AbstractObjective:To examine associations between work and commute hours with food consumption and test whether neighbourhood type (20-minute neighbourhood (20MN)/non-20MN) moderate associations.Design:Cross-sectional analysis of the Places and Locations for Activity and Nutrition study (ProjectPLAN). Exposures were work hours (not working (0 h), working up to full-time (1–38 h/week), working overtime (> 38 h/week)), and among those employed, combined weekly work and commute hours (continuous). Outcomes were usual consumption of fruit, vegetables, takeaway food, snacks and soft drinks, and number of discretionary food types (takeaway, snacks and soft drinks) consumed weekly. Generalised linear models were fitted to examine associations between each exposure and outcome. The moderating role of neighbourhood type was examined through interaction terms between each exposure and neighbourhood type (20MN/non-20MN).Setting:Melbourne and Adelaide, Australia, 2018–2019.Participants:Adults ≥ 18 years old (n 769).Results:Although all confidence intervals contained the null, overall, patterns suggested non-workers and overtime workers have less healthy food behaviours than up-to-full-time workers. Among those employed, analysis of continuous work and commute hours data suggested longer work and commute hours were positively associated with takeaway consumption (OR = 1·014, 95 % CI 0·999, 1·030, P-value = 0·066). Patterns of better behaviours were observed across most outcomes for those in 20MN than non-20MN. However, differences in associations between work and commute hours with food consumption across neighbourhood type were negligible.Conclusions:Longer work and commute hours may induce poorer food behaviours. There was weak evidence to suggest 20MN moderate associations between work and commute hours with food consumption, although behaviours appeared healthier for those in 20MN.