Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 107 (2013) 4 12

Evaluation of Learning for Performance Improvement International Conference

Malaysia, 25 26 February, 2013

Non Standard Work Arrangements and Affective

Commitment: the Mediating Role of Work-Life Balance
Muhamad Khalil Omar*
Universiti Teknologi MARA, Faculty of Business Management, Kuala Selangor 43200, Malaysia

Abstract
This paper aims to determine the relationship of non-standard work arrangements such as non-standard work status,
schedule, shift and hours towards work-life balance and affective commitment of services employees in Malaysia. Its
secondary aim is to contribute to the literature by determining the mediating role of work-life balance in the
relationship between non-standard work arrangements and affective commitment using analysis of Structural
Equation Modelling. The results suggest that the preferences for standard or non-standard work arrangements are the
elements which affect the employees satisfaction with work-life balance and affective commitment. The
hypothesised model indicates the best fit for the mediating role of satisfaction with work-life balance.

2013The
Published
Elsevier
Ltd. Selection
peer-review under responsibility of Universiti Malaysia
2013
Authors. by
Published
by Elsevier
Ltd. Openand
access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
Kelantan,
Malaysia
Selection and
peer-review under responsibility of Universiti Malaysia Kelantan, Malaysia
Keywords: Non-standard work arrangements; work-life balance; affective commitment; non-standard employment

1. Introduction
Current human resource practices have developed tremendously in last few decades due to the process of
globalisation, technological advancement and social improvements. Work arrangements nowadays have
been developed into two types, which are standard and non-standard. Standard work arrangement is
traditional staffing practices involving the employment of permanent and full-time workers who are
working in normal work schedules, shifts and hours (Walker, 2011). Whereas non-standard work
arrangements are for modern staffing practices with the employment of non-permanent workers (i.e., parttime, contractual, temporary and etc) and flexible work schedules, shifts and hours (McNall, Masuda, &
Nicklin, 2010). Polivka and Nardone (1989, p.11) defined non-standard employment as "...any job in
which individual does not have an explicit or implicit contract for long-term employment or one in which
*

Muhamad Khalil Omar. Tel.: +6-012-308-9147; fax: +6-035-544-4693.

E-mail address: khalil.omar@salam.uitm.edu.my.

1877-0428 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of Universiti Malaysia Kelantan, Malaysia
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.392

Muhamad Khalil Omar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 107 (2013) 4 12

the minimum hours worked can vary in a non-systematic way." Therefore, this study defines non-standard
employment as any flexible work arrangements that do not include permanent full-time status and normal
working schedule, shift and hours.
1.1 Non-standard work arrangements and affective commitment
The studies of non-standard work arrangements have evolved since early 90s as accordance with the
advancement of human resource practices. Non-standard workers are acknowledged to differ
demographically from standard employees, but the extent to which their work attitudes differ is less clear
(Holtom, Lee, & Tidd, 2002). Hence the early studies of non-standard work arrangements were mostly
concentrated in identifying the effect of non-standard employments towards work-related attitudes such
as job satisfaction, commitment and turnover intention, and comparison with standard employees
(Thorsteinson, 2003). However, past research findings comparing the job attitudes of standard and nonstandard workers have been conflicting and inconclusive (Conelly, Gallagher, & Giley, 2007). In terms of
commitment levels of part-time and full-time employees, inconsistent findings have emerged as well.
Studies have found part-time workers to be more affectively committed than full-timers (e.g. Martin &
Sinclair, 2007). However there were studies that have revealed that part-timers to be less committed (e.g.,
Han, Moon, & Yun, 2009). Conversely, there were also studies that revealed part-timers as equally
committed to their jobs as compared to full-time workers (e.g., Hill, Martinson, Ferris, & Baker, 2004).
Studies comparing commitment levels between permanent and temporary workers also illustrated
contradictory outcomes. Van Dyne and Ang (1998) found that temporary workers have more positive
views of their psychological contracts and high affective commitment, as they view the flexibility of
contingent work and their consequent ability to balance a professional career and their other life interests
as important inducements by their organizations. In contrary, Coyle-Shapiro and Morrow (2006)
concurred that permanent workers are more committed than temporary workers. In addition, Pearce
(1993) did not find any significant difference in terms of commitment level between permanent and
temporary or contract employees.
To deal with all the discrepancies in prior research of non-standard work arrangements and its
relationship with work-related attitudes, a new concept of work-status congruence based on discrepancy
theory was used in this study. This new construct was developed by Holtom et al. (2002), and in their
study, work status congruence is defined as the degree to which employers match employee preference
for standard or non-standard work arrangements (i.e. work status, schedule, shift, and hours). Their
studies had indicated that work status congruence was positively related with affective commitment and
job satisfaction. Carr, Gregory and Harris (2010) validated Holtom et al.s (2002) study and there were
significant relationship between work status congruence and affective commitment as well as
organisational citizenship behaviour. The work status congruence is theorised as a unifying concept to the
inconsistent empirical findings regarding the attitudes of employees in standard and non-standard work
arrangements. Besides, the results of prior studies also suggested that work status congruence is broader
than a simple match between desired and actual staffing arrangements (e.g. full-time or part-time) and
should include congruent preferences for scheduling arrangements (i.e. work schedule, shift and hours).
However, in Holtom et al.s (2002) study, work-status congruence using its new comprehensive measure
was operationalised as full-time and part-time only without inclusion of temporary and permanent
dimensions and its effect towards the work-life balance study was untested. The construct was also not
being assessed as in hypothesized framework using structural equation modelling. Hence, this study
beside to cope with the limitation of tested outcome variables, sample and analysis technique of work
status congruence, it will further extend it towards work-life balance studies which has not been
empirically examined before.

