Working mums get all the shit and end up with no career

[farewellfigure]

Hi. I really don't know if I've just a bee in my bonnet or whether workplaces in general really are unfair and women get such a raw deal. It's all very emotional at the moment as our department has just announced that 2 out of 10 of us will be made redundant in the next month. I'm applying for an admin/assistant role in my DS's school and I really hope I get it. I'm actually really excited but I can't help pondering over the fact I will become the cliché of a career woman who has to give it all up.

Anyway, at work, there are 3 designers who are part time, and 2 part time writers. We are all mums who had careers... we were managers, department heads etc. Then we had babies and came back part time and weren't allowed to be managers any more. And how about the men we used to manage whose wives had babies? They are now managers, department heads etc. It drives me NUTS. In DS's school, there are so many mums who had careers, and are now dinner ladies, TAs, admin assistants etc, it's just not funny. Not that there is anything wrong with any of those jobs whatsoever. But it just seems so unfair to me. I know having children is a choice, and I chose to do it. And I chose to go back part time. Yes... all my choices because I actually wanted to see my DS a bit every day and have a relationship with him. But basically I waved good bye to my career and now it looks like I'll have to wave good bye to the job as well.

There are 2 young women in the office who will probably get to keep their jobs when the redundancies come because they are young and full time and 'fresh'. WIBU to say to them, 'When your time comes, and you choose to have babies, come back full time. Put your DCs in nursery all day every day and keep your management roles. Otherwise you can kiss good bye to your high-flying careers and do what all the other overlooked mums end up doing'. Bitter? Me? Just a wee bit. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts and maybe a bit of perspective! And I'm giving myself a . Is that allowed?

howabout long and very boring story. In part because I want things to be as amicable as possible and as neither of us is seeking a financial settlement I'm hoping to work this out on an ad hoc basis. STBX is now in a new job and claiming its very difficult for him to help out with drop offs and pick-ups but clearly if he doesn't start to pull his weight we might have to go down the legal route on this.

I understand that the thread is focused on the challenges for and discrimination against PT work, which I wholly sympathise with. It was just an aside really.

I never wanted to share childcàre equally with DH and he would not have wanted that. I think that paid work / childcàre ( both of which are equally valuable) should be split in a way that works for each family.

This thread is really interesting - I haven't read all 15 pages, I must confess, so apologies if I am repeating what's gone before.

I am currently trying to get back into work after having been made redundant almost 2 years ago. At that point I had been working 3 days a week for a company I'd been with for several years, having reduced my hours after having my first child. After being made redundant I got a short term contract somewhere else fairly quickly, made the mistake of 'negotiating' a 4 day week (when of course I ended up doing the full time post in less time for less money - won't be making that mistake again!) and although I'd hoped this post might lead to more work, it didn't.

I'm now looking for another post - and realising that this is how women's careers get ruined. Financially we are OK as my partner earns more than me, and with childcare costs, my wage didn't really make a differnece to us as a family, so it would be really easy for me to just not go back. However, it's now almost 6 mo since I finished my last contract- it's been nice seeing the kids more, but I feel really unfulfilled and aimless and frustrated, and have realised that I am a better mother when I aim working. The irony is too that I am by far the more qualified in terms of education, driven and ambitious out of the two of us - not that my partner isn't accomplished or doesn't work hard, but he's never had a 'plan' career-wise, whereas I most definitely have. I am now getting worried that if I don't get back into work soon, my chances will start to diminish rapidly.

I have an interview this week for a position I'd love to do - however even if I'm offered it I have reservations about taking it as for various reasons that are really not my partner's fault it would still fall to me to be almost wholly responsible for the children's daily pick ups etc.

There is an imbalance, definitely. And I don't know what we do about it :\

Good luck daim with the job.
Before we married my children's father said if hiring a daily nanny did not work out he would give up work. i was reading my diary from that year (we hired her when I was 7 months pregnant and she started soon after the baby was born and stayed 10 years) and it did work out. The reason he said he'd give up work was because I would earn more (and I did). Also before we even got engaged we discussed this and feminism and fairness at home and the fact I was going to work full time after babies so I suppose we both went into it with our eyes open and based on my potentially higher earnings (me lawyer in London, he head of dept. teacher).

The only thing I want for younger women is knowledge. I think there are myths out there that work is soft and fluffy and if you work a few hours a day everyone thinks that's briliant and you are getting just as much experience as someone working flat out and that you will preserve a career. In practice for whatever reasons in many jobs long maternity leaves and short hours do cause more trouble than they are worth.

in our case his female colleagues with children left work much earlier and he had to stay until 6pm even though he was the one most days who got home first to let the nanny go home (I stayed until she arrived in the morning). He also wasn't given a pay rise one year because I earned too much. So men who are the first line primary responsible parent after the nanny or nursery don't always find it hard to make employers realise that can be their role. Hopefully that will change as more and more women earn more than their men and bring in most of the bacon.

