working from home research australia

More than 40 per cent of Australians worked from home

More than 40 per cent of employed people were regularly working from home during the first half of August, according to new data released today by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS).

Working from home and other arrangements

Bjorn Jarvis, Head of Labour Statistics at the ABS, said: "Prior to the pandemic, the percentage of employed people working from home on a regular basis had been steadily increasing by around a percentage point every two years. Our latest data for August 2021, as the Delta period impacts were deepening, are showing an 8.4 percentage point jump to 40.6 per cent.”

Working from home continued to be more common in some occupations. Close to two-thirds (64 per cent) of managers and professionals were doing it regularly in August 2021, compared with around a quarter (25 per cent) of people across other occupations.

“Interestingly, while the pandemic has seen a large shift in people working from home, there haven’t been similarly large changes in other working arrangements such as working Monday to Friday only. Working arrangements other than working from home have generally followed pre-pandemic trends,” Mr. Jarvis said.

• Download table as CSV
• Download table as XLSX
• Download graph as PNG image
• Download graph as JPG image
• Download graph as SVG Vector image

Further details can be found in  Working arrangements  available on  www.abs.gov.au .

• Employee earnings

The impact of lockdowns and other restrictions were again evident in the distribution of earnings, with fewer lower paid workers in August 2021 than before the pandemic.

"In August 2021, the number of employed people who were earning less than $1,000 per week fell by almost half a million compared to pre-pandemic levels, from 4.5 million in August 2019 to just over 4 million in 2021,” Mr. Jarvis said.

“This echoes what we saw last year, in August 2020, when lower paid workers and their jobs were also particularly affected by lockdowns and other restrictions.”

Note: In August 2020, there was a larger number of people than usual earning around $750 per week, which was the amount of the JobKeeper wage subsidy.

In contrast with the fall in the number of employees earning below $1,000 per week, the number of employees earning $1000 or more per week increased between August 2019 and 2021, by 8 per cent. However, this was below the two-yearly growth rates seen before the pandemic (14 per cent between August 2017 and 2019, and 10 per cent between 2015 and 2017). 

Further details can be found in  Employee earnings  available on  www.abs.gov.au .

Leave entitlements

In August 2021, there were 2.4 million casual employees. This was equivalent to 22.5 per cent of all employees, down from 23.6 per cent of employees in May 2021 and 24.1 per cent in February 2020 before the pandemic. This shows the extent to which casual employment has been impacted during the pandemic. Casual jobs are more likely to be lower paid.

“In August 2021, 90 per cent of employees who earned the median wage of $1200 per week or more were entitled to paid sick leave or paid holiday leave. Over 50 per cent of these employees had access to paid parental leave,” Mr Jarvis said.

“For workers in the lowest 25 per cent of earners (less than $750 per week), 40 per cent had access to paid sick leave or paid holiday leave, and 20 per cent were entitled to paid parental leave.”

Media notes

• Characteristics of employment
• Working arrangements
• Employees are the subset of employed people who worked for an employer and received remuneration by wage, salary or otherwise.
• Casual employees used in this release are defined as employees without leave entitlements. Other measures of casual employment are also available from  Working arrangements .
• It is important to note that most casual employees can work or expect to work in their jobs for 12 months or longer. Casual employment should therefore not be assumed to be temporary employment.
• Median is a statistical term referring to the middle point of a distribution. In the case of earnings, it refers to the earnings of the person in the middle of the distribution, with the same number of people earning more and less than them. Unlike means or simple averages, medians are not skewed by very high and very low earners.
• Earnings are the pre-tax amount paid to employees for work done or time worked (including paid leave), and are a subset of employee income.
• When reporting ABS data you must attribute the Australian Bureau of Statistics (or the ABS) as the source.
• For media requests and interviews, contact the ABS Media Team via  [email protected]  (8.30am-5pm Mon-Fri).
• Subscribe to our media release notification service  to get notified of ABS media releases or publications upon their release.

This website uses cookies to ensure you get a better experience. Allow Cookies

Search La Trobe

Pros and cons of working from home

In Australia, prior to the pandemic, approximately 24 per cent of employees were engaged in some degree of work from home. This figure jumped to 41 per cent during the COVID-19 pandemic, with higher rates in those states with severe lockdowns.

As many of us continue to work from home despite much of the COVID restrictions having been removed, a new report from La Trobe University on effective strategies to combining work at home with work at the office, school, factory or shop provides much-needed advice.

Published in Industrial Health , the study led by Associate Professor Jodi Oakman – head of the Centre for Ergonomics and Human Factors at La Trobe University – identified optimal working strategies from people working from home during the pandemic.

Managers and non-managers from a range of sectors were invited to participate in focus groups.

According to Associate Professor Oakman, most participants’ experiences were more negative than positive, in part due to extreme lockdowns including curfews, with childcare and school closures compounding their work from home experiences.

Some of the negative aspects of work from home during the pandemic identified in the report include:

• Blurring of boundaries (working longer hours and on weekends), invasion of privacy (using webcam and private phone for work), and work impinging on carer responsibilities
• Both managers and non-managers reported exhaustion associated with increased working hours and long periods of work without taking leave
• Negative physical health outcomes such as increased musculoskeletal pain and weight gain
• A decrease in productivity, due to negative mental wellbeing effects of work from home
• A feeling of isolation and disconnect from work, particularly for those living alone in lockdown who could not socialise
• Negative financial impact for employees resulting from increased utility bills and purchase of additional equipment

Positives included:

• Improved work–life interaction, particularly for employees that were not in mandatory lockdown situations – including flexibility to accommodate parenting responsibilities, household chores, dog walking and exercise
• Improved access to networking and professional development opportunities through online conferences and seminars that were previously inaccessible due to overseas locations
• Increased team bonding due to online meetings, which provided insight into private lives of employees
• The introduction of online communication platforms such as Microsoft Teams and Zoom resulted in improved communication within teams and between departments, as well as cross business collaboration
• Productivity increase – due to staff working longer days and not being distracted in the office – contributed to the positive financial impact for employer organisations

However the study found that effective workplace-initiated strategies to optimise work from home included management support of flexible work hours; provision of necessary equipment with ICT support; regular online communication; performance management adjustments; and manager training.

Contact the La Trobe University Media Team

More from La Trobe

• Media releases
• Search media archive

Find an expert

Search our experts database.

For best results, use one word only

By expert name --> By keyword

• La Trobe News
• Media Releases
• La Trobe Opinions
• Ideas and Society

• Melbourne Institute: Applied Economic & Social Research

Study shows Australians happy working from home, men and women are looking to upskill, but young people feeling the pinch

Almost 70% of Australians who have been working from home because of COVID-19 would like to continue doing so according to the latest Taking The Pulse of the Nation survey . The survey found, of those who are employed, half of Australians are working mostly from home (59% of Victorians and 47% of those in the rest of Australia).

Working from home is highest among 25-34 year-olds, and more men are working from home than women. 55% of younger employees – the 18-24 age group - are still going to work, compared to 45% working from home.

A third of Australians are looking to upskill in response to the pandemic. Men were most likely to be doing so to keep their current job, while most women are upskilling to find new work.

Led by the Melbourne Institute: Applied Economic & Social Research at the University of Melbourne, the fortnightly survey tracks changes in the economic and social wellbeing of Australians. The 19th wave of the survey was conducted from 14 – 18 September.

Professor Guay Lim, lead author of the survey report, said six months of social distancing restrictions seem to have changed our attitudes to work.

“Employers and employees have adapted. Should working from home become part of the new normal, it will have fundamental effects on infrastructure needs and policies concerned with connecting where people live with where people work,” Professor Lim said.

A Research Insight paper based on the survey has found young people have taken the biggest hit to their working lives. The data show that one in five Australians aged 18-24 suffered a job loss during the first months of the pandemic. The employment rates have mostly bounced back outside of Victoria but there is still a difference between the employment rates of young Australians versus older Australians. In Victoria, the employment rates are better today but the second wave has affected the return to work for young Victorians more severely than older Victorians.

Across gender, young women have suffered more than young men. The employment rates fell most for young women in April (44% for women versus 56% for men) and by September, while the overall rates of employment have increased for both genders, they have increased faster for young men (64% for men versus 59 percent for women).

23% of young people report experiencing high levels of mental distress in the last six months, more than twice the rate as before the pandemic.

Dr Jan Kabátek, author of the research, said the findings highlight the pressure points for young Australians in the labour market.

“Young workers were likely more affected because they work in industries most affected by the shut down and are more likely to be employed on casual contracts. Without JobSeeker or JobKeeper arrangements, this population would be at higher risk of negative economic shocks than other age groups. While JobSeeker was a necessary stopgap measure given the immediacy of the problem, now is the time to think about longer term solutions for supporting casual contract workers,” said Dr. Kabátek.

The Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work

Working from home: opportunities and risks.

• Law, Society & Culture

Alison Pennington

Jim Stanford

With many regular workplaces shut down to ‘flatten the curve’ of COVID-19, millions of Australians are now shifting their work to home. Home work has great potential to cushion the economic blow of the pandemic: allowing many to keep working and earning an income, and many firms and industries to continue at least partial production. But there are also many challenges and risks associated with this major shift in work patterns. Much of the increase in home work will likely become permanent, even after the immediate health emergency passes. That makes it crucial to ‘get home work right’: providing home workers with appropriate support and protections, and preventing abuse and exploitation as home work becomes more common.

This new Briefing Paper from the Centre for Future Work, written by Alison Pennington and Jim Stanford, surveys the scope of home work, considers its impacts on economic and gender inequality, and proposes several policy recommendations to make home work safer and fairer.

Main findings of the Briefing Paper include:

• About 30% of Australian jobs could conceivably be performed from home – but it will take time for workplaces to make necessary organisational and technological adjustments to reach that potential.
• Occupations which can work from home were already paid about 25% more than occupations which cannot be shifted to remote locations. The shift to home work could therefore exacerbate income inequality; this reinforces the need for comprehensive income protections for those who cannot work from home.
• The expansion of work-from-home arrangements raises several concerns regarding the conditions of home work, and protecting those who perform it. These include fair compensation for extra expenses associated with home work; applying normal rules regarding working hours and pay; ensuring a safe home work environment (including its social and familial context, with challenges like domestic violence); and protecting the privacy of home workers from undue monitoring and surveillance by employers.

The paper concludes by urging researchers, unions, regulators and policy-makers to pay top-priority attention to ensuring the safety and fairness of home work – because this shift is clearly here to stay.

Full report

Working from home research

The Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies has partnered with industry on two projects to track the travel activity and positions of the Australian population on working from home through a longitudinal data plan, commencing in March 2020.

Responses from employers and employees to working from home throughout COVID-19 will raise important questions as to what revisions will be required to strategic models used by state governments in respect of modal choice and frequency of weekly travel.

The research program develops revised post-COVID-19 travel choice models conditioned on working from home preferences.

The projects have been undertaken in collaboration with:

• the iMOVE Cooperative Research Centre
• Transport for Main Roads, Queensland
• Transport for NSW
• Western Australia Department of Transport

View the April 2024 Hensher Econ Society Presentation: Commuting mode choice and work from home in the later stages of COVID‐19: Consolidating a future focussed prediction tool to inform transport and land use planning

• COVID and Working from Home: How has it impacted transport?
• Prospects for Working from Home: Assessing the evidence
• Working from Home: Revising metro strategic transport models (QLD)
• Working from Home: Revising metro strategic transport models (NSW, WA)

Related research

Papers and publications.

Beck, M. and Hensher, D.A. (2020) Insights into the Impact of Covid-19 on Household Travel, Work, Activities and Shopping in Australia – the early days under restrictions, Paper #1, Transport Policy , 96, 76-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.07.001 (one of top most downloaded papers in the journal).

Hensher, D.A., Beck, M. J. and Wei, E. (2021) Working from home and its implications for strategic transport modelling based on the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, Paper #2 , Transportation Research Part A , 148, 64-78.

Beck, M. J., Hensher, D.A. and Wei, E. (2020) Slowly coming out of COVID-19 restrictions in Australia: implications for working from home and commuting trips by car and public transport, Paper #3 , Journal of Transport Geography , 88, 102466.

Beck, M. and Hensher, D.A. (2020) Insights into the impact of COVID-19 on household travel and activities in Australia – the early days of easing restrictions, Paper #4 , Transport Policy, 99, 95-119. Online 19 August 2020 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.08.004 .

Hensher, D.A., Wei, E., Beck, M.J. and Balbontin, C. (2021) The impact of COVID-19 on the time and monetary cost outlays for commuting - the case of the Greater Sydney Metropolitan Area after three months of restrictions, Paper #5, Transport Policy , 101, 71-80.

Vallejo-Borda, J.A., Lira, B.M., Basnak, P., Reyes-Saldías, J.P., Giesen, R., de Dios Ortúzar, J., Hensher, D.A., and Beck, M.J. Characterising public transport shifting to active and private modes in South American capitals during the Covid-19 pandemic, Paper #6 . Submitted to a Special Issue on COVID-19 (edited by Hani Mahmassani and Patricia Mokhtarian), Transportation Research Part A, January 2020.

Beck, M.J. and Hensher, D.A. (2020) What does the changing incidence of Working from Home (WFH) tell us about Future Transport and Land Use Agendas? Transport Reviews, 41(3). (Shortened version for The Conversation , November 2020 to accompany Academy of Social Sciences Australia (ASSA) podcast). https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2020.1848141. Also https://theconversation.com/covid-has-proved-working-from-home-is-the-best-policy-to-beat-congestion-148926

Beck, M. J. and Hensher, D.A. (2021) Australia 6 months After COVID-19 Restrictions Part 1: Changes to Travel Activity and Attitude to Measures Paper #7a . Transport Policy, online 17 June 2021.

Beck, M. J. and Hensher, D.A. (2021) Australia 6 months After COVID-19 Restrictions Part 2: The Impact of Working from Home Paper #7b . Transport Policy , online 17 June 2021.

Hensher, D.A, Balbontin, C., Beck, M.J. and Wei, E.(2022) The Impact of working from home on modal commuting choice response during COVID-19: Implications for two metropolitan areas in Australia, Paper #8 For a Special Issue on COVID-19 (edited by Hani Mahmassani and Patricia Mokhtarian), Transportation Research Part A , 155, 179-201.

Beck, M.J., Hensher, D.A., and Nelson, J.D. (2021) Public transport trends in Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic: an investigation of level of concern as a driver for use, Paper #9, Journal of Transport Geography , online 96, 103167.

Hensher, D.A., Beck, M.J. and Balbontin, C. (2021) What does the quantum of working from home do to the value of commuting time used in transport appraisal? Paper #10 , Transportation Research Part A , 153, 35-51.

