During the last three decades Swedish education has undergone a radical change, meaning deregulation, decentralisation and increased school autonomy. Today Sweden has got one of the most decentralised educational systems among the OECD countries. A gradual weakening of central regulation of teaching time has constituted one aspect of this change. This is further accentuated by a five year trial, where compulsory schools in seventy-nine municipalities are allowed to allocate their school hours more freely. At the same time a shift from central to local regulation of teachers' working hours and salaries has taken place. The changes towards increased school autonomy have aimed at school development by e.g. increased individualisation, alternative teaching methods, teacher collaboration and flexibility. Before 2000, teaching time as a strategic resource and the governance and change of it, have been relatively hidden in debates on educational policy and research. But, connected with the trial and quality inspections of time use in schools, these questions are introduced on the agenda. The aim of the paper is to explore and analyse teachers' experiences of structuring contents and work in schools that are not regulated by the national time schedule. Central questions are: To what extent, how and why have teachers changed their allocation of time over contents, activities and pupils when the freedom to distribute teaching hours increases? To what extent and why have they refrained from using this freedom? Which possibilities and constraints are emphasised? How is teacher work affected? The study is based on interviews with 30 secondary school teachers and five headteachers from three schools. It also includes classroom and staff meeting observations and documentation. The schools are selected to represent varying initial orientations towards school development, structuring of contents, control over instruction and extent of autonomous teacher teamwork. The analysis departures from the theories and concepts of framing and classification, frame factors and teachers' work culture. I conclude that all three schools have elements of new and alternative teaching forms and work in teacher teams, but to varying degrees. The context of teacher culture and the existence of functioning teacher teams seem to be a crucial factor. All three teacher groups have increased their influence over decisions of time allocation In two teams have cross-disciplinary work is conducted at a regularly basis, meaning weakened boundaries between school subjects. The teachers are generally satisfied with the members and atmosphere of the team per se, but are not equally happy with the focus and results of teamwork. The teachers in the two contexts characterised by weak classification and framing try to go further in this direction. Teachers in context characterised by relatively strong classification and framing deliberately reduce the pace of change. Teachers in practical and aesthetic subjects tend to be more negative towards subject-integrated work and other forms of flexible time use than teachers in academic subjects. Factors constraining planning and teaching are economic resources, the composition of pupils and different aspects of time. Breaking up from the still existing traditional time allocation seems to be a complex and difficult task.