The purpose of the present study was to investigate the factors that may be related to employees' decisions to use the family-friendly benefits (e.g., maternity/paternity leave, flexible work schedule) that are offered to them by their employers. Research has shown that both employees and organizations benefit when employees use family-friendly benefits. However, research has also shown that many employees do not take advantage of such benefits. Studies examining this issue are limited, and much of the research that has been conducted is anecdotal and atheoretical. The present study overcame this problem by empirically examining the use of family-friendly benefits within the theoretical context of Ajzen's (1991) theory of planned behavior. The results of this study support the theory of planned behavior. Specifically, the results indicated that whether an individual perceived he/she had control over the use of family-friendly benefits was the most predictive of whether he/she intended to use them. Whether the individual perceived that others would approve of these behaviors was also predictive of intention to perform the behaviors. In addition, an individual's intention to take leave or use a flexible work schedule was the most predictive of whether he or she actually engaged in the behaviors. Implications for practice as well as future research directions are also discussed.

Socialinės apsaugos sistema susiformavo XX a., kai esant ekonominiam socialiniam pakilimui, vis labiau tapo svarbu apsaugoti darbuotoją nuo keliamų socialinių rizikų pasekmių. Socialinę apsaugą galima apibudinti kaip ne tik valstybės priemone taikoma socialinės rizikos atveju, bet ir kaip garantas, įstatyme numatytų atveju šeimai nelikti be pragyvenimo lėšų. Socialinė apsauga yra stipriai įtakojama ekonominiais rodikliais, todėl sulėtėjus ekonomikai, padidėjus socialinės apsaugos išlaidoms, valstybės turi reformuoti socialinės apsaugos sistemą. Esant tokiems ekonominiams pokyčiams, socialinės apsaugos sistema tampa nuolat kintanti ir nestabili, nors nepraranda savo esmės ir siekia savo tikslų. Socialinės rizikos kaip socialinis institutas, su apibrėžtomis ribomis, skirtas socialinės apsaugos sistemai įgyvendinti. Socialinė rizika – tai tikėtini įvykiai, nuo kurių padarinių yra numatytos socialinės apsaugos priemonės. Išskiriamos tokios tradicinės socialines rizikos: senatvė (asmuo dėl amžiaus negali užsidirbti pakankamai lėšų), neįgalumas (dalinis arba visiškas darbingo amžiaus asmens negalėjimas dirbti), nelaimingi atsitikimai darbe ar profesinė liga (ūmus darbuotojo sveikatos sutrikdymas dėl trumpalaikio pavojingo, kenksmingo darbo aplinkos poveikio arba neatsargumo, dėl kurio darbuotojas netenka darbingumo), nedarbas (asmuo ne savo noru neturi mokamo darbo ir, būdamas darbingas, negali jo rasti), motinystė (medicininė priežiūra nėštumo ir motinystės metu), sveikata... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / Social Security System was formed in the twentieth century, when a social economic upturn, has become increasingly important to protect workers from risks posed by the social consequences. Social protection can be characterized as not only the state measure of social risk, but also as a guarantor, the law provided for the family to remove the case without means of subsistence. Social security is strongly influenced by economic indicators, the slowdown of the economy, increasing social security costs, countries have to reform the social security system. With these economic changes, social security system is constantly changing and unstable, although not lose its essence and achieve its goals. Social risks as a social institute, with defined boundaries, is intended for realized social security system. Social risk - the likelihood of events, from which results are provided for social security measures. Such a distinction is made between traditional social risks: old age (the age a person can not earn enough money), invalidity (partial or total working-age person inability to work), employment injuries and occupational diseases (acute worker health-threatening disruption of short-term, harmful effects of the working environment or negligence, for which the employee ceases to work), unemployment (as a working person does not have gainful employment and can not find it), maternity benefits (medical care during pregnancy and motherhood), health (patients treatment, rehabilitation... [to full text]

No description available.