The trend of working remotely has been slowly increasing globally since 2015, with a one to three percent annual increase rate. However, the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 upended the world economy and global markets. Employment trends were no exception to this, with the share of employees working remotely increasing to some 27 percent in 2022 from just 13 percent two years prior. The industry with the highest share of remote workers globally in 2023 was by far the technology sector, with over 67 percent of tech employees worldwide working fully or mostly remotely. How are employers dealing with remote work? Many employers around the world have already adopted some remote work policies. According to IT industry leaders, reasons for remote work adoption ranged from a desire to broaden a company’s talent pool, increase productivity, and reduce costs from office equipment or real estate investments. Nonetheless, employers worldwide grappled with various concerns related to hybrid work. Among tech leaders, leading concerns included enabling effective collaboration and preserving organizational culture in hybrid work environments. Consequently, it’s unsurprising that maintaining organizational culture, fostering collaboration, and real estate investments emerged as key drivers for return-to-office mandates globally. However, these efforts were not without challenges. Notably, 21 percent of employers faced employee resistance to returning to the office, prompting a review of their remote work policies.
Before the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, 17 percent of U.S. employees worked from home 5 days or more per week, a share that increased to 44 percent during the pandemic. The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the remote working trend, as quarantines and lockdowns made commuting and working in an office close to impossible for millions around the world. Remote work, also called telework or working from home (WFH), provided a solution, with employees performing their roles away from the office supported by specialized technology, eliminating the commute to an office to remain connected with colleagues and clients. What enables working from home?
To enable remote work, employees rely on a remote work arrangements that enable hybrid work and make it safe during the COVID-19 pandemic. Technology supporting remote work including laptops saw a surge in demand, video conferencing companies such as Zoom jumped in value, and employers had to consider new communication techniques and resources. Is remote work the future of work?
The response to COVID-19 has demonstrated that hybrid work models are not necessarily an impediment to productivity. For this reason, there is a general consensus that different remote work models will persist post-COVID-19. Many employers see benefits to flexible working arrangements, including positive results on employee wellness surveys, and potentially reducing office space. Many employees also plan on working from home more often, with 25 percent of respondents to a recent survey expecting remote work as a benefit of employment. As a result, it is of utmost importance to acknowledge any issues that may arise in this context to empower a hybrid workforce and ensure a smooth transition to more flexible work models.
A survey of 1,500 NSW workers during August and September 2020 (2020 Remote Working Survey) and March and April 2021 (2021 Remote Working Survey), commissioned to understand workers' experiences of and attitudes to remote and hybrid working. To be eligible, respondents had to be employed NSW residents with experience of remote working in their current job. After accounting for unemployed people and those whose jobs cannot be done remotely—for example, dentists, cashiers and cleaners—the sample represents around 59 per cent of NSW workers. Workers answered questions on: • their attitudes to remote working • the amount of time they spent working remotely • their employers’ policies, practices, and attitudes • how they spent their time when working remotely • how barriers to remote working have changed • the barriers they faced to hybrid working • their expectations for future remote working
Open Government Licence - Canada 2.0https://open.canada.ca/en/open-government-licence-canada
License information was derived automatically
Percentage of workforce teleworking or working remotely prior to February 1, 2020, on March 31, 2020, and percentage of workforce able to carry out a majority of their duties during the COVID-19 pandemic, by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code, business employment size, type of business and majority ownership.
Hybrid models of working are on the rise in the United States according to survey data covering worker habits between 2019 and 2024. In the second quarter of 2024, 53 percent of U.S. workers reported working in a hybrid manner. The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic saw a record number of people working remotely to help curb the spread of the virus. Since then, many workers have found a new shape to their home and working lives, finding that a hybrid model of working is more flexible than always being required to work on-site.
https://www.iza.org/wc/dataverse/IIL-1.0.pdfhttps://www.iza.org/wc/dataverse/IIL-1.0.pdf
WageIndicator is interviewing people around the world to discover what makes the Coronavirus lockdown easier (or tougher), and what is the COVID-19 effect on our jobs, lives and mood. WageIndicator shows coronavirus-induced changes in living and working conditions in over 110 countries on the basis of answers on the following questions among others in the Corona survey: Is your work affected by the corona crisis? Are precautionary measures taken at the workplace? Do you have to work from home? Has your workload increased/decreased? Have you lost your job/work/assignments? The survey contains questions about the home situation of respondents as well as about the possible manifestation of the corona disease in members of the household. Also the effect of having a pet in the house in corona-crisis times is included.
