To think women can't have it all?

[0Cripes]

I'm pregnant with DC3 and due soon. My boss recently announced he was leaving at the end of this month on a 9 month secondment. His role is a natural progression for me and he has been teeing me up for it for 7 years. However, someone will backfill his role and gain experience for 9 months that I won't have a chance to get, therefore when the permanent position comes up (my boss has no intention to return) I'll be at a disadvantage.
If I wasn't going on mat leave I would stand a very good chance getting this role. I am annoyed as I feel I'm now at a disadvantage and my career is suffering because I've chosen to have a child. I appreciate that I still have the opportunity to apply but I'm pretty sure I won't get it knowing I'll be absent for 6 months of it!
I know the timings are nobodies fault but AIBU to be annoyed at this and think it's so hard for women to have kids and a successful career?

And interestingly not one mention by PP’s that it is, on balance, much better for the baby to be at home with it’s mother for at least a year, if not longer. There needs to be so many changes for women to be able to be a parent and not disadvantaged in their careers in the UK.

Its complete impossible to think that a child needs to be with it mother for the first full year but also expect a womans career not to be impacted. There's never going to be a time that can happen.

A work place moves on a lot in a year. You take 12 months off and then the next 1-2 months catching up. Then do it again a few years later and then again.

Opportunities can and should be offered to people on mat leave. But, like in ops case, if a role needs covering and she isn't at work at that time, it can't be offered to her. And therefore she is at a disadvantage.

And that is the choice. Having a career isn't the be all and end all. But if the Op wants to be available for every opportunity that comes up she can't take a long mat leave.

No one can take 3 years out of the work place and it not impact their career at all.

Slight tangent to the OP but it has been mentioned in PP - there are more subtle and practical motherhood penalties than not being able to take a job role because of planned mat leave, people saying only take 2/3 weeks, that almost assumes a woman can work up to her due date and not go (up to 2 weeks) overdue.

I had a fairly physical job and couldn’t go beyond 37 weeks, i may have been forced to go sooner due to SPD but managed to limp to the end. You could easily use 5-6w plus mat leave before baby even arrives. Add on 6 after for a caesarean. That’s not to mention time off for antenatal visits before the birth and potentially adaptations to pump milk afterwards if you come back early. I have known women try to hide/play down these things because as soon as your pregnancy becomes noticeable, there is a shift in perception so however focussed you are and however soon you plan to be back at your desk, other people write you of as an inconvenience. They don’t offer you a promotion after one child because they anticipate the second. Even childless women are subconsciously discriminated against for the perception that they are the right age and stage to have a baby soon, whatever their plans.

I have also found a motherhood penalty in terms of poorer pension contributions, interest going up on my student loan while I’ve been off (DH meanwhile has paid his off) no break or reduction for professional fees or costly cpd requirements (I noticed this was reduced for covid but not for mothers).

You definitely can’t have it all, and I feel that although having a child is a joint venture - women bear most of the physical, financial and career burden. I think if you are married and see everything as joint income (pension etc) and you want to be home with your kids, then within the existing framework you can be content with your lot.

However for those women who really want or need to advance their career and earnings, to feel penalised by parenthood and particularly watching potentially less qualified, less motivated coworkers leapfrogging you because they have a wife at home doing all the child rearing, must be jarring.

[quote Jangle33]@Faevern my DH does just as much child rearing and also works part time. We split evenly. So you are perpetuating the men are useless stereotype which is unfair and unhelpful.[/quote]
Don’t be daft where did I say men are useless, where did I even imply that 🤷🏻‍♀️

Your DH may share everything evenly but he didn’t carry the baby or give birth, he didn’t have to make a choice to return to work while his body was recovering from childbirth. That’s just a fact.

The concept of 'have it all' is nonsense and simply causes a lot of issues and dissatisfaction.

