Flextime/Flexspace for All in the Organization? A Study of the Availability, Use, and Consequences of Flexible Work Arrangements for Low and High SES Employees in Nine European Countries
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for the opportunity to read this work, which addresses an important and timely issue, especially in the aftermath of the pandemic. Congratulations on the work you have done. Below are just a few suggestions aimed at enhancing the article.
The references are mostly ' old ' in the introduction and conclusion. I suggest that the authors include more current research and summarize the growing debate on new forms of work and temporal and spatial flexibility. This also serves to better contextualize this work (done a few years ago) in the context of the current debate. What does this research teach us, and how can we use it to inform and ask new questions in today's changing work context?
It is important to add a theoretical section and make the current 1.1, 1.2,1.3,1.4 sub-titles of the theoretical section.
On the analytical model, I wonder if it would not have been interesting to add the presence/absence of the union at the organizational level among the control variables. Moreover, the union should be closer to low SES employees and could play a decisive role in communicating work-life balance policies. This cue could also strengthen the interpretation in the conclusion section.
In the conclusion, when talking about the study's limitations, it would be better also to discuss the fact that this is a pre-pandemic research. Things have changed a lot since 2016, so there is a need to add authors' reflections on this and more contextualization in the current debate.
Overall, the article is good, and I found it very interesting to read.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article is very interesting and brings new threads to the research area on the determinants of flexible work.
The introduction is well written and sets the study in a broad context. The hypotheses and survey of the existing literature is also well written.
In my opinion, the research part of the article should be revised. The authors should calculate and show in a table the values of factor loadings obtained by exploratory factor analysis. This is especially true for previously unvalidated tools, i.e. commitment and wok-life conflict.
The Conclusion and Discussion chapters should be written separately.
A clear description of the research limitations should be added. A description of interpretive concerns is not enough.
A proposal for future research should be added.
Author Response
Please see the attchment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsComments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