The increase in the extent of working-from-home determined by the COVID-19 health crisis has led to a substantial shift of economic activity across geographical areas; which we refer to as a Zoomshock. When a person works from home rather than at the office, their work-related consumption of goods and services provided by the locally consumed service industries will take place where they live, not where they work. Much of the clientèle of restaurants, coffee bars, pubs, hair stylists, health clubs, taxi providers and the like located near workplaces is transferred to establishment located near where people live. These data are our calculations of the Zoomshock at the MSOA level. They reflect estimats of the change in the number of people working in UK neighbourhoods due to home-working.The COVID-19 shutdown is not affecting all parts of the UK equally. Economic activity in local consumer service industries (LCSI), such as retail outlets, restaurants, hairdressers, or gardeners has all but stopped; other industries are less affected. These differences among industries and their varying importance across local economies means recovery will be sensitive to local economic conditions and will not be geographically uniform: some neighbourhoods face a higher recovery risk of not being able to return to pre-shutdown levels of economic activity. This recovery risk is the product of two variables. The first is the shock, the effect of the shutdown on local household incomes. The second is the multiplier, the effect on LCSI economic activity following a negative shock to household incomes. In neighbourhoods where many households rely on the LCSI sector as a primary source of income the multiplier may be particularly large, and these neighbourhoods are vulnerable to a vicious circle of reduced spending and reduced incomes. This project will produce data measuring the shock, the multiplier, and the COVID-19 shutdown recovery risk for UK neighbourhoods. These variables will be estimated using individual and firm level information from national surveys and administrative data. The dataset, and corresponding policy report, will be made public and proactively disseminated to guide local and national policy design. Recovery inequality is likely to be substantial: absent intervention, existing regional inequalities may be exacerbated. This research will provide a timely and necessary input into designing appropriate recovery policy. These data reflect derived variables based on the methodology described in De Fraja, Matheson and Rockey (2021) (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3752977). Variables are derived from 2011 Census data provided through the ONS Nomis website.
Source: Snapshot visualization of the estimated average number of individuals working from home by census block, disaggregated from ACS data.
Purpose: Tile layer utilized for visualization.
Contact Information: Charles Rudder (crudder@citiesthatwork.com)/ Alex Bell (abell@citiesthatwork.com)
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset presents median income data over a decade or more for males and females categorized by Total, Full-Time Year-Round (FT), and Part-Time (PT) employment in Home Brook township. It showcases annual income, providing insights into gender-specific income distributions and the disparities between full-time and part-time work. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based pay disparity trends and explore the variations in income for male and female individuals.
Key observations: Insights from 2023
Based on our analysis ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates, we present the following observations: - All workers, aged 15 years and older: In Home Brook township, the median income for all workers aged 15 years and older, regardless of work hours, was $40,625 for males and $24,000 for females.
These income figures highlight a substantial gender-based income gap in Home Brook township. Women, regardless of work hours, earn 59 cents for each dollar earned by men. This significant gender pay gap, approximately 41%, underscores concerning gender-based income inequality in the township of Home Brook township.
