Introduction

The previous chapter showed that flexible working can lead to work encroaching on private life. This encroachment can take shape in terms of time, that is, working longer (unpaid) overtime or working during ‘free time’, and mental or cognitive space, that is, thinking about work when not at work, impacting one's capacity to fully relax and recover (Sonnentag, 2003; Sonnentag and Bayer, 2005). One pattern observed in the empirical evidence outlined in the previous chapter is that the pattern of the flexibility paradox, especially relating to overtime and long working hours, were more prevalent among men and women without children. Although we do see some patterns of the flexibility paradox among women with care responsibilities, in most cases, they were less likely to expand their working hours when they work flexibly.

This chapter aims to explain why these patterns occur. It argues that the weaker empirical evidence of the flexibility paradox found for mothers is largely due to the fact that these studies exclude an important part of the ‘work’ that is carried out in our societies, that is, namely unpaid domestic work. To quote Fraser, this is due ‘to the inadequacy of androcentric definitions of work’ (1994: 593). In other words, we cannot limit our analysis only to the measurement of paid work when examining the flexibility paradox. This is especially true when consider our original theoretical assumption of the flexibility paradox, that it is a manifestation of the subjectification of self to the capitalist model of homo-economicus as argued by Foucault (2010). Foucault argues that the pattern of subjectification is not limited to individuals exploiting their own labour as a form of entrepreneurship to maximise profits gained through the market. It also entails the need to invest in the human capital of the household, namely through one's children as a part of the formation of their human capital, in the form of caregiving.

In the next section, I will go into greater detail, using the works of Foucault and feminist theories of parenting such as that of Hays (1998) and Wall (2010), to explain why for women the pattern of the flexibility paradox may not necessarily be evident through the expansion of their working hours, but through the expansion of their hours spent in childcare and housework.