Attitudes at work to working mothers, particularly if part-time

[Notcontent]

Sorry - just feel like a moan and wonder if other people feel like this.

I work in a professional role, in a job that can require long hours and can also pay extremely well. I am lone parent so can’t do those long hours and so I work in a role which pays well, but not compared to most of my colleagues. I also work part time (four days a week) and obviously my pay reflects that.

But I always feel that my boss (who earns about 10 times what I do or more) and others think I am not pulling my weight. My work keeps banging on about work/life balance, etc but ultimately I feel that as a woman, with caring responsibilities, I will always be seen as not doing enough.

That's interesting, Iwouldratherbe - and what about the layer below - do they have this flexibility also? It is true that the more senior you are, the more likely you are to get some flexibility.

My DH managed to do a 4 day week when our DC was small. It was completely unofficial. I had to take a 20% pay cut and put up with a lot of snipey comments to get the same. Our respective levels of seniority were definitely a factor.

To be honest, they should offer a reduced workload, but equally the part time person should actually do the reduced workload! People at dh's work are part time but expect him to finish their work for them! So as a sahm I'm essentially expected to facilitate their life and career as well as dh's. Cfs of the highest order as far as I'm concerned.

If you couldn't do a full time job in just the hours contracted then you probably can't do a part time version of that job with proportionally reduced wirkload in just the hours contracted either. Lots of jobs include overtime. And flexibility to leave at a set time does not come with a further reductioninworkload. It's just that: flexibility. Finish your work when the DC's are in bed. Yes, all part timers claim to be more efficient suddenly. Maybe true for some, but not the story I hear from those expected to do their work for them!

Yes! I'm self employed, as I was before the baby. And now I get constant comments from family and some peers that imply that I'm almost playing at this ... When actually I'm juggling the same amount of work only on 3 days.

It's soul destroying to constantly feel like you're not good enough and to be so shattered.

I know that the same people would judge me beyond all belief if I were full time. And my peers if I were a SAHP. It's like you can't do wrong for doing right.

I hate their time will come argument. A fifth of women do not have children. Some mothers will always work full-time. It is a patronising thing to say.

@mrex that sounds like a toxic workplace. There's nothing admirable about working until gone 10. Work smarter not harder and all that.

You're right, fivebyfive. There are a lot of victims of inflexible rules and I was that person in my 20s too, although in an industry where there was absolutely no choice about long hours so what actually happened was it was mostly staffed by 20-somethings...

I don't condone anyone, parent or not, that dumps work avoidably on colleagues and doesn't reciprocate.

4 days is almost full time though. It's ridiculous to face these attitudes because of 1 day a week. I work 4 days and people have 2 attitudes. A handful of people I sit near/my team see me as part time and make snide comments / leave me out of meetings etc. For stakeholders I work closely with across the rest of the business, and externals, they actually don't even realise I'm part time!

I also hate the comments on here about full timers browsing the internet or gossiping. Maybe this is the case in your work? But I work part-time and have worked full-time and this was never the case for me.

I don't t get overtime. If I wanted to work for free I'd get a volunteer position. I especially don't get why people I'm jobs with few prospects bother. We don't even get extra pay, you just build up TOIL you can't even take because of the massive ongoing workload

I didn't mean to be patronising and I'm sorry if I was. But on your stats, 4 of 5 of those colleagues will have children and nearly everyone needs flexibility at some point as their parents age or if they or a partner suffer ill health.

A workplace that makes things hard for parents makes things hard for humans.

I fully admit that before I had DC I had little idea of how difficult all this was. It's worth talking about and not just to other people in the same position.

I mean, I have been in rooms of (mostly) men discussing the gender pay gap where I was the only person who knew what wrap around care was or why it was relevant.

A person I once knew, worked in a team where 0900 - 1500 was client-facing, 1500 - 1700 was admin time. She worked part time 0900 - 1445 (school hours) so never got any admin time. She asked if some time could be booked client-free during her day, but was told no as the office is open plan. She was terrific at the job but went off sick with stress. Came back, a promotion came up which would have meant her own office so she could have managed her time better (and the role was right up her street) but they refused to consider it because of her sickness history.... She left, and they lost a good team member. Crazy.