Someone has already said what is 'it'. You can't be a SAHP and work on an oil rig. Bit extreme but just saying you make your choices in life and sometimes making one choice restricts or excludes another. If you were self employed pregnancy is still a big issue or would you expect your clients to put their project on hold for 6-9 months while you have a baby. You mentioned that you felt you had a good chance of getting your managers job if you weren't pregnant, but there's no guarantee. They could simply advertise and bring someone in from outside or promote one of your colleagues who probably thinks they're just as capable.

You can't really have it all as you must prioritise somethings in your life. You want children focus on being a parent then on your job. You want to be a career woman focus on your career and put children on hold until you can afford to have an aupair/nanny to raise them for you.

I think in a partnership you have to decide. My husband and I split our relationship so he works out of the home and I work in it.

Friends split it 50/50.

I don't know anyone where the husband stays at home but it does happen.

You need to choose the % as a couple and then go from there. Society doesn't choose it, you and your partner do.

Obviously for single parents it will be different and this is just broad strokes for people in partnerships.

Depends on your own perspective of having it all!
Everyone's lives a different, careers, partners etc.
If your definition of having it all is both working full time in high flying careers with children. I don't believe it's possible as something has got to give! Ie work will not get your 100% or your children due to childcare, Stress and exhaustion.
I work as a nurse and I see far too often that life is short and it's for enjoying as much as possible.
My definition of having it all is having a good work life balance, both me and my husband could have more money and better paid jobs but we wouldn't have the flexibility what we have now with hours and child care. I work part time (24hours over 2 days) with the option of working extra hours as and when. OH works flexi time so when I'm at work he works shorter hours and when I'm off work he works longer hours.

I don't think anyone of either sex can take repeated 6-month leaves without it affecting their career progression. If I'm wrong, please tell me where you work so I can apply!

@FloconDeNeige

Op you are not wrong in the slightest.

This is bullshit.

I say that as someone who had severe hyperemesis to term and lost my job over it.

Choosing to have a third child and choosing to take long parental/maternity leaves can have consequences for careers. Yes of course, (most) women need to recuperate in the weeks after giving birth, but they don’t need 9-12 months to do that. It’s a choice.

As I said before, the workplace is unfair for women in loads of ways, but in this particular situation, a man planning extended parental leave would also likely be passed over. He’d need to make a choice as to what to focus on at that point in time; career or family.

I agree with this. My partners and my career are equally as important, so we are taking shared parental leave. In blocks, so we aren't out of the office for huge amounts of time in one go. If I can breast feed (hopefully I can), work gives me a pumping room, and I can come in a bit later and leave a bit earlier and catch up on anything later on on the evening.

I think its how you choose to set it up within your family which affects how much it'll impact which partners career. Ive been really glad to see a lot more men in our circles and amongst our colleagues take half the time off

You're choosing to have children though and as such choosing to take 9 months away from work. I'd expect anyone who was taking 9 months away to be at a disadvantage, whatever the reason.
It's not just a female issue, you could let your partner take paternity leave instead of you being off. Any person taking 9 months off could experience the same.

Women going back to work at 6 weeks postpartum so that their careers aren't disadvantaged by their biology is a problem, not a solution.

Despairing at this thread.

OP, that's thoroughly rotten timing. I'd make it crystal clear that you want the role, and shout from the rooftops that they should contact you if the position comes up while you're off even though you're on maternity.

@PurpleOkapi

I don't think anyone of either sex can take repeated 6-month leaves without it affecting their career progression. If I'm wrong, please tell me where you work so I can apply!

Precisely. If you take time out of work repeatedly, it would be silly to expect it not to affect progression.

No, I don't agree.

It's true in your specific situation, of course. Horrendous timing that an excellent career move would become available just as you're going on maternity leave.

But it's very much about the maternity leave, and noy about you being a woman or mother (in my opinion).

If this was two or, even better, four years down the line and DC was in school or had settled childcare, this wouldn't be the case.

I have young children and don't feel held back in my career, but I very much did when pregnant. When pregnant/on maternity leave, your career is on hold. As soon as the career restarts, so do the opportunities.