I don't know if this is unusual, but one of the reasons that my career is taking less of a priority is that DH is less tolerant of boredom than me. He would really struggle to be doing the same thing for years on end (while stuck in a job with shorter hours), whereas I can cope better. Though part of my coping strategy seems to be a conveniently placed maternity leave.

Yes, I agree: it is a pretty crappy situation. I returned back to work after having my second child only to be haranged by a female boss who would often ask me when I was going to return to full time work.

If it is any concillation to you, I am now in my forties and my children are in their late teens. I began a new career now that the children are less dependent.

I do not regret for a minute my decision to reduce my hours/change my job to fit in with my children. I hated the thought of leaving them in childcare from 7.30 - 6pm every day!

I think with age, and a bit of perspective, I see things differently. My family are far more important. Once you have been made redundant a few time or treated badly by management despite working really hard, you will recognise that investing all your energies in work is not always so rewarding. You are indepensible to them - but not to your family.

The workplace is sexist - I can not tell you the number of times at different companies I have seen men receive a bonus or pay rise that coincides with them becoming a father - I have never seen the same for a women becoming a mother. That may be because of impending maternity leave but it still sucks.

I worked ft for first child now work pt but compressed hours and I am cheap for my senior role. My boss livings working mothers he thinks they are incredibly cheap and loyal - ie can not change jobs as easily due to childcare etc and the fact they are not that attractive to other employers!!!

Ps anyone read the sat times about the sexism experienced by the equities trader - it was quite something!

What annoys me about being a working mum is that most of the other mums are SAHM so it buggers up your social life and has an effect on playdates as well I've found.

I was promoted twice within a year of giving birth to my second. It depends on your attitude to work. I am a hard worker so having children hasn't changed my attitude to work. I agree with lots of Lotuslight's points.

A lot of mothers work in my chidlren's schools actually but that might be because of the need to pay for school fees and more professional higher paid women amongst the parents so I never had the children to play issue but it probably depends on the school. We also had class mothers' evenings over a meal rather than in the day although I am sure those who don't have jobs did meet during the day sometimes too.

Obviously I agree with rainbow - ti's just common sense. If you want to earn a lot and do well you work hard whether male or female. If you work less hard at work or fewer hours you don't earn as much and you might get a Mother Teresa medal for changing 24 nappies a day but don't expect much thanks from anyone nor that it will benefit your children. Do it for yourself if you do it for anyone.

There is no reason in this day and age that a dad can't either stay at home or his career take a back seat. Men can even take your entire maternity leave now, so it is all about choices.

LoyusLight - when I was at school almost all of my friends' mothers worked which allowed them to pay school fees.

The problem with "letting" skilled women take unskilled jobs is that it's not economically as beneficial to the country - and unskilled women will have to fight for those same jobs.

As to pp who said men can be P/T, it's a choice - both DH and I put part time requests in to our employers. Despite being in a unique and more senior role my employer said yes; my DH's employer, despite him being one in a team of 7, said no.

I'm convinced that is because he is male and I am female.

I was a SAHM mainly because I didn't earn enough to pay for childcare. Also I was not in a career job, as I'd left school at 17 after a serious health condition diagnosis. (My consultant advised me to get a job with a big company as quickly as I could because I'd need a lot of time off - it was back in the 80s - not sure that advice would apply today).

However, new treatments meant that in my 30s I was able to pick up my education and get qualified (it helped that I didn't have a salary to give up and parents nearby who helped with school runs). So by my 40s I finally got the career I'd never had (and at times thought I'd never get). It hasn't been an easy ride, especially with a divorce and remarriage which blessed me with 4 DSCs (3 of primary age when I met their DF).

Just remember OP that kids grow up quicker than you ever expect them to. We're living longer and there is life after kids. In the immortal words of Maureen Lipman 'you give birth to them and then you teach them to drive'. With hindsight it really feels like that.

@rainbowdashpony you live in never-never land if you think that "hard work" and the "right attitude" is all that's needed. I'm an academic, continued to work full-time, continued all of the research and conference travel after my DC's, yet I have still been overlooked for promotion. Why? Because I didn't do enough research during my maternity leave. Because 'now you're a mum, perhaps it's better to stop doing research.' The idea that an academic who has children is not committed to their work is rife. I've been told that to my face by the man who sat on the promotion committee.

There's a reason why 80% of professors in my College are men. Across my disciple, 3/5 make professor, while 1/5 women are promoted to professor. It has nothing at all to do with having "the right attitude." Open your eyes and stop tarring women with the 'if I did it, so can you" attitude.

