to wonder why I can't keep my career on track when part time?

[Igglystuffedfullofturkey]

I've gone part time on return from maternity leave. Before I had DS I was a "high flyer", got promoted quickly etc.

Since I've come back, I still feel the desire to do well but recognise that now I'm a mum, I can't put in the hours. But it doesn't mean that I can't do a good job in the time I am there, right?

I'm fed up of the culture of long hours and that it seems that you have to be seen to be there after 5 when in fact if you do the job properly you can have a decent work life balance.

It's a bit of a ramble but AIBU to think that a successful career can be maintained even if I am part time now? Or am I being naive to try and break the mould.

If a colleague of yours is putting in all the hours god sends while you are there half the time, it's hardly fair to promote you over them is it? (assuming all other things are equal).

I know 3 women who have all continued to have high-flying careers despite (multiple) kids, and they ALL run their own companies. It seems to me that If you want work to work for you, you gotta branch out on your own.

I hate the competitive 'who can stay latest' attitude but from the company's perspective, it works. From their POV you're there to facilitate the company, not your career so you'll always be a step behind if you have other priorities.

Sucks the fat one though. I am coming to terms with the same issues as you.

Don't really know what you mean by high-flying - I'm guessing you mean a profession in the private sector.

I have a very successful friend who manages an NHS team on 3 days a week

Why hammy if I do a better job than they do? I mean people might stay late but doesn't mean they are effective.

Jamie no I'm in the public sector. You can have a decent career there too!

It's more the attitude that now I'm part time, I cant possibly do "as well" in the office. Obviously I can't do a full time job but that doesn't mean I cant do a good job. In my line of work we take on several clients so I just serve less clients but can serve each client equally as well if I were full time. On the days I'm not in, I can equip my team to sort things out - it's never a matter of life and death and I know when the key deadlines are so can anticipate most things.

You might think you're doing a better job when you actually aren't. What if a meeting crops up after 5pm and those who dealt with the matter did an excellent job. You were not there to see what they did or "save the day". Sounds extreme but where OH works there have been many occasions when things have gone belly up and if he hadn't been there then it would have been a disaster for the company as everyone else trotted home at 5pm.

If you are serving less clients because of your hours then you shouldn't expect promotion over someone who has more clients and works more hours!

I think if you are p/t you need to be content with letting your career trundle along slowly. that way when you are able to up your hours again, you don't have any catching up/ retraining to do and can advance more rapidly.

I did this ,and it really was just to keep my career "on track", not to forge ahead

I put 'all things being equal' to mean, if two people are as good as each other in the job, then the person that puts the hours in and can stay late should get the promotion. The other person may be prepared to postpone having a family, have other interests to give their all to their career. Surely that should not go un-noticed.

Right so if my bosses tell me I'm doing a better job, then are they lying? I'm not living in cloud cuckoo land where I think I'm doing well based on my own opinion. That would be ludicrous.

As for things going belly up at 5pm, that's rare in my line of work - simply that if something is wrong, there's not much you can do until the next day. And if there was something like that, I'd put in the extra time by taking things home and working remotely if I thought it necessary. But I don't think I need to work longer hours regularly as a matter of course just because it looks good. That is what I have a problem with and find it incredibly ineffective and a waste of time. People think that having meetings etc to fill the diary is a good use of time but a lot of the time it isn't (as an example).

Some people have a few large clients, others have loads of small ones. So which one is doing the better job?

hammy accepted - provided the extra hours are put to good use.

Part of me thinks that yes my career will slow down now I'm part time but I don't think it means it has to trundle along. I have no grand illusions about getting promoted whilst part time (although technically I could do), it's more about being recognised as still having the potential to do well.

I get the sense that people write you of once you reduce your hours. I could take advantage of that and kick back a bit, but I like to do a good job and get involved in interesting projects etc.

write you off

What is your problem? You've just said your bosses say you do a better job so they won't overlook you. However it is rare for bosses to openly compare employees at work so I'm a little suspicious and get the impression you think you do a better job. Meetings are very important and I really wouldn't discount them!

I took a step back in my career when I had the DC. Initially I stayed at the same level but chose to take a step down whilst p/t as I recognised that it just needed someone there all the time and it just wasn't worth it to me.

I know several people whose careers have really taken off after returning to work after having the DCs. They did have a 'lull' period though of 2-5 years where they didn't work at all, not even p/t. When they did return to work f/t it was like they were making up for lost time and really pushed forward with their careers.

The was I see it - I am just 'keeping my hand in' (pay nice as well!) whilst p/t. I don't expect to gain promotions at all until I am f/t but there is plenty of time for that in the future.

A better job as in I get a good appraisal, not as in you're better than x. That would be mental.

I don't think all meetings are a waste.

I'm just trying to decide whether it's worth working as hard as I can in the hours I do to maintain my performance or whether I should accept that there's no point while I'm part time and get a lower performance appraisal. That, Those, is my problem as you so politely put it.

Promotion should be based on who is best able to perform in the senior role, not who "deserves" to be promoted by doing the most work at the level below - so in theory there isn't any reason why you couldn't be promoted whilst working part time as long as the more senior job can also fit into those hours. But it's often hard for a company to be comfortable that the more senior job can be done part time, because usually no one has proved that it can.

Thanks Sea. I'm wondering I should just accept that it's madness to try and keep up while part time or just accept that it can't be done when part time. Part of me is so stubborn, that I want to try.

Yes Apuski I suspect that's the case re senior roles. There are a handful of part time senior staff but they reduced their hours once they were senior.

Why would you not want to work as hard as you can for your own pride and self respect regardless if it pays off or not?

TBH I think there's usually a big difference in perception between 4 days a week and 3 days. Where I work, you end up doing project work if you're 3 days a week rather than line roles, and that immediately sets a seniority ceiling.

Iggly - I know you can! It's just that term "high flying" - I always associate it with being Ally Mc Beal or something

It's not very relevant (though I like to witter) but we lived in Japan for a while where there is a real long-hours culture. Unfortunately this means people sitting on their arses reading the paper, surfing the internet, etc - because what matters is being seen to be there, first one to go home loses. My DH got his head down, did a normal working day, and fit more into his day than many of the others in his office (though he didn't read the paper). So you are right, it shouldn't be just about hours present.

You can work hard Those or you can do a mix of stuff and make your job a bit more interesting, get the wide range of experience etc - which is how you do well in my line of work. I'm not talking about slacking off here.

at Ally McBeal. No chance!

Apuski, yes I think 3 days seems a whole lot less. I have thought about upping to 4 days but undecided really.

You also cannot compare appraisals. An employee under OH may get an Exceeded for his appraisal as his office skills are exemplary. OH may only get a Met for dealing with billions of pounds, setting up a subsidiary and managing his employees. It doesn't mean that the tea boy should be promoted or given more pay!

You seem to be looking at things rather black and white. Are you one of those types who would want to know everyone's salary?

Iggly, I can really recommend this book - it gives a really honest picture of the reality of this kind of stuff, some strategies on how to work within the system, and ideas on how to escape it if you decide organisational life isn't for you after all.

why would you compare appraisals of people at different levels? Where did you get that idea? No I don't care about salaries although it's all quite transparent anyway. I think you've got the wrong impression of me

Thanks Apuski, I'll take a look. I would love to get out of the rat race but no idea where to begin!

I think some of the sttitudes on this thread are appauling!

This is the 21st century people!

It is illegal to discriminate against someone because they work part time. When will attitudes catch up with the law?

Getting rid of the long hour culture and presenteeism needs to be a priority for women, feminists and politicians.

It's not doing business any favours to be wasting such valuable staff.