AIBU to say that some people just cannot work full time or even at all?

[thebeesknees123]

This does seem to be an age old discussion among parents, particularly among women with young children.

I can think of various reasons why people can't work:

Just had a baby and breastfeeding
Mental or physical health conditions
Caring responsibilities - e.g. elderly relative
The money does not cover childcare/commute expenses

Personally, I do work (30 hours per week) but I am lucky in that it is shifts around the school so I don't have childcare costs. I would never slate someone who couldn't find something suitable for their needs or pressure them to take something that is going to cause them undue stress because they are put in a position where they are forced to be unreliable, which, frankly, I would be if I were forced to work 9 to 5.

Indeed MojoMoon I also find it odd because in real life I don’t know so many couples where the gap in education and career is so wide. I work in finance and my male colleagues are largely married to other professionals. And yet the women do tend to leave work. Maybe it’s just my social circle but I don’t see these massive gaps.

Well it might be something to do with the fact that so many industries still treat women as potential breeding stock, pay them less, won't promote them if they can parachute in someone with a dick, condemn them for being 'bitches' if they stand up for themselves, etc.
Or it might be that the men some women marry convince the women that they will never amount to much professionally because they don't have dicks.

Mojo, totally agree. As I said up thread, in the majority of couples I know, both partners have equallly senior, well paid jobs and there isn’t the major gender divide that so many people on here talk about and that’s both pre and post DC.

It’s been quite a depressing read to see so many posters on here giving up any chance of a future career so easily and seemingly knocking the women who aren’t prepared to do that!

Another problem with current work/business/economics (which quite a lot of posters simply can't comprehend, because they have either got family financial support or are established in a decent job and have been for years) is how much worse things are than they used to be. One of the big problems is the huge growth of agencies/middlefolk/ 'disruption', where there is a layer of people taking a cut out of every transaction. I see quite a bit of well-meant (ish) advice to skint posters that they take up cleaning or ironing or driving a minicab: nowadays it's a lot harder to bring in money doing that because of all the apps and agencies that will undercut what you would charge and keep a chunk of what the client pays.

Yes, this is another good point and one that MN as a whole doesn't do very well at understanding. I'm not of the view that low income women gain no advantages from working even if it doesn't add much to their household, but there's nowhere near enough understanding of how low paid work works these days.

One of the big problems is the huge growth of agencies/middlefolk/ 'disruption',

I think the lack of comprehension is compounded by the fact that in some middle class professions, self employment has been ordinary business model for some time. Middle class professionals often conveniently forget that they have power in client/agency negotiations whereas a cleaner has very little. Not to mention general incomprehension of the difficulties that income fluctuations can cause people on very low wages.

My DH can't do salaried work any more as he's too unwell, but he has taken up doing translation work part-time via agencies. The agency business model can work very well for people like him but, crucially, only because the relationship is not one-sided (he turns down most of the work he is offered and never works below his minimum rate) and because we have my full-time salary to fall back on.

However there is a lot of help out there with childcare costs ( if you can get them paid ! ) or couples can work around each other as we did for many years

Not always possible though. Dh working away 8 months of the year means there is no working around each other, and childcare easily exceeds the wage possible for me, atm.

women are saying their earnings will be so much less than men when they return to work after maternity leave and so might as well give up

Because they’re weighing the cost of childcare against their salary and there isn’t enough left over to make it worth working. Of course there’s always someone who doesn’t understand basic maths who will say “but it’s a shared expense!” You’re weighing one job against one childcare bill It isn’t possibly to weigh half a job against half a childcare bill. Because you can’t quit half a job if the numbers don’t stack up.

Men still earn more than women and get promoted more in the long run. Plus the woman is already on maternity leave, perhaps breastfeeding, etc. So if only one of a couple can work, it makes sense if it’s the man.

In the end it comes down to the fact that childcare is too expensive and underfunded in this country, and wages for the poorest are atrocious. Which is how we end up in a situation where childcare exceeds salary.

It’s not just the childcare costs, it’s the backup childcare when your kids are ill, inset days at school, school holidays, snow days. School assemblies, parents mornings etc etc
It all adds up and if you’ve not got flexible and understanding employer. It makes it very very difficult to be pulled in all those places

A flexible and understanding employer is hard to come by. And even if you do find one, you certainly aren’t going to get promoted to a highly paid position of responsibility. The person who gets promoted will be someone with no childcare responsibilities who can regularly work late.

And, let's face it, often the promoted person as per cosmics comment, does have childcare responsibilities, he's simply avoiding putting kids to bed by 'working late'. Win, win for the blokes. Looks good to the boss, and by the time they're home, kids are in bed, hard work done.

A flexible and understanding employer is hard to come by. And even if you do find one, you certainly aren’t going to get promoted to a highly paid position of responsibility. The person who gets promoted will be someone with no childcare responsibilities who can regularly work late

That very much depends on the sector. It is possible in my sector where you aren't measured on the hours you are in the office but on your output. I've been promoted twice since returning from mat leave and I still work very flexibly.

