Is There an “Ideal Remote Worker”? The Gendered Implications of the Rise of Remote Work

Abstract

Scholars have previously theorized that employers believe an “ideal worker” is completely committed to work, which conflicts with widely held cultural beliefs of “mothers” as primarily devoted to caregiving. These theories assume employers utilize traditional work arrangements, including an in-person setting. But the rapid expansion of remote work, often assumed to be a more flexible work arrangement, raises the question: is there an “ideal remote worker?” Using an online survey experiment, we explore evaluators’ gender and parental status preferences when assessing candidates for in-person or remote positions. We find that the effect of parental status on certain hiring outcomes is negative and similar in magnitude for women and men candidates for in-person positions. However, among candidates for remote positions, the effect of parental status is more negative for women than for men. The difference in parental status penalties across remote versus in-person positions is explained by participants’ consistent beliefs that mothers are less committed to work than nonmothers, combined with increased concern with invisible productivity in remote work. We conclude that while the rise of remote work may have appealing features for parents, business leaders will need to ensure that these benefits are equally accessible to women and men.