Beck, M. J. and Hensher, D.A. Insights into Work from Home in Australia in 2020: Positives, Negatives and the Potential for Future Benefits to Transport and Society, Paper #11 submitted to a Special Issue on COVID-19 (edited by Hani Mahmassani and Patricia Mokhtarian), Transportation Research Part A , 12 January 2021, referees reports 25 May 2021, revised 1 June 2021. Download Paper #11 (pdf, 425KB)

Balbontin, C., Hensher, D.A., Beck, M.J., Giesen, R., Basnak, P., Vallejo-Borda, J.A., Venter, C. Impact of COVID-19 on the number of days working from home and commuting travel: A cross-cultural comparison between Australia, South America and South Africa, Paper #12 , Journal of Transport Geography , 96, 103188

Balbontin, C., Hensher, D.A. and Beck, M. J. Balbontin, C. Advanced modelling of commuter choice model and work from home during COVID-19 restrictions in Australia Paper #13, early version presented at the 2021 International Choice Modelling Conference online and Chilean Transport Research Conference, 23 May 2021, submitted to Transportation Research Part E , 1 December 2021. Download Paper #13 (pdf, 498KB)

Hensher, D.A., Beck, M.J., Nelson, J.D. and Balbontin, C. (2022) Reducing congestion and crowding with WFH, in Mulley, C. and Attard, M. (editors) Transport and Pandemic Experiences , Emerald Press, Paper #14.

Balbontin, C., Hensher, D.A. and Beck, M. J. (2023) Relationship between commuting and non-commuting travel activity under the growing incidence of working from home and people’s attitudes towards COVID-19, Paper #15 , Transportation . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-023-10403-2

Hensher, D.A., Beck, M. and Balbontin, C. Time allocation of reduced commuting time during COVID-19 under working from home, Paper #18 , submitted to Journal of Transport Economics and Policy , 29 September 2021. Download Paper #18 (pdf, 846KB)

Hensher, D.A., Wei, E, and Liu, W. (2023)Accounting for the spatial incidence of working from home in MetroScan - an integrated transport and land model system, Paper #19 , Transportation Research Part A https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/27127 ), 173, 103793.

Beck, M.J., Nelson, J., and Hensher, D.A, Restoring Confidence in Public Transport post Delta COVID-19 Lockdowns: Identifying User Segments and Policies to Restore Confidence, Paper #20 , completed 22 November 2021. Download Paper #20 (pdf, 959KB)

Hensher, D.A. and Beck, M. J. (2023) Exploring how worthwhile the things that you do in life are during COVID-19 and links to well-being and working from home, Paper #21 ,  Transportation Research Part A, 168, 103579/ https://authors.elsevier.com/sd/article/S0965-8564(22)00330-5

Balbontin, C., Hensher, D.A. and Beck, M. J. (2023) How are life satisfaction, concern towards the use of public transport and other underlying attitudes affecting mode choice for commuting trips? A case study in Sydney from 2020 to 2022, paper prepared for presentation only at IATBR, December 2022 Chile and World Conference on Transport Research - WCTR 2023 Montreal 17-21 July 2023. Transportation Research Part A, accepted 2 September 2023. Paper #22 .

Nelson, J., Beck, M.J. and Hensher, D.A.(2023) COVID-19 and public transport response and challenges, for COVID-19: Implications for Policy and Planning , edited by Veronique Van Acker, Patricia L. Mokhtarian, and Sangho Choo; Elsevier book series “Advances in Transport Policy and Planning” Paper #23 , ( https://www.elsevier.com/books/book-series/advances-in-transport-policy-and-planning ).

Balbontin, C., Hensher, D.A. and Beck, M. J. The influence of working from home on the number of commuting and non-commuting trips during 2020 and 2021 pre- and post-lockdown in Australia, paper prepared for 17th International Conference on Competition and Ownership of Land Passenger Transport (Thredbo 17), Sydney, Australia, September 2022. Paper #24. Submitted to Transportation Research Part A , 4 October 2022.

Hensher, D.A., Beck, M. J., Balbontin, C. Working from home and what it means for the future provision of transport services and infrastructure, paper prepared for 17th International Conference on Competition and Ownership of Land Passenger Transport (Thredbo 17), Sydney, Australia, September 2022 Research in Transportation Economics , online 9 March 2023, 98, 101271 . Paper #25.

Beck, M. J., Hensher, D.A. and Balbontin, C. Can (Is) work from home be sustained (sustainable) after intensive lockdowns? an examination of three disparate experiences, Paper #29 . Submitted to Sustainable Cities and Society , 28 February 2023.

Hensher, D.A., Wei, E. and Beck, M.J. (2022) The Impact of COVID-19 and working from home on the main location office space retained and the future use of satellite offices Transport Policy , 130, 184-195. Paper #30 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2022.11.012

Hensher, D.A., Beck, M.J. and Nelson, J. (2023) What have we learned about long term structural change brought about by COVID-19 and working from home? Transportation Letters, online 19 July 2023. Paper #31 https://doi.org/10.1080/19427867.2023.2237269

Xi.,H., Li, Q. H., Hensher, D.A., Nelson, J. and Ho, C. Quantifying the impact of COVID-19 on  travel behavior of people in different groups, submitted to Transportation Research Board Annual Conference , Washington D.C, January 2023, Paper #32 ; Transport Policy , accepted

Hensher, D.A., Balbontin, C., Beck, M.J., and Wei, E. (2024) Commuting mode choice and work from home in the later stages of COVID-19: Consolidating a future focussed prediction tool to inform transport and land use planning. Paper #34,   Presented at ICMC Conference  Chile (April1-3 2024), Transportation Research Part A ,  187, 104194 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2024.104194

Hensher, D.A. Beck, M.J. and Balbontin, C. (2023) Final Report for Combined WFH projects 1-031 and 1-034, 22 December 2022. Available at https://imoveaustralia.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Working-fromHome-and-implications-for-revision-of-Metropolitan-Strategic-Transport-Models.pdf

Full drafts not yet published

Jose Agustin Vallejo-Borda, Ricardo Giesen, Beatriz Mella Lira, Paul Basnak, José P. Reyes, Francisco Pasqual, Guillermo Petzhold, Matthew J. Beck, Juan de Dios Ortúzar, David A. Hensher. Paper #16 , Characterizing public transport shifting to active and private modes in Brazil during the Covid-19 pandemic, 4 May 2021.

Hensher, D.A., Beck, M.J., and Balbontin, C. How has COVID-19 impacted on the propensity to work from home? An assessment over four time periods between March 2020 and June 2021, Paper #17 , Journal of Transport Geography , 20 April 2022.

Basnak, P. Camila Balbontin; Jose Agustin Vallejo-Borda; Fernando Feres; José Reyes; Matthew J. Beck; David A. Hensher; Ricardo Giesen, Determinants of mode changes in times of COVID-19: A study of 11 main Latin American cities, Paper #36, submitted to Transportation Research Part A, 15 August 2023.

Hensher, D.A., Beck, M., Balbontin, C. and Nelson, J. Commuting mode choice and work [RC1]   from home in the later stages of COVID-19: Implications for sustainability in Routledge Handbook of Sustainable Urban Transport, edited by Lucy Budd and Maria Attard, for 2025 publication. Paper #37.

In progress

Hensher, D.A. and Beck, M. J. How worthwhile do you think the things that you do in life are during COVID-19 and working from home? Paper #21 , Full draft 30 November 2021.

Beck, M.J., Hensher, D.A. and Balbontin, C. Working from home changes over 10 months during the COVID-19 Pandemic: a contrast between metropolitan and regional locations. Paper #26 .

Balbontin, C., Hensher, D.A., Beck, M.J. and Venter, C. Contrasts in South Africa between 2 waves, Paper #27 . This paper has been cancelled.

Balbontin, C., Hensher, D.A. and Beck, M. J., Venter, C. and PUC Comparison of Wave 4 Australia and Wave 2 Latin America and South Africa, Paper #28 .

Balbontin, C., Hensher, D.A. and Beck, M.J. Comparative assessment of metropolitan and regional incidence of working from home, Paper #33 , being prepared for ICMC, Chile, May 2024.

Mobility as a Service (MaaS): Where to next?  - ASSA: Academy of Social Sciences Australia (ASSA)

How avoiding the commute is making us happier - Seriously Social 

Corona Business Insights: Urban mobility - Sydney Business Insights

Early Days of the Pandemic (April 2020) and Views on Working from Home  - The Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies (ITLS)

Consequences for land transport of Covid 19 and work from home (esansw.org.au)

Australian Institute of Transport Planning and Management (AITPM) Presentations:

• 8 October 2020
• Q&A 15 October 2020

ACSPRI 2020 Conference on Social Science Methodology: the Australian Consortium for Social and Political Research, Inc. 3 December 2020

Engineers Australia, Transport Australia Society 3 February 2021

TfNSW's TDM Session #3: iMOVE/ ITLS speakers 7 July 2021 . TDM talk for the AITPM group. This is the third talk in our four part TDM series. 

Third online free Bridging Transport Researcher (BTR) conference (5th & 6th August).

Australian Institute of Traffic Planning and Management Ltd. Meeting agenda of 2021 transport modelling knowledge sharing workshop, 17 August 2021. 

AITPM National Conference Plenary session (David Hensher) speakers at the AITPM National Conference 1 on “Impact of COVID on mobility, place-making, shared mobility models or other interesting and innovative solutions to the ’new normal’”. 6 September 2021.

Other material

What might the changing incidence of Working from Home (WFH) tell us about Future Transport and Land Use Agendas - Thinking Outside the Box series

What might the changing incidence of Working from Home (WFH) tell us about Future Transport and Land Use Agendas

Attention: Access to DSM-5 resources is currently experiencing issues and we are working with them on a resolution. Learn more

This page requires JavaScript. Your browser currently has JavaScript turned off.

InPsych 2020 | Vol 42

June/July | Issue 3

Perks and pitfalls of working from home: Will COVID-19 change the future of work?

Heather Ikin MAPS, National Chair, APS College of Organisational Psychologists

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has renewed discussions about the way we work. We are now questioning the way we work, with much popular opinion suggesting remote work is the way forward. So what of the future of work? And what should we as psychologists have to say about it?

In an effort to respond swiftly to the COVID-19 pandemic, Australian organisations have moved as many employees to working from home arrangements as operationally practical. This has provided an unprecedented opportunity to get a taste of what such an arrangement can be like on a large scale, especially for organisations that did not previously permit working from home or did not have the technological capabilities to do so. With social distancing requirements likely to continue for some time, organisations are looking to establish longer term working-from-home arrangements.

Working from home has typically been considered an employment benefit; a privilege to be enjoyed for the purpose of flexibility and managing work-life balance. However, there is little research available to help understand the impacts of imposed working-from-home requirements, particularly where working from home is an involuntary full-time arrangement. What research is available suggests there are also many drawbacks to working from home, particularly brought about by isolation and lack of boundaries between work and home life.

There is a lot we can do to proactively ensure employers are fully informed when making decisions about the way employees work, enabling arrangements that enhance rather than deplete mental health. But from a reactive perspective, we should also consider potential long-term psychological impacts of working from home, particularly for those that have not had the luxury of choice.

Perks of working from home

For some years there has been a growing trend for organisations to offer flexible work arrangements, particularly in the form of working from home options. Flexibility is often promoted as part of the employee value proposition, enabling workers to attend to family and other personal responsibilities, reducing work-family conflict, and increasing quality time spent with children (Troup & Rose, 2012). It also helps employees escape the noise and distractions of open-plan office environments (Sander, 2019).

Research shows that allowing employees to work from home can result in several mutual benefits, including increased productivity, decreased turnover (Bloom et al., 2015) and greater work satisfaction (Dockery & Bawa, 2014). Furthermore, working from home may improve subjective wellbeing through greater autonomy, control over one’s work schedule, better work-life balance, less time spent commuting and reduced fatigue levels (Song & Gao, 2018).

COVID-19 has certainly provided an opportunity for renewed discussion about the importance of the flexibility and options available to employees to manage the way they work, where and when. Past research has shown that most workers that work from home do so on an informal arrangement, i.e. flexibly as it suits their needs (Troup & Rose, 2012). With greater availability of technology to support remote working, ‘blended working’ has become more common, with employees working from a range of locations (predominantly home) as it suits their needs and circumstances. Research suggests that employees with a strong need for autonomy are generally less concerned with the need for relatedness and work structure, and find that blended working is an effective arrangement because of the control and flexibility it affords (Van Yperen, Rietzschel, & De Jonge, 2014).

Working from home is also associated with increased satisfaction in the distribution of childcare responsibilities, particularly for women, suggesting that women may particularly enjoy flexibility in helping them to respond to family needs and responsibilities (Troup & Rose, 2012). Research suggests women who work at home regularly spend less time on work activities and more time on domestic work and childcare, which may indicate that working from home does facilitate greater work-life balance for mothers, enabling labour-force participation (Powell & Craig, 2015).

Nevertheless the question for many employers has been whether working from home makes business sense. Research by Bloom and colleagues (2015) showed that remote employees can work as effectively as office-based employees when resourced in the same way, with a four per cent increase in efficiency observed for call centre workers (more calls answered per minute), with consistent levels of quality.

Further, Rupietta and Beckmann (2016) found that working from home is associated with increased motivation and work effort. This demonstrates that working from home can work, and employers need not feel concerned about the performance and reliability of employees when out of sight. Bloom and colleagues did also note a vast difference in attrition, with turnover dropping by 50 per cent for home-based workers versus the office-based control group. The increased satisfaction that comes with working from home, greater autonomy and job control, and ability to manage work-life balance appear to be positive drivers of retention, resulting in significant cost savings.

Pitfalls of working from home

Despite a general belief that working from home is beneficial for both performance and wellbeing, on balance the evidence-base does not provide overwhelming support for such arrangements. While Bloom and colleagues (2015) confirmed the performance and productivity benefits of working from home, they also determined that it does not work for everyone. After their experiment, more than half of the workers assigned to the work from home group decided to return to the office, largely due to negative impacts of lost social connection. The employees that continued to work from home were those performing very well.

“COVID-19 has certainly provided an opportunity for renewed discussion about the importance of the flexibility and options available to employees to manage the way they work, where and when”

Working from home has been associated with a range of detrimental outcomes, including decreased social interaction, difficulties psychologically detaching from work, tendency to overwork, stress, depression, and anxiety. Working from home can also hinder team effectiveness and creativity, and result in fewer career opportunities (Sander, 2019). Song and Gao (2018) found that working at home is associated with a higher likelihood of experiencing work-related stress and negative affect. A deeper examination of the purported benefits of remote working certainly reveals a gloomier picture.

Working from home may be a ‘necessary evil’ to help cope with increased work demands and long work hours (Dockery & Bawa, 2014), but it may also lead to overworking that otherwise wouldn’t have occurred. Having our work close by at home, enabled by technology, blurs the boundaries between work and home life. According to recent research by Roy Morgan (2020), most Australians who work from home at least some of the time experience greater difficulties switching off than those who don’t work from home.

The European Union conducted research to investigate the impacts of remote work, and found employees who predominantly work from home report being more stressed than those that are office-based (Eurofound and the International Labour Office, 2017). Working from home reduces visibility between employees and managers, and can leave employees feeling pressure to ‘look busy’ and ensure high levels of productivity, which can lead to overworking.

While we all want a sense of work-life balance, we achieve this in different ways. For some, integrating work and home is achievable and works well, for others segmentation is critical. Though working from home is often seen as helpful to managing family demands, bringing the workspace into the home increases the likelihood of work-family and family-work conflict occurring, with the former tending to me more stressful.

