To think having children does not make you less selfish

[Atthewelles]

There's a woman I work with who constantly expects everyone to fit in with her child care arrangements. Even if its part of her job to attend a late evening meeting she will insist that a colleague covers for her because 'I have kids'. She has had the last couple of Christmasses off but is insisting she is getting this one as well, even though people are meant to take turns at providing cover on 27th - 31st Dec because 'I have a young family'. She's the same with Summer holidays. The creche closes for the first fortnight in August so, as far as she's concerned, this gives her an automatic right to have these two weeks off despite the high demand from other staff.
I have just heard her discussing, with another colleague, how becoming a mother totally changes you and makes you 'much less selfish'. .
I have heard people come out with that remark before, even though some of the most selfish people I know are those with small children who expect the world to revolve around them.
AIBU to think that some people are selfish and some are not, and parenthood does not change that?

Exactly. If someone said childless people should be given preference for promotion because they don't have as many ties outside of work, what would you call it juneau?

thing is with your way (circulating a list, then deciding who should get the time) is far less fair on people who "just fancy going away in the summer this year" than those with a 'valid reason' - if you know you will get 'crunch' points like the first 2 weeks of August, by doing hte list approach you are then saying you're going to wait for everyone to apply and then someone (manager) has to make a value judgement on who is "more deserving" of the time off.

Saying "you can't have August off 2 years in the row" is as much of a value judgement as someone saying "X has to have the time off because she's got childcare issues" or "Y has to have the time off because they've got a wedding to go to" - this is very unfair on "Z" who might just fancy going away in August and will therefore never 'win'. It's far fairer to say "The reason you need the time off is irrelevant, first come first served with time off" (if someone really needs time off later on that they didn't get the application in on time such as an ill parent, then the manager will have to deal with those requests, but they can be very last minute so circulating a list is no more help with those problems).

It feels fairer that way to the people who don't have a "valid reason" for wanting the time - it's easier to think "Oh, I can't go that week because I got my application for leave in too late and there's already 2 people off that week" than "I didn't get that time off yet again because yet again X trumps me because they have kids." one gives you an equal chance of getting the time off (getting in first) the other means you'll never get it, or you have to 'wait your turn'

In practice, people without DCs do tend to get promoted over working mothers (having DCs apparently improves a man's career, subconciously managers see them as more reliable, whereas working woman are seen as less reliable). I know I used to be at my desk until 8pm at least 3 nights a week pre-DS, these days I'm out of the door between 5-6pm. (However I went back to a more junior job because I couldn't see my old job being family friendly.) I fully expect this is why I had a very low bonus this year. I won't be offered any additional responsibility. But I'm fine with that for a few years.

Well it's been standard practice in any office I've worked in simply because if you have kids taking them on holiday can only happen during certain expensive, crowded weeks of the year. Those without DC don't have those same restrictions - at least in theory. They may though be constrained by other family members' school age DC, GC, etc, which is why I mentioned other 'valid reasons'. When I was child-free I was happy to let the parents take the expensive weeks of the year and good luck to them - I was more than happy to go away the rest of the year and spend a fraction of the money!

but why should someone with no children have to prove that there is a need beyond them wanting that week off?

Exactly. If someone said childless people should be given preference for promotion because they don't have as many ties outside of work, what would you call it juneau?

Realistically, we all know that happens don't we?

Sounds like you want the holidays allocated in the way that suits you. So you don't want people to ask in advance as you might decide closer to the date that you want it. Many folk have to p,an in advance to tie up with partners and children's holidays. If you want to go away in the busiest time you often have to book up really early or be lucky to take what's left. Why shouldn't people be able to plan in advance?

Some people are so selfish they don't even know how to put their kids first.

been pondering this. Pre-children (and in fact still now as DD is pre-school) I would never want to (and never did) take holiday during school hols as a) it's more expensive and b) I wouldn't want to be surrounded by loads of schoolkids. Christmas is different though, most of us have family we want to be with, so that should be allocated fairly.

But, I am dreading DD starting school because of the holidays. She will have 10 weeks holiday, between me and DH we will have around 10 weeks holiday allocation. Which means we could cover her holidays but not all together, which would be pretty depressing. And we won't be able to afford to go anywhere cos it'll be too expensive! Can't call on GPs to help, health not great.

So, I can see it's annoying, and it does sound like she's being a bit of a nightmare. But have a heart. She's got to juggle this for, what, 11 years minimum? Her choice, of course, but it's not something you really think about when planning to start a family (or maybe that's just me!). Maybe getting your team together to talk about it could be a starting point, see what everyone's immovable commitments are?

I'm single with no kids. I would vocalise my discontent if someone who had kids insisted their needs came before mine. I have elderly parents, siblings, nieces, nephews and friends. They are as important to me as your children are to you (those that are saying your needs are greater than mine).

I think parents can be more selfish. Some have the attitude that their children are entitled to everything being perfect. They aren't embarrassed to put their children before everyone else.

I'm a lot more selfish since having dd. I have expanded my sense of self to her and I know that I put her first where, in a similar situation, I wouldn't have put me first.

OP your response implies that your problem is with management, not the "selfish" mum.

So deal with it! Raise it with the manager!

If you have issues you need to accommodate, make that clear.

YY MrsDeVere 'being selfish makes you selfish'

well without knowing her circumstances it's impossible to say.Is she single? maybe she has no-one to care for her DC when the crèche is closed

Sounds like she's selfish to the precise degree that the management are spineless tbh.

Her manager is doing the other people that work there a huge disservice.

Is the creche provided by work? (only ever heard it referred to as a creche rather than nursery in that context). If it is and they close it for two weeks I think she has a good reason to ask for that time off. If not she should find better childcare.

No having children does not make you less selfish, you now have dependents to put before everyone else, but I do think 75% of the time you are reasonable to put tge first and the workplace can be a hard place to do that.

I don't really think it's abount being selfish tbh. Young children need adult supervision. If their childcare provider is closed/ill and there's no one else to help out then a parent has no choice but to take time off work. Whilst a childless person might like to attend a family birthday or whatever, it's not absolutely essential in the same way as a child being taken care of is.
Then there's the issue cost. Full time childcare for 2+ children would quite often cost more than the parent earned so obviously it makes sense to be off when your children are as much as possible.

I haven't been home for Christmas for eleven years. This Christmas will be the 12th. In nearly every case this is because either my husband or I are covering for co-workers with small children. I live in the US, so we don't get much paid time off, which complicates the matter.

I understand a parent's desire to spend the holiday with family, but it does get really, really old.

Pre DS and in a former job, (24 hour) my company had a policy that team members with DC under 5 for priority time-off over Christmas.
For seven straight years I worked Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, Boxing Day, New Years Eve and New Years Day because there was always someone whose shift fell on one of those days and who wanted it off, or where cover was needed and me (and other childless people) had to cover other shifts as well as our own, because it was contractual.
Really nice idea for those with young families - but I love Christmas and I had a sodding miserable time for 7 years. I missed out on time with family and just enjoying a festive break. And - as I was infertile and TTC at the time, it was horrendous to hear people telling me it was "because I didn't have kids."
YANBU OP. everyone has a reason to want time off - even if it's just because they want it!

Acceptable my parents are old. I'm an only child. It is essential that u spend Christmas etc with them.

I not You, obviously (although you are most welcome!)

Not essential in the sense that they could be seriously injured/taken into care if you weren't there. Which is what would happen if a young child was left home alone.