Are we tilting towards work in the work-life balance equation, asks Gina Passarella in an article in Law.com. The article speaks of young associates asking for more assignments- at the cost of work-life balance- to keep their jobs in a downturn which is affecting all sections of society.
Some argue that the downturn actually presents a terrific opportunity for firms to work with innovative flex-time and telecommute options, as distinct from the more conventional way of taking on more people on their rolls.
Interesting points. But to my mind, there is no question about basics.
I believe that work-life balance as a concept is built on the basic assumption that the person has work. If the person has no job, I might argue, the question of achieving such a balance simply does not arise.
There is no point in finding out if the person would prefer more cash in hand or deferred stock options- if we are not sure whether the person has a job at all.