A study conducted by Lapierre et al. (2016) demonstrated that involuntarily working from home is associated with an increase in work-family conflict. This effect is more pronounced for workers with low self-efficacy (that is, low belief in one’s ability to successfully juggle both roles). It has been suggested that women may find it most difficult to maintain boundaries between work and family responsibilities, and given that we know that women tend to bear the brunt of household chores and unpaid care, are likely at greater risk of experiencing work-family conflict and the stress that comes along with it (Powell & Craig, 2015).

In contrast, many Australians live alone, and while working remotely, may have very limited opportunities to connect or interact and intellectually engage with others. Research has shown that loneliness is one of the biggest challenges associated with remote working (McCrindle, 2013). A related but distinct issue is isolation, which involves feeling cut off from work and having limited access to the connections, resources and information required to enable job performance. Working from home often sees employees receiving less feedback and recognition, getting less information, experiencing a shift in the way communication occurs, having difficulty tracking co-workers down, not having access to colleagues to bounce ideas around with, and getting less time with managers to discuss work progress (Song & Gao, 2018). Such conditions are likely to ultimately lead to frustration, decreased engagement and satisfaction, and poor wellbeing outcomes.

Finding the balance

Remote working is a double-edged sword. Our current working-from-home arrangements have come about through necessity, and many employees are making the adjustment because they must rather than because they want to. Employers and employees alike have demonstrated resilience and willingness to adapt, but for how long will this flexibility last, what will the future bring, and what will this mean for mental health? Organisational leaders need to take decisive action regarding future plans, but should understand the implications of decisions and balance risk management with meeting both business and employee needs.

While there are clearly wellbeing benefits to be gained from working from home, these are most likely to be derived from situations where employees have full control over when they work from home, can successfully manage the boundaries between work and home life, and have flexibility in work hours. At least for some employees, continued requirements to work from home, and strategies to rotate employees through the workplace due to physical space restrictions, are likely to impact on the mental health of workers. It is our time for psychology to be part of this important conversation.

The author can be contacted at [email protected]

Bloom, N., Liang, J., Roberts, J., & Ying, Z. J. (2015). Does working from home work? Evidence from a Chinese experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130 (1), 165–218.

Dockery, A. M., & Bawa, S. (2014). Is working from home good work or bad work? Evidence from Australian employees. Australian Journal of Labour Economics, 17 (2), 163-190.

Eurofound and the International Labour Office (2017). Working anytime, anywhere: The effects on the world of work. Publications Office of the European Union & the International Labour Office. https://www.ilo.org/global/publications/books/WCMS_544138/lang--en/index.htm

Lapierre, L. M., Van Steenbergen, E. F., Peeters, M. C., & Kluwer, E. S. (2016). Juggling work and family responsibilities when involuntarily working more from home: A multiwave study of financial sales professionals.  Journal of Organizational Behavior ,  37 (6), 804-822.

McCrindle (2013). Working from home: The benefits and the cost . https://2qean3b1jjd1s87812ool5ji-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Working-from-Home_The-Benefits-and-the-Cost_McCrindle-Research.pdf

Powell, A., & Craig, L. (2015). Gender differences in working at home and time use patterns: Evidence from Australia. Work, Employment & Society, 29 (4), 571-589.

Roy Morgan (2020, May 5). Hard to switch off work for many Australians working from home . http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/8401-coronavirus-working-from-home-may-2020-202005050514

Rupietta, K, & Beckmann, M. (2016). Working from home: What is the effect on employees' effort? University of Basel, Centre of Business and Economics (WWZ).

Sander, L. (2019, January 15). It’s not just the isolation: working from home has surprising downsides. The Conversation . https://theconversation.com/its-not-just-the-isolation-working-from-home-has-surprising-downsides-107140

Song, Y., & Gao, J. (2018). Does telework stress employees out? A study on working at home and subjective well-being for wage/salary workers. Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

Troup, C., & Rose, J. (2012). Working from home: Do formal or informal telework arrangements provide better work-family outcomes? Community, Work & Family, 15 (4), 471-486.

Van Yperen, N. W., Rietzschel, E. F., & De Jonge, K. M. M (2014). Blended working: For whom it may (not) work. PLoS One, 17 (9). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102921  

Disclaimer:  Published in InPsych on June 2020. The APS aims to ensure that information published in InPsych is current and accurate at the time of publication. Changes after publication may affect the accuracy of this information. Readers are responsible for ascertaining the currency and completeness of information they rely on, which is particularly important for government initiatives, legislation or best-practice principles which are open to amendment. The information provided in InPsych does not replace obtaining appropriate professional and/or legal advice.

Not a member? Join now

Forgotten Password

Please enter your User ID (APS Membership Number) and last name. A link to reset your password will be emailed to you.

Return to Login

Articles on Working from home

Displaying 1 - 20 of 137 articles.

What a ‘right to disconnect’ from work could look like in the UK

Alan Felstead , Cardiff University and Jane Parry , University of Southampton

Working from home can make us healthier and happier. Employers benefit too. Here’s the evidence if you need any convincing

Ty Ferguson , University of South Australia ; Carol Maher , University of South Australia , and Rachel Curtis , University of South Australia

Is linking time in the office to career success the best way to get us back to work?

John L. Hopkins , Swinburne University of Technology

Working from home since COVID-19 ? Cabin fever could be the next challenge

Farzam Sepanta , Carleton University ; Laura Arpan , University at Buffalo , and Liam O'Brien , Carleton University

What’s it worth to work from home? For some, it’s as much as one-third of their wage

Lynette Washington , University of South Australia and Akshay Vij , University of South Australia

Plants and bookcases in, living rooms and blank walls out: how your Zoom background can make you seem more competent

Paddy Ross , Durham University

Rural communities are being left behind because of poor digital infrastructure, research shows

Aloysius Igboekwu , Aberystwyth University ; Maria Plotnikova , Aberystwyth University , and Sarah Lindop , Aberystwyth University

Stress levels in Australian workplaces among the highest as we battle constant interruptions and irritating colleagues

Libby (Elizabeth) Sander , Bond University

This desk is mine! How noisy offices can make us more territorial

Oluremi (Remi) Ayoko , The University of Queensland

Remote work marks the path to a greener future

Patryk Makowski , Technological University of the Shannon

Can employers stop you working from home? Here’s what the law says

Giuseppe Carabetta , University of Technology Sydney

Working from home has worked for people with disability. The back-to - the-office push could wind back gains

Sue Williamson , UNSW Sydney ; Helen Taylor , Australian Defence Force Academy , and Vindhya Weeratunga , Australian Defence Force Academy

The shift to working from home will be difficult to reverse

Andrew Parkin , University of Toronto and Justin Savoie , University of Toronto

Working from home immoral? A lesson in ethics, and history, for Elon Musk

Dale Tweedie , Macquarie University

Our bedrooms aren’t refuges anymore – working, studying and eating in them is bad for our sleep

Christian Tietz , UNSW Sydney and Demet Dincer , UNSW Sydney

Remote working improves the lives of female managers - but at a cost

Willie Tafadzwa Chinyamurindi , University of Fort Hare

Digital nomad visas offer the best of two worlds: what you should know before you go

HILDA finds working from home boosts women’s job satisfaction more than men’s, and that has a downside

Mark Wooden , The University of Melbourne ; Esperanza Vera-Toscano , The University of Melbourne , and Inga Lass , The University of Melbourne

Morning or evening type? Choice of hours is the next big thing in workplace flexibility

Stefan Volk , University of Sydney

Burnout and isolation: Why employees and managers can’t ignore the social and mental health impact of working from home

Kiffer George Card , Simon Fraser University

Related Topics

• Coronavirus
• Mental health
• Remote work
• Remote working
• Telecommuting
• Work-life balance

Director of STEM

Community member - Training Delivery and Development Committee (Volunteer part-time)

Chief Executive Officer

Finance Business Partner

Head of Evidence to Action

Top contributors.

MBA Director & Assistant Professor of Organisational Behaviour, Bond Business School, Bond University

Management Professor, McGill University

Associate Professor of Work and Employment, University of Southampton

PhD Candidate in Anthropology, UCL

Senior Lecturer, Organisational Behaviour & Management, University of South Australia

Associate Professor of Management, Swinburne University of Technology

Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Muscle Physiology, Karolinska Institutet

Lecturer in Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Organisational Design, RMIT University

Associate Professor, Ethics and Labour Relations, University of Regina

Assistant professor in leadership, IÉSEG School of Management

Senior Lecturer, Employment Relations, Griffith University

Laurie Carmichael Distinguished Research Fellow at the Centre for Future Work, and Professor Emeritus, Griffith Business School, Griffith University

Associate Professor HRM/IR, CQUniversity Australia

Professor in Social & Health Psychology, Durham University

Associate Professor, Human Resource Management, UNSW Canberra, UNSW Sydney

• X (Twitter)
• Unfollow topic Follow topic

Working from home: research paper

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to large-scale and rapid changes in work practices, including a dramatic increase in the number of people working from home. The pandemic has demonstrated that many jobs can be effectively done from home, and it appears likely that the number of people working from home will remain much higher than it was previously.

This report considers how decisions about location of work will be made as firms and workers continue to learn how to organise their work, and what an increase in working from home might mean for workplace regulation, urban centres and wellbeing more generally.

Add to favourites

• The Missing Link Repository

Distanced revolution: employee experiences of working from home during the pandemic

Working during the pandemic: the future of work is hybrid

Working during the pandemic: from resistance to revolution?

The age of remote work: how COVID-19 transformed organizations in real time

Zooming into better work-life balance? Gender and equity insights from New Zealanders’ experiences with working from home

Hybrid working: from ‘the new normal’ to ‘business as usual’

A best practice guide for flexible and work-from-home arrangements

Hybrid working: the story so far .. preview.

Working from home, or living at work?

Free to be flexible the politics of new ways of working.

• Browse this collection
• Acknowledgements
• Toggle view

Working from home : research paper / Productivity Commission

9781740377294 (ISBN)

Related Documentation

http://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-2992871348

Australia. Productivity Commission, author. (2021). Working from home : research paper Retrieved August 30, 2024, from http://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-2992871348

Australia. Productivity Commission, author. Working from home : research paper [Canberra, Australian Capital Territory]: Australian Government, Productivity Commission, 2021. Web. 30 August 2024 < http://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-2992871348 >

Australia. Productivity Commission, author. 2021, Working from home : research paper Australian Government, Productivity Commission, [Canberra, Australian Capital Territory] viewed 30 August 2024 http://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-2992871348

{{Citation   | author1=Australia. Productivity Commission, author.   | title= Working from home : research paper   | year=2021   | section=1 online resource (v, 110 pages) : colour maps, colour charts.   | isbn=9781740377294   | location=[Canberra, Australian Capital Territory]   | publisher=Australian Government, Productivity Commission   | url= http://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-2992871348   | id= nla.obj-2992871348   | access-date=30 August 2024   | via=Trove }}

Citations are automatically generated and may require some modification to conform to exact standards.

Download the whole document and cover image as a ZIP file.

You can order a copy of this work from Copies Direct.

Copies Direct supplies reproductions of collection material for a fee. This service is offered by the National Library of Australia

Share on Twitter

Share on Facebook

What can I do with this?

In Copyright

You may order a copy or use the online copy for research or study; for other uses Contact us .

Copyright status was determined using the following information:

Copyright status may not be correct if data in the record is incomplete or inaccurate. Other access conditions may also apply.

For more information please see: Copyright in library collections .

• Strategy & Advice
• Keynote Speakers
• Not for Profit
• Search for:

Working from home: The benefits and the cost

Working from home is a key employment alternative for growing businesses offering teleworking solutions, emerging entrepreneurs establishing a customer base, and small business owners seeking to minimise administrative overheads.

What are the key advantages and setbacks involved with working from home? For those seeking to take the plunge or weighing up the options, McCrindle Research has recently analysed the lives of 250 ‘work-from-home’ workers, weighing up the pros and cons of the home office setting.

Click here to download the full research summary.

Key enjoyment factors: Flexibility and work-life balance

The most significant advantage in working from home for respondents was having the flexibility to juggle other things, reported by almost half (45%) or respondents. Another quarter of respondents felt that in working from home, they were able to create a work-life balance to enjoy life more. 1 in 7 respondents (15%) enjoyed being able to work undistracted from the interruptions present in an office-based working environment, and a further 1 in 8 (12%) felt that the most significant advantage in working from home was being able to take care of their children.

Other reasons that people chose to work from home included decreased commuter stress, lower travel costs, being able to work in solitude, and being their own boss.

“While those who work from home most love the flexibility and work-life balance that it allows,” says social researcher Mark McCrindle, “For 15%, the biggest benefit was being able to work undistracted. Employers should note that while modern workplaces facilitate social interaction, project teams and meetings, the need to work solo and uninterrupted is keenly felt.

Key advantages explored: Flexibility, decreased commuter stress, increased time with family

When explaining these significant advantages and others in working at home instead of an office based environment, participants elaborated on a number of key themes:

Flexibility in working hours was seen as a key advantage: “The ability to work all hours and unusual hours, doing other non-work things in the home.” “The flexibility to work when I can, choosing when I work.”

Having less stress due to commuting to and from work was mentioned numerously: “Less time spent travelling means I have more time to devote to chores and exercise.” “I don’t have to deal with traffic congestion and save travel time.”

Spending time with family was seen by others as a great positive: “I can work around family and other commitments, and am able to take more part in raising my son.” “I work when I want and have more time with my family, and I can eat lunch at home while seeing my wife and kids.”

The need for social interaction while working from home

When asked to comment on the difference in social interaction between working in an office-based working environment and working from home, 3 out of 5 respondents (58%) noted that they feel some need for increased social interaction.

While working from home does create the difficulties of social isolation for almost 3 in 5 home-workers, 42% never feel this deficiency: “Even when discussing this lack of interaction it was more in a professional, collegiate sense than a purely social sense. This research highlights that the best workplaces are those that provide the opportunities for collaboration and professional interactions, while ensuring that private work spaces are provided. Employers need to think like an extrovert and an introvert in their workspace provisions,” says McCrindle.

Greatest disadvantages: Isolation, distractions and work-life balance

Respondents were asked to name the most significant disadvantage they face in working from home through an open-ended response.

The biggest negative that workers faced in working from home, reported by 22% of respondents, was professional and social isolation: “Working on my own and only seeing friends and workmates occasionally.” “Not having other employees to sound ideas and brainstorm with.” “I am isolated and lonely at times, and do less networking.”

Maintaining a work-life balance was the most significant difficulty according to 15% of respondents: “[There are] no boundaries between home and work life.” “[I] can’t relax because I know there is work to do. It’s hard to stop.” “Being on call – people seem to think you are available at any time, including your days off.”

Household distractions were another common thread, reported as most significant by 14% of respondents: “[I am] too easily distracted by household tasks. ” “[I find it difficult] to get into the mindset of ‘working’ at home without distractions. ” “The environment is not conducive to working.”

