wokring parents

[sunnyjim]

Just wanted to get some opinions here;

there's alot of stuff out at the moment about how women suffer in their careers through having children. I have to admit I felt a bit puzzled by some of the comemtns etc.

I don't understand why you should be given the same promotion prospects as someone else when you havn't been in your job for a year due to mat leave, you work 35 hr weeks and take 20 days unpaid leave a year due to fmaily commitments, the other person has worked f/t for the past 3 years, works 45 hr weeks and never takes sick leave let alone unpaid leave.

surely you get back what you put in?

I think the only way to be taken seriuosly in your job is to take the job seriuosly. If your kids come first and foremost and you would take a day off without a second thought to deal with fmaily matters then your employer will notice and quite honestly i think thats one of the biggest problems working parents face - the fact that some working mums give the rest of us a bad name because they aren't committed to their jobs.

Anyway here are my 'rules' that I'm trying to live by now both me and DH work f/t and we have a 2 yr old.

1. Both our jobs are equally important so we take it in turns to do the nursery run etc. On days when I'm not doing nursery run I get in as early as possible and stay a bit later.
2. Get VERY VERY organised, I don't natter in the staffroom and I don't take 30 minutes for a coffee break. I make sure I get my prep and marking done in free lessons and lunchtimes so I can leave at 3.30 on nursery pick up days. Get a working wardrobe put together and prepack your bag - it honestly does work.
3. Get help; we're getting an au pair in the autumn but prior to that we're trying to find a p/t mothers help to give us some leeway. Send the ironing out, get a cleaner. You can't do it all so see what you can get someone else to do.
4. Pick one or two things that you can do relativly easily but very well in your job to make the point that you are a dedicated employee, for example DH works sunday afternoons going into the office at 3pm and staying until 7pm, this makes up for leaving early two days a week. I offer to do junior choir two lunchtimes a week.
5. Say what you can do and do what you say, never over promise but always keep your promises. You get more respect for saying firmly, I can't attend meetings held after 5pm and I CAN take lunchtime meetings. than saying 'oh maybe i can try and stay' but then be watching the clock or rushing off halfway through to get to school.
6. Don't use your family as an excuse, never apologise or whinge about the children keeping you up all night. At best you get sympathy but waste time you could be spending doing your work so you can leave earlier, at worst you are seen as a whinging female who can't keep her personal life out of the office.
7. take as much interest in your career as you do in your kids, read industry magazines at lunchtime, go on conferences etc
8. Don't waste time and energy feeling guilty about working
9. If you negotiate flexible working patterns understand the impact this may have on colleagues, make sure they aren't left picking up your work.

10. Get flexible, reliable childcare and have a plan B, whether tis granny, a neighbour or an au pair if you both work you ened a back up. What happens when DH is 2 hrs away and I'm at an all day conference and the trains go down? Or DS is ill? backup means you don't have to argue about who takes time off work to deal with the crises!

(all this is assuming you have a career you enjoy and value - its not aimed at anyone who is working purely cos they need some extra cash - totally different set up!)

[WideWebWitch]

at your first para.

[somersetmum]

"7. take as much interest in your career as you do in your kids"

It doesn't sound like you're showing much interest in your kid at all, imo. Using an au pair, going on conferences, working extra hours at weekends. It hardly leaves much quality time with your child, does it? You have one chance at parenthod with each child. They need nurturing and loving and they grow up fast. Don't blink too hard, because your two year old will be at school and you will have missed his pre-school years completely.
I hope you don't want any more because, believe me, when you have two or three you will NOT be so easy.

[OrmIrian]

Not entirely sure why pt working means you aren't committed. Assuming that you are just as capable and just as efficient. In my experience pt working tends to mean more concentrated effort, less hot air around the water cooler and less pointless presenteeism (ie leaving the office just after the boss).Working with young kids tends to mean you have to be more determined and organised. Which translates well into the workplace.

All this is assuming that you are good at your job in the first place of course. If not you'll be just as crap with kids and without.

[fizzbuzz]

[Judy1234]

sj's views are just like most successful working parents. It's a non topic. Anyone who isn't like that and thinks their career should be preserved in aspic whilst they piddle around putting little Johnny first because he has a slight cold is living in cloud cuckoo land.

I want to be the best at what I do in the UK. I earn a lot. I have often put the children second but they know I'd die for them and if it were a life and death thing they would always come first. They also know I love my work and sometimes I'd prefer it to putting on another load of washing or playing football with them. So what? It proves I'm a human not some kind of domestic automaton.

