Source:http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20120109_11_A1_CUTLIN855059

The article is essentially about how more and more men are moving over from full time employment to part time employment. Whilst initially the article suggests that the recent global economic recession was a causational factor in this shift, it later goes on to add that changing lifestyle choices could have also contributed. Additionally, interviews with a number of fathers who had taken the plunge into the temporary jobs market revealed that they also enjoyed the freedom to spend more time with their children than fathers in previous generations did. Finally, statistical data is provided at the end of the article to back up its claims with regards to the shift towards temporary employment amongst the male demographic.

The key reason I chose this article was because I thought it was up to date with modern mindsets and was backed by compelling data. Additionally, felt that it tied in very closely with the concept of balancing valuations of time spent at work and time spent away from work in terms of opportunity cost.

In the discussion in class, it was noted that there were varying perceptions of precisely what it was that constituted work life balance. There were, of course, a series of varying opinions as regards the topic. One theme however, that stood out, was that of opportunity cost. It seems that people nowadays value their time differently. Whilst previously time that could be potentially spent working had a far higher value on it than time that could have been spent at leisure, one finds this no longer to be the case. This assumption is borne out in the article where it is noted that where American fathers used to spend an average of 2 hours a week with their child, now they spend about 4.

I must admit that I was quite surprised by the trend noted in the article. In a Singaporean society where the social emphasis lies on hard work as well as what historians and sociologists have termed ‘Asian values’, the thought of leaving a job with a stable income for an impermanent position is unthinkable. The article therefore came as something of a surprise as it highlighted the stark differences that exist between our different societies.

My question therefore is; will the positions of our two societies as pertaining to striking some form of appropriate balance between work and non-work ever converge? To my mind, these processes of harmonization are inevitable, given the current rate of globalization.