Résultats de recherche

1. Objectifs

Intentions :
«This paper explores male lawyers’ use of MTs [mobile technologies] for work–family interface across organisational positions and national contexts through analysis [….] with Finnish and Canadian male lawyers.» (p. 1389)

2. Méthode

Échantillon/Matériau :
«The study uses a sample of male lawyers from private law practice in Helsinki, Finland (n = 20) and Montreal, Quebec, Canada (n = 14).» (p. 1346) «The men in [this] sample – middle-class, well-educated professionals – are employed in organisational settings where conflicting values of parenthood and business are most acute. The interviewees ranged in age from 32 to 68 years. All interviewees were either married or cohabiting.» (p. 1347)

Instruments :
Guide d’entretien semi-directif

Type de traitement des données :
Analyse de contenu

3. Résumé

«The results show that the issue of work–family boundary management is not as simple as it may seem in light of varied organisational norms that encourage men to prioritise sudden unanticipated work demands over family time […]. Men differ in their preferences and strategies of work–family boundary permeability. These differences are related to national differences in policies that encourage and legitimate fathers’ involvement in family life. In Finland, male lawyers more readily embraced family responsibilities, having taken on greater involvement since the birth of their children. At the same time, they were also more inclined to set firm boundaries on work spillover to family life. Yet, the male breadwinner remains a culturally and professionally salient model, especially for Canadian fathers whose spouses are more likely to carry the bulk of responsibility for childcare and housework. Canadian male lawyers also experienced greater pressure to be ‘on call’ at all times via MTs. When they brought legal work home these work hours were typically in addition to, rather than a substitute for, law office time commitments. Not surprisingly, these men were more skeptical about the prospect of remote work and MTs to promote work–life balance.» (p. 1407)

1. Objectifs

Intentions :
In this study, authors «have examined the use of paternity and parental leaves and the motives behind their decisions among male lawyers in Helsinki and Montreal.» (p. 313)

2. Méthode

Échantillon/Matériau :
The sample is composed of 38 «male lawyers who work or have worked in private law practice. The empirical material originates from two separate sets of interviews conducted in 2011, when six Quebecois male lawyers were interviewed, and in 2016, when 20 Finnish male lawyers and 12 Quebecois male lawyers were interviewed.» (p. 306-307) They come from various law firms in Helsinki and Montreal.

Instruments :
Guide d’entretien semi-directif

Type de traitement des données :
Analyse de contenu

3. Résumé

Results show that the «use of paternity leave, particularly the portion of it that can be combined with maternity leave, is less stigmatised among lawyers in Finland, probably owing to its longer tradition and national outreach. In Montreal, paternity leave policy is relatively young and is limited to the Québec province. To avoid jeopardising their careers, Quebecois male lawyers refrain from using parental leave and instead use annual holiday time. Additionally, work organisation at Finnish law firms enables men to use paternity leave, especially if they are at an early stage in their careers. However, more individualistic work organisation at law firms in Montreal – which places extensive expectations on young lawyers in the areas of marketing, networking and recruiting potential clients – discourages their use of paternity leave. Only those who feel very confident about their careers and have collegial support from their peers take the leave. While society has evolved in Finland and Québec, where fathers are offered paternity leave and the chance to share parental leave, the gendered organisation of work in law firms does not yet acknowledge men as caregiving parents. Thus, the existence of paternity leave at law firms is not enough to make men feel comfortable using it if there are few incentives. Law firms are doing very little to encourage male lawyers to claim their statutory rights as fathers.» (p. 313-314)