That isn't because you are a woman it is because you have taken time out. Same happened to dh as he took time out from birth. I had 2 weeks off twice and was straight back so obviously that is going to make a difference.

Rainbow that's not a world we should be wanting to live in. That's discrimination, no more acceptable than being overlooked for promotion because you have the wrong colour of skin.

No, it's because I'm a woman. I took a short maternity leave on both occasions, too. In my area, only 10-15% of women have children because it's frowned upon. I don't know any other women who have more than 1 child.

I know a couple of men who took unpaid sabbaticals to look after their kids and they've done just fine. Being a woman and having children is the ultimate sin. Women can be just as bad as men in this regard. In some areas of employment, no amount of hard work will ever make up for your biology. It's not a case of the glass ceiling, but a reinforced steel ceiling.

We now have a new Dean (male, with children) who openly acknowledges we have a really big problem & it's unacceptable. I'm hopeful things might begin to change over the next 10-20 years.

I've just started a new job and it's been an absolute revelation. The workforce, from junior to top senior management is 90% women, and everyone works part time. They actually look suspiciously on people who want to work full time hours and until recently the entire company only worked 4 days per week. The work week is 35 hours and no-one is expected to work over their hours. It's fantastic! And what's more, the business is flourishing, employee loyalty is high and everyone who goes off on mat leave is very happy to come back.

It just goes to show how most businesses are still run on an old-fashioned model of employees (men) having a SAHP so no childcare responsibilities. But in this day and age that just isn't the case any more. Women both want and need to work, which leaves many employees, both men and women, needing their employers to be open to flexible hours and part time work. Otherwise the only people who are going to progress are the people who have a SAHP or are childless - a group who are increasingly becoming a minority.

Things are changing, slowly. But in most sectors it's certainly still true that women get "Mummy Tracked" once they have children, while men who would love to cut down on hours and share more family responsibility don't dare because they see what happens to the women who do.

30 years ago, I deliberately chose a career that I knew was flexible enough to work around a family as I wanted to be able to work part time when my DC were small then be able to work full time later on if I needed to. It is definitely something that should be mentioned to everyone (men and women) while they are choosing university courses, apprenticeships or a first job. The main message should be 'you cannot have it all, either your career will suffer or you won't spend as much time with your DC as you want and will have less money as a result'

Op, YANBU and there is no easy answer.

Actually, the one thing that gives me hope in my work is the fact that of those younger women who are married and have kids, 75% are married to other academics. Those men take an equal share in looking after their kids. They bring them to weekend conferences, take them to work during the holidays, and reschedule meetings when they're sick. Men are far more open about their family commitments than women. My Dean commented that when men bring their kids to work, everyone praises them. Women rarely do this as they fear being judged.

I think that the most important factor in bringing change to workplaces is for men to change their roles.

Totally agree scissors. Academias is one of the least family friendly enviroments and some academis dont even think it is a problem.

That should have read 'you cannot have it all, either your career will suffer and you will have less money as a result or you won't spend as much time with your DC as you want'

Luckily, I don't work in proofreading

Snapple I read the article in the Times about the sexual discrimination case. I too can testify that as a finance professional I found sexism and actual discrimination to be pretty much endemic. It was also true in my case that once I had cut through I was treated and respected as an equal. However this meant me being very astute at manipulating the prejudices in my favour and of course there were opportunities which I was excluded from. I also think like Lotus that it is naive to think that the workplace is where hard work is rewarded. For men and women I think it is always about maximising your worth and knowing the relative strength of your bargaining position.
For me, given that I am able to choose, having DC reduces my ability to put in the hours, travel and intellectual effort necessary for me to do the fun bits of my career stream. I also have lots of other interests which my non paid work affords me the freedom to pursue. This means I have yet to find an employee who would offer me enough money and enough flexibility to persuade me to work for them.

The other thing I wanted to comment on was the position regarding involvement at school. I am very reticent about volunteering as I have a tendency to intimidate the teaching staff and I think they are much better placed to do the job than me. I also resent doing unpaid work to help all the pupils when I know a fair few working Mums think a non working Mum is a second class citizen. In any case all our PTA meetings are in the evening to accommodate the working parents and I do not have free time in the evenings because that is when my schoolage DC need me. As most mothers in my school work social isolation is greater if you are a SAHM. Also you cannot escape the politics of the playground in favour of the politics of the workplace. I don't like either and this is another reason I stay away from the PTA.

A bit of a digression, but I think it is worth pointing out the non financial issues of being a SAHM when assessing the relative benefits of FT or PT employment. There are loads of other issues about relative power in the relationship between the parents but that is indeed a whole other thread!

Autocorrect changed employer to employee lol. Perhaps it understands my attitude to potential employers better than I do!