Flexibility at work: Insights from 50 years of data

Remote work and flexible hours are more than convenient working conditions for employees. They are catalysts for economic inclusion and growth, fostering productivity, improving work-life balance, and helping economies tap into the full potential of their workforce. The COVID-19 pandemic has further highlighted the importance of these kinds of arrangements, prompting a global reevaluation of traditional work models. The Women, Business and the Law (WBL) project has responded to the current evolving landscape by assessing the existence of laws and policies granting employees the right to request flexible work arrangements: flexible time and remote work.

The WBL data show that countries that legally support flexible work create the enabling conditions for women to enter and stay in the labor force. The potential economic benefits are substantial: as the World Bank estimates, if women participate in the workforce at the same rate as men, long-term income per capita could increase by nearly 20%. As such, flexible work arrangements are critical to fostering economic growth.
 

A global dataset on flexible work arrangements

Women, Business and the Law has collected historical legal data on flexible work in 190 economies, from 1971 to 2024. The data show which countries were early adopters, and which ones have only recently begun to legislate flexibility. It also helps to identify regional trends and the global legal shift since the pandemic hit.

For the WBL dataset, flexible work refers to both, flexibility to choose the time of work, such as when to start and finish work, — “flexible time”—, and flexibility to choose the place of work,  whether it is fully or partially carried out on a site other than the default place of work—“remote work”.
 

What do the WBL flexible work data show?

The WBL data set reveals that the adoption of flexible work legislation has been uneven. Laws on flexible time gained momentum in the mid-1990s, while remote work started to appear in the early 2000s. The data also show regional disparities. Until the 2010s, most of the flexible work legislation was concentrated in the High Income OECD and Europe and Central Asia economies, and it was non-existent until recently in regions such as East Asia and the Pacific.

As reflected in the WBL dataset, which is built around coding cycles, France became the first country in the world to adopt flexible time laws in 1974, marking a significant milestone 50 years ago. However, it was not until WBL cycle of 2013 that France recognized the right to work remotely.

Almost twenty years after France's pioneering move, Bulgaria joined the ranks in 1993, becoming the second economy to legislate on flexible time arrangements. Interestingly, it took another twenty years for Bulgaria to extend these rights to remote work, coincidentally in the same year as France, in 2013.

In 2003, the Slovak Republic set a global precedent by being the first country to legislating flexible time and remote work together, recognizing the different challenges of work-life balance. By enshrining both arrangements in law, the country acknowledged that no single solution fits all and offered workers—particularly women—the possibility to choose the tool that best addresses their specific needs. This landmark served as an example for the rest of the economies, which would take nearly a decade to regulate both flexible work arrangements. 

The WBL data show that, among 190 economies, only 42 (22%) have legislation allowing employees to benefit from flexible time arrangements, while 61 (32%) have legal provisions permitting them to request remote work. However, a mere 12% of economies (23 out of 190) offer both options, indicating a significant gap when it comes to work flexibility. This suggests that while there is a growing trend towards accommodating remote work, the integration of both flexible time and remote work remains limited. 
 

The Covid-19 Pandemic as a catalyst for flexible work

The global data set on flexible work arrangements offers a unique lens to assess the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on flexible work arrangements between the onset of the pandemic, 2020, and October 2023—the latest year covered by our data.

Specifically, 16 economies introduced new laws granting the right to flexible time. In the High-income OECD region, Finland, Greece, and Poland have introduced new laws supporting flexible time. In Europe and Central Asia, San Marino, Türkiye, and Ukraine have followed suit. Latin America and the Caribbean have seen similar developments in Honduras, Peru, and Uruguay. In Sub-Saharan Africa, Guinea-Bissau and Mauritius have enacted laws to support flexible time. Lastly, in East Asia and the Pacific, Malaysia, Thailand, and Viet Nam have also embraced this shift towards flexibility in the hours of work.

In parallel, the confinement measures adopted during the pandemic highlighted the importance—and necessity—of remote work. As a result, 38 out of 190 economies passed laws enabling remote work arrangements.

These changes suggest that the pandemic not only disrupted labor markets but also spurred governments to modernize their legal frameworks. Many economies in the European Union enacted flexible work legislation not only in response to the pandemic, but also as part of their obligation to transpose the EU Work-Life Balance Directive 2019/1158, which entered into force in July 2019. This directive aimed to improve the work-life balance for parents and caregivers by strengthening rights to flexible working arrangements and leave policies. EU Member States had until August 2, 2022 to incorporate its provisions into national law, prompting a wave of flexible time and remote work legislation across the region that coincided with—and was likely accelerated by—the labor market shifts triggered by the pandemic. 

Regional trends in flexible work

Most economies with legislation on flexible work arrangements are concentrated in the High-Income OECD region. Of the 32 economies in this group, 20 have laws on flexible time only, while two—Lithuania and Portugal—regulate remote work exclusively. Notably, 18 economies (56%) have enacted legislation covering both flexible time and remote work.

In the Europe and Central Asia region, 17 out of 23 economies have laws regulating remote work. Among these, 11 also provide flexible time arrangements, representing 47 % of the economies in the region.

In Latin America and the Caribbean, 8 out of 32 economies (25 %) have legislation covering both flexible time and remote work. Additionally, 7 economies regulate remote work only, while Haiti and Puerto Rico have provisions on flexible time but not on remote work.

In the Middle East and North Africa, the United Arab Emirates is the sole economy with legislation on remote work. No country in the region currently regulates flexible time.

In Sub-Saharan Africa, Guinea-Bissau and Mauritius have laws on flexible time, but only Guinea-Bissau has legislation on remote work—making it the only economy in the region to regulate both forms of flexible work.

In East Asia and the Pacific, only Malaysia, Thailand, and Viet Nam regulate both flexible time and remote work. Meanwhile, Mongolia and the Philippines have laws that address remote work only.

No legislation on flexible work arrangements—neither flexible time nor remote work—has been adopted in the South Asia region to date.

Making flexibility the rule

The Women, Business and the Law data set shows that while flexible work legislation have gained traction in recent years—particularly in response to the COVID-19 pandemic—legislative progress remains uneven and fragmented.

Without clear legal and supportive frameworks, flexible work often remains a practice, rather than a right—subject to employer discretion, unavailable in many sectors, and inaccessible to women who could benefit the most. By contrast, countries that enshrine flexible work in law can help close gender gaps in labor force participation, support caregiving responsibilities, and enable more equitable access to decent work.

Flexible work should not be treated as a temporary accommodation or crisis response—it is a powerful tool for economic inclusion and resilience. The future of work must be flexible, and the law must lead the way. It’s time to move from temporary solutions to lasting legal protections.