Muhamad Khalil Omar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 107 (2013) 4 12

1.2 Non-standard work arrangements and work-life balance

The articulation of work and life, cast as work-life balance, has become a key feature of much current
government policymakers, practitioner and academic debate (Hyman & Summers, 2004). However,
Moore (2007) explains that defining the "balance" in work/life is as unique to each individual as
individuals are themselves. Recent changes in the nature of careers elevate a stronger concern for
balancing work and non-work lives and flexible working options, which also known as non-standard
work arrangements and are offered as work-life balance policies or initiatives allowing employers to
appear employee-friendly whilst meeting business needs (Fleetwood, 2007). As concern for balancing
work and non-work roles grows, work schedule flexibility, or the ease with which employees can change
their work hours, may be a work characteristic that is increasingly favoured by employees (Jang, Park, &
Zippay, 2011).
Therefore, the use of several life-friendly policies and practices (e.g., flexible work schedules or nonstandard work arrangements) are likely to reduce work-family conflicts and personal stress as well as
enhancing the work attitudes of employees (Sturges & Guest, 2004). Although the use of organisational
work-life program has been shown to reduce work-family conflict (Aryee, Srivinas, & Tan, 2005), the
studies of the effects of work-life balance by using flexible work options have been incoherent in their
results and consequences. Higgins, Duxbury, and Johnson (2000) for instance, highlighted that nonstandard employment such as part-time offers the best of both worlds since it enables employees to
pursue their career interests while still affording time to be with their families. On the contrary, it has
been argued that the low fringe benefits, routine tasks, and limited career advancement opportunities that
characterize most part-time jobs, make it more difficult for individuals to balance family demands
(Hyman & Summers, 2004). Furthermore, Wayne, Randel, and Stevens (2006) also found that
family/life-friendly benefits were not related with work-family enrichment. Additionally, Moores (2007)
two-year-long ethnographic and in-depth interview study at an Anglo-German automobile factory did not
found that flexible work arrangements were necessarily good for work-life balance. Instead it contributed
to poor balance. Moore questioned whether flexible working practices have a positive or negative
influence on work-life balance depends on the circumstances of the individual. Whereas, Baral and
Bhargava (2010) discovered that there were no associations between the 22 items of work-life benefits
and policies and work-family enrichment.
Hence the utilisation of work status congruence in this study as a unifying concept of non-standard
work arrangements (due to inclusion congruent preferences for work status, schedule, shift and hours) is
expected to overcome the inconsistencies of the effects of non-standard employment towards employees
work-life balance. Consequently, past studies have shown that work-life balance is positively related
employees affective commitment (Sturges & Guest, 2004). Based on existing literatures, the following
hypotheses are derived to identify each of the variables relationship in a framework; Hypotheses 1: There
is a relationship between work status congruence and satisfaction with work-life balance; Hypotheses 2:
There is a relationship between work status congruence and affective commitment; Hypotheses 3: There
is a relationship between satisfaction with work-life balance and affective commitment; Hypotheses 4:
The relationship between work status congruence and affective commitment is mediated by satisfaction
with work-life balance.
2. Methodology
This research was conducted in quantitative manner with concentration on survey method to enable it
to be more conclusive and exclusive since the samples involved all dimensions of standard and nonstandard employment status including full-time and part-time as well as permanent and contractual or
temporary basis. The method of sampling for this research was convenience sampling because of its
procedures involve collecting information from members of the population who are conveniently
available to provide pertinent information related to the study. The instrument for this research was a
standardized questionnaire, as it provides an opportunity for the respondents to reply in full and honest

