To ask how having children affected your career?

[Fluffysparks]

Just that really. Were you employed before having the DC, how much time did you take out and do you think it affected your career? I’ve just realised that it probably has with me, in more ways than one, and I’ve been quite lucky as well...

I had a thread running on a similar topic the other day. It was depressing then and it's depressing now. Mine isn't dead but it's definitely on life support - treading water - going nowhere anytime soon. And that's with an amazingly supportive partner and good childcare.

All of my closest 5 friends gave up work and became SAHM.

All are now self employed and doing really well.

Giving up work and re-evaluating life and work can be a fantastic opportunity if you allow it to.

Speakout - lovely for your group of friends but we’re talking about the majority here. Most start up businesses aren’t successful, and most women who give up their career end up financially disadvantaged, as well as frustrated by their diminished opportunities, as this thread shows

Pretty similar story here. I have 3 degrees (2 at postgraduate level), worked as a fulltime academic until having children, took time out to look after them but then could only get zero hours, semester by semester work and even this was erratic. My pension is crap. ‘DH’s career flourished meanwhile. Eventually decided it was fruitless hanging around waiting for a FT academic post (which tended to go to young males with no responsibilities who could network down the pub/go off on conference jollies), so I retrained in my 50s. I do have a FT permanent post in public sector but earn the same as a 21 year old who’s just qualified. Me and DH split last year. I’m still doing FT childcare for 2 kids ... just now with a FT job on top of this (he refuses to have the kids). It’s hard work and I feel very very resentful re him. I need to get myself z good solicitor and start divorce proceedings but have, literally, not a minute to myself.

My dd has seen the reality of it all. She’s making academic choices now and thinking about a career. There’s been some hard lessons in all of this for her but she is now aware of how prevalent the inequality of it all is in terms off her own future decision-making.

Having my daughter has actually improved my career. I'm a mature medical student and before I had her I used to procrastinate and struggle with exams. Since I had her my results have been much higher and I have won several prizes and has research presented internationally. She is my drive to get work done efficiently. I have always been ambitious and having bed hasn't dampened that at all

Having children ended my career and rendered me (I think) unemployable. I've grown to used to being at home, being my own boss, can't imagine going out to work anymore. If I had my time again, I might do it differently.

Killed it dead, despite me trying part time etc from first child to first few years of the second. Largely due to dh working away and helping out v little when home, parents living abroad, and in laws who said they lived too far away to help on inset days, for example. Despite the fact they could make it to ours in good time when it suited them. Bitter? Yes.

Sorry for the typos

I'll just leave this here.

isitamummyday.com/2017/03/26/the-golden-handcuffs-of-part-time-working/

Back part time 3 days after mat leave. Definitely impacted career - had to give up grad scheme as couldn't be flexible enough for the role I had to take and no other roles available.

I do enjoy current job but there's zero chance of getting an excellent performance rating as to do that, you have to put the extra hours in, over and above your contracted ones and I feel like I'm being pulled in all directions as it is, with elder care responsibilities as well as childcare (though I do still put in a few extra hours after dd's in bed). Promotion, I would imagine is at least 5 years away, although colleagues I started grad scheme with in 2012 have been 2 pay grades above me for about 2 years!

double do you have a partner?

It's not the fault of employers that women have to go part time because their husbands refuse to take on their fair share!

Perhaps not but it is the fault of employers that women who go on maternity leave are often sidelined or made redundant (as some sort of punishment).

It is the fault of employers that there is a gender pay gap in the first place that forces women to sacrifice the (female) lower paid career (eg if childcare costs are exorbitant compared to income).

Its the employers fault that there is still an 'old boys' network in many careers, with all important weekend networking on the golf course or evenings in the pub taking priority over an employees competence.

So yes. There's a lot employers could do. But whilst the majority of industries are led by male dominated Boards do you think they're incentivised to make changes? Why would they when having wifey at home suits them very well?

And in the meantime women struggle to reach/stay in senior positions and the vicious circle continues.

dame I agree with you, mostly. And the article you posted sums it up perfectly.

As a general rule, I think employers could and should be doing more on a whole range of issues to enable more equality in the workplace.

This is an area, though, where I think the spotlight is actually a little too much on what the employer should be doing, while men (specifically fathers) get away scot free.

I don't think it's actually that scandalous that if you stop being able to go the extra mile and work long hours, your opportunities for progression will decrease. What is scandalous is the societal and cultural expectation that it's mothers who will put themselves in that position, not fathers.

Also, is the gender pay gap that clear cut? I though the data showed that women in their 20s now out earn men, and it's only after the birth of the first child that the real disparity appears.

Otherdoor- good post.
While employers undoubtedly have a role to play, that article also highlights how difficult it is for an employer (or manager) to accommodate everyone’s wishes. Imagine trying to manage a whole team where person A wants fridays off, person B wants to start late on Wednesdays, person C wants an early finish when granny who looks after the kids has got something else on, and person D wants to work from home every other Monday!! This type of scenario can quickly add to the workload of the manager (who, ironically, may be a mum who’d quite like a decent work life balance too!) And here’s the rub... for ‘Person A, B, C and D, substitute ‘woman’ because in almost all cases it is the woman. It doesn’t take a huge leap to see that from an employer’s perspective, a man who’s going to turn up every day and not want work patterns which may conflict with those of other employees or the business, is going to seem like a better bet.

Really, it’s only when men are seen to be taking on equal responsibilities in the home and with children, that we’ll see a fundamental shift

These days even when your children have flown the nest, there may be another 20 years of working life ahead of you,

See, this is why I don’t understand why some PPs think they will never be able to work again because they’ve had children. Obviously, if they don’t want to work again or can’t for some other reason, that’s different. But I can’t see why someone who’s, say, 30 with a couple of toddlers thinks they are unemployable forever.

