Stuck in a job: being “locked-in” or at risk of becoming locked-in at the workplace and well-being over time

In this study, being “locked-in” at the workplace is conceptualized as being in a non-preferred workplace while at the same time perceiving low employability. The aim of the study was to investigate how being locked-in or at risk of becoming locked-in (being in a non-preferred workplace yet currently satisfied, combined with perceiving low employability) relates to well-being (subjective health and depressive symptoms). The hypotheses were tested in a Swedish longitudinal sample (T1 in 2010 and T2 in 2012) of permanent employees (N = 3491). The results showed that stability with regard to locked-in-related status (being non-locked-in, at risk of becoming locked-in, or locked-in at both T1 and T2) was related to significant and stable differences in well-being. The non-locked-in status was associated with better well-being than being at risk of becoming locked-in. Moreover, those at risk of becoming locked-in showed better well-being than those with stable locked-in status. Changes towards non-locked-in were accompanied by significant improvements in well-being, and changes towards locked-in were associated with impairments in well-being. The relationships that were found could not be attributed to differences in demographic variables and occupational preference. The findings indicate that being locked-in is detrimental to well-being. This has implications for preventative interventions.