it depends on how you define the term work.
this capitalist world creates a particular context for the word (and coercion plays a huge part in it). most communists i know cannot really think outside of that context in terms of work; they merely change the ownership of the means of production, and the working conditions for the workers. no substantial divergence from a world driven by a hugely disjointed and mediated cycle of production and consumption.
if work means selling one's time (and energy, etc) in exchange for a wage which can then be used to purchase/barter the necessities (and desirities) of their life, then my anarchist world would have nothing to do with it.
if work means putting one's time (and energy, etc) directly into creating the things they want and need in their life, then fuck yeah! to paraphrase a particularly abhorrent capitalist phrase: it takes energy to make energy. :-)
edit: i should add that if i want to get someone else to put their time/energy/etc into creating what i want/need in my life, that is between me and them, based solely on our direct relationship. money or other managed medium of exchange would not exist in my world; no authority (or laws) would exist to oversee our relationship or our choices for helping each other out (or not). coercion, should it rear its ugly head, would be dealt with as each person involved sees fit.
definition clarified, thanks.
i'll just point out that my second use of the term does not imply or require enjoyment of the process (of directly creating the things one needs), although that surely makes it easier. and of course, enjoyment should always be a factor in the end result.