To resent my husband for not making enough money?

[Mummy252]

I'm on maternity leave with our first baby, love being a mummy so much and I do love my husband to bits but I am also feeling very resentful towards him.
We've been together 10yrs since we were very young, he's from a good family and works for the family business, has since we met. His family are financially comfortable, mums a "lady that lunches" and has never worked.
We always planned for me to work but also wanted a family. With the recession etc his business isn't doing too well but it hasn't stopped his parents going on 6 holidays a year whilst he continues to work 6/7 days a week and earns half what I do. A lot if the income is from dividends and his dad and grandparents still own 90% of the shares, he has 3%. He says there's nothing they can do its hard for all of them but I am hugely resentful that I'm having to go back to work full time and leave my gorgeous baby because his parents won't give him a fair share of the business. His mum saw all her children grow up, I'm happy to work and understand this recession has hit lots of ppl but I just feel cheated because I always expected him to at least match what I earned,not have me as the major breadwinner. I want to be a mummy like we always planned and ideally go back 3 days a week but I can't because of our financial situation.
He doesn't see why it upsets me because he works 50-60 hour weeks and has about 3 weeks holiday a year whereas I'm a teacher get long holidays etc. he does work very hard but financially he isn't bringing in anything like we expected so I feel a lot of the financial burden has fallen to me.
I know we live in an equal society but I want to be a mummy, I don't want equality, I want time with my little baby!

personally I feel like they should maybe have a few less holidays and perhaps share their fortune with their sons.

why? they worked for what they have. why should they give it to you so you can sit on your backside. Maybe when they were your age, the dad worked 100 hours a week, you have absolutely no idea what went on.

If you want more money and a fancy lifestyle, get off your backside.

wordfactory and StillSquiffy have made some good points.

Imagine this for a moment from the perspective of the in-laws. I'm making some assumptions here, so do tell me if I've got it completely wrong. They built up a business from nothing, into a successful business worth lots of money, and enjoyed the lifestyle that goes with that kind of success. They gave their son everything money can buy, then a job in the family business, shares in it, and an expectation of inheriting it along with a very small salary. Since he has taken over more responsibility the business isn't doing so well (yes, there's a recession but the in-laws will have weathered a few of those in their time building the business too). Your DH is working lots of hours but the business isn't growing the way it used to when he didn't have so much of a role. In the meantime he is using his wife's money to keep up appearances and look successful and affluent.

The trouble is, in the real world, if your DH started to take more responsibility in a business and the profits dropped, he wouldn't get a salary raise he'd likely get the sack, regardless of whether his wife had kids or wanted to work full time.

Things are getting a bit muddled because of the family/business boundaries being blurred. If you have wealthy parents and have had kids they might give you a bit of money as a gift to help you with expenses for their grandchildren. But your boss doesn't raise your salary for that reason. It sounds to me like the in-laws could perhaps help you more financially, but it is their money and their decision whether to do that - and it should be a personal help, not done through a business. It also sounds like the in-laws should perhaps hire someone else to run the business as from your description of your DH he doesn't have sound financial acumen and might not be the best person to put in charge of a business.

Also the relationship stuff needs to be separated out - the issue about his over-spending and thinking that you should support his luxury lifestyle. I agree with everyone about making him do a budget with you and face reality.

It sounds really hard for you. There are some difficult conversations ahead and I do honestly sympathise.

Your dh could do all this work now and still end up with nothing. Established and previously successful businesses fail all the time and just because the family firm made a lot of money in the past, there's no guarantee that your dh will inherit a 'good' business. I don't think it's worth sacrificing time with your baby, for what you may get in the future.

I think your dh is behaving like a spoilt child. He is taking no responsibility for his own career progression, doing no extra training or studying to improve his skills, but is spending as though he's a high flyer. He is effectively saying, that his right to a high life style is more important than the desires of the person providing that life style.

I think your mum is right OP. Put your 'extra' money away in your own account, to show him just how much you are funding. If dh is being underpaid, then he needs to man up and raise it with his family. If he's being fairly paid, wrt his skills, then he needs to knuckle down and improve his skills and therefore his 'worth' and in the meantime, live according to what he can earn.

If you want more money and a fancy lifestyle, get off your backside.
OP is off her backside! She is paying for the lifestyle. She doesn't want more more money she wants time at home with her baby. Its her DH who doesn't want to give up his car and luxuries (that she is paying for).

Oh and not only does her DH want to continue living the high life he wants to pretend that he is the one paying for it not her - fucked up much??

Has anyone pointed out that you'll still be a "Mummy" when you're at work?

Unless of course going to work means having your kids adopted.....

Hmm, ditzy, possibly should have read the thread properly...

What a pointless post worra.

Obviously there is a difference between working part time and working full time in how much the OP spends with her child. Nothing wrong with working part time IMO. Or even not at all. Individual choice, isn't it, whatever suits people and families best.

I completely understand, if I had a choice finance-wise I would prefer to stay home full-time with my little ones, and the thought of leaving them after maternity leave was very difficult for me. I did, but I felt quite resentful at times, and only did so for money reasons. However, a bit further down the line, I have a good career, and in all honesty, your prospects for the future look better than your husbands (as you are better qualified, already on a career path), so perhaps keeping going at this stage won't be a disaster.

I think a frank chat is in order, along with the spreadsheets everyone has suggested.

Worra nothing wrong in working fulltime except the OP doesn't want to for the next few years and financially she doesn't have to in order to pay the bills.

You just sound really resentful of your Dh's family and that is not good. No they should not give him a bigger share of the business - at some point he will stand to inherit bigger portions of the business so it is a fair trade off from that point of view. You had a baby knowing your situation, I do appreciate that you feel a bit differently now you have had a baby but why should the ret of the family give up portions of their live for your choice? If you want more money you will have to work.