- Full-time workers, aged 15 years and older: In Home Brook township, among full-time, year-round workers aged 15 years and older, males earned a median income of $85,000, while females earned $44,375, leading to a 48% gender pay gap among full-time workers. This illustrates that women earn 52 cents for each dollar earned by men in full-time roles. This level of income gap emphasizes the urgency to address and rectify this ongoing disparity, where women, despite working full-time, face a more significant wage discrepancy compared to men in the same employment roles.Remarkably, across all roles, including non-full-time employment, women displayed a similar gender pay gap percentage. This indicates a consistent gender pay gap scenario across various employment types in Home Brook township, showcasing a consistent income pattern irrespective of employment status.
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. All incomes have been adjusting for inflation and are presented in 2023-inflation-adjusted dollars.
Gender classifications include:
Employment type classifications include:
Variables / Data Columns
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Home Brook township median household income by race. You can refer the same here
http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/open-government-licencehttp://reference.data.gov.uk/id/open-government-licence
This dataset provides Census 2021 estimates that classify usual residents aged 16 years and over in England and Wales in employment the week before the census by method used to travel to work (2001 specification) and by industry. The estimates are as at Census Day, 21 March 2021.
_As Census 2021 was during a unique period of rapid change, take care when using this data for planning purposes. Due to methodological changes the ‘mainly work at or from home: any workplace type’ category has a population of zero. Please use the transport_to_workplace_12a classification instead. Read more about this quality notice._
Area type
Census 2021 statistics are published for a number of different geographies. These can be large, for example the whole of England, or small, for example an output area (OA), the lowest level of geography for which statistics are produced.
For higher levels of geography, more detailed statistics can be produced. When a lower level of geography is used, such as output areas (which have a minimum of 100 persons), the statistics produced have less detail. This is to protect the confidentiality of people and ensure that individuals or their characteristics cannot be identified.
Lower tier local authorities
Lower tier local authorities provide a range of local services. There are 309 lower tier local authorities in England made up of 181 non-metropolitan districts, 59 unitary authorities, 36 metropolitan districts and 33 London boroughs (including City of London). In Wales there are 22 local authorities made up of 22 unitary authorities.
Coverage
Census 2021 statistics are published for the whole of England and Wales. However, you can choose to filter areas by:
Method used to travel to workplace
A person's place of work and their method of travel to work. This is the 2001 method of producing travel to work variables.
"Work mainly from home" applies to someone who indicated their place of work as their home address and travelled to work by driving a car or van, for example visiting clients.
Industry (current)
Classifies people aged 16 years and over who were in employment between 15 March and 21 March 2021 by the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code that represents their current industry or business.
The SIC code is assigned based on the information provided about a firm or organisation’s main activity.
The employment and unemployment indicator shows several data points. The first figure is the number of people in the labor force, which includes the number of people who are either working or looking for work. The second two figures, the number of people who are employed and the number of people who are unemployed, are the two subcategories of the labor force. The unemployment rate is a calculation of the number of people who are in the labor force and unemployed as a percentage of the total number of people in the labor force.
The unemployment rate does not include people who are not employed and not in the labor force. This includes adults who are neither working nor looking for work. For example, full-time students may choose not to seek any employment during their college career, and are thus not considered in the unemployment rate. Stay-at-home parents and other caregivers are also considered outside of the labor force, and therefore outside the scope of the unemployment rate.
The unemployment rate is a key economic indicator, and is illustrative of economic conditions in the county at the individual scale.
There are additional considerations to the unemployment rate. Because it does not count those who are outside the labor force, it can exclude individuals who were looking for a job previously, but have since given up. The impact of this on the overall unemployment rate is difficult to quantify, but it is important to note because it shows that no statistic is perfect.
The unemployment rates for Champaign County, the City of Champaign, and the City of Urbana are extremely similar between 2000 and 2023.
All three areas saw a dramatic increase in the unemployment rate between 2006 and 2009. The unemployment rates for all three areas decreased overall between 2010 and 2019. However, the unemployment rate in all three areas rose sharply in 2020 due to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. The unemployment rate in all three areas dropped again in 2021 as pandemic restrictions were removed, and were almost back to 2019 rates in 2022. However, the unemployment rate in all three areas rose slightly from 2022 to 2023.