Muhamad Khalil Omar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 107 (2013) 4 12

answers. The distribution of questionnaires was conducted in various organizations which represented
various kinds of services and retail industries such as hotels, restaurants, hypermarkets, banking and
hospitals. Additionally, data was collected from various ranks of employees in the organization ranging
from non-clerical to lower managements. This is important so that the findings will be based on mixture
of opinion regardless of employment status and to minimize bias of differences in task performed as these
were among the limitations from the previous studies.
In addition, the distribution of these questionnaires was done in various organizations located in Klang
Valley area of Malaysia (covering territory of Kuala Lumpur and Selangor) since these areas are the most
developed area in this country. Majority of companies operating under services sector has been setting up
their main premises and headquarters here and employing most numbers of workers in this area. The
collected data was analysed using Structural Equation Modelling (SEM), an analytic technique that
provides an overall test of model fit and an assessment of model parameters (Byrne, 2010). Thus data
could be processed comprehensively in order for the findings to be accurately presented in this study. By
using SEM, various kinds of analysis methods was used to completely exploit the gathered data into a
reliable results and workable solution as well as in order to ensure validation of measurements and
confirmation of causality framework as hypothesized in order to achieve approachable conclusion and
recommendations.
The following measures were used in this study were adapted from various research, as this study will
further validate the adapted measure as well as provides valuable contributions in extending prior works
of studies in non-standard employment and work-life balance; work status congruence (Holtom et al.,
2002). This 7-point scale was used to assess an employees congruent preferences for his/her work status,
schedule, shift and hours. Satisfaction with worklife balance (Valcour, 2007). This 7-point scale was
used to assess an employees satisfaction with his/her work-life balance. This scale was once called as
satisfaction with work-family balance by Valcour (2007), but renamed as work-life in this study. This is
because as an adapted scale, the instrument was adjusted to include personal life rather than using the
word family only to make items equally relevant to respondents with and without family and to
accommodate other non-work concerns of employees. Affective commitment was assessed with six-item
measure developed by Meyer, Allen, and Smith (1993). Responses were based on a Likert scale (1 =
strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). The alpha reliability coefficient was .85.
3. Results and Discussion
Anderson and Gerbings (1988) two-step approach to structural equation modeling is used as a
guideline for the data analysis. According to Anderson and Gerbing (1988), the first step requires
development of a measurement model. The measurement model in the SEM model deals with the latent
variables and their indicators. A pure measurement model is a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model
in which there is unmeasured covariance between each possible pair of latent variables. The measurement
model is evaluated like any other SEM model, using goodness of fit measures. Secondly, full structural
model was executed, so that all hypothesised relationship between all latent variables and its observed
variables can be tested, hence ascertaining the overall fit of the causal model towards the sample data.
The AMOS program version 18.0 with maximum likelihood estimation was used to estimate the
confirmatory and structural equation models in this study. Most of the respondents were in the age of
between 20 to 29 years old (51%). Female dominated male respondents by 76% and most of the
respondents were from the Malay ethnicity (60.7%), singles (53%), having secondary education or
holding diploma/certificate (88%), working low levels (81%) and mostly full-time (76.6%).
3.1 Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)
A CFA was carried out for each of the three latent variables or construct of this study namely work
status congruence, satisfaction with work life balance and affective commitment due to the reason for
identifying only significant standardised parameter estimates as validity coefficient. Hence using this

