearly half of the local government employees in justice, public order, and safety functions worked alternative shifts; but

only 4.5 percent of those employed in educational services

worked an alternative shift.

The CPS supplement included a question intended to derive workers’ main reason for working an alternative shift; the

results support the notion that the occurrence of shift work is

highly correlated with particular industries and occupations.5

More than half of all full-time employees who worked an alternative shift did so because it was the “nature of the job.”

It is also apparent that very few of these workers chose to

work one of these shifts for the purpose of obtaining greater

monetary compensation or to alleviate nonwork conflicts.

Only 6.1 percent of all alternative shiftworkers reported working a shift for better pay. About 4.1 percent worked an alternative shift for better childcare arrangements; and only a small

fraction did so for an easier commute (0.7 percent) or because

it allowed time for school (2.9 percent). Roughly 13.0 percent

reported that they were on one of these shifts specifically

because alternative shifts were mandated by their employer

to meet transportation demand, management, or pollution

abatement program requirements. A small percentage of

shiftworkers (5.7 percent) worked an alternative shift because

they were unable to find another job. (See table 5.)

As is the case with differences in flexible work schedules

among workers, a portion of the differences among demographic groups in the incidence of shift work can be traced to

the occupational distributions of the groups. As indicated in

table 2 for example, men were more likely than women to work

on an alternative shift: 19.1 percent versus 13.7 percent, respectively; a difference of 5.4 percentage points. A standardization analysis shows that if women had the same occupational distribution as men, then the overall proportion

of women on alternative shifts would be 16.3 percent, reducing the difference between men and women to 2.8 percentage

points. If the rates of alternative shift work by occupation

for men are applied to the occupational distribution of women,

then the difference in shift work rates falls to 1.5 percentage

points. Thus, shift work is more common among men for two

reasons: first, men are more likely then women to choose occupations in which shift work is common; and, on the same job,

men are typically more likely than women to work an alternative

shift.

Among other major groups, workers who had never been

married were employed on one of these shifts more often

than married workers (21.0 percent versus 14.8 percent, respectively), and a greater proportion of blacks (20.9 percent)

worked alternative shifts than either whites (16.1 percent) or

Hispanics (16.0 percent). Another shift-share analysis shows

that only a small proportion of the disparity in alternative

shift work between blacks and whites can be explained by

different occupational groupings; on the same jobs, it is usually the case that more blacks than whites work an alternative

shift. In addition, the incidence of alternative shift work varied to some degree by age: nearly one-third of employed

teenagers worked an alternative shift. This is not surprising

as daytime school commitments prevent many teenagers from

working during normal business hours. The prevalence of

shift work declines with age to a low of 14.6 percent for workers aged 45 to 54 years. (See table 3.)
40 Monthly Labor Review June 2000

Flexible Schedules

In general, the proportion of workers on alternative shifts

has changed very little for all of the major demographic

groups over the last 12 years. The following tabulation shows

the percent working alternative shifts, 1985–97:

.......................................... 1985 1991 1997

Total, 16 years and older .... 15.9 17.8 16.8

Men ............................... 17.8 20.1 19.1

Women .......................... 13.0 14.6 13.7

Race and Hispanic origin:

White ............................. 15.3 17.1 16.1

Black .............................. 19.9 23.3 20.9

Hispanic origin .............. 15.5 19.1 16.0

Part-time workers. Alternative shift work was much more

common among workers who usually worked part time than

among full-time workers. Of the 20.3 million part-time wage

and salary workers, roughly 7.3 million, or 36.0 percent, usually worked an alternative shift on their primary job. The majority of these workers usually worked an evening shift or an

irregularly scheduled shift. In many cases, part-timers are

students, parents, or persons with other daytime commitments

that conflict with a regular “9-to-5” schedule.6

 Another explanation for the high rates of shift work among part-timers is that

a sizable proportion of businesses maintain operating hours

that extend past the traditional 8-hour day; part-time workers

are needed to fill this gap. While the proportion of full-time

wage and salary workers who worked alternative shifts was

unchanged between May 1991 and May 1997, the proportion of part-timers on alternative shifts fell from 45.6 percent

to 36.0 percent over the period.

THE “9-TO-5” WORKDAY does not appear to be in jeopardy of

fading from its prominence in U.S. workplaces; yet the data

do suggest that the rigidity of those hours continues to relax. In May 1997, about one-fourth of all full-time wage and

salary workers could vary the times they began or ended

work, nearly double the proportion in May 1985. In contrast,

the proportions working alternative shifts—something

other than a regular daytime shift—have not increased

over the period.

Clearly, the prevalence of both flexible work schedules

and alternative shifts is linked to the nature of the work involved in a particular job or industry. However, this explains

only a portion of the variation in the frequency of these

types of work schedules across demographic groups. Even

within the most detailed occupational groupings, sizable

differences remain, in both the rates of alternative shift

work and flexible work hours among the various demographic groups, differences that the available data do not

completely explain. 

Notes

1

 Throughout this article the two terms “alternative shift” and

“shift work” refer to all work schedules that do not conform to the

regular daytime schedule, for which work hours typically fall between

6 a.m. and 6 p.m.

2

 The source of the data used in this article is the May 1997

supplement to the Current Population Survey (CPS). The CPS is a

monthly survey of about 50,000 households, conducted by the Bureau

of the Census for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The employment

estimates for the period under study have been affected by a number

of factors. Official data for 1990 and later years incorporate 1990

census-based population controls, adjusted for the estimated

undercount, whereas prior data are based on 1980 census-based population controls, for which no such adjustment has been made.

In addition, data for January 1994 and forward are not strictly

comparable with data for earlier years because of the introduction

of a major redesign of the CPS questionnaire and collection methodology. For additional information on the redesign, see "Revisions in the Current Population Survey Effective January 1994,"

in the February 1994 issue of the BLS periodical Employment and

Earnings.

3 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employee Benefits Survey, Bulletins 2517 (1999); 2507 (1999); and 2477 (1996).

4

 The actual wording of the question on flexible work schedules

was altered on the most recent May supplement to the Survey. Specifically, the word "flexitime" was removed in the description of

flexible work hours.

4

 Earl F. Mellor, “Shift work and flexitime: how prevalent are

they?” Monthly Labor Review, November 1986, pp. 14–20.

5

 Those who responded that they work a schedule other than a

regular daytime schedule were asked, “What is the main reason why

you work this type of shift?”

6

 Data from the Current Population Survey show that among

workers who usually work part time, roughly 55.9 percent work part

time due to one of the following reasons: 1) childcare problems; 2)

other family or personal obligations; 3) attending school or training.

These data are 1997 annual averages and appear in table 20 of the

January 1998 issue of the BLS periodical Employment and Earnings.