Other common issues included the access and cost of necessary resources (8%) such as documents and technology, the perception that work from home is not actually work (7%), self-motivation (6%), lower income received (4%) when working from home, and poor communication between home and the office (3%). “I am unable to access other files and lack access to computer systems.” “The expense of technology and using more utilities (electricity, internet cost, gas for heating, water).” “I am trying to justify that I am actually working; the perception by others is that I’m not.” “[I lack the] motivation to start each day that I work.” “My income is lower now that I’m working at home.” “I’m not finding out what has happened during work.”

Still others (1 in 5, 21%) reported no negative experiences with working from home: “I have really enjoyed [working from home] and think it is the way of the future.” “I can’t do it often enough – I have found no negatives.” “There has been no negative for me personally working from home. If anything, I am far more productive due to less distraction.”

Unexpected costs: office supplies, electricity bills, and household consumption

While over half of respondents (52%) who had worked from home had never incurred any unexpected costs in doing so, the other half of respondents had. 1 in 3 (30%) respondents spent more on office supplies and technology than working in an office environment, 1 in 4 (25%) had incurred higher electricity bills, and 1 in 6 (16%) noticed an increase in food consumption and home goods.

Workplace health and safety issues

While a number of respondents (75%) did not report encountering any workplace health and safety (WHS) issues in working in a home office environment, others were faced with unique concerns:

The main concern respondents faced was with lack of ergonomics in their home office set-up: “I generally don’t sit at a proper desk so, while not currently causing any problems, my posture may cause issues in the future.” “I don’t have proper desk and chair height, and I stay at the desk too long with bad posture.”

Others felt the weight of responsibility when it came to WHS issues: “I am totally responsible for the health and safety standards and issues in my home, even when someone comes uninvited.”

Still others reported not taking appropriate breaks as an issue: “I don’t take appropriate breaks and I lack sleep, working longer than I would in an office.”

The lack of space and unsuitability of the home working environment were other issues: “I don’t have enough space to work properly.” “The electrics in the house are not always the best set-up because I don’t have an office, and the kids can get under the desk playing with cables.”

“With teleworking a growing phenomenon and working from home a key tool of workplace retention, managers not only need to provide for it, but also effectively manage it,” says McCrindle. “This research reveals challenges along with the benefits, with almost half of Australians who work from home incurring some increased costs, and one in four experiencing some workplace health and safety issues.”

For media commentary contact us on 02 8824 3422 or at  [email protected]

Trends of 2022 Infographic

Download the latest infographic with the trends of 2022

Building healthy intergenerational teams

The workforce is set to undergo significant changes over the next decade. By 2034, Gen…

Rebel Girls

The challenge Rebel Girls is a leading global brand for Generation Alpha girls with a…

Why culture, not goals, set high performing teams apart

The health of an organisation’s culture influences and determines the health of the organisation. It…

• Today's Paper
• Markets Data
• Work & Careers
• Working from home

Less productive, more depressed: the problem with working from home

Subscribe to gift this article

Gift 5 articles to anyone you choose each month when you subscribe.

Already a subscriber? Login

Working from home last year made the average worker less productive and more anxious, depressed and lonely, according to academic research that also found these impacts were lessened by good managers.

The study, by researchers from the Australian National University, University of Newcastle and Macquarie University, broadly found that people were less productive the more they worked from home.

Introducing your Newsfeed

Follow the topics, people and companies that matter to you.

• Workplace culture
• Productivity
• Young Executives Summit

Latest In Workplace

Fetching latest articles

Most Viewed In Work and careers

Work from home research Jobs in All Australia

Perform a job search.

• Wonthaggi VIC 3995
• Traralgon VIC 3844
• All Perth WA
• Bairnsdale VIC 3875
• All Sydney NSW
• All Melbourne VIC

Related searches

Research and Evaluation Support Officer

This is a Part time job

• Attractive remuneration and salary packaging
• Contribute to a positive culture, with a shared vision and core values
• Flexible working arrangements with a mix of working from the office and home

Market Research Interviewer from any location

This is a Casual/Vacation job

Clinical Trial Recruitment Specialist

This is a Full time job

• Be the reason Clinical Trials are successful through linking patients to trials
• Hybrid work model - 3 days work from home + 2 day office in City fringe
• Small local team which is an extension of an Aussie & Kiwi workforce

Education Researcher

This is a Contract/Temp job

• Support remote and disadvantaged schools
• Salary packaging benefits
• Opportunity to work from home

Search Analyst - WFH - No Experience Required

• Work From Home
• Fully flexible schedule

Administrative and Research Assistant

• Enjoy work/life balance & a collaborative team culture
• Join a high-performing team in a highly collaborative environment
• Access to dedicated learning and development framework and programs

Product Specialist and Territory Manager (Remote)

Project manager to research associate (qilt), work from home - online data analyst (english speakers).

Research Officer, Aboriginal Identified role

Fundraising support and database specialist, redress and research (family history) assistant.

Projects Officer, Regulatory Experience Engagement

• Hybrid work arrangement - balance of home and office days.
• Friendly and supportive team - you and your work is valued.
• Protecting the public - what a great reason to come to work!

Research Data Officer

• Flexible Working Hours Arrangement
• Part-time Working from Home
• Generous Salary Packaging (Up to $15,900)

Project Officer

• Based in UniSA Justice & Society at the Magill Campus
• Full-time, fixed term contract from 18 November 2024 until 6 March 2026
• A space where research meets education

Policy and Project Officer, Accreditation

• Full time, ongoing position, commencing immediately
• Collaborative, supportive team environment
• Join an organisation where your work matters

Receive new jobs for this search by email

Select a job.

• Health, Pharma & Medtech ›
• State of Health

Industry-specific and extensively researched technical data (partially from exclusive partnerships). A paid subscription is required for full access.

• Share of mental health issues faced while working from home Australia 2020, by gender

Breakdown of mental health issues faced by workers while working from home in Australia as of 2020, by gender

To access all Premium Statistics, you need a paid Statista Account

• Immediate access to all statistics
• Incl. source references
• Download as PDF, XLS, PNG and PPT

Additional Information

Show sources information Show publisher information Use Ask Statista Research Service

November 2020

10,100 respondents

18-64 years

among Australian workers

Other statistics on the topic Work from home and remote work in Australia

IT Services

• Global telework state and trend COVID 2020-2022
• Benefits to working remotely worldwide 2022
• Poll on the state of remote work worldwide 2022
• Average working days and WFH days in Australia in 2023, by state

To download this statistic in XLS format you need a Statista Account

To download this statistic in PNG format you need a Statista Account

To download this statistic in PDF format you need a Statista Account

To download this statistic in PPT format you need a Statista Account

As a Premium user you get access to the detailed source references and background information about this statistic.

As a Premium user you get access to background information and details about the release of this statistic.

As soon as this statistic is updated, you will immediately be notified via e-mail.

… to incorporate the statistic into your presentation at any time.

You need at least a Starter Account to use this feature.

• Immediate access to statistics, forecasts & reports
• Usage and publication rights
• Download in various formats

* For commercial use only

Basic Account

• Free Statistics

Starter Account

• Premium Statistics

The statistic on this page is a Premium Statistic and is included in this account.

Professional Account

• Free + Premium Statistics
• Market Insights

1 All prices do not include sales tax. The account requires an annual contract and will renew after one year to the regular list price.

Statistics on " Work from home and remote work in Australia "

• Company policy on remote work worldwide 2020-2021
• Office employees' preferences on hybrid and remote work worldwide 2022, by generation
• Technologies used to enable secure work from home worldwide 2022
• Ways in which tech company leadership supported remote working worldwide 2021
• Average days spent working from home in Australia 2023, by occupation
• Main reason Australians worked from home from August 2015 to August 2021
• Share of Australian employees who would utilize remote work option 2022 by frequency
• Long term expectations of teleworking arrangements Australia 2022, by employment size
• Flexible work practices offered by organizations in Australia 2022
• Leading reasons why Australian adults have returned to working in the office 2022
• Leading pressures for employees to return to office in Australia 2022
• Share of Australian adult employees who would quit if forced to work in office 2022
• Share of Australian employees likely to consider permanent remote work 2022
• Worker-employer agreement on WFH preferences Australia 2021-2022, by agreement level
• Factors influencing teleworking arrangements Australia 2022, by employment size
• Flexible work options planned for future by organizations in Australia 2022
• Employee views of key reasons their employer encourages remote work Australia 2022
• Work methods considered best for reducing cost of living Australia 2022 by work mode
• Support employees think employers could provide to improve remote work Australia 2022
• General state of wellbeing of workers in Australia in 2022, by working arrangement
• Frequency of burnout at work by workers in Australia in 2022, by working arrangement
• Respondents' tech reliability while working from home during COVID-19 Australia 2020
• Share of employees concerned about returning to the office Australia 2022 by reason
• Change in job situation due to COVID-19 in Australia 2022
• Monthly change in job situation due to COVID-19 in Australia February-September 2022
• Positive experiences of working from home during COVID-19 pandemic in Australia 2020
• Negative experiences of working from home during COVID-19 pandemic in Australia 2020
• Share of workers with mental health issue working from home Australia 2020, by gender

Other statistics that may interest you Work from home and remote work in Australia

Global overview

• Premium Statistic Company policy on remote work worldwide 2020-2021
• Premium Statistic Poll on the state of remote work worldwide 2022
• Basic Statistic Benefits to working remotely worldwide 2022
• Basic Statistic Global telework state and trend COVID 2020-2022
• Premium Statistic Office employees' preferences on hybrid and remote work worldwide 2022, by generation
• Premium Statistic Technologies used to enable secure work from home worldwide 2022
• Premium Statistic Ways in which tech company leadership supported remote working worldwide 2021

Australian overview

• Premium Statistic Average days spent working from home in Australia 2023, by occupation
• Premium Statistic Average working days and WFH days in Australia in 2023, by state
• Basic Statistic Main reason Australians worked from home from August 2015 to August 2021
• Premium Statistic Share of Australian employees who would utilize remote work option 2022 by frequency
• Basic Statistic Long term expectations of teleworking arrangements Australia 2022, by employment size
• Premium Statistic Flexible work practices offered by organizations in Australia 2022

Flexible working arrangements

• Premium Statistic Leading reasons why Australian adults have returned to working in the office 2022
• Premium Statistic Leading pressures for employees to return to office in Australia 2022
• Premium Statistic Share of Australian adult employees who would quit if forced to work in office 2022
• Premium Statistic Share of Australian employees likely to consider permanent remote work 2022
• Premium Statistic Worker-employer agreement on WFH preferences Australia 2021-2022, by agreement level
• Basic Statistic Factors influencing teleworking arrangements Australia 2022, by employment size
• Premium Statistic Flexible work options planned for future by organizations in Australia 2022

Employee perspectives

• Premium Statistic Employee views of key reasons their employer encourages remote work Australia 2022
• Premium Statistic Work methods considered best for reducing cost of living Australia 2022 by work mode
• Premium Statistic Support employees think employers could provide to improve remote work Australia 2022
• Premium Statistic General state of wellbeing of workers in Australia in 2022, by working arrangement
• Premium Statistic Frequency of burnout at work by workers in Australia in 2022, by working arrangement
• Premium Statistic Respondents' tech reliability while working from home during COVID-19 Australia 2020

COVID-19 and remote work

• Premium Statistic Share of employees concerned about returning to the office Australia 2022 by reason
• Basic Statistic Change in job situation due to COVID-19 in Australia 2022
• Basic Statistic Monthly change in job situation due to COVID-19 in Australia February-September 2022
• Premium Statistic Positive experiences of working from home during COVID-19 pandemic in Australia 2020
• Premium Statistic Negative experiences of working from home during COVID-19 pandemic in Australia 2020
• Premium Statistic Share of workers with mental health issue working from home Australia 2020, by gender
• Premium Statistic Share of mental health issues faced while working from home Australia 2020, by gender

Further related statistics

• Premium Statistic Feelings of working situation under COVID-19 in Denmark 2020
• Premium Statistic Opinion on challenges of working from home in Hong Kong 2020
• Premium Statistic Attitude towards working from home after coronavirus crisis in Hong Kong 2020
• Premium Statistic Working situation during COVID-19 in Denmark 2020
• Premium Statistic Opinion on benefits of working from home in Hong Kong 2020
• Basic Statistic Opinions on working from home due to the coronavirus in Denmark 2020
• Basic Statistic Challenges with working from home during the coronavirus pandemic in Denmark 2020
• Basic Statistic Professional situation of French people confined following the COVID-19 epidemic 2020
• Basic Statistic Share of people working from home due to the coronavirus in Denmark 2020, by region
• Basic Statistic Work from home policy of companies following COVID-19 in GCC 2020
• Premium Statistic Plans for companies transitioning to on-site work U.S. 2020
• Premium Statistic Share of companies supporting work from home South Korea 2020, by company size
• Basic Statistic COVID-19: economic recovery expectations worldwide 2020
• Basic Statistic Share of population who think they are infected by COVID-19 in Norway 2020
• Basic Statistic Opinions on how long the coronavirus epidemic will last in Norway 2020, by gender
• Basic Statistic NO2 air pollution fall during the coronavirus crisis Spain March 2020
• Premium Statistic Financial actions considered by CFOs as a result of COVID-19 U.S. 2020
• Basic Statistic NO2 air pollution variation during the coronavirus crisis Spain March 2020

Further Content: You might find this interesting as well

• Feelings of working situation under COVID-19 in Denmark 2020
• Opinion on challenges of working from home in Hong Kong 2020
• Attitude towards working from home after coronavirus crisis in Hong Kong 2020
• Working situation during COVID-19 in Denmark 2020
• Opinion on benefits of working from home in Hong Kong 2020
• Opinions on working from home due to the coronavirus in Denmark 2020
• Challenges with working from home during the coronavirus pandemic in Denmark 2020
• Professional situation of French people confined following the COVID-19 epidemic 2020
• Share of people working from home due to the coronavirus in Denmark 2020, by region
• Work from home policy of companies following COVID-19 in GCC 2020
• Plans for companies transitioning to on-site work U.S. 2020
• Share of companies supporting work from home South Korea 2020, by company size
• COVID-19: economic recovery expectations worldwide 2020
• Share of population who think they are infected by COVID-19 in Norway 2020
• Opinions on how long the coronavirus epidemic will last in Norway 2020, by gender
• NO2 air pollution fall during the coronavirus crisis Spain March 2020
• Financial actions considered by CFOs as a result of COVID-19 U.S. 2020
• NO2 air pollution variation during the coronavirus crisis Spain March 2020

Cookies on GOV.UK

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Future of work in 2035: Horizon Scanning and Scenarios, Australian government

This case study, focusing on the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Australia, illustrates how the organisation used the Horizon Scanning and Scenarios tools from the Futures Toolkit.

Future of work in 2035: Horizon Scanning and Scenarios

This 2015 study used futures tools to develop a set of megatrends and scenarios to 2035, looking at the future of work in Australia. The report has inspired policy and strategic initiatives to support the development of a digitally-enabled workforce in Australia.

Read other futures tools and methods case studies .

Updates to this page

Sign up for emails or print this page, related content, is this page useful.

• Yes this page is useful
• No this page is not useful

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.

To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. Please fill in this survey (opens in a new tab) .