Muhamad Khalil Omar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 107 (2013) 4 12

analysis, the best indicator for a particular construct shall be determined. Next, full measurement model
was developed to identify the overall fir of all variables under study; and at the same time identifying the
discriminant validity for each construct by comparing it with other alternative models. After performing
CFA for these three constructs, the fit indices generally indicate a not so well fitting model since the
normed chi-square (5.464) is significant and above the recommended range. However other fit indices are
as follows: RMSEA (.071), NFI (.883), TLI (.889), and CFI (.902). An examination of the AMOS output,
including standardized factor weights and modification index, identified an error covariance between a
few items i.e. e2 with e5, e13 with e14, e8 with e 9 and e15 with e18. This error covariance is justifiable
as the items reflected a high level of similarity. The fit indices after model revised generally reflect a high
level of fit. The absolute fit index of RMSEA (.054) provides evidence that the model fits the data well.
The incremental or comparative fit indices also indicate a good fit with the TLI (.935), CFI (.944), and
NFI (.925) being above the recommended minimum value of .90. The normed chi- square (CMIN/DF) of
3.606 also near the recommended range of maximum three.
3.2 Full measurement model
In this study, work status congruence, satisfaction with work-life balance and affective commitment
were treated as a 3 Factor model considering the differences involved. Based on AMOS results, this
measurement model was adequate and has fit the data very well since all the indices were above
minimum requirement for best fit model, i.e TLI (.935), CFI (.944), NFI (.925), RMSEA (.54) and
normed chi- square (CMIN/DF) of 3.606. However, before the testing of the next step of hypothesised
structural model is conducted, it was essential to identify construct validity by comparing this
measurement model with other alternative models. This shall be gained by assessing the discriminant
validity, which refers to the extent to which a certain construct is different from other constructs. Hence,
in this full measurement model, all the three constructs (i.e. 3 Factor Model) need to be tested for
discriminant validity, so that it can verify that the scales developed to measure different constructs, are
indeed measuring different constructs (Byrne, 2010). Consequently, the discriminant validity of each
construct shall be ascertained using model comparison with 2 Factor Model (if there were 2 groups of
construct which were discriminant, i.e work status congruence and satisfaction with work-life balance
were in 1 group of construct and affective commitment was in the other) and 1 Factor Model (if none of
the construct were discriminant i.e work status congruence, satisfaction with work-life balance and
affective commitment were the same).
Based on AMOS results, this measurement model was adequate and has fit the data very well since all
the indices were above minimum requirement for best fit model, i.e TLI (.935), CFI (.944), NFI (.925),
RMSEA (.54) and normed chi-square (CMIN/DF) of 3.606. However, before the testing of the next step
of hypothesised structural model is conducted, it was essential to identify construct validity of this full
measurement model which shall be achieved by comparing this measurement model with other alternative
models. This shall be gained by assessing the discriminant validity which refers to the extent to which a
certain construct is different from other constructs. Hence in this full measurement model, all 3 constructs
need to be tested for discriminant validity so that it can verify that the scales developed to measure
different constructs, are indeed measuring different constructs (Byrne, 2010). Hence, this discriminant
validity of each construct shall be ascertained using model comparison with 2 Factor Model (if there were
2 groups of construct which were discriminant i.e work status congruence and satisfaction with work-life
balance were in 1 group of construct and affective commitment was in the other) and 1 Factor Model (if
none of the construct were discriminant i.e work status congruence, satisfaction with work-life balance
and affective commitment were the same).

Muhamad Khalil Omar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 107 (2013) 4 12

Table 1. Model fit summary (model comparison for measurement)

Model
Model 1 (1 Factor)
Model 2 (2 Factor)
Model 3 (3 Factor)
Differences (Model 3-1)
Differences (Model 3-2)
Note: * p0.001