(I'm not saying there aren't other factors that can hold a woman back in her career which may be linked to having a child. But I don't think being a woman and mother means your opportunities and career progress need to stop.

Taking a year mat leave and part time work once you’ve had children are the norm in my social circle.

These same women then moan that they can’t progress their careers in the way their DH can.

Until we share parental leave and childcare
responsibilities equally then we will always be in this situation. This would be a huge cultural shift and honestly I think most women wouldn’t want to sacrifice their mat leave and/or work full time once children arrive. Similarly men don’t want shared parental leave or to work part time.

So women are going to be in this situation forever. Any break from work is going to affect your chances, regardless of what it’s for, especially if you are in a fast moving job.

@MindyStClaire

Women going back to work at 6 weeks postpartum so that their careers aren't disadvantaged by their biology is a problem, not a solution.

Despairing at this thread.

OP, that's thoroughly rotten timing. I'd make it crystal clear that you want the role, and shout from the rooftops that they should contact you if the position comes up while you're off even though you're on maternity.

If the pp wants this opportunity, what else would you suggest.

They need cover for the time she is off. The only solution is to not be off.

Of course she should, be invited to apply if that process happens while she is off.

But in this case OP can not take a lengthy mat leave AND have this opportunity. Just like I can't be a sahp and travel 2 days a week for work.

I don't understand all these comments saying men can't have it all either!? Men definitely have the advantage in the workplace because of circumstances just as you've described! Yes, I do think men miss out on the baby stage due to being at work, but given my husband inability to birth or breastfeed a baby it falls to me, naturally.
I'd be feeling very frustrated by the situation too OP. Unfortunately it is just one of those things for women. Your only option would be to put the baby in childcare from the off or to have DH take the 6 months.
I did successfully apply for a promotion when my daughter was 8 weeks old and didn't actually go back and start the role until she was 12 months. But that wasn't a management position or cover. I was very surprised I got it given the circumstances but as I was well know to the team I was more than likely the most suitable candidate.

@Shhhhhhhshh agreed. The chose for shared parental leave is taken by few and then they main that their career was impacted. It’s confusing.

*moan

Although just to add. Two babies and neither would accept a bottle, so it's not always as easy as just let dad do it.

Well it depends. Not all women can have children. Not all women chose to have 3. You don't need to be on mat leave for 9 months. Men lose out in other ways, pressure to provide, losing out on time with the children / not socialising at work / networking. Conditions are much better now that they've ever been.

'Although just to add. Two babies and neither would accept a bottle, so it's not always as easy as just let dad do it.'

All babies will take a bottle if they have to. If the mum died/couldn't breastfeed the baby wouldn't starve to death and we don't have wet nurses anymore....they take a bottle. It's their instinct to survive!

I don't believe women can have it all.

You just end up with all the responsibility on your shoulders and life becomes endless organising, nagging, mentally keeping track of everything.

If you have a demanding job, that on top of the household/childcare is too much.

Yes it would be great if men did their fair share but they never do. Once you stop work for mat leave things are never the same again.

Not bitter honest.

If the pp wants this opportunity, what else would you suggest.

As I said, I think she should make it abundantly clear that she wants the position regardless of her maternity leave. They can fill it temporarily just as they would have had to if she'd gotten pregnant six months after taking up the position.

Until we share parental leave and childcare
responsibilities equally then we will always be in this situation

I do agree with this, but men just can't take on half the load of pregnancy and breastfeeding. And we shouldn't be disadvantaged because of that. Even if men and women took six months each after a baby was born, women would get the physical recovery, establish breastfeeding, deal with colic, reflux and all the rest and by far the worst of the sleepless nights. Then we'd hand a happier baby in a nice routine over to our partners ready for six months of weaning and walks in the pram. The burden of those initial days will fall on women and it's disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

Later on, sure care and household tasks can be split 50/50 but it's not weakness or lack of effort that means the early days overwhelming fall on women.