I wouldn't even go there with discussing it with them - your family and how many children you have and at what times etc is your choice and responsibility. His family have worked for a long time to earn the privilege of taking a lot of holidays, so you seriously believe you even have the right to comment on that - you just sound jealous.

If you want more money you will have to work.
WTF? The OP has said all she wants to do is go down to 3 days a week and that she is happy to give up some luxuries in order to do this. Her DH is unwilling to make the sacrifice.

pinky that is a really strange post.

Why don't you think it is a problem that OPs DH is working 70 hours a work for minimum wage, and he wants OP to work full time to pay for luxuries for him, which he pretends he pays for, when she would like to go part time and have more time with their child?

SQ you have just articulated exactly what I wanted to say.

pinky I see you too haven't read the thread...

The OP doesn't want more money. The OP is happy to cut back on luxuries in order to facilitate PT work so she can spend more time with her LO.

Her DH, on the other hand, is refusing to cut back on luxuries and wants OP to continue to fund the lifestyle he grew up with, as she is the main breadwinner.

So, basically, because he wants to look well-off to the outside world, and wants to use her salary to continue to have flash cars, the OP must now give up staying at home with her new baby and go back to work full time.

The in-laws is a bit of a red-herring, although I think OP takes issue with their son working all the hours God sends for less than minimum wage. I think OP was trying to show the difference between the generations - her DH's grandparents gave a large share of the business to OP's IL's which enabled MIL to be a SAHM, yet one generation down the line, the IL's aren'ts doing the same for their own son. Think OP just thought their might be more empathy from MIL, but unfortunately they are perfectly entitled to do with the business what they will. If the DH doesn't like it, he's going to have to stand up for himself and his new little family.

It isn't his lower income that bothers you then, its the uses he chooses to put the money towards. In which case I sympathise. Been there, done that!

Had to work full-time from my first baby being 12 weeks, 18 with second, 18 with third but I went back part-time (30 hrs). Given the choice I wouldnt (at least second time round). In fact the number of posts on here about the subject suggests it's not uncommon.

I think you need to show him in detail what the current situation is, and what you want to see different. It sounds as if he doesn't even understand the true picture atm.

But the point is it is not about his family - resenting their lifestyle is not the answer is it? The OP had a baby with this knowledge about her personal financial situation between her and DH and now other people should cut back on their lifestyles? I agree her husband needs to do something about it particularly if he is 'pretending' that he is paying for things when it is actually the OP but this is not problem with the wider family. The answer here is to say no we are not going to have that expensive thing, we cannot afford it not resent the MIL because she has so many holidays and have in the past privately educated their children etc.

Just put half of the money for bills in - Dh will soon get the message, maybe he does need to speak to his family about earning more but my point is slagging off your MIL for being a lady that lunches changes fuck all about their situation. She needs to sort her husband out not his family.

Stillsquiffy he is not on a salary, he is getting a dividend from his shareholding which is from the profits.

I know views can change, but isn't this the sort of thing that should be discussed before you have children?

Or did you want to go back full-time and have now changed your mind?

Family businesses are always notoriously tricky.

I know a man who worked for his FIL all his life (having married the daughter at nineteen and becoming the son they never had yadda yadda) only for his FIL to sell the busness from under him, rendering his daughter and SIL without an income.

I know two brothers who work together and one is useless but the other keeps working with him because its family.

The OP's DH probably feels, has had it drummed into him from childhood, that family stick together , that all this will one day be his.
But that doesn't mena he should be expected to work for fuck all now.

Without knowing what the job is, it's difficult to say for sure, but with 10 years of experience, it seems reasonably likely that a salary of £20k would be well under market rate for that role, so it does sound like the inlaws are taking advantage of it being a family business. He should be the one to tackle that, not the OP, though. In any other job your spouse would not go and have a salary chat with your boss! Even in a family business that would be odd. Mentioning that he is considering giving up work because he doesn't earn enough to cover childcare would be a good idea.

OP, from a business point view there are a number of possibilities that are not clear, but you may be making assumptions about the in laws having loads of holidays. The business may not be doing as well as before, as you implied, so they could be going on holidays using money earned over previous years and saved. Their current remuneration in dividend terms may be very low if your Hs income is mostly/all from salary. In which case your issue is with your H to sort out his outgoings.

If the business is doing reasonably well, and say half his income is from dividends then his parents are earning about 300k and his salary is 10. Given the hours he works this is nuts, but from a business perspective it depends what he does.

If he were run over by the proverbial bus, how much would it cost his parents (still the directors playing an active part?) to get someone else to do the work? That is what he is worth to them in unemotional terms. That is what he should be paid, but the carrot is an inheritance, although a distant one I think.
If he is building business and it is growing from his presence then it is in their interest to give him more; if he sweeps the floors and does the tea then why should he get more?

Whatever is the case, unless you see a change in the near future in terms of share ownership or salary changes then £20k for 60 + hours is unrealistic, and if I were him I would look to do something else. If he says he is needed, then he must be worth more.

pinky "The answer here is to say no we are not going to have that expensive thing, we cannot afford it "

How is that going to work? It doesn't sound like her husband is willing to talk about it - that's the whole problem.

I just think the husband's quip about OPs job (when full time) only being part-time as it's not 60/70 hours is awful.

So he's saying she has to go back full time
So he can afford to buy stuff
And he justifies that by saying it's not really a full time job

Bollocks to that. Is he a nice husband, OP?

If your DH works 6 or 7 days a week, long hours, when does he see you and the baby?

Why doesn't he want to spend more time with you?