Medical research suffers from sex and gender bias. New standards hope to change that

ABC Health & Wellbeing

Topic: Women's Health

Considering sex and gender in health and medical research can improve health outcomes and reduce inequities. ( Getty Images: Tetra Images )

Evidence suggests there are clinically significant sex and gender differences across a broad range of diseases but these often aren't factored into research and treatment.

Australia's largest health and medical research funding body has recommended sex, gender, variations of sex characteristics and sexual orientation be routinely considered in health and medical research.

What's next?

Experts say the new recommendations need to be incorporated into research funding applications to ensure research is more inclusive and equitable.

When Cheryl Carcel was in medical school, little attention was paid to the role that sex and gender can play in the detection and treatment of many major diseases.

"We weren't taught that men and women might present differently or have different outcomes."

Associate Professor Cheryl Carcel is a neurologist and head of the Brain Health Program at The George Institute for Global Health. ( Supplied: The George Institute of Global Health )

But Dr Carcel, a neurologist and head of the Brain Health Program at The George Institute for Global Health, said in her own field — and many other areas of medicine — such differences were stark.

Last year, she co-authored a study investigating the medical care that people with stroke receive before arriving at hospital in NSW , and found women were less likely to have their stroke recognised compared to men.

"[Women] were thought to be having a migraine, high blood pressure, or some type of headache or nausea," she said.

"And we think one of the reasons is because some of the symptoms of women are not recognised as being stroke."

Stroke isn't unique in this regard: women are less likely to be diagnosed and appropriately treated if they suffer a serious heart attack , less likely to have chronic pain acknowledged and treated , and more likely to be misdiagnosed or discharged during a serious medical event .

Bronwyn Graham, director of the Centre for Sex and Gender Equity in Health and Medicine, said part of the reason was because women had been under-represented in medical research for decades.

"Our models of how diseases emerge in humans, the ways they look and the ways they can be treated, are based on the male body, and those findings don't always translate," said Professor Graham.

"The consequence is that we see poorer health outcomes and treatments that are not evidence-based for certain sex and gender groups."

Major funding body calls for attention on sex and gender

In early August, the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) released a statement encouraging sex, gender, variations of sex characteristics and sexual orientation to be routinely considered in health and medical research.

The NHMRC is the largest public funder of health and medical research in Australia and distributes hundreds of millions of dollars in research grants every year, including through the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF).

"What it means in practice is that researchers should consider these variables at all stages of the research process," said Professor Graham, who is also a professor of psychology at the University of New South Wales.

"So that's from the very start (what questions should we be asking?)  through to the conduct of the study (do we have equal representation of sexes and genders?) to how data are analysed and reported … and then how things get translated into healthcare practices."

Gender bias in medicine means conditions that primarily affect women and other under-represented groups have been understudied and are therefore less understood. ( Getty Images: dragana991 )

A growing body of evidence suggests there are clinically significant sex and gender differences across a broad range of diseases , from susceptibility and screening to risk factors, treatment and prognosis.

The aim of the statement, according to the NHMRC, is to improve health outcomes and ensure medical research produces evidence that is relevant to all people.

It encourages researchers to increase the representation and involvement of historically under-represented groups, including women, trans and non-binary people, people with variations of sex characteristics (intersex) and diverse sexual orientations.

A recent study showed while women were over-represented in research perceived to 'female-patient' dominated, they were they were significantly under-represented in other areas, such as cardiology.

Meanwhile, intersex and non-binary people were found to be severely under-represented across all areas of medical research.

"Women are often the people who are missing out here — women, intersex, trans and non-binary folk," Professor Graham said.

"We see in practice, for example, that women are 50 per cent more likely to have adverse reactions to drugs and vaccines than men; that pain medications don't work as effectively in women as they do in men; and that women are more likely to develop chronic pain conditions and addictions to pain medication."

Professor Bronwyn Graham is director of the Centre for Sex and Gender Equity in Health and Medicine, a collaboration of The George Institute, Deakin University and the Australian Human Rights Institute at UNSW. ( Supplied: The George Institute of Global Health )

In Australia, research shows women disproportionately experience delayed diagnosis, overprescribing, and a failure to have their symptoms properly investigated .

Professor Graham said that failing to consider biological and physical characteristics in research, as well as gender roles and behaviours, also meant that men miss out.

"If we're looking at things in a sex- and gender-blind fashion, we're also not thinking about what are the unique things about men that we need to pay attention to that might actually impact the prognosis of an illness … and also response to treatment."

Australia lags behind on sex and gender equity

Last year, a study co-authored by Dr Carcel found just 30 per cent of health and medical research publications in Australia analysed their findings by sex and/or gender.

"The NHMRC statement is groundbreaking for Australia," she said.

"It's not meant to increase the pool of researchers who focus on these variables, but is for all researchers applying for NHMRC and MRFF grants."

Historically, the tendency to conduct scientific research on men and generalise the findings, including to women, has been driven largely by concerns over potential harm to the female reproductive system.

Martha Hickey, a professor of obstetrics and gynaecology at the University of Melbourne, said the exclusion of women was also a product of the misguided belief that female hormonal fluctuations may affect the reliability of study results.

"There were a number of false assumptions made at different levels," said Professor Hickey, an NHMRC Leadership Fellow.

"I think all of us have been surprised by how far down this goes. It wasn't just about [research on] people, it was also animals, and even cell-based research." 

Professor Hickey, who contributed to the development of the new NHMRC statement, said when it came to recognising sex and gender differences, Australia lagged behind Europe and North America.

"The Americans have been doing this for more than 20 years, by which I mean stating that there needs to be equal numbers of males and females and other important variable groups taken into consideration," she said.

"I think we've all learnt that research is better if it's inclusive, and it's more likely to be taken up."

Research grants should reflect new recommendations, experts say

While Professor Graham described the statement as "an incredibly positive step", she expressed concern that the new recommendations were not yet "written into policy".

"There is nowhere in the grant application process where researchers are required to indicate how they have taken sex, gender, variations of sex characteristics and sexual orientation into account."

Traditionally, researchers have worked with male lab animals and primarily used men in clinical trials. ( Getty Images: SolStock )

In some circumstances, having equal gender representation or analysing data by sex may not be necessary, but she said researchers should still have clear reasoning as to why.

"They should still need to justify the sample: how is it actually representative? Is the research being conducted in the population that stands to benefit from this research?"

Dr Carcel agreed, and said the statement should be followed up with an implementation and evaluation plan requiring sex and gender to be addressed in grant applications where appropriate.

A spokesperson for the NHMRC said researchers and their institutions were being "encouraged to reflect on the statement and start doing what they can now", but no formal requirement was in place.

"The next phase of work will include consideration of how to incorporate the statement in granting processes," the spokesperson said.

Improving knowledge and healthcare requires sector-wide change

In addition to funding bodies, Dr Carcel stressed that universities, medical research institutes, and health and medical journals had a significant role to play in improving sex and gender equity.

"[Journal editors] act as gatekeepers of bad science, and bad science is what we get if we don't include sex and gender into our research."

Professor Graham agreed: "The places in which we practise research have a huge amount of control over our code of conduct. If [universities and medical research institutes] implement their own policies, that is a further support to ensure things like the NHMRC statement can gain momentum."

In 2023, the NHMRC introduced measures to ensure an equal number of men and women were awarded senior investigator grants , which Professor Hickey said would also help to "change the nature of research".

She added that there had been a major "feminisation" of the medical workforce and that awareness of sex and gender differences was "much more apparent" than in the past, but that improvements in knowledge wouldn't solve the problem alone.

"The bias isn't only around clinicians not understanding how women may present, it also appears to be how doctors and other health personnel respond to them," she said.

In a recent survey of almost 3,000 Australian women, two in three reported health care-related bias and discrimination , with many women feeling dismissed and disbelieved.

"We've got a lot to learn," Professor Hickey said.

Health in your inbox

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Working from home in Australia in 2020: Positives, negatives and the potential for future benefits to transport and society

The year 2020 has been marked by the most extraordinary event we have witnessed since World War II. While other health threats and geographical disasters have occurred, none have been on the global scale of COVID-19. Although many countries have experienced more than one wave of the pandemic throughout 2020, Australia has been largely able to contain the impact of the virus. While there are many reasons for this, a key component of reducing transmission has been restrictions on movement, and the widespread adoption of working from home (WFH) by those who can. In describing the experience Australian’s have had with working from home across 2020, via three waves of data collection, we find that WFH become a positive unintended consequence in contributing to the future management of the transport network, especially in larger metropolitan areas. Evidence suggests that support for WFH will be continuing in the form of a hybrid work model with more flexible working times and locations, linked to largely positive experiences of WFH during 2020, an improved wellbeing of employees, and no loss of productivity to the economy. We highlight potential future benefits of WFH to society, including significant implications for congestion and crowding, concluding that WFH is a formidable transport policy lever that must become embedded in the psyche of transport planners and decision makers so that we can gain some benefit from the pandemic.

1. Introduction

The COVID-19 global pandemic has brought sweeping disruption to travel and activity on a global scale. At the time of writing (early January 2021), there have been more than 80 million confirmed cases, and over 1.8 million deaths attributable to the disease ( OWD, 2021 ). In terms of global movements, in May 2020 air passenger travel fell by 91% relative to the same time last year and is not expected to return to pre-COVID-19 levels until 2024 ( IATA, 2020 ). Even now in Australia, international borders remain closed. Cities also witnessed similar seismic shifts in transit as activities were curtailed and in many instances the home became the main place of work.

It is important to note that Australia has had a markedly different experience with COVID-19 on a global scale. For example, total deaths per million are estimated at 57 in Australia compared to: 2,028 in the United Kingdom; 2,152 in the United States; 1,125 in Germany; 745 in Canada; and 143 in Japan ( OWD, 2021 ). There are structural advantages facilitating the relative success of supressing COVID-19, such as not having to share borders with other countries, and a manageable number of state governments working largely in unison via a specially formed National Cabinet 1 ; but decisive and effective policy making has been equally important. For such policy to work, there has been the need for strong public–private collaboration: collaboration that is not only transferable and repeatable in other economies, but collaboration that will also likely mean that the trajectory of impacts due to COVID-19 will continue to differ in Australia as compared to other economies.

A key component of the policy response has been the requirement to work from home (WFH), which lasted for most of the year. In Victoria it was November 30, 2020 when office workers were able to return to the workplace, albeit with a limit of 25% of staff being allowed onsite, and in New South Wales it was only on December 14, 2020, when the public health order requiring employers to allow employees to work from home (where it is reasonably practicable to do so) was fully repealed. The upshot of these measures is a reduction in time spent at the workplace ( Fig. 1 ).

Time Spent at Workplace (Google Mobility Data).

In understanding the experiences with, and future impacts of, working from home, this paper is structured as follows. We begin with a brief overview of some of the literature on telecommuting and its links to travel. In Section 3 we introduce the ongoing waves of data collection and summarise the composition of each of the three initial waves of data; in Section 4 we examine nine different aspects of the WFH experience in Australia; and in Section 5 we draw insight from the analysis and summarise what the experiences might mean moving forward, especially for the transport network and commuter activity. In Section 6 we in turn discuss what future research is required and what might be next for policy and planning with regards to WFH and commuting. Finally, in Section 7 we provide concluding remarks. This paper builds on the contributions of Beck and Hensher (2020a,b) where the focus was on the early days under restriction (Wave 1) and under easing of restrictions (Wave 2), by now also including a time point where many freedoms had returned to individuals but WFH home remained a defining feature (Wave 3).

2. Telecommuting and transportation

From a transportation perspective, working from home represents a long-discussed policy lever for reducing congestion (e.g., Nilles et al., 1977 ). Several earlier studies focussed on the role of telecommuting in the white-collar sector ( Salomon and Salomon, 1984 ) and the challenges that this type of work might engender such as lack of social interaction, inability to separate home from work, and lack of visibility for advancement ( Salomon, 1986 , Hall, 1989 , Mokhtarian, 1991 ), along with potential benefits such as greater flexibility in time management ( Nilles, 1988 , Olszewski and Mokhtarian, 1994 ). Research has also explored the societal benefits that might accrue with increased working from home, including improved traffic flows ( Kitamura et al., 1990 , Maynard, 1994 ) and reductions to energy consumption ( Mokhtarian, 1991 ) and air pollution and CO 2 emissions ( Nilles, 1988 ) 2 . Many forms of telecommuting have been explored; working at different times of the day, from different locations, changes to the frequency or proportion of work time and duration, and type of employment ( Mokhtarian et al., 2005 , Pratt, 2000 ), noting that home-based businesses and overtime work should not be considered telecommuting due to the small impact such behaviour would have on commuting ( Mokhtarian, 1991 ).

Some studies have shown the potential for significant benefits related to telecommuting. For example, the potential for time savings of up to 44 h per year for the telecommuter ( Lari, 2012 ), and reductions of between 7-to-11% in congestion and cost savings in a city like Tokyo, equivalent to up to 26% of annual spending on public transportation ( Mitomo and Jitsuzumi, 1999 ). Reduced work-life conflict is another benefit that an individual might accrue due to working from home ( Hayman, 2009 ), with benefits also being enjoyed by business in the form of capacity for longer work hours ( Hill et al., 2010 ). Overall, the availability of flexible work arrangement leads to greater enrichment from work which, in turn, is associated with higher job satisfaction and lower turnover intentions ( McNall et al., 2009 ).

Irrespective of the benefits or the different rates of uptake, the growth of telecommuting pre-COVID-19 has been marginal. Mokhtarian (2009) provides 12 possible reasons why, with the ongoing spread of ever-improving technologies, travel and congestion continue to increase. These include noting that not all activities have a telecommuting (work from home) counterpart, and even when feasible telecommuting may not always be a desirable substitute. When looking to identify what might facilitate more flexible work, it is common place to find that management trust of employees, the ability to secure the technology involved, and a rational workplace culture which emphasises human resources and member participation, facilitate telecommuting ( Harrington and Ruppel, 1999 ).

In Australia prior to COVID-19, the number of people who have worked from home regularly since 2001 was 4.6%, and only for an average of 11 h per week ( DSS, 2020 ). A report by the Productivity Commission found that rising demand for telecommuting was effectively stymied by incompatible management practices and cultural norms in workplaces, rather than technology barriers ( PC, 2014 ). An Australian study conducted prior to COVID-19 showed the existence of a positive attitude toward anywhere working (work conducted anywhere outside of the traditional office that formal work might be done), regardless of the amount of time spent the participant commuting each day ( Hopkins and McKay, 2019 ). Importantly, the authors also found that the desire for ‘anywhere’ working grew stronger once workers had participated in remote work themselves.

3. Overview of data

The data is comprised of three waves of data collection throughout 2020 . Wave 1 was completed in March immediately after National Cabinet announced restrictions on travel and activities. Wave 2 was in field from the May 23 to June 15 , after a relatively sustained period of low new case numbers and just prior to the second wave of infection in Victoria. It built upon the Wave 1 survey and started to examine work from home behaviour in more detail as it became increasingly apparent that the disruption to where work was done was large and ongoing. Wave 3 , the most recent data, was collected across the August 4 to October 10 : a period that saw the second wave in Victoria (VIC) result in significant lockdowns (including border closures between States) while the rest of Australia had either practically eliminated COVID-19 or had experienced low rates of community transmission (almost exclusively in Sydney).