This data is sourced from the Illinois Department of Employment Security’s Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS), and from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Sources: Illinois Department of Employment Security, Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS); U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
Analysis of how working from home has affected individuals’ spending and how this differs by characteristics, Great Britain.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
This table contains data on the percent of residents aged 16 years and older mode of transportation to work for California, its regions, counties, cities/towns, and census tracts. Data is from the U.S. Census Bureau, Decennial Census and American Community Survey. The table is part of a series of indicators in the Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project of the Office of Health Equity. Commute trips to work represent 19% of travel miles in the United States. The predominant mode – the automobile - offers extraordinary personal mobility and independence, but it is also associated with health hazards, such as air pollution, motor vehicle crashes, pedestrian injuries and fatalities, and sedentary lifestyles. Automobile commuting has been linked to stress-related health problems. Active modes of transport – bicycling and walking alone and in combination with public transit – offer opportunities for physical activity, which is associated with lowering rates of heart disease and stroke, diabetes, colon and breast cancer, dementia and depression. Risk of injury and death in collisions are higher in urban areas with more concentrated vehicle and pedestrian activity. Bus and rail passengers have a lower risk of injury in collisions than motorcyclists, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Minority communities bear a disproportionate share of pedestrian-car fatalities; Native American male pedestrians experience four times the death rate Whites or Asian pedestrians, and African-Americans and Latinos experience twice the rate as Whites or Asians. More information about the data table and a data dictionary can be found in the About/Attachments section.
This commuter mode share data shows the estimated percentages of commuters in Champaign County who traveled to work using each of the following modes: drove alone in an automobile; carpooled; took public transportation; walked; biked; went by motorcycle, taxi, or other means; and worked at home. Commuter mode share data can illustrate the use of and demand for transit services and active transportation facilities, as well as for automobile-focused transportation projects.
Driving alone in an automobile is by far the most prevalent means of getting to work in Champaign County, accounting for over 69 percent of all work trips in 2023. This is the same rate as 2019, and the first increase since 2017, both years being before the COVID-19 pandemic began.
The percentage of workers who commuted by all other means to a workplace outside the home also decreased from 2019 to 2021, most of these modes reaching a record low since this data first started being tracked in 2005. The percentage of people carpooling to work in 2023 was lower than every year except 2016 since this data first started being tracked in 2005. The percentage of people walking to work increased from 2022 to 2023, but this increase is not statistically significant.
Meanwhile, the percentage of people in Champaign County who worked at home more than quadrupled from 2019 to 2021, reaching a record high over 18 percent. It is a safe assumption that this can be attributed to the increase of employers allowing employees to work at home when the COVID-19 pandemic began in 2020.
The work from home figure decreased to 11.2 percent in 2023, but which is the first statistically significant decrease since the pandemic began. However, this figure is still about 2.5 times higher than 2019, even with the COVID-19 emergency ending in 2023.
Commuter mode share data was sourced from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) 1-Year Estimates, which are released annually.
As with any datasets that are estimates rather than exact counts, it is important to take into account the margins of error (listed in the column beside each figure) when drawing conclusions from the data.
Due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, instead of providing the standard 1-year data products, the Census Bureau released experimental estimates from the 1-year data in 2020. This includes a limited number of data tables for the nation, states, and the District of Columbia. The Census Bureau states that the 2020 ACS 1-year experimental tables use an experimental estimation methodology and should not be compared with other ACS data. For these reasons, and because data is not available for Champaign County, no data for 2020 is included in this Indicator.
For interested data users, the 2020 ACS 1-Year Experimental data release includes a dataset on Means of Transportation to Work.
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2023 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (18 September 2024).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2022 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (10 October 2023).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2021 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (14 October 2022).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2019 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (26 March 2021).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2018 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (26 March 2021).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2017 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (13 September 2018).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2016 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (14 September 2017).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2015 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (19 September 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2014 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2013 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2012 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2011 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2010 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2008 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2007 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2006 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2005 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).