2
739.698
673.424
587.713

df
166
164
163
3
1

151.985*
85.711*

2/df
4.456
4.106
3.606

NFI
.905
.914
.925

CFI
.925
.933
.944

TLI
.914
.923
.935

RMSEA
.062
.059
.054

Based on Table 1, it was found that the 3-Factor Model which is the full measurement model under
study was the best model that mostly fitted the samples data very well. This model was having the
smallest , CMIN/DF and RMSEA. In addition, the hypothesized measurement model was the best fit
since all of its goodness-of-fit were more than the required value and the highest among other model for
fine-fitting model (i.e. NFI, CFI and TLI of > .90). Hence, this model was more superior as compared to
other models. Furthermore, in assessing the extent to which a model exhibited the best fit, a univariate
approach was used to determine if the difference in fit between the three models were statistically
significant. As such, the differences in () values between the three models was examined with the
presumption that all models were nested and a significant indicating substantial improvement in
model fit. Comparison of 3-Factor Model with other models have yielded a differences in of 151.985 if
to compare with 1-Factor Model and differences of 85.711 if to compare with 2-Factor Model; while all
the differences in () were significant since p-value was < .000. Hence it was certain that all of these
constructs in the full measurement model under study were having discriminant validity, thus it was
confirmed that the scales that were developed to measure different constructs, were indeed measuring
different constructs.
3.3 Full structural model
Since the full measurement model was successfully conducted for each of constructs under this study,
and it was satisfied that the measurement model was valid and well fitted to the data, thus it was best to
proceed to full structural model to test the hypothesized research model between latent variables with full
SEM. By executing the full structural model, then the hypothesised relationship between latent variables
can be tested hence ascertaining the overall fit of the proposed model towards the samples data. In
addition, once the full structural model was satisfied, the mediation effect shall be further testified against
the alternatives. Based on the results of full measurement model and the proposed research framework as
explained in the Methodology section, the full structural model was developed as per Figure 1.
Based on Figure 1, certain constructs were modified during CFA and measurement model, and the
relationship of each of the variables and its indicators were examined to test the hypotheses as well as to
identify whether the proposed model fit the data well. As shown in Figure 1, satisfaction with work-life
balance was hypothesised as partial mediating variables between work status congruence and Affective
Commitment. Hence, this proposed model need to be verified against other alternative models i.e. Full
Mediation Model (no direct relationship between work status congruence and Affective Commitment)
and Non-Mediation Model (no direct relationship between affective commitment and Job Satisfaction).
By accomplishing this model comparison verification, the best model shall be ascertained hence testifying
the proposed partial mediation model and at the same time proving the whole model fit towards data
sample.
Based on results in estimates, it was found that all variables and their indicators were significantly
related in a positive way. Hence, it is confirmed that there is a relationship between work status
congruence and satisfaction with work-life balance hence supporting Hypotheses 1 with a significant
standardised regression weight of .509. Similarly for Hypotheses 2, it is verified that there is a
relationship between work status congruence and affective commitment with a significant standardised

10

Muhamad Khalil Omar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 107 (2013) 4 12

regression weight of .253. As for Hypotheses 3, it was testified that there is a relationship between
satisfaction with work-life balance and affective commitment with a significant standardised regression
weight of .615.

e21
WLB7

1
1

Satisfaction with
Work-Life Balance
e1

e2
e3
e4
e5
e6

e7

1
1

1
1
1

WSC1

WSC4

WLB5

WLB4

WLB2

WSC3
Work Status
Congruence

e14

WLB6

WLB3

WSC2

WLB1

e13
e12

e11

e10

e9

e8

WSC5
WSC6
WSC7

AC6
AC5

Affective
Commitment

AC4
AC3

e22

AC2
AC1

e20

1
e19
1

e18

1
e17
1

e16
e15

Figure 1: Full structural model

Based on Table 2, it was found that the proposed Partial Mediation Model which is the full structural
model under study was the best model that mostly fitted the samples data very well. This model was
having the smallest , CMIN/DF and RMSEA. In addition, the hypothesised partial mediation model was
the best fit since all of its goodness-of-fit were more than the required value and the highest among other
model for fine-fitting model (i.e. NFI, CFI and TLI of > .90). Hence this model was more superior as
compared to other models thus supporting Hypotheses 4 that the relationship between work status
congruence and affective commitment is mediated by satisfaction with work-life balance. Furthermore, in
assessing the extent to which a model exhibited the best fit, a univariate approach was used to determine
if the difference in fit between the three models were statistically significant. As such, the differences in
() values between the three models was examined and in comparison with 2 other models have
yielded a differences in of 80.915 if to compare with Full Mediation Model and differences of 11.448 if

11

Muhamad Khalil Omar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 107 (2013) 4 12

to compare with Non Mediation Model; while all the differences in () were significant since p-value
was .001.
Table 2. Model fit summary (model comparison for mediation)
Model
Model 1 (Partial Mediation)
Model 2 (Full Mediation)
Model 3 (Non mediation)
Differences (Model 3-1)
Differences (Model 3-2)
Note: * p0.001