I get that women returners and retrainers might need some help with their confidence, refreshing their skills, etc (and this thread has made me want to do something to help with that), but the idea that it means they can never work again seems rather extreme.

I went out to work after a while as a SAHP and then went back to school and retrained in a completely new career with a load of youngsters once I’d had my DC, and it was perfectly doable (and more or less essential, financially). It makes me sad that so many women appear to have little confidence in their own abilities to earn and progress in the workplace after having children.

I don’t think it’s so much that people are completely unemployable; rather that having a number of years out of the workplace does set you back, as evidenced by the many women on here who are returning to work in lower grade roles than previously. In fast paced careers there have often been changes too, sometimes at systemic level which make it impossible to step back in where you left off.

And as you say, even if skills are brushed up, many women who’ve had time out, lack confidence in their ability to perform in the workplace which is a whole other issue

It's not the fault of employers that women have to go part time because their husbands refuse to take on their fair share!

My husband does do his fair share. We do 50:50 time/drop offs/pickups/sick cover. He’s as much a parent as I am. I blame my employer 100%.

as soon as my employer heard I was pregnant I was stripped of any interesting work, had my direct reporting chain removed, and was sidelined. Invites to interesting projects and meetings stopped. The sort of communication that started ‘you might be interested in attending...’ stopped. A tone of curt rudeness was adopted.

When I came back, I was demoted. Because I have the same grade it’s legal, but I was placed into a lower role with nonreporting chain, doing stuff well below my ability level.

None of this is down to my husband being a lazy arse - he just isn’t. He’s as likely as me to get up in the night, change a nappy, fix dinner. We have a rough schedule that means the ‘stuff’ is covered and we do half each. But from the moment I said I was pregnant it was all congratulations for him and career doom for me.

I’m fucking furious.

anatidae well, obviously in your specific situation it is quite clearly your employer's fault. Sorry you went through that.

otherdoor

Thanks - I totally get your point, that many men don’t help at all and it can be a matter of family dynamics as much as the employer. At the same time, I am so peeved that despite me thinking I’d done all the right things (reproducing with someone who pulls their weight, parenting equally) I still got shafted. God help those who DO have lazy manchildren in the house.

Really, it’s only when men are seen to be taking on equal responsibilities in the home and with children, that we’ll see a fundamental shift

I agree with babbity's point here. I also note anitadae's experience with an employer seemingly presuming she was less valuable as a working mother than a childless woman (or working father). The trouble is ... employers often do tend to tar all mothers with the same brush because the majority of women DO take a longish maternity leave and want to go part time, or give up work. This generalisation makes things harder for those of us who want a full time career. I took short maternity leaves and although I kept my employers informed they seemed surprised that I did return to work quickly and there was a bit of scrabbling around finding me stuff to do - some of my best cases had been reallocated (rather than "minded") and I had to throw a few strops to get them back. One partner even said "I was sure you wouldn't be coming back now you've got two children" ?!?

Whilst I agree that men in general need to step up at home women need to own the issue too. I started a thread yesterday (sorry TAAT) asking hypothetically about 50/50 earning/ domestic tasks being compulsory. A lot of posters said that they thought many men wouldn't like that at all. But a LOT of women posted to say they would hate it too as they wanted to be at home for their children and not go out to work. For many women it's a choice, not something they are railroaded into, and employers do note that and it does affect how they view female employees. I don't know what the solution is - or rather, where the solution should start.

I know three women who went pt because of the kids, the rest like myself went pt because their employers treated them like shit because they dared to get pregnant and they didn’t want to give 110% to an employer that treats them like shit - why would you? And much like the women who find their partner doesn’t want to do 50/50 after the babies are born, many women don’t find out how little their employer values them until they’re not available 24/7.

It is a very charmed life one would lead where your life never, ever impacts on your ability to work all hours. Personally I think the long hours and unnecessary travelling of many professions needs to be addressed whilst simultaneously looking at men stepping up domestically. As pp said your dh can be doing everything but if your employer shafts you what can you do? At least if your employer doesn’t shaft you but your partner does, you can afford to pay people to do childcare, shopping and housework as you have a career.

I don't know what the solution is - or rather, where the solution should start.

I dont think compulsive measures work well. Where does it start? Well I think it’s two pronged: you need both a strong legal protective framework in place AND you need a shift in society’s views.

I did take maternity leave. I was fine doing that. I was happy to, and it’s hard not to where I live as no daycare will take a child under one and nannies aren’t common. I assumed my career would be on hold for a year, then pick up after I got back with a. bit of catching up.
I wasn’t prepared for being sidelined immediately I told them I was pregnant. There was NO logistical reason to do so, it was just made quite clear that they viewed the very idea with total contempt. I had no one senior to go to - the level above me was the top of that boy of company. And I’m not naive enough to think that HR act for the employee, they’re there to protect the company from the employees.

I think you need a Scandinavian style legal framework of good paid PARENTAL leave rather than an insistence on maternity leave. You need strong protection for parents. Better flexible working provision, better, more flexible childcare (we do better here but it sure as hell isnt flexible.)
Then you need to make the men take the leave! Or make it possible and desireable for them to. That perhaps is harder.

I also think framing it as ‘other women’s bad choices’ takes away any of the structural reasons these things happen and provides what feels like the usual answer to these issues - individual women are at fault.

I think employers who automatically don't promote part timers as a matter of course need to consider whether the loss of experience/talented people to more senior positions is actually the best way forward and whether what they perceive to be problems are actually problems or whether they could be overcome, or would be worth the pay-off of a larger talent-pool.