The Corona crisis (COVID-19) affects a large proportion of companies and freelancers in Germany. Against this background, the study examines the personal situation and working conditions of employees in Germany in times of corona. The analysis mainly refers to the situation in May 2020 and can only make limited statements about the further situation of the employed persons in the course of the corona pandemic. Personal situation: change in working times during the corona crisis; current work situation (local focus of one´s own work); preference for home office; preference for future home office; financial losses due to the corona crisis; concerns about the financial and economic consequences of the corona crisis in Germany; concerns about the corona crisis in personal areas (job security, current working conditions, financial situation, career opportunities, family situation, health, psychological well-being, housing situation); support from the employer in the corona crisis. 2. Economy and welfare state: political interest; assessment of the economic situation in Germany; preferred form of government (strong vs. liberal state); agreement on various statements on the weighing of values in the Corona crisis (the restrictions on public life to protect the population from Corona are not in proportion to the economic crisis caused by it, the money now being made available for economic aid will later be lacking in other important areas such as education, infrastructure or climate protection, for politicians, the health of the population is the top priority, the interests of the economy influence them less strongly with regard to the corona crisis, the worst part of the crisis is now behind us, as a result of the economic effects of the corona crisis the contrast between rich and poor in Germany will become even more pronounced, the corona crisis affects the low earners more than the middle class, the corona crisis significantly advances the digitalisation of the world of work); perception of state action in the corona crisis on the basis of pairs of opposites (e.g. bureaucratic - unbureaucratic, passive - active, etc.); responsibility of the state to provide financial support to companies in the corona crisis; responsibility of the state to provide financial support to private individuals in the corona crisis over and above basic provision; recipients of state financial aid in the corona crisis (companies, directly to needy private individuals, companies and private individuals alike); assessment of the bureaucracy involved in state financial aid (speed vs. exact examination). 3. Measures: awareness of current measures to support business and individuals in the corona crisis; assessment of current measures to support business and individuals in the corona crisis; reliance on assistance in the corona crisis; nature of assistance used in the corona crisis; barriers to use of assistance in the corona crisis; assessment of the effectiveness of the state measures to cope with the corona crisis; appropriate additional measures to mitigate the economic consequences; concerns about the consequences of the planned state measures (increasing tax burden, rising social contributions, rising inflation, stagnating pension levels, rising retirement age, reduction of other state transfers, safeguarding savings). 4. Information: active search for information on financial assistance offers by the Federal Government in the corona crisis; self-assessment of the level of information on measures to support business and private individuals in the corona crisis; request for detailed information on state assistance measures in the corona crisis (e.g. application process, sources of funding, conditions for receiving assistance, etc.) sources of information used about state aid measures in the Corona crisis; contact with institutions offering economic and financial aid during the Corona crisis (development bank/ municipal development agency, employment agency, tax office, none of them); experience with institutions offering economic and financial aid during the Corona crisis (appropriate treatment). 5. Outlook: assessment of the future economic situation in Germany; assessment of Germany´s future as a strong business location; assessment of its own future economic situation; assessment of the duration of the economic impairment caused by the Corona crisis. Demography: age; sex; education; employment; self-localization social class; net household income; current household income; household income before the crisis; occupational activity; belonging to systemically important occupations; number of persons in the household; number of children under 18 in the household; size of town; party sympathy; migration background. Additionally coded: current number; federal state; education (low, medium, high); weighting factor.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset presents the detailed breakdown of the count of individuals within distinct income brackets, categorizing them by gender (men and women) and employment type - full-time (FT) and part-time (PT), offering valuable insights into the diverse income landscapes within Home township. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based income distribution within the Home township population, aiding in data analysis and decision-making..
Key observations
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.
Income brackets:
Variables / Data Columns
Employment type classifications include:
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Home township median household income by race. You can refer the same here
Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.
As the UK went into the first lockdown of the COVID-19 pandemic, the team behind the biggest social survey in the UK, Understanding Society (UKHLS), developed a way to capture these experiences. From April 2020, participants from this Study were asked to take part in the Understanding Society COVID-19 survey, henceforth referred to as the COVID-19 survey or the COVID-19 study.
