Modern working patterns can directly and adversely affect family lives and personal relationships. Using quasi-longitudinal survey data from Queensland, this study confirms qualitative evidence that long hours of work, weekend work, irregular starting times, and high-pressure, long-hours cultures contribute to deteriorating home relationships and to dissatisfaction among partners. This study uniquely contrasts the quality impacts of work with the consequences of work quantity, indicating that the former is much more influential in modulating work-life conflict and satisfaction variables. Claims that long and increased working hours reflect the use of work as a refuge from home are shown to be unfounded.

A considerable amount of rhetoric from government and, to a lesser extent, unions, employer associations and some employers has been devoted to the promotion of policies to better balance work and family life. In the early 1990s a Work and Family Unit was established within the Commonwealth Department of Industrial Relations. Similar units were later established in some State departments. However, this rhetoric does not sit easily with evidence of increasing work intensity (Allan, 1997; Allan, O’Donnell & Peetz 1999; Morehead et al 1997; Reeder 1988; Wright & Lund 1998) and increasing working hours (Campbell 2002, Pocock 2003, Watson et al. 2003). Data from the mid 1990s suggested increasing dissatisfaction with the balance between work and family life (Morehead et al 1997:583; DIR 1995:227), with dissatisfaction higher amongst employees whose weekly hours had increased.

"Drawing on qualitative and survey research in a number of organisations, we report on some of the causes and effects of extended working hours. Extended hours were mostly employer-driven, where workplace regulation of hours was weak so that employees were not compensated for extra hours worked, though in a minority of instances they were jointly driven by employers and employees who benefited from overtime pay. Workplace culture was important in shaping extended hours. Employees internalised pressure to work long hours, so that without adequate say on their workload, those with higher say in their working hours tended to work longer hours. Yet many full-time employees were working more hours than they wanted, and there was strong support for an upper limit on hours. Such a limit failed in implementation, however, where there was no enforcement mechanism and a minority were willing to circumvent it."

Drawing on qualitative and survey research in a number of organisations, we report on some of the causes and effects of extended working hours. Extended hours are mostly employer-driven, where workplace regulation of hours is weak so employees are not compensated for extra hours worked, though in a minority of instances it was jointly driven by employers and employees who benefited from overtime pay. Workplace culture was important in shaping extended hours. Employees internalised pressure to work long hours, so that without adequate say on their workload, employees with higher say in their working hours tended to work more, not fewer hours. Yet many full-time employees were working more hours than they wanted, and most supported an upper limit on hours. Such a limit failed when it was implemented, however, due to lack of enforcement and the willingness of a minority to circumvent it. Method Australia is one of the few countries in the industrialised world with increasing working hours for employees (Campbell, 2002). An important feature of Australian work time practice is the high proportion of employees working extended or long hours. Based on a comparison of nine OECD countries, Jacobs and Gerson (2000:93-95) found that Australia had the highest proportion of workforce working more than 50 hours per week. The problem of extended working hours was the catalyst for the ACTU to pursue its ‘reasonable hours’ test case in the AIRC. In 2001 and 2002, we undertook a major study of working time arrangements in Queensland, including case studies of 17 organisations and employee surveys in 15 of those organisations. The latter included: two manufacturers, a mine, a construction company, a government department, a law enforcement agency, a public utility, a bank, a theme park, a retailer, a law firm, a large-vehicle repair company, a trade union, a hospital and an educational institution. This included a mixture of small, medium and large organizations (although there was a greater representation of larger sized firms), a balance of strongly-, weaklyand nonunionised workplaces and a blend of female-dominated, male-dominated and mixed gender workplaces. In each case study organisation, qualitative interviews with management and employee representatives were undertaken, along with focus groups of employees. Questions were designed to elicit information on working time changes that had occurred at the research site, the processes by which the changes were Extended hours can have negative implications for health and safety at work (Dawson et al. 2001) and the coherence of social relations within families and communities (Pocock, 2001). In this paper we explore the issue of long hours using workplace survey and case study data. In particular, we examine some of the factors associated with 'very long hours' that is, 'normal' working weeks of 50 hours or more. We also use the term 'long hours' to refer to employees normally working 45 hours per week or more.

Drawing on qualitative and survey research in a number of organisations, we report on some of the causes and effects of extended working hours. Extended hours are mostly employer-driven, where workplace regulation of hours is weak so employees are not compensated for extra hours worked, though in a minority of instances it was jointly driven by employers and employees who benefited from overtime pay. Workplace culture was important in shaping extended hours. Employees internalised pressure to work long hours, so that without adequate say on their workload, employees with higher say in their working hours tended to work more, not fewer hours. Yet many full-time employees were working more hours than they wanted, and most supported an upper limit on hours. Such a limit failed when it was implemented, however, due to lack of enforcement and the willingness of a minority to circumvent it.