While some questions were asked in all three waves, differing combinations of questions were deployed, which places limits on what can be compared across all waves. Wave 1 was conducted extremely early in the pandemic, going to field before it was really known what the impact would be. From this, and in each subsequent wave, we developed a greater understanding of key issues, in particular the need to explore the change in work in more detail. In this paper, we focus only on the working from home questions asked over the three waves. To accommodate the multifaceted nature of the survey, some questions were also asked on a rotational basis, a common approach in large panel-like surveys.

The online survey company PureProfile was engaged to randomly sample respondents across Australia. Table 1 provides an overview of the sample composition in each of the three waves. Quotas were not introduced on those completing the survey, other than ensuring representation from all states and territories. The impact of COVID-19 is sufficiently widespread that no demographic can escape the disruption caused.

Overview of National Sample in Each Wave.

* In Wave 1 and 2 household income was asked, in Wave 3 personal income was asked.

** A worker is defined as anyone who was working at least 1 day prior to COVID-19 restrictions.

4.1. Changes to work and working from home

Fig. 2 shows the dual impact of COVID-19 and associated restrictions on the availability of work and the nature of working from home. During Wave 1, the 25% of respondents who employed prior to COVID-19 (i.e., reported working one or more per week prior to COVID-19), were no longer working (i.e., reported 0 days of work in the last week). During Waves 2 and 3 this number started to return towards the pre-COVID-19 levels of employment. Interestingly, in the early stage of the pandemic, younger respondents and those on lower incomes were impacted more heavily, working significantly fewer days per week on average than other age and income groups. However, in the Wave 3 data, the only broad socio-demographic difference identifiable is that older respondents, on average, work fewer days per week in Wave 3; but this group also worked fewer days per week prior to COVID-19. In Victoria, where the entire state was placed in lockdown (including curfews in place in Melbourne restricting the hours a person was allowed outside their home), unemployment had moved back towards the highs of Wave 1.

Changes to Work and Work from Home in the Last Week.

In Wave 1 almost half of the respondents (47%) indicated they could WFH, a result more prevalent among those on higher incomes and/or those middle-aged. This trend, including the differences by age and income, held through to Wave 3 where 29% of respondents indicated that all their work could be done from home, and a further 33% that some of their work could be done from home. There are also broad geospatial differences in terms of the type of employment where work can be done from home, with regional respondents more unable to WFH (46%) versus those in metropolitan areas (32%). Over the waves, we see that as the rate of infection is brought under control, people work from home less, albeit at a rate that remains significantly higher than before COVID-19 (average of 1.5 days across the sample in Wave 3, versus 0.8 before COVID-19). The outlier is Victoria, where the reintroduction of restrictions resulted in WFH home levels returning to those observed in Wave 1.

Unsurprisingly, the ability to WFH differs based on the occupation of the individual 3 . White-collar workers are more likely to either be directed to WFH or given the choice during the pandemic ( Table 2 ). For a large majority of blue-collar workers, the workplace policy towards WFH remains restrictive ( Table 3 ). As a result, those in white-collar occupations work significantly more days from home than others (4.2 days on average compared to 1.5 for blue-collar). These differences exist through each wave of data collection.

Workplace Work from Home Policy by Occupation (Wave 3).

Change in Workplace Work from Home Policy by Occupation (Wave 3).

4.2. Benefits and challenges of working from home

As part of the Wave 2 data collection (primarily in June 2020; 3 months after the initial COVID-19 outbreak in March 2020), a series of questions were asked to identify the challenges and potential benefits experienced while WFH. As shown in Fig. 3 , the most beneficial aspect of WFH is not having to commute (particularly the case among younger and middle-aged respondents), followed by having a more flexible work schedule (also more prevalent among younger and middle-aged respondents, along with females). Spending more time with family, while relatively lower in terms of the perceived benefit, is significantly more important among those respondents with children. Interestingly, there are no differences in the perceived benefits of WFH between metropolitan and regional areas.

Most Important Benefits of Working from Home (Wave 2).

Fig. 4 shows that the greatest challenges in WFH are interruptions from family and children during working hours (data confirms that it is a significantly greater challenge for those with children as expected), followed by being able to concentrate on work. The challenges are largely the same across gender, age, income and regional versus metropolitan areas: although younger respondents were less likely to rate “dealing with email and communication” as one of their most or second most challenging aspects of WFH. On a similar theme, Fig. 5 shows that respondents found online meetings to be, on average, just as effective on average as normal face-to-face meetings. Data also revealed that, during Wave 2, respondents had an average of 3 online meetings per week (σ = 6).

Most Challenging Aspects of Working from Home (Wave 2).

Relative Effectiveness of Online Meetings (Wave 2).

4.3. The experience of working from home

In Waves 2 and 3 we examined how the current WFH experience might be perceived and how that might translate into desires for changes to working arrangements in the future. Fig. 6 shows that from 3 months after (June 2020) the initial outbreak in March 2020, to 9 months after (September 2020), attitudes towards the WFH experience unchanged and overall positive when taking all factors into account. For each attitudinal statement, there is no difference in the average scores from each wave between those who WFH at least before COVID-19 and those who did not in normal pre-COVID-19 week, indicating that relative inexperience with WFH has not made the experience less positive.

Evaluation of the Work from Home Experience (Wave 2 and Wave 3).

We also sought to understand the overall evaluation of the WFH experience ( Fig. 7 a), and if the experience meant they would like to WFH moving forward ( Fig. 7 b). The overall numbers of respondents agreeing to the statements substantially exceeds those who disagree. Additionally, there is a significant and strong positive correlation ( r  = 0.78) between the two statements suggesting that the more positive the experience, the more likely someone would want to WFH more in the future. Looking at the most recent data (Wave 3), there are significant, albeit weak, positive correlations between the number of days WFH in the last week and how positive the experience has been ( r  = 0.17), and the desire to WFH in the future ( r  = 0.24), indicating the WFH has seemingly been more positive for those who WFH to a greater extent. Unsurprisingly, white-collar workers report significantly higher agreement with both statements.

Current Work from Home Experience and Preference for Future (Wave 2 and Wave 3).

4.4. Working from home and commuting

Fig. 8 shows that the number of commuting trips more than halved in Wave 1 compared to the average number of one-way trips conducted before COVID-19 (a 53% fall). There was a reduction in all modes, but it was particularly pronounced for train (92% below pre-COVID-19 levels) and bus (78% lower). In Wave 2 we saw an uptick in commuting as restrictions eased and more people returned to work at the office (41% below pre-COVID-19), which appeared to have stabilised for all states by Wave 3, excluding Victoria. In Wave 2 (r = −0.51) and Wave 3 (r = −0.60) there are significant and strongly negative correlations between the number of commuting trips made per week and the number of days WFH, as expected. Bio-security risks associated with public transport remain despite the effort by government to move away from the initial messaging (in the Wave 1 and 2 periods) to not use public transport, to Wave 3 where the message was that with social distancing and recommended mask wearing, it was now safe to use these modes. Hensher et al. (2021a) found that biosecurity concern associated with using public transport was a statistically significant positive influence on the increased probability of WFH.

Commuting Activity by Mode (Wave1, Wave 2, and Wave 3).

Fig. 9 shows that WFH behaviour is relatively consistent across the working week, with approximately 30% of respondents working only from home on any one day, with just over half travelling for work. Fig. 9 does not consider when travelling might be occurring for those that do travel. It might be the case that with increased ability to WFH, people might also be taking this opportunity to stagger their working hours, so that when they do travel for work, they can do so outside of peak periods and thus avoid traffic congestion or crowding on public transport.

Commuting / Work Travel and Working from Home by Day of Week (Wave 3).

4.5. Relative productivity of work from home

An important component of WFH is the extent to which employees can be productive while doing so. Starting in Wave 2, we asked respondents to assess how productive they felt they had been in the last week while WFH, relative to their normal place of work. Fig. 10 shows that employees perceive their WFH productivity to equal to that of their normal work environment prior to COVID-19. In fact, the sample average of this measure is significantly greater than the neutral point (3 = about the same) for both Wave 2 (3.11) and in Wave 3 (3.23), noting that the while statistically significant the difference is only slight. That aside, the data indicates that productivity remains relatively unchanged, and there is the potential that people may well become more productive as WFH becomes entrenched and new norms are developed. Indeed, there is a weakly positive (but significant) correlation between relative productivity and: the number of days WFH prior to COVID-19 ( r  = 0.12); and the number of days WFH in Wave 3 ( r  = 0.11), providing some suggestion that the more you WFH, the more productive you find the experience to be. There are no differences in productivity across occupation, gender, age, gender, or income.

Relative Productivity while Working from Home (Wave 2 and Wave 3).

To complement the qualitative assessment, we developed an ordered logit model 4 to investigate the drivers of increased vs same or decreased perceived productivity. The key findings focussed on the elasticities, suggest that the direct elasticities are typically, for all significant influences, in the range of (-) 0.2 to 0.5 with a noticeable probability of perceived productivity being increased compared to pre-COVID-19 (i) as age and income increases, (ii) occupation is a manager, (iii) distance to work from home increases, (iv) persons living at home enrolled in a tertiary institution such as a University, (v) the ability to balance work and non-work time more, and (vi) a preference to WFH even more in the future. The Pseudo R 2 for this model is 0.173.

4.6. Adding an employer perspective

The random sample of respondents across Australia means that the sample also contains respondents who are employers and managers 5 (Wave 2 = 106, Wave 3 = 125). With regards to the risk that COVID-19 presents in the workplace, employers and managers are no less concerned than employees; however, employers and managers in larger companies of 20 or more employees appear to be significantly more concerned about the risk than those who are in smaller businesses.

With regards to future policy towards WFH, Fig. 11 shows that between Wave 2 (June 2020) and Wave 3 (September 2020) there was an increase in the number of employers who would adopt a flexible work policy whenever COVID-19 restrictions were to end. The response from employees in Wave 3 highlights a potential mismatch between what they might think is the policy their workplace would adopt versus what an employer or manager might support; specifically, there is the potential that employers might be more supportive of increased WFH than an employee might think. This is a finding that Brewer and Hensher (2000) found many years ago when interviewing employers and employees on telecommuting options.

Views on Work from Home Policy when Restrictions End (Wave 2 and Wave 3).

Fig. 12 shows the number of days that an employer and manager think are appropriate for staff to WFH. The results are very similar in Wave 2 and Wave 3, with no significant difference in the average number of days thought to be appropriate; however, managers and employers provide an average number of days of WFH that is higher than what an employee states that they would like. There is no difference in the average number of days based on size of business however, managers in white collar roles support a higher average number of days WFH in the future.

Number of Days Appropriate for Staff to Work from Home when Restrictions End (Wave 2 and Wave 3) .

In Wave 2 we asked employers and managers to justify the number of days they felt were appropriate for staff to WFH. Those arguing for high levels of work from home did so because it works, it minimises office space or they believe staff like it. Those advocating for a balance tended to cite reasons around maintaining collegiality, keeping connections, generating value through interaction, the need for face-to-face meetings, and mentoring. In Wave 3 we repeated the question, and the nature of the responses is similar. Those who state that employees cannot WFH cite the nature of the job restricting ability to do so; and those advocating a mix do so because of the ability of an employee to concentrate while working from home, but still needing the interaction of colleagues for team building, collaboration and working on complex problems. Interestingly several employer’s state that while most of their work cannot be done from home, some can be done from home and thus one day a week might be appropriate moving forward. On the other hand, a small number also state that an employee could WFH as often as they would like, so long as productivity is not diminished.

With regards to productivity of staff, Fig. 13 similarly shows that the perspective of employers and managers has been stable from Wave 2 to Wave 3, with the general view being that productivity of staff is unchanged. Female employers/managers report significantly higher average productivity scores for staff. There is a significant positive correlation between productivity and the number of days that an employer/manager thinks appropriate for a staff member to work from home once restrictions end. There are no differences based on metropolitan versus regional responses.

Relative Productivity of Staff while Working from Home (Wave 2 and Wave 3).

5. Discussion of policy implications

In this section we draw on the descriptive overview of how employees and employers have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic with a particular focus on working from home. The focus is on benefits to an individual, benefits to employers and wider societal implications.

5.1. Benefits to the individual

Rather than having to imagine the future of WFH we may already be seeing that future state now, given that future WFH intentions have been shown to closely match the current levels of working from home that are observed during Wave 3 (September 2020). If this is the case, then future with a more flexible use of WFH would mean that on any given weekday there would be 30% of people WFH resulting in significantly lower number of commuting trips and thus commuters on the road or public transport networks. Using evidence presented in Hensher et al. (2021b) , assuming the average person works 48 weeks of the year (with 4 weeks of annual leave), this equates to 90 h of saved time or just over two and a half standard working weeks (there are 38 h per standard working week in Australia). This is not an insignificant amount of time that a person could spend in ways that offer themselves, or their family, higher levels of utility. Given that a large percentage of Australians have been WFH at a consistent high level for what has now been an extended period, it is reasonable to assume that new habits towards WFH have developed, and people have begun to embed routines that will see them be able to productively WFH at the level they prefer.

5.2. Benefits to the employer

Although there are time savings benefits that accrue to the employee who is WFH, there are also benefits for employers. Most directly, there is the potential for significant cost savings on rent. For example, in the Sydney CBD the average commercial rent is $1,075 per square metre per annum ( Lenaghan, 2020 ), with an estimated 8–12 square metre needed for each employee ( Calautti, 2019 ). By having more staff WFH, with less office space required overall, the potential savings to the business quickly add up, typically between $8,500 to $13,000 per employee per year. There is also the indirect benefit of staff who are WFH having more time to spend on work; many of our respondents indicated that the time saved on the commute was of benefit because it allowed them to reinvest that time into more hours of work 6 . The research in the literature review also strongly indicates that WFH and flexible working arrangements lead to better staff retention and create a more attractive employment offer which is particularly important for attracting highly skilled workers.

The recent experiences of both staff and employers/managers indicate that flexibility can be given without any loss to productivity. Both groups indicated that, in the face of a non-marginal change to the nature of work, relative productivity has remained unchanged . The results suggest that management should be more amenable to allowing staff to WFH more often in the future, potentially to the extent currently observed in Wave 3 (September 2020). There are a growing number of reports of large organisations already embracing increased WFH in a significant way (e.g., Bleby, 2020 , Smith, 2020 ), essentially as a hybrid model.

Many employees express reservations about their workplace and the risk of COVID-19. At the time of writing, a cluster in Sydney is emerging, with one of the more the concerning hotspots being an inner-suburb bottle-shop where a close contact of a hotel quarantine worker infected a staff member in the store, who in turn infected another staff member, and as a result over 2,000 customers are now being asked to get tested and self-isolate. Workplaces, particularly large white-collar workplaces that are often indoors and in shared spaces and represent a risk for forming such a COVID-19 cluster. As such, any organisation seeking to manage risk should be looking at policies such as rotating staff through the office on different days, to minimise the impact on the business should one staff member develop the disease. Additionally, a public relations reality is that should a cluster emerge within in organisation, having a robust COVIDSafe plan to point to will be beneficial.

