The autonomy paradox, working from home and psychosocial hazards

Alexis Vassiley et al.

Journal of Industrial Relations2025https://doi.org/10.1177/00221856251315859article
AJG 2ABDC A
Weight
0.54

Abstract

This article investigates the experience of knowledge workers in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, who worked from home during the COVID-19 pandemic to understand their exposure to psychosocial hazards, specifically: workload and work pace; the work-home interface and social isolation. We explored how the increased autonomy afforded by working from home fitted with workers’ actual experience during the pandemic. Drawing on interviews with 33 NSW remote workers and 19 line-managers conducted in early 2021, this article argues that the increased autonomy afforded to employees by remote work is paradoxical. Many interviewees worked longer hours and experienced work intensification, as well as an unwelcome blurring of the work and home spheres. The phenomenon of greater work output was bound up in the trust between workers and line management. Further, interviewees experienced a sense of social isolation. The potential for work intensification, blurring, and social isolation all featured in the working from home literature before COVID-19. This article provides a novel application of the ‘autonomy paradox’ concept, by integrating it within the framework of psychosocial workplace hazards.

9 citations

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/00221856251315859

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{alexis2025,
  title        = {{The autonomy paradox, working from home and psychosocial hazards}},
  author       = {Alexis Vassiley et al.},
  journal      = {Journal of Industrial Relations},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/00221856251315859},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

The autonomy paradox, working from home and psychosocial hazards

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.54

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.52 × 0.4 = 0.21
M · momentum0.72 × 0.15 = 0.11
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.