Why any parent would want to work part time I've never known. You get the worst of all worlds and your partner usually assumes your career means nothing and you end up doing most of the domestic stuff too.

somerset's is just the other view. Neither is right or wrong but it's not true that women with my views don't interact with their children. You can spend a lot of time with them particularly if you've outsourced cleaning, shopping etc In fact the full time worker on a good salary can give more time to their children and benefits the children more arguably than someone struggling on a pittance in a worthless part time job and trying to do all the domestic stuff too.

[fizzbuzz]

Can't keep out....Thank God we have laws to protect us from your second paragraph way of thinking.

[unknownrebelbang]

I'll ignore the bit about maternity leave...that's legal stuff, surely.

I take my job seriously and am committed (for 25 hours a week), but even my manager tells me that my family comes first. I won't take a day off without a second thought to deal with family matters, but I will take a day off if necessary to look after MY children if they're ill - I have no one else! And I've probably got a better name than some childless colleagues who are more committed to socialising than their job.

1. DH's job is more important than mine - he gets double my pay, therefore it has to be more important but he still does the school run when he's around.

1. I am organised, however I natter WITH MY BOSS, shock horror! and we have tea at our desks rather than breaks.

1. I'd love help, but prefer to work 25 hours per week and spend more time with my children, thanks.

1. My boss KNOWS I'm a dedicated employee, I've proved myself over the years. DH often works whole weekends - it's his shift pattern - so his Sundays off are precious to us, whereas your DH is just making up his time for skiving early in the week.

1. Goes without saying for ANY employee, surely?

1. So men don't do this then? Or childless colleagues who're hungover?

1. My boys come first - even my manager says so! However, I don't have a lunchbreak as I only work 25 hours pw - but I read Home Office circulars and the like during my work-time.....cos it's work.

1. I don't.

1. My flexible work pattern actually assists my colleagues.

10. Chance would be a fine thing - I have a 72 year old FIL who is wonderful, but neither use nor ornament if my children are sick. I have no one else to rely on.

Funny though, we manage quite well between us, and both myself and my DH have good reputations within our workplaces.



Thank you for enlightening my on YOUR WAY, but I think I'm doing just fine and I'll stick to the Bang Way.

[unknownrebelbang]

I've been surviving the working parent routine for 12 years (3 boys) rather than just one child for two years.

[llareggub]

I did read somewhere that working parents are far more reliable and hardworking than employees without children. The gist of the article was that working parents (actually the article said mothers) are more likely to work harder and more effectively. The reason given was that they felt they needed to prove their commitment. They are also less likely to have sick leave.

I think there needs to be a balance. For me, my career is important to my health and happiness and not working/working less hours would probably make me miserable. I'm in the process of negotiating compressed hours (2 long days and 3 shorter days) to allow me to work full time and spend quality time with my son. I've offered to be flexible about the shorter days and will change my working pattern to account for workloads/meetings etc.

I think it's also important to remember that work is an activity, not a place. There is nothing to be gained from being "present" in the office, indeed, working long hours just for the hell of it may actually be counter-productive. Output and outcomes are more important than the number of hours put into a job in some careers.

[OrmIrian]

Hmm... unknownrebel! 10 years and 3 kids here. Can't help feeling that longevity tends to speak volumes for a working parents' determination and enthusiasm.

[Judy1234]

22 years full time working and 5 children...

A manager who says - yes dear put your children first just doesn't want you to have his job. Aim to run every company you're in and once we have more women in charge than men then think about going back into the kitchen. We need about 60% of the cabinet and all boards female as well to make a start on this stuff properly.

[Judy1234]

A law that prohibits any male in the UK from working more than 15 hours a week might be a good plan and help women a lot.

[indiajane]

Wasn't there a case recently in which a mother who had been on maternity leave lost her appeal to have the same promotion as her colleagues?

Personally I work part-time but get pretty much the same amount of stuff done as my counterparts - just lots less time chatting! Obviously don't get paid for it though.

[beansprout]

I work in the voluntary sector where people manage to do decent jobs and genuinely achieve work/life balance. As such, I work part-time, my boss knows he has a very hard working and loyal member of staff who he relies on for a great deal. Sorry to hear you are victim of the long hours culture that prevails in this country.