5.3. Wider economic benefits

While WFH benefits confer more fully to segments of the working population, such as those in white-collar jobs, typically on higher incomes, in middle or younger age groups, and living in metropolitan areas, there are non-trivial wider economic benefits that can be shared, if people who are able to WFH successfully are able to do so more often.

Infrastructure Australia highlighted that in the six largest capital cities and neighbouring satellite cities, the total annual cost of road congestion (pre-COVID-19) was $19 billion in 2016, and the cost of public transport crowding was estimated at $175 million ( IA, 2019 ). By 2031 this was projected to grow to forecast total annual cost of road congestion of $39 billion, and $837 million for public transport crowding. During the height of the pandemic, private vehicle use plummeted with aggregate indicators such as the Apple Mobility Trends showing car use falling by up to 60% ( Apple, 2020 ). Global GPS firm TomTom also publishes data via their Global Traffic Index ( TomTom, 2020 ), wherein they construct a metric termed the Congestion Level index. An index level of 100 percent means that a 30-minute trip takes an hour to complete (i.e., due to traffic on the network, travel time doubles). During a typical pre-COVID-19 weekday, peak Sydney records a congestion level of approximately 80, but throughout April 2020 it went above 30 on only two days. These results indicate a very large reduction in congestion.

While car use was never expected to stay at the low levels observed during March/April 2020, it has rebounded strongly: SCATS (Sydney Coordinated Adaptive Traffic System) data shows that car use is now tracking 5–6% below that of a similar time last year ( MySydney, 2020 ). The fact that it remains some percentage lower is still important in gaining significant improvements in traffic flow. For example, Infrastructure Victoria (2016) indicated that if just five per cent of drivers change their behaviour, driving conditions on Melbourne’s road network would be the same as in the school holidays, every day of the week.

There has been an even bigger and sustained reduction in public transport patronage. During April 2020, Opal Card data reveals that monthly trips on public transport fell by 80% compared to the same period in 2019. As of November 2020, total trips on all public transport modes remain 45% below the same period last year, and over 2020 public transport patronage has more than halved on the year, down 54% ( TfNSW, 2020 ). While much of this reduction (and subsequent rebound in car use) can be explained by the concerns people have towards the risk of COVID-19 on public transport ( Beck and Hensher, 2020a , Beck and Hensher, 2020b ), encouraging WFH as restrictions ease is a viable and cost-effective measure for transport authorities to ease crowding during the peak. Reduced crowding will have significant positive dividends for those individuals who have no choice but to commute to work, given that negative crowding events are memorable ( Abenoza et al., 2017 ) and may be the main driver of public transport dissatisfaction ( Börjesson and Rubensson, 2019 ).

There are also potential benefits to regional areas in terms of growth in economic activity. Recent media reports highlight the strong growth in regional house prices, which have risen at a higher annual rate than in capital cities for the first time in more than 15 years ( Terzon, 2020 ). It is speculated that part of the reason for the 7% average increase across all regional marketplaces (compared to 2% in cities) is the desire for urban dwellers to leave the city because of COVID-19 and the associated ability to WFH 7 . While it is hard to disentangle if the interest in regional areas is due to prior growth in the regions, or the desire to move out of an urban environment because of COVID-19 itself; the disruption and consequent uptake of digital work solutions cannot be ignored as a factor in making working outside of capital cities a more tenable proposition. If the increase in property prices is a leading indicator of potential growth and thus improved economic activity in regional areas, there are positive long-term implications for jobs, accessibility, and amenity 8 . Growth in regional areas is a noted strategic objective ( DIRDC, 2017 ), especially given that 51% of the national population is in the three capital cities of Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane ( ABS, 2020 ).

6. Directions for future policy and research

COVID-19 has been a crippling event, but WFH has the potential to be an unintended positive consequence of the widespread disruption. There are benefits to the individual employee, to employers and businesses, and to the wider economy, including the transport network. Our data indicates that those who WFH have found the experience to be positive and would like to continue doing so to a greater extent than they did before. Additionally, the data also shows that productivity remains relatively unchanged, and that employees are potentially becoming more productive as WFH becomes entrenched and new norms are developed. The benefits are great and should not be ignored in any ambition to the return to pre-COVID 19 ‘normality’.

Even where there may be pressure from certain circles for employees to return to the office en masse, to do so would not only ignore the inherent risks that remain with larger indoor gatherings, but also the redistributive impact of WFH on more localised or suburban economic activity. While the impact on central business districts (CBDs) is currently large, a greater balance between WFH and the office is likely still enough activity to revitalise much of the business in the supply chain that is currently suffering. While traffic has been quick to rebound, there is currently lower CBD focused congestion, but this may return quickly if the uplift in second-hand car purchases ( IA, 2020 ), combined with the concern about public transport, indicates that a higher car mode share may persist for some time. To avoid congestion at levels which would be worse than before COVID-19, authorities and policy makers should do everything in their power to facilitate the choice to WFH rather than the choice to drive to work. Government policy to support more WFH will likely be a more popular strategy than what has been the politically unpalatable option of road pricing.

While there are limited sociodemographic differences that have emerged in our analysis thus far, highlighting just how widespread disruption has been, it does not mean that such differences or inequalities will not arise or become embedded in the future. This is something the transport community, and indeed social scientists more broadly, need to be keenly aware of such that we do not further embed income or social exclusion inequalities, or give rise to new forms of inequality (such as technology accessibility for example).

A barrier that might exist to ongoing WFH is the position of management within organisations. Research cited in the literature review shows that managerial resistance is perhaps the biggest barrier to flexible work practices. However, the widespread and extended nature of the COVID-19 disruption is such that this barrier may have been broken. Our empirical evidence suggests that employers and managers show favourable attitudes to increased WFH, which have remained stable over the multiple periods of data collection. That said, research has shown that many managers express low self-confidence in their ability to manage workers remotely which in turns undermines their support for WFH ( Parker et al., 2020 ). Rather than reduce WFH due to a lack of managerial confidence, organisations should seek to equip managers with new skills to boost their ability to manage in a technologically advanced environment. This is especially true as a meta -analysis of 46 telecommuting studies proves the benefits on job satisfaction, performance, employee turnover and stress that WFH can have ( Gajendran and Harrison, 2007 ). There is more work required to understand the response of employers to COVID-19.

While we use the term “working from home” within this paper, there is also the concept of the third office, or “anywhere working” ( Blount and Gloet, 2017 ) which covers any space where work might be completed that is outside of the traditional office environs. There is contemporary anecdotal evidence which suggests that individuals conduct paid work from public locations such as coffee shops, parks, and libraries, yet no documented evidence of the rate of use of these alternative locations was found outside of one study that found a small percentage of telecommuters worked from summer cottages or from ‘elsewhere’ ( Helminen and Ristimäki, 2007 ). More research should be undertaken to determine exactly where people have been doing work from, and how productive that work has been, and thus facilitate a conversation about how remote working can be more than just WFH 9 .

There is also the need to continue to investigate increased levels of WFH as either a complement or substitute for non-commuting trips. In many jurisdictions, the current data being collected on travel activity may not yet be appropriate for such analysis, as it is likely that travel activity is still suppressed, to varying degrees. However, in the research prior to COVID-19 the evidence on this relationship is mixed. Mokhtarian et al., 1995 find a reduction in both commute and non-commute-based trips, and Mokhtarian et al., 2004 find that while telecommuter have long average commute distances when they do travel, they telecommute often enough to compensate for longer one-way commutes. Choo et al. (2005) find that while telecommuting reduces vehicle-miles travelled by a small amount on the surface, it appears to be far more effective policy than public infrastructure expenditure. Others have found that telecommuting can increase personal travel and non-commute activity ( Zhu, 2012 , Kim et al., 2015 ). In unpublished research on Wave 3, we have found that WFH has resulted in less commuting, work related, and home-based education trips, but that home-based shopping and personal business trips have not been impacted. We continue to investigate this moving forward.

7. Conclusion

Working from home is not and should not be seen as an all or nothing affair: there is no expectation that people will either work only from home or only from the office. Analysis herein indicates that respondents (for whom it is possible) would like a mix of work where WFH is a greater percentage of the mix than it was before (referred to in mainstream media in Australia as a hybrid model whose adoption is gaining popularity). Even without all work being WFH, simply more WFH than was the case before COVID-19 (i.e., more people who can do so, working more flexibly) would have significant positive dividends. We fully acknowledge that not every worker is able to WFH, nor that the widespread increase in WFH that has meant that the barriers to WFH have disappeared. To that end, policies that support formal childcare resources could relieve the family-to-work conflict and encourage people to work at home ( Zhang et al., 2020 ); direct financial support for telecommuting facilities or a subsidy for firms adopting telecommuting could be considered ( Mitomo and Jitsuzumi, 1999 ); and even rethinking the opening hours of shops and leisure facilities ( Saleh and Farrell, 2005 ). As a formidable transport policy lever, WFH must become embedded in the psyche of transport planners and decision makers as well as the tools they use to arrive at a future that can benefit from the unfortunate imposition of a virus pandemic. This is the challenge that we all should work on as we seek to understand what the new priorities might be for the future delivery and maintenance of and efficient and effective transport network that aligns with the aspirations of society.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgement

This research is part of iMOVE Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) research projects 1-031 and 1-034 with Transport and Main Roads, Queensland (TMR), Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) and WA Department of Transport (WADoT) on Working for Home and Implications for Revision of Metropolitan Strategic Transport Models. The findings reported are those of the authors and are not the positions of TfNSW or TMR; but approval to present these findings is appreciated. We also thank Andre Pinto of ITLS for his role in the iMOVE projects. We thank two referees for very useful comments as well as Hani MahMassani and Patricia Mokhtarian for suggestions.

1 National Cabinet is a forum comprising of the Prime Minister, Premiers and Chief Ministers, established on 13 March 2020 to facilitate a collaborative and nationwide pandemic response.

2 Although it has been suggested that energy consumption at home has increased due to greater presence and notably higher computer use time. See for example Cheshmehzangi (2020) who suggests that “the impact on household entertainment is likely to increase in the longer term, with a potential increase in computing entertainment that became more popular in recent months. Hence, we anticipate steady and higher energy consumption for household entertainment activities”, and a report by WSP (2020) that suggests that due to home heating inefficiencies the carbon production of a WFH employee could be more than an office worker.

3 As per the Australian Bureau of Statistics ANZSCO major occupation groupings, white collar workers include Managers, Professionals, Community and Personal Service Workers, Clerical and Administrative Workers, and Sales Workers. Blue collar workers are those categorised in ANZSCO as Technicians and Trades Workers, Machinery Operators and Drivers, and Labourers.

4 Available on request

5 Importantly, many employees in an organisation act in an employer-like role in terms of any advice and decisions being made about the support or otherwise for employees to be able to WFH more flexibly.

6 Later surveys (already conducted) seek to explore where that saved time is invested in more detail.

7 This is linked in part to the continuing low interest rates with a lower threshold for a minimum home deposit together with a significant increase in the shortage of housing in regional areas as more people locate there in part attributed to the ability to WFH and hence less need to commute to a major Centre. It is also possible that COVID-19 has prompted many to consider a lifestyle change due to greater flexibility. Indeed, in early June 2021 in Australia, a national advertising campaign has launched encouraging movement to regional areas (in part funded by the Federal Government - http://www.regionalaustralia.org.au/home/move-to-more/ ).

8 We would also suggest that the relevance of physical connectivity that is the cornerstone of agglomeration economies (also known as effective employment density) is no longer as relevant with a growing use the digital connectivity. Hence the ability to undertake business from a geographically more disperse location is expected to change the meaning and metric of agglomeration economy.

9 Remote or satellite offices remain an interesting part of the remote working toolkit, as an effective way of holding meetings with other members of staff or clients. Travel to such sites should not be an issue if carefully planned. Indeed, it not only avoids the need to meet at someone’s home if the traditional office location has been downsized, and the flexibility of space enables the location to be booked to suit the group attending. Indeed, there may even be a new Office-Space-as-a-Service model that emerges.

