The well-being economy prioritizes human and ecological well-being over material growth. Working-time reduction (WTR) is a promising measure to enhance work-life balance and potentially improve both human well-being and environmental sustainability. Happiness economics suggests that reduced consumption doesn't necessarily harm well-being, and time-use research highlights the importance of time allocation for well-being. Reduced working time can yield environmental benefits through reduced income and consumption (the income effect) and less environmentally intensive use of additional time (the time-use effect). However, the effectiveness depends on the type of WTR and how individuals reallocate their time. Flexible benefits plans, increasingly popular in Belgium, allow employees to choose additional leave. This study examines the motives for choosing additional leave in such a plan and how employees plan to use this extra time, addressing the gap in research on this specific type of WTR and its socio-environmental impacts. The study uses data from a Belgian media company.

The literature on flexible benefits plans is limited and outdated, focusing on aspects beyond employee motives and time use. Therefore, the study draws from the broader WTR literature. Motives for WTR are categorized into push (negative aspects of work), pull (desire for leisure), and barriers (factors hindering WTR). Pull drivers primarily focus on personal well-being improvement, while push drivers address professional well-being shortcomings. Environmental motives are rarely explicitly stated. Regarding time use, studies have examined changes in time allocation after WTR to assess well-being or environmental impacts. Significant changes were observed in domestic work, childcare, and personal care, while moderate changes occurred in leisure, social activities, education, and voluntary work. The impact on transport varied across studies.

This study employed a mixed-methods approach using data from a Belgian media company. Quantitative data were collected through administrative data (N=1040) and an online survey (N=241) in March 2022. The survey included socio-demographic, work-related, and personal characteristics, including planned time use for 18 activities (based on the Belgian Time Use Survey of 2013) using a 5-point Likert scale. Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured interviews (N=13) in July and August 2022 with employees who had chosen at least 5 additional leave days. Cluster analysis was used to group employees based on motives and planned time use. Template analysis was applied to the interview data. The study considers potential self-selection bias due to the sampling method.

Cluster analysis based on motives revealed three clusters: work-life balancers (low work intensity, sufficient time for leisure, sufficient standard leave, low difficulty in taking leave), time-strapped leave seekers (high work intensity, insufficient time for leisure, insufficient standard leave, low difficulty in taking leave), and leave-sufficient non-seekers (high difficulty in taking up standard leave, high sufficiency of standard leave). Time-strapped leave seekers are primarily women with children and lower seniority. Leave-sufficient non-seekers are mostly men with higher salaries and seniority. Descriptive statistics on planned time use show that leave-choosing employees plan to spend more time on family, friends, rest, hobbies, and household chores. Over half plan to travel more. Cluster analysis of planned time use identified two clusters: in-house caregivers (more time on care activities) and outdoor leisure spenders (more time on diverse activities including social and individual leisure and travel). In-house caregivers are older and more likely to be parents, while outdoor leisure spenders are younger and less likely to be parents. Template analysis of interviews revealed that motives for choosing additional leave are complex, involving a mix of push and pull factors, personal beliefs about the income-leisure trade-off, and contextual factors. Flexibility in using additional leave days was also highlighted as a key benefit.

The findings indicate that the desire for more leisure and difficulty in using standard leave are key factors driving the choice for additional leave. Socio-demographic differences exist among employee groups with different preferences. Planned time use aligns with the motivation for increased leisure and varies with family structure. The potential for well-being improvements through increased autonomy and leisure is evident, but this might be offset by substituting paid work with unpaid care. The environmental impact is complex; while travel is significant, many preferred activities have low environmental impacts. The study highlights the need for considering both income and time-use effects when assessing environmental impacts of WTR.

This mixed-methods study provides valuable insights into the motives and planned time use of additional leave within flexible benefits plans. The results suggest that this specific form of WTR can contribute to a well-being economy by enhancing autonomy and leisure time. Future research should address the limitations of this case study by expanding the sample, using panel data, and exploring contexts where flexibility is less pervasive. Comparative studies across different WTR schemes are also needed.

The study's limitations include its single-company focus, cross-sectional data (leading to planned time use rather than actual time use), self-selection bias in both survey and interview samples, and potential bias in interview findings due to participant selection and hypothetical questions. Data collection during the COVID-19 pandemic may have affected travel behaviour data.