[ssd]

sunnyjim, what was all that about?

[nogoes]

I am a SAHM so I don't actually have any experience of being a working parent but I will give my twopennysworth anyway .

I was going to go back to work part time but chose not to in the end for a variety of reasons, mainly financial, childcare issues and because I was scared that I would not be able to give 100% to my work and my family and I have always been a bit of all or nothing type of person. Anyway when I put in a request to go back 2.5 days per week it was approved straight away and apparantly this narked a few of my colleagues who I guess were jealous that in their minds I was going to have the best of both worlds. Anyway apparantly my boss told a colleague that he accepted my part time work proposal because he knew that I would work harder and do more work than a lot of the people working full time and yet I would be paid half the salary for doing so.

When I was at work on occasions there would be parents who would take time off at inconvienent times for childcare issues or have to leave in the middle of the meetings because they had to get to the nursery but if you can't accept this as an employer you are being very short sighted because in my experience the parents I have worked with work as hard or harder than non parents because they need the money more than their colleagues, only take time off when they need to rather than phoning in sick with a hangover on Monday etc and are generally better at multi-tasking.

[lizziehoney]

I think maybe the part about 35 hours per week as opposed to 45 is a little misleading. Surely what is important is that whatever contract you have with your employer, you stick to the deal and put 100% effort into your job. If someone works, say, 3 days a week, and they do it well, then I'd say they're just as committed as someone who is contracted (and paid!) to work fulltime. I do think sunyjim makes some valid points - eg flexible working rights should NOT impact unfavourably on others' workloads (I speak from experience - my boss agreed for a colleague to go part time, and I was relly angry that the assumption was made that I'd be happy to renegotiate some parts of my job to accommodate this. Also agree about needing escellent back up for childcare, not clockwatching at meetings etc. And remember sunnyjim is talking about people with a career, not just doing a job to earn a bit of cash.

[nightowl]

oh here we go again.

i worked full time until ds was 6. when he was ill i mostly had my family to look after him (this was a lot, they live a fair distance which meant i didnt see him often enough) or i would spend the night in the hospital, with no sleep then go to work. or i would spend the night watching him, with no sleep and then go to work. yet i was always the one willing to go out of my way, work overtime with no extra pay for it etc etc. my collegue who had no children and still lived with her mum was out of the door every day at 4pm, no matter what had to be done.

i work part time now somewhere else but im laughed at by the girl higher up than me and 7 years younger than me because i take my job seriously and because im not as important as she is. she's happy to sit and do her nails, or eyebrows and mess about, where as i do my little support type role as best i can. i wont put my job first anymore because the last one got me no-where, they made me redundant and i sued them. all that time and effort to be cast aside for someone who didnt have children.

if i was an employer i think i'd rather have the one who may need time off with children yet understands responsibility than the one who has plenty of time to spare yet mucks around. is it better to have an employee who works 40 hours in theory but actually does bugger all at work, or a part timer who gets the job done?

[chocolatekimmy]

sunnyjim - I have to disagree with this

"I don't understand why you should be given the same promotion prospects as someone else when you havn't been in your job for a year due to mat leave, you work 35 hr weeks and take 20 days unpaid leave a year due to fmaily commitments, the other person has worked f/t for the past 3 years, works 45 hr weeks and never takes sick leave let alone unpaid leave.

surely you get back what you put in?"

I'm educated, have spent 6 years (in my own time) studying for 2 professional qualifications. I have worked 10 hour days at times (sometimes longer) to achieve my objectives and help the company (reduce costs/provide better service) without extra pay or time off. I am excellent at my job and wholly committed to my employer.

so

Why shouldn't I have the same prospects as anyone else just because I have chosen to take time off to have a few children when I have given over and above what is required of me for the 12 years prior to starting a family?

I shouldn't be labelled a 'write off' just because I have had a family nor should I suffer detriment and let all my hard work and effort go to waste.

I should be given opportunity to develop and achieve promotion - look at my track record and the investment I have put in.

I work three days a week and my company benefits by retaining me as a high achieving manager with the skills required and knowledge of the business. Though I am 'only' there 3 days I do more like 4+ days workload by being organised and focused.

Your odd assumption about a 45hr worker "never taking sick leave let alone unpaid leave" is just plain stupid. What has health levels got to do with being a mum or not - and how about the men who take sick leave, those that take a career break, go to jail for a period of time ect.