• Abenoza R.F., Cats O., Susilo Y.O. Travel satisfaction with public transport: determinants, user classes, regional disparities and their evolution. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Practice. 2017; 95 :64–84. [ Google Scholar ]
• ABS, 2020. Regional Population, Australian Bureau of Statistics, https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/regional-population/latest-release , accessed 06/01/21.
• Apple, 2020. Mobility Trends Report. https://covid19.apple.com/mobility , accessed 02/01/21.
• Beck M.J., Hensher D.A. Insights into the Impact of Covid-19 on Household Travel, Work, Activities and Shopping in Australia – the early days under restrictions. Transp. Policy. 2020; 96 :76–93. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Beck M.J., Hensher D.A. Insights into the impact of COVID-19 on household travel and activities in Australia – the early days of easing restrictions. Transp. Policy. 2020; 99 :95–119. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bleby, M., 2020. AECOM cuts Sydney office footprint as staff work from home. Financial Review 19/10/20, https://www.afr.com/property/commercial/aecom-cuts-sydney-office-footprint-as-staff-work-from-home-20201019-p566fq , accessed 06/01/21.
• Blount, Y., Gloet, M. (Eds.), 2017. Anywhere working and the new era of telecommuting. Business Science Reference, Hershey, PA. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-2328-4.
• Börjesson M., Rubensson I. Satisfaction with crowding and other attributes in public transport. Trans. Policy. 2019; 79 :213–222. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brewer A., Hensher D.A. distributed work and travel behaviour: the dynamics of interactive agency choices between employers and employees. Transportation. 2000; 27 (1):117–148. [ Google Scholar ]
• Calautti, L., 2019. How much office space do I need?, Commercial Real Estate 17/04/19, https://www.commercialrealestate.com.au/advice/how-much-office-space-do-i-need-57459/ , accessed 06/01/21.
• Cheshmehzangi A. COVID-19 and household energy implications: what are the main impacts on energy use? Heliyon. 2020; 6 (10):e05202. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05202. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Choo S., Mokhtarian P.L., Salomon I. Does telecommuting reduce vehicle-miles traveled? An aggregate time series analysis for the US. Transportation. 2005; 32 (1):37–64. [ Google Scholar ]
• DIRDC, 2017. Regions 2030: Unlocking Opportunity, Department of Infrastructure, Regional Development and Cities, https://www.regional.gov.au/regional/publications/files/regions-2030.pdf , accessed 06/01/21.
• DSS, 2020. Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia, Department of Social Services, https://www.dss.gov.au/national-centre-for-longitudinal-data/household-income-and-labour-dynamics-in-australia-hilda-fact-sheet , accessed 13/08/20.
• Gajendran R.S., Harrison D.A. The good, the bad, and the unknown about telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences. J. Appl. Psychol. 2007; 92 (6):1524–1541. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hall, D.T., 1989. Telecommuting and the management of work-home boundaries. Paper prepared for the Annual Review of Communications and Society, a joint project of the Aspen Institute and the Institute for Information Studies. Boston University, August.
• Harrington S.J., Ruppel C.P. Telecommuting: a test of trust, competing values, and relative advantage. IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun. 1999; 42 (4):223–239. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hayman J.R. Flexible work arrangements: exploring the linkages between perceived usability of flexible work schedules and work/life balance. Community, Work Family. 2009; 12 (3):327–338. [ Google Scholar ]
• Helminen V., Ristimäki M. Relationships between commuting distance, frequency and telework in Finland. J. Transp. Geogr. 2007; 15 (5):331–342. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hensher, D.A., Balbontin, C., Beck, M.J., Wei, E., 2021a. The impact of working from home on model commuting choice response during COVID-19: Implications for two metropolitan areas in Australia, submitted to a Special Issue on COVID-19 (edited by Hani Mahmassani and Patricia Mokhtarian). Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Hensher D.A., Balbontin C., Beck M.J. The impact of COVID-19 on the time and monetary cost outlays for commuting - the case of the Greater Sydney Metropolitan Area after three months of restrictions. Transp. Policy. 2021; 101 :71–80. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hill E.J., Erickson J.J., Holmes E.K., Ferris M. Workplace flexibility, work hours, and work-life conflict: Finding an extra day or two. J. Fam. Psychol. 2010; 24 (3):349–358. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hopkins J.L., McKay J. Investigating ‘anywhere working’ as a mechanism for alleviating traffic congestion in smart cities. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2019; 142 :258–272. [ Google Scholar ]
• IA, 2019. Urban Transport Crowding and Congestion: The Australian Infrastructure Audit 2019, Infrastructure Australia, https://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-08/Urban%20Transport%20Crowding%20and%20Congestion.pdf , accessed 06/01/20.
• IA, 2020. Infrastructure beyond COVID-19: A national study on the impacts of the pandemic on Australia, Infrastructure Australia, Interim Report for the 2021 Australian Infrastructure Plan December 2020, https://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-12/Final_COVID%20Impacts%20on%20Infrastructure%20Sectors%20Report_14%20Dec%202020.pdf , accessed 06/01/21.
• IATA, 2020. Recovery Delayed as International Travel Remains Locked Down, International Air Transport Association, Press Release No: 63 28/07/20, https://www.iata.org/en/pressroom/pr/2020-07-28-02/ , accessed 06/01/20.
• Victoria I. Infrastructure Victoria; Policy Papers: 2016. The Road Ahead: How an efficient, fair, and sustainable pricing regime can help tackle congestion; p. 201603. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim S.-N., Choo S., Mokhtarian P.L. Home-based telecommuting and intra-household interactions in work and non-work travel: A seemingly unrelated censored regression approach. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Practice. 2015; 80 :197–214. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kitamura R., Nilles R., Fleming D., Conroy P. Telecommuting as a transportation planning measure: Initial results of state of California pilot project. Transp. Res. Rec. 1990; 1285 (1990):98–104. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lari A. Telework/workforce flexibility to reduce congestion and environmental degradation? Procedia – Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012; 48 :712–721. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lenaghan, N., 2020. CBD office rents slump as workers stay home, Financial Review 30/06/20, https://www.afr.com/property/commercial/cbd-office-rents-slump-as-workers-stay-home-20200630-p557lj , accessed 06/01/21.
• Maynard, R., 1994. The growing appeal of telecommuting, Nation's Business, August (1994), p. 61.
• McNall L.A., Masuda A.D., Nicklin J.M. Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover Intentions: The Mediating Role of Work-to-Family Enrichment. J. Psychol. - Interdisciplinary Appl. 2009; 144 (1):61–81. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mitomo H., Jitsuzumi T. Impact of telecommuting on mass transit congestion: the Tokyo case. Telecommun. Policy. 1999; 23 (10-11):741–751. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mokhtarian P.L. Telecommuting and travel: state of the practice, state of the art. Transportation. 1991; 18 :319–342. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mokhtarian P. If telecommunication is such a good substitute for travel, why does congestion continue to get worse? Transport. Lett. 2009; 1 (1):1–17. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mokhtarian P.L., Collantes G.O., Gertz C. Telecommuting, residential location, and commute-distance traveled: evidence from State of California employees. Environ. Plann. A. 2004; 36 (10):1877–1897. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mokhtarian P.L., Handy S.L., Salomon I. Methodological issues in the estimation of the travel, energy, and air quality impacts of telecommuting. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Practice. 1995; 29 (4):283–302. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mokhtarian P.L., Salomon I., Choo S. Measuring the measurable: Why can’t we agree on the number of telecommuters in the U.S.? Qual. Quant. 2005; 39 (4):423–452. [ Google Scholar ]
• MySydney, 2020. COVIDSafe Travel Choices – Summer Edition 2020/2021, https://www.mysydney.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-12/Summer%20Edition%20eBook_0.pdf , accessed 06/01/21.
• Nilles J.M. Traffic reduction by telecommuting: A status review and selected bibliography. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Practice. 1988; 22 (4):301–317. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nilles, J.M., Carlson, F.J., Gray, P., Hanneman, G.J., 1977. The Telecommunications-Transportation Tradeoff, Options for Tomorrow, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
• Olszewski P., Mokhtarian P. Telecommuting frequency and impacts for state of California employees. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 1994; 45 (3):275–286. [ Google Scholar ]
• OWD, 2021. Total confirmed COVID-19 deaths and cases per million people, Our World in Data, University of Oxford, https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-covid-cases-deaths-per-million?country=~OWID_WRL , accessed 14/10/21.
• Parker, S.K., Knight, C., Keller, A., 2020. Remote Managers Are Having Trust Issues, Harvard Business Review 30/06/20, https://hbr.org/2020/07/remote-managers-are-having-trust-issues%20-%20should%20break%20down , accessed 06/01/21.
• PC, 2014. Geographic Labour Mobility: Research Report, Productivity Commission, http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/labour-mobility/report/labour-mobility-overview.pdf , accessed 06/01/21.
• Pratt J.H. Asking the right questions about telecommuting: Avoiding pitfalls in surveying homebased work. Transportation. 2000; 27 (1):99–116. [ Google Scholar ]
• Saleh W., Farrell S. Implications of congestion charging for departure time choice: Work and non-work schedule flexibility. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Practice. 2005; 39 (7-9):773–791. [ Google Scholar ]
• Salomon I. Telecommunications and travel relationships: a review. Transp. Res. 1986; 20 (3):223–238. [ Google Scholar ]
• Salomon I., Salomon M. Telecommuting: The employee’s perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 1984; 25 (1):15–28. [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith, P., 2020. Almost half of Aussie workers will be at home post-COVID-19 , Financial Review 21/09/20, https://www.afr.com/technology/almost-half-aussie-workers-will-be-at-home-post-covid-19-study-finds-20200918-p55x58 , accessed 06/01/21.
• Terzon, E., 2020. House prices rise with regional market outperforming capital cities, CoreLogic data shows, ABC News 04/01/21, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-04/house-prices-rise-1pc-regional-beats-capital-cities/13029268 , accessed 06/01/21.
• TfNSW, 2020. Public Transport Patronage - Monthly Comparison, Transport for New South Wales, https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/data-and-research/passenger-travel/public-transport-patronage/public-transport-patronage-monthly , accessed 06/01/21.
• TomTom, 2020. Traffic Index Ranking, https://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/traffic-index/ranking/ , accessed 06/01/21.
• WSP, 2020. Office vs Home Working: How we can save our carbon footprint 20/02/20, https://www.wsp.com/en-GB/insights/office-vs-home-working-how-we-can-save-our-carbon-footprint , accessed 06/01/21.
• Zhang S., Moeckel R., Moreno A.T., Shuai B., Gao J. A work-life conflict perspective on telework. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Practice. 2020; 141 :51–68. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhu P. Are telecommuting and personal travel complements or substitutes? Ann. Reg. Sci. 2012; 48 (2):619–639. [ Google Scholar ]

• Israel-Gaza War
• War in Ukraine
• US Election
• US & Canada
• UK Politics
• N. Ireland Politics
• Scotland Politics
• Wales Politics
• Latin America
• Middle East
• In Pictures
• Executive Lounge
• Technology of Business
• Women at the Helm
• Future of Business
• Science & Health
• Artificial Intelligence
• AI v the Mind
• Film & TV
• Art & Design
• Entertainment News
• Destinations
• Australia and Pacific
• Caribbean & Bermuda
• Central America
• North America
• South America
• World’s Table
• Culture & Experiences
• The SpeciaList
• Natural Wonders
• Weather & Science
• Climate Solutions
• Sustainable Business
• Green Living

Australians get 'right to disconnect' after hours

A "right to disconnect" rule has come into effect in Australia, offering relief to people who feel forced to take calls or read messages from employers after they finish their day’s work.

The new law allows employees to ignore communications after hours if they choose to, without fear of being punished by their bosses.

A survey published last year estimated that Australians worked on average 281 hours of unpaid overtime annually.

More than 20 countries, mainly in Europe and Latin America, have similar rules .

The law does not ban employers from contacting workers after hours.

Instead, it gives staff the right not to reply unless their refusal is deemed unreasonable.

Under the rules, employers and employees should try to resolve disputes among themselves. If that is unsuccessful in finding a resolution Australia's Fair Work Commission (FWC) can step in.

The FWC can then order the employer to stop contacting the employee after hours.

If it finds an employee's refusal to respond is unreasonable it can order them to reply.

Failure to comply with FWC orders can result in fines of up to A$19,000 ($12,897; £9,762) for an employee or up to A$94,000 for a company.

Organisations representing workers have welcomed the move.

It "will empower workers to refuse unreasonable out-of-hours work contact and enabling greater work-life balance", The Australian Council of Trade Unions said.

A workplace expert told BBC News that the new rules would also help employers.

"Any organisation that has staff who have better rest and who have better work-life-balance are going to have staff who are less likely to have sick days, less likely to leave the organisation", said John Hopkins from Swinburne University of Technology.

"Anything that benefits the employee, has benefits for the employer as well."

However, there was a mixed reaction to the new law from employees.

"I think it's actually really important that we have laws like this," advertising industry worker, Rachel Abdelnour, told Reuters.

"We spend so much of our time connected to our phones, connected to our emails all day, and I think that it's really hard to switch off as it is."

Others, however, do not feel the new rules will make much of a difference to them.

"I think it's an excellent idea. I hope it catches on. I doubt it'll catch on in our industry, to tell the truth though," David Brennan, a worker in the financial industry, told the news agency.

"We're well paid, we're expected to deliver, and we feel we have to deliver 24 hours a day."

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Australia is the latest country to give workers the 'right to disconnect' after hours

Rachel Treisman

A new Australian law protects workers who don't respond to work-related messages outside of their working hours, with some exceptions. Getty Images hide caption

Millions of Australians just got official permission to ignore their bosses outside of working hours, thanks to a new law enshrining their "right to disconnect."

The law doesn't strictly prohibit employers from calling or messaging their workers after hours. But it does protect employees who "refuse to monitor, read or respond to contact or attempted contact outside their working hours, unless their refusal is unreasonable," according to the Fair Work Commission , Australia's workplace relations tribunal.

That includes outreach from their employer, as well as other people "if the contact or attempted contact is work-related."

The law, which passed in February, took effect on Monday for most workers and will apply to small businesses of fewer than 15 people starting in August 2025. It adds Australia to a growing list of countries aiming to protect workers' free time.

Rough Translation

Stuck@work: your country's brand is escape, but you can't.

"It's really about trying to bring back some work-life balance and make sure that people aren't racking up hours of unpaid overtime for checking emails and responding to things at a time when they're not being paid," said S en. Murray Watt , Australia's minister for employment and workplace relations.

The law doesn't give employees a complete pass, however.

The law says a person's refusal to respond will be considered unreasonable under certain conditions , taking into account the seniority of the employee, their personal circumstances (including caregiving responsibilities), the reason for the contact, and how much disruption it causes them.

The FWC says employers and employees must first try to resolve any disputes on their own, but can apply to the FWC for a "stop order" or other actions if their discussions are unsuccessful.

"If it was an emergency situation, of course people would expect an employee to respond to something like that," Watt said. "But if it's a run-of-the-mill thing … then they should wait till the next work day, so that people can actually enjoy their private lives, enjoy time with their family and their friends, play sport or whatever they want to do after hours, without feeling like they're chained to the desk at a time when they're not actually being paid, because that's just not fair."

Protections aim to address erosion of work-life balance

The law's supporters hope it will help solidify the boundary between the personal and the professional, which has become increasingly blurry with the rise of remote work since the COVID-19 pandemic.

A 2022 survey by the Centre for Future Work at the Australia Institute, a public policy think tank, found that seven out of 10 Australians performed work outside of scheduled working hours, with many reporting experiencing physical tiredness, stress and anxiety as a result.

The following year, the institute reported that Australians clocked an average of 281 hours of unpaid overtime in 2023. Valuing that labor at average wage rates, it estimated the average worker is losing the equivalent of nearly $7,500 U.S. dollars each year.

"This is particularly concerning when worker's share of national income remains at a historically low level, wage growth is not keeping up with inflation, and the cost of living is rising," it added.

Working from home allowed him to be a more engaged dad. Now it’s over

The Australian Council of Trade Unions hailed the new law as a "cost-of-living win for working people," especially those in industries like teaching, community services and administrative work.

The right to disconnect, it said, will not only cut down on Australians' unpaid work hours but also address the "growing crisis of increasing mental health illness and injuries in modern workplaces."

"More money in your pocket, more time with your loved ones and more freedom to live your life — that's what the right to disconnect is all about," ACTU President Michele O’Neil said in a statement .

Not everyone is thrilled about the change, however.

A manufacturer tried the 4-day workweek for 5 days' pay and won't go back

Australian opposition leader Peter Dutton has already pledged to repeal the right to disconnect if his coalition wins the next federal election in 2025. He has slammed it as damaging to relations between employers and employees, and portrayed it as a threat to productivity.

The Business Council of Australia echoed those concerns in a statement released Monday , saying the new workplace laws "risk holding Australia's historically low productivity back even further at a time when the economy is already stalling."

"These laws put Australia's competitiveness at risk by adding more cost and complexity to the challenge of doing business, and that means less investment and fewer job opportunities," said Bran Black, the Business Council's chief executive.

The 2022 Australia Institute survey, however, found broad support for a right to disconnect.

Only 9% of respondents said such a policy would not positively affect their lives. And the rest cited a slew of positive effects, from having more social and family time to improved mental health and job satisfaction. Thirty percent of respondents said it would enable them to be more productive during work hours.

Eurofound, the European Union agency for the improvement of living and working conditions, said in a 2023 study that workers at companies with a right to disconnect policy reported better work-life balance than those without — 92% versus 80%.

Could the trend reach the U.S.?

Australia is far from the first country to adopt this kind of protection for workers.

More than a dozen countries — mostly across Europe and South America — have enacted a version of the right to disconnect in recent years, starting with France in 2017 . Others are exploring various possible solutions to burnout, including the four-day workweek .

In Belgium, government workers no longer have to answer the boss's emails after hours

The right to disconnect hasn't reached the U.S. just yet.

A San Francisco assemblyman proposed legislation earlier this year — inspired by Australia — that would grant workers the right to disconnect outside of work, with violations punishable by fine.

It would make California the first state in the country to do so, but its future is uncertain. The bill was criticized by business groups and shelved in committee this spring.

• work-life balance
• right to disconnect