I think the main problem with this issue is that 99% of the time, it's WOMEN who have the PT jobs/hours and not men. If men actually shared the burden of childcare and child-rearing 50:50, rather than women shouldering it almost single-handedly I think it would be very different. I never worked with a man who worked PT hours because of childcare needs, yet I worked with many women. Women who came in on the dot of when they were due to start and ran out the door not a minute after their allotted finish time. Until there is true equality and men pay the same career price for having DC that women do I don't really see the situation changing.

I totally get this...I work part days and my boss once asked why I couldn't stay late! "Because I need to pick up my child from nursery otherwise I have to pay for a full day which defeats the object of me being part-time".

Really winds me up! I have to attend meetings which are at the end of the working day (total nightmare!) and people get given time back to finish earlier but not me "as you finish early every day". One colleague in particular always dismisses/ridicules me being part-time. One day I called her out on it "you were lucky enough to stay at home with your two before they started school weren't you? It's such a juggle trying to balance both my career and kids but my performance management proves I'm doing a brilliant job!". She's in a junior position despite being older than me as she started again after children...despite being part-time I'm more senior and have been in talks with the big boss about my progression next year when my little one starts school. It's hard but I'll have the last laugh!

jenny read my comment again. I never said that this was the case for all full timers. But it's part of the discussion - that hours in the office do not necessarily equate hours spent doing valuable work. That is presenteeism and is of no use to anyone.

I am on the other side of this and work in a team where about half are part time and the other half full time. I am full time.

The issue in my industry is that part timers are paid pro rata by hour so are set targets that are pro rata too. The fixed costs of employing a part timer and full timer are pretty much the same i.e. there is no reduction in those costs for part timers, so full timers will be more profitable pro rata. To meet target pro-rata the part-timers still have to attend the same length team meeting and training, so they end up with more to fit in.

We have both full and part timers who only work their hours but that means the ones who are able to give more and put in more hours don't get paid for that and in my team there is a mix of PT and FT at all levels who can and do put in extra unpaid time. It is the nature of the industry that needs to be done and it is well paid.

At the moment the pay and remuneration doesn't work for anyone. The work set hours people feel resentful that they have to fit more in. The work unpaid overtime people feel resentful that they are paid less but to make it work and keep the team afloat they do it. Flexibility is valuable but isn't paid for. Equally those with more time available are not always as productive as those with less, but they definitely can be.
Until we can work out how to iron this out I think there will be issues on all sides.

Whoever doesn't get overtime:

If you have a salaried role, your have a set amount of work and have to get it done. Normally in your contact. Obviously you shouldn't be given an excessive workload, but if you can't finish in the time and there are deadlines, you have to do the work. Why should someone else do your job for you? Get another job if you're not able or willing to complete your workload.

I'm fortunate as where I work there is a proper commitment to flexible working (within reason). People at all levels work p/t and/or from home some days, and for lots of different reasons. Some are parents (mothers and fathers) of small children, some just find that's what they need for balance.

Basically, p/t working has been normalised which I think is the key. It took a few trail blazers to show it could work well for the business as well as the individuals, but we're now in a good place. People do need to be somewhat flexible as we are a client-driven business (law) but they do get paid a lot.

It depends on the people doing the roles though. I hate the comment that PT workers are more efficient spend less time gossiping etc because its simply not true- some are some aren't the same as with FT people.
PT and flexible working is so much more accessible and acceptable now than it ever was. I think one of the biggest remaining problems is that employers don't look at the overall position. So for example if you have one person working 4 days it might not be a problem increase in workload for others - but when you have 6 out of ten- its a significant increase in work load for everyone else - and it may be hard to cover /get additional staff in - so it impinges on everyone- equally people leaving early or working unconventional hours is fine - but its an absolute pain when you are trying to set up a meeting or get a decision made in a timely fashion-it becomes easy to exclude people from decision/have them miss meetings. By far the best employee I had working PT managed her diary (and everyone around hers) very proactively so that she could pre-empt as many meetings/decisions occurring on her day off- but also accepting that some things did have to happen on a Wednesday.