I have never taken unpaid leave in connection with my children. I have taken 1 day off due to child sickness in 6 years. I had 3 days off in my first pregnancy after falling down some steps, no time off with my second and 3 days off with my third.

I am assuming that YOU have a career that you enjoy and value and that you are not working for purely financial reasons (based on your last sentence) so I can't understand why you would put your career above your child? Why did you bother having a child in the first place if your career is that important?

I also don't think anyone on here who works is thick enough NOT to have thought of any of your 10 'tips' either, bit patronising in my opinion

[llareggub]

It would also help if there was a culture shift towards the concept of flexible working for all, not just mothers.

I know legally both parents can request flexible working but I only know of one man who has acheived this in my large organisation, and his wife died some years ago. It's just not considered by most and it's always the woman who gets to give up her career/work part-time.

In my organisation morning meetings generally start at 8.30am which is a real PITA nursery/school wise.

With the ageing population being what it is we'll soon have legislation enforcing the flexible working rights of employees with dependent parents in order to ease the burden on the state. It's probably not such a bad thing. Work can happen outside the 9-5 and as long as the work gets done and the world turns, why not have flexible working?

[FrayedKnot]

I work part-time. I love my life and I get the best of both worlds, imo, not the worst.

But then, I live the way I do through choice, luckily, not necessity.

i like working, and I like spending time with DS, and the time I spend on each is right for me.

The problem I have is that choosing to work part-time has a negative impact on the type of work open to me.

I am not sure why I have to accept that choosing to work part-time, but yet not being any less committed to my job than a full-time employee, means that I have to (a) accept lower pay (b) accept a job for which I am overqualified and (c) accept being "used" by the company that I work for as basically when they employed me, they specifically chose me because I have skills over and above what was advertised for and they were prepared to pay for - they quite openly admit this.

To put it frankly, I feel shafted for having chosen to try and balance my home and working life on a more equitable basis than full-time working would allow.

And I really do fail to see - other than the purely financial aspect - the reasoning behind the reluctance of employers to consider flexible working on a much wider scale than is done at the moment.

[crunchie]

thst legislation for ALL carers is coming into effect from April 2007.

Whilst i agree with many of your comments SJ, and I often support Xenia in her way too, I do feel blessed that I ma able to get promotion and move up the career ladder in my new job.

I am in a job that does take dedication, I do work 8.30 - 6 almost every day, I rarely take a lunch break, yet in my interview I stated my kids would always come first. Luckily I am very good at my job, and totally commited and am in a culture where rewards are based on sucess, so in a matter of months I have the opportunity to go for senior management positions as I have already proved my worth.

I work in recruitment sales and luckily in my area the senior managers are women, most with kids and unusally perhaps most work flexible hours in some ways. ATM I don't work flexible hours (I am too new only beenthere 4 months) but as I have said I have proved myself so quickly that I am on targets that others usually take 2 - 3 years to achieve.

Whilst I understand your sentiments SJ, I do think that some women are their own worst enemy, however most women I know who want to work PT hours also want opportunities as they do deserve it and in most cases are better than men at the same job as they do multitask and don't wate time with water cooler gossip!!

[nightowl]

this annoys me. why does it seem that when a working parent has a "career" they should absolutely not be discriminated against, yet a "job" is not so important?

a "job" is important. ive seen working mothers who are very low down as far as work is concerned yet value their job and show 100% commitment to it while their younger, childless full time colleagues have sat at their desk painting their nails, plucking their eyebrows and sneering at their part time "support staff" who are older and more qualified yet took the part time, low responsibility job because they had childcare responsibilities/had no other option/wanted to spend time with their kids.

a clued up employer would know which one he/she could rely on. this attitude stinks.

[llareggub]

I once worked for a company where everyone was valued equally for the contribution they made. Lets face it, a person isn't employed just to make up the numbers, each person, in their own way, plays a part in success of the organisation.

Some people have a career, others a job, but in a good company each will be equally valued.

I've also worked in organisations where people sneer at others for not being "career focused" or whatever. It's just bullying really - think back to your school days where the hockey team would sneer at the girls who were crap at sports. Sometimes we are our own worst enemies.

Women who think that showing commitment at work equals working long hours have got it wrong. Achieving results is what counts.

[ssd]

hear hear nightowl!

all this "well I have a career, not a job" is a load of crap

as if sunnyjim isn't working for "the extra cash"

patronising in the extreme