The COVID-19 survey regularly asked people about their situation and experiences. The resulting data gives a unique insight into the impact of the pandemic on individuals, families, and communities. The COVID-19 Teaching Dataset contains data from the main COVID-19 survey in a simplified form. It covers topics such as
The resource contains two data files:
Key features of the dataset
A full list of variables in both files can be found in the User Guide appendix.
Who is in the sample?
All adults (16 years old and over as of April 2020), in households who had participated in at least one of the last two waves of the main study Understanding Society, were invited to participate in this survey. From the September 2020 (Wave 5) survey onwards, only sample members who had completed at least one partial interview in any of the first four web surveys were invited to participate. From the November 2020 (Wave 6) survey onwards, those who had only completed the initial survey in April 2020 and none since, were no longer invited to participate
The User guide accompanying the data adds to the information here and includes a full variable list with details of measurement levels and links to the relevant questionnaire.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset presents the detailed breakdown of the count of individuals within distinct income brackets, categorizing them by gender (men and women) and employment type - full-time (FT) and part-time (PT), offering valuable insights into the diverse income landscapes within Home Brook township. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based income distribution within the Home Brook township population, aiding in data analysis and decision-making..
Key observations
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.
Income brackets:
Variables / Data Columns
Employment type classifications include:
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Home Brook township median household income by race. You can refer the same here
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Context
The dataset presents the detailed breakdown of the count of individuals within distinct income brackets, categorizing them by gender (men and women) and employment type - full-time (FT) and part-time (PT), offering valuable insights into the diverse income landscapes within Home Lake township. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based income distribution within the Home Lake township population, aiding in data analysis and decision-making..
Key observations
https://i.neilsberg.com/ch/home-lake-township-mn-income-distribution-by-gender-and-employment-type.jpeg" alt="Home Lake Township, Minnesota gender and employment-based income distribution analysis (Ages 15+)">
When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.
Income brackets:
Variables / Data Columns
Employment type classifications include:
Good to know
Margin of Error
Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.
Custom data
If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.
Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.
This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Home Lake township median household income by gender. You can refer the same here
http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/open-government-licencehttp://reference.data.gov.uk/id/open-government-licence
Dataset population: All usual residents aged 16 and over in employment the week before the census
Location of where people live when working
The location in which an individual lives when they are working.
Place of work
The location in which an individual works.
Geographies of origin areas:
Geographies of destination areas:
For the area in which people live while they are working, if that address is a work-related second address that is outside of the UK then this is signified by code OD0000005.
*The following codes are used for area of workplace that is not an LAD geographic code:
OD0000001 = Mainly work at or from home
OD0000002 = Offshore installation
OD0000003 = No fixed place
OD0000004 = Outside UK*
The trend of working remotely has been slowly increasing globally since 2015, with a one to three percent annual increase rate. However, the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 upended the world economy and global markets. Employment trends were no exception to this, with the share of employees working remotely increasing to some 27 percent in 2022 from just 13 percent two years prior. The industry with the highest share of remote workers globally in 2023 was by far the technology sector, with over 67 percent of tech employees worldwide working fully or mostly remotely. How are employers dealing with remote work? Many employers around the world have already adopted some remote work policies. According to IT industry leaders, reasons for remote work adoption ranged from a desire to broaden a company’s talent pool, increase productivity, and reduce costs from office equipment or real estate investments. Nonetheless, employers worldwide grappled with various concerns related to hybrid work. Among tech leaders, leading concerns included enabling effective collaboration and preserving organizational culture in hybrid work environments. Consequently, it’s unsurprising that maintaining organizational culture, fostering collaboration, and real estate investments emerged as key drivers for return-to-office mandates globally. However, these efforts were not without challenges. Notably, 21 percent of employers faced employee resistance to returning to the office, prompting a review of their remote work policies.