@Mayagoldchoc, the deadlines and work being finished is the bosses problem. I'll care when I get the same salary maybe. If other colleagues want to martyr themselves that's their choice. I just see work as a case of me agreeing to work my contracted hours for an agreed salary and no more. If the place falls down I'll dust myself off and look for another job.

I can empathise with this!

I work in a professional sought after role although relatively junior. When I got married I felt a sort of ‘tension’ like my manager/senior manager taking a collective ‘how is this going to play out?’ Breath.

When I announced my pregnancy shortly after there was an even louder collective ‘oh here we go’ sigh, as they all wrote my future career off!

Tbf I don’t care. I don’t intend to go back to work full time with a tiny baby. So I’ll either work PT or SAHM.

I think in some careers there’s such an understanding that the hours are not THE HOURS. Those working FT (37.5) actually work much closer to (50-60) whilst those who work PT expect to JUST work those PT hours! It’s ok to say ‘well I’m only contracted to/ paid for X’ but EVERYONE ELSE is working far more than their hours so actually I understand why there’s resentment towards part timers or those who can’t commit to the hours.

I also think that it’s 100% choice from women how many hours they commit to a role and children are often used as an ‘out’ to not work extra hours.

My exec manager is a single mother to 4 children (one with additional needs) and she works insane hours with no extra support. She works all through the night sometimes. She deffo pulls the same hours as her male counterparts!

But I don’t want to do that. I want to raise my children and have a decent work/life balance!

my work actively recruits part timers, female boss, which is great i think and good planning.

I’ve recently started working full time because it’s so much easier to balance a workload that isn’t reduced for part time positions and children in childcare. I actually have something that resembles a relaxed home life now. It was a really tough decision to make as undoubtably it looks like I’m spending less time with the children but after the initial settling down, I’m finding that the quality of time together is better because I’m so much less stressed and have more money and time (more holiday!) to do things.

I think you'll always get this, I'm afraid. Some of your colleagues are probably jealous that they're stuck in the office while you are seen as 'swanning off' to enjoy the sunshine, the garden, cricket, tennis, etc, etc.

Then there's the money side - they have to work full time while you can manage on considerably less - very well paid husband?
The fact that you give it all you've got while you're there doesn't wash with them.

I found PT work was the best of both worlds and only had a bit of this type of attitude. I think you just have to demonstrate how committed you are when you are there, keep your head down.

I think the problem is less specific to working mothers (though am quite sure they have struggles others don't) but a toxic attitude to work in this country and others.

"Commitment" is a fancy word for the company wanting you to work for free. It's just no one wants to call it what it is. If you have a job that is 9-5 then that is the job. Expecting you to do more is to expect you to work for free. That includes salaried workers.

That may be ok in some circumstances such as when there is something siginificant happening at work and provided the same flexibility is given back (i.e. you get to leave early without a reduction in salary) but for many, many work places this is not equal.

They look for a free 30mins or more out of people every day and expect to just give back with an early finish every now and again.

It is toxic.

What's more, research shows that most ofice workers are actually only really production for 3-4 hours a day. Which means insisiting on longer hours is just a bloody charade.

@Snuggybuggy: don't know your situation, but most salaried employees are not just contracted to work set hours. They normally have opportunities for promotion over and above hourly paid work. Get an hourly paid job if that's what you want. Yes my husband is a boss. Doesn't mean he should do eveyone else's job for them. He's got a right to a private life too. "The boss" could be a woman with children: I know of one with disabled children. Should she have to do your work for you too? Or do you accept her right to a private life. The ppl not getting work done at his work could do if they actually got on with it. Why should you be paid to not do your job? I did mine in the time when I worked.