2
587.713
668.628
599.161

Df
163
164
164
1
1

80.915*
11.448*

2/df
3.606
4.077
3.653

NFI
.925
.914
.923

CFI
.944
.934
.943

TLI
.935
.934
.943

RMSEA
.054
.059
.055

4. Conclusions
This research has made its contributions with regard to the body of knowledge especially in extending
the concept of work status congruence in work-life balance studies. Moreover, operationalisations of
work status congruence and satisfaction with work-life balance were enhanced by inclusion of other nonwork activities and expanded on the subject of non-standard and temporary workers. Hence, this research
has complemented prior studies of non-standard employment and work-life balance especially in
substantiating positive impact of both domains towards affective commitment. Furthermore, effect of
satisfaction with work-life balance as a mediator in work status congruence and affective commitment
relationship has been established thus supporting previous scholars call for such confirmation.
References
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and
recommend two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411-423.
Aryee, S., Srinivas, E. S., & Tan, H. H. (2005). Rhythms of life: Antecedents and outcomes of work
family balance in employed parents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 132146.
Baral, R., & Bhargava, S. (2010). Work-family enrichment as a mediator between organizational
interventions for work-life balance and job outcomes. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25(3), 274300.
Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and
programming (2nd ed.). NY: Routledge Academic.
Carr, J. C., Gregory, B. T., & Harris, S. G. (2010). Work status congruences relation to employee
attitudes and behaviors: The moderating role of procedural justice. Journal of Business Psychology,
25, 583592. DOI 10.1007/s10869-009-9151-z
Connelly, C. E., Gallagher, D. G., & Gilley, K. M. (2007). Organizational and client commitment among
contracted employees: A replication and extension with temporary workers. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 69, 326335.
Coyle-Shapiro, J. A-M., & Morrow, P. C. (2006). Organisational and client commitment among
contracted employees. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 68, 416-431.
Fleetwood, S. (2007). Why worklife balance now? International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 18(3), 387400.
Han, S.-S., Moon, S. J., & Yun, E. K. (2009). Empowerment, job satisfaction, and organizational
commitment: Comparison of permanent and temporary nurses in Korea. Applied Nursing Research,
22, 1520.
Higgins, C., Duxbury, L., & Johnson, K. L. (2000). Part-time work for women: Does it really help
balance work and family? Human Resource Management, 39(1), 1732.

12

Muhamad Khalil Omar / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 107 (2013) 4 12

Hill, E. J., Ferris, M., & Martinson, V. (2003). Does it matter where you work? a comparison of how
three work venues (traditional office, virtual office, and home office) influence aspects of work and
personal/family life. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63(2), 220241.
Holtom, B. C., Lee, T. W., & Tidd, S. T. (2002). The relationship between work status congruence and
work-related attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(5), 903915.
Hyman, J., & Summers, J. (2004). Lacking balance? Work-life employment practices in the modern
economy. Personnel Review, 33(4), 418-429.
Jang, S. J., Park, R., & Zippay, A. (2011). The interaction effects of scheduling control and worklife
balance programs on job satisfaction and mental health. International Journal Social Welfare, 20,
135143. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2397.2010.00739.x
Martin, J. E., & Sinclair, R. R. (2007). A typology of the part-time workforce: Differences on job
attitudes and turnover. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80(2), 301319.
McNall, L. A., Masuda, A. D., & Nicklin, J. M. (2010). Flexible work arrangements, job satisfaction, and
turnover intentions: The mediating role of work-to-family enrichment. The Journal of Psychology,
144(1), 6181.
Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations:
extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538
551.
Moore, F. (2007). Work-life balance: contrasting managers and workers in an MNC. Employee Relations,
29(4), 385-399.
Pearce, J. L. (1993). Toward an organizational behavior of contract laborers: Their psychological
involvement and effects on employee coworkers. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 10821096.
Polivka, A. E., & Nardone, T. (1989). The definition of contingent work. Monthly Labor Review, 112, 916.
Sturges, J., & Guest, D. (2004). Working to live or living to work? Work/life balance early in the career.
Human Resource Management Journal, 14(4), 5-20.
Thorsteinson, T. J. (2003). Job attitudes of part-time versus full-time workers: a meta analytic review.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 151-77.
Valcour, M. (2007). Work-based resources as moderators of the relationship between work hours and
satisfaction with workfamily balance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 15121523.
Van Dyne, L., & Ang, S. (1998). Organizational citizenship behavior of contingent workers in Singapore.
Academy of Management Journal, 41, 692703.
Walker, B. (2011). How does non-standard employment affect workers? A consideration of the evidence.
New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 36(3), 14-29.
Wayne, J. H., Randel, A. E., & Stevens, J. (2006). The role of identity and workfamily support in work
family enrichment and its work-related consequences. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 69(3), 445461.