And, let's face it, often the promoted person as per cosmics comment, does have childcare responsibilities, he's simply avoiding putting kids to bed by 'working late'. Win, win for the blokes. Looks good to the boss, and by the time they're home, kids are in bed, hard work done

That's an incredibly broad generalisation. I know of senior directors both male and female who put in their diaries that they leave early/on time on certain days for school pick ups. I also know that this is shared relatively equally with their partner. The more people do this the more this will become part of the organisational culture.

Men still earn more than women and get promoted more in the long run. Plus the woman is already on maternity leave, perhaps breastfeeding, etc. So if only one of a couple can work, it makes sense if it’s the man

Interestingly, statistically salaries for men and women are relatively equal until they start a family. Once women have children men overtake women by some margin and in many cases women don't recover in terms of career progression and salary.

For most of us, not all unfortunately, there are choices.
A choice to work hard in school to get the grades to get a decent job, a choice to work hard establishing a career and get a decent salary before having children, a choice of how many children to have.
To say I can't work because I'd need to pay for 4 kids in full time nursery and I'd only get nmw, so it would cost me to go to work; whilst that is true, it is also (sometimes) due to choices.

I know of senior directors

Once you’re at that high level you can pretty much do what you want and nobody questions you because you’re the boss. But if you’re not the boss then you’re unlikely to have the same flexibility.

A choice to work hard in school to get the grades to get a decent job, a choice to work hard establishing a career and get a decent salary before having children

This is a really short sighted and privileged viewpoint. Good grades don’t necessarily mean you get a good job. You might graduate during a recession or be autistic and not come across well at interview. And working hard doesn’t mean you have a career either. Factory workers doing 12 hour shifts work damn hard but it isn’t a career. My mum’s cleaner scrubs her hands raw every week but it’ll never be a career.

That's why I specifically said not everyone gets these choices. But many do, let's be honest.

Once you’re at that high level you can pretty much do what you want and nobody questions you because you’re the boss. But if you’re not the boss then you’re unlikely to have the same flexibility

Again, sector and organisation dependent. Yes flexibility tends to increase with seniority but I've always had a decent level of flexibility even very early in my career even before children. My role is incredibly flexible and although i'm senior i'm nowhere near being the boss.

Spot on arethey

Cosmic. You have a serious misunderstanding of what is required in senior roles! Most don’t get to do whatever they choose and leave early whenever they feel like it . It’s no different to any other role and, in some cases, even harder to work flexibly but it’s still possible with a bit of planning and good time management.

All I can see from your posts is a constant stream of excuses why people cant work.

It’s no different to any other role and, in some cases, even harder to work flexibly but it’s still possible with a bit of planning and good time management.

That's true to an extent but with one big difference which is that it's generally the most senior person who gets to dictate the schedule. So if you're senior enough you can say 'I'm not available for that meeting on X date because it's my child's parent teacher interview' but if you're further down the pecking order it's 'no, sorry, you can't have that afternoon off because that's the day that the chief executive is free to attend the meeting'.

When you're lower down the scale you can have fantastic time management and forward planning skills but you are expected (quite rightly) to fit around the timetables of those who are more senior.

For most of us, not all unfortunately, there are choices.
A choice to work hard in school to get the grades to get a decent job, a choice to work hard establishing a career and get a decent salary before having children, a choice of how many children to have.
To say I can't work because I'd need to pay for 4 kids in full time nursery and I'd only get nmw, so it would cost me to go to work; whilst that is true, it is also (sometimes) due to choices.

So what if it's due to choices or not, past choices can't be undone in the present, while you may have always made the right choices in everything related to your career being smug and judgemental about it to people who've had different experiences and different priorities to you isn't exactly the greatest choice in the world.

Not everyone can work in a senior role though can they we need people that work at every level and actually people who are unemployed have a significant role in society too. They are volunteers, carers, SAHPs, also dreamers, thinkers, artists etc.

"Given how utterly pointless many jobs are - the sort of cubicle-mouse role where you might actually complete about 3 hours worth of 'work' in an 8 hour day but you have to be there, for example."

This, a million times over. The work I do is very niche and doesn't involve much contact with anyone else in my workplace. It also has very set deadlines. There is absolutely no need for me to be sitting in an office for set hours five days a week, it is a complete waste of so many hours of my life.

Not everyone can work in a senior role though can they confused we need people that work at every level and actually people who are unemployed have a significant role in society too. They are volunteers, carers, SAHPs, also dreamers, thinkers, artists etc

Of course we do. That’s so important. No reason you can’t do these kinds of jobs AND be a parent.

As long as those “dreamers and thinkers” are funding that themselves then they can knock themselves out!