To be narked by this woman’s attitude? Working parents v child free employees

[SJaneS49]

Not a biggie, at the moment I’ve got a lot going on in the background and am generally hacked of with the world .. but this response has generated a real ‘oh ffs’ reaction in me just now.

Expectations of working parents, especially women as typically (but not obviously always ) we have to date carried more of the childcare burden and been the ones taking the compromises has always been of interest to me & something I think we have got wrong in Britain. I posted something on LinkedIn earlier about how society expects parents to work as if they don’t have children and to parent as if they don’t work. Until I started working from home 14 years ago, that was my experience as a professional working in London, working all hours in the office while also being the sole parent at home, getting in about 7.30/8pm & going straight into helping out with homework.

So I put out a question on LinkedIn, asking parents if their recent experience of working in the new normal had changed what they themselves would be looking for in their next role in terms of flexibility of hours worked when or where they carried out their work. Plenty of employers are currently offering flexibility..but are pretty woolly & vague on what the expectations will be in the longer term. Quite possibly as a number haven’t really worked that out themselves yet! As well as interesting me on a personal level, as I advise my clients on how to make their roles more attractive, I wanted to gauge what changes 2020/21 had made to attracting candidates who if they were parents might not now (having experienced the opportunity to be more ‘present’) want to go back to how it was. Potentially!

Anyway. I have had a reply from someone who is child free who I worked with on a project years ago basically saying special measures should not be made for parents and therefore burdening their childless colleagues. Flexibility if it was being offered should be for all.

While I completely agree with her that parents should not be offered special measures or more flexible options than others, I wasn’t suggesting that at all! Which has me wondering whether this would read like this to others? This particular woman seems to spend a lot of her time writing ranty comments on LinkedIn posts judging by my feed so feeling a bit 🙄 about implications made in her post that the child free ‘carry’ more workload than working parents.

Basically, is she being a knob? Or was it fair enough! Just brought back memories of some of the attitudes around years ago of some of the women I worked with, making bitchy comments about women who had to head out at dead on 5 to relieve the childminder.

I think the key gripe is that in many work places it becomes expected without even bothering to ask that the child free will step in at short notice to cover. When I joined a smallish company in my late 20s it was just assumed that as a bloke my only committments outside the work place was going to the pub. I lost count of the number of times where I would come back from a meeting late afternoon to find a team member gone and some pithy post it note on my desk with a 'can you generate month end reports for the X project, Sarah needs them by lunchtime tomorrow' or similar. Never mind that I coached a rugby team a few evenings a week which they knew about, that came second, never mind the ballache of trying to get coaching cover last minute, never mind the risk of 30 plus players being let down, that came second, never mind said reports would take me hours to generate, that came second. There are dozens of similar examples I have experienced in my career, and after a while ones initial willingness to help out and be 'flexible' is severely tested and I started to be less flexible as I had been thrown under a bus too many times. My favourite was when I booked a Christmas trekking holiday a whole year in advance, booked the flights as soon as I could and flagged it on the office holiday calendar. The holiday was a surprise for my sister who for various reasons (health and relationship) had unfortunately had one of the shittest years ever and the trip was intended as a bit of tonic for her. Sure enough, come November I start getting leaned on to change my plans, never mind the cost to me, various passive aggressive comments and at one point management involvement because various team members had been bitching non stop about my selfishness. Nevermind I had covered the previous three Christmases and stepped countless times to cover. F*ck them and their entitlement, it was complete one way traffic. That office was the worse example but I have seen similar in most work places I have been in.

Readyforthegoodlife

Perhaps employers then during the interview stages should be obliged to advise a candidate where they are in the office pecking order so at least they can make an informed decision as to whether they want to join an organisation where they are expected to be more 'flexible' then their colleagues.

Any with with all due respect, hobbies very rarely require missing part of the work day, they take place at weekends or in the evenings. For many people said activity is a vital component of their physical or mental well being. Assuming that it is just some trivial pastime that can be sacrificed to the benefit of a work colleagues timetable is a bit shit.

@Tailendofsummer It depends on the sector and your role in that sector. It has been that way for a couple of decades now.

One of my brothers' has flexible working with core hours in his job there as his wife, who works for the NHS, doesn't. She used to work in hospitals. This meant when their kids were sick my SIL would have to swap shifts if she was to be the parent to look after their child. There as my brother could take a day unpaid, use banked hours or take holiday.

Another of my brothers whose wife also worked in hospitals, would be the parent who always did the pick ups for his small children.

In both cases which parent looked after a sick child would depend on whether my SILs had to work a shift or not.

@MeAndDebbieMcGee

Some non parents get a bit weird about it all, like you just mentioning your parenting commitments is some unacceptable act. I usually think there's issues for them when they do. Like maybe infertility or something. Having legal responsibility for a child isn't really like anything else and it's ok to discuss the particular logistic/practical problems that involves in the context of working and providing for your family. But it does seem to bend some folks out of shape.

what a load of old bollocks

Love the German policies referred to by PP.

Honestly, I think the solution to all of this is pretty simple. Either we do away with putting staff wellbeing on a hierarchy according to the status of each employee's personal life, or we continue to do it but those at the bottom of the heap are financially compensated for it.

My guess is that if we did this, there'd be complaints from parents about being paid less to do the same job, but if you're doing fewer hours than me and we're both paid the same salary to be full time, then frankly you should be paid less.

@tailendofsummer It does affect childless men too, but in my department there are considerably more women than men. Can't speak for more balanced organisations.

@Balonzette

But parents of young children DO need more flexibility than others. Some people don't NEED flexibility at all, but just want it. There's a difference between want and need, and I think we need to decide whether we personally feel that everything should be exactly the same for everyone regardless of their circumstances, or whether we need to make exceptions for people who are actually in need.

For example, is it fair to make sure that everyone is able to work FLEXIBLY, or is it fair that everyone is able to work?

If parents of young children (or people with other relevant issues that require flexible working) are prioritised for flexible working, then people with no children/other commitments can still work. Whereas if literally everyone has to have the same options - either everyone has the option of flexibility, or nobody does - then often nobody will be given the option. Which means that some people - a lot of mothers and carers - physically won't be able to work at all.

So what is really fair? The UK has become really selfish and there's no concept of people having different circumstances so if we are going to have a better society then we might need to be more caring/understanding. It's all just "Well if so and so has this, then I want it too!! Even if I don't need it! Or it's NOT FAIR!"

And yes, I know people choose to have children. And they always will.

And yes, I know people choose to have children

And this lone sentence is what rubbishes your entire argument! Nobody NEEDS to have children, they choose to...

What some pp are saying is that an employer should view both those requests as equally valid. Surely it would be totally unfeeling and inhuman to toss a coin and potentially agree to the hobby request and turn down the parent?!

And yet again in what way shape or form is it the childfree colleague to step up every bloody time. EVERY TIME. Feelings shouldn't come into it. The parent of the child MUST put a robust system in place. And if they want all this one-way flexibility you have to accept that your promotion chances should also be reduced. Don't notice anyone queuing up for that.

I'm not saying that every single time the wants/needs/desires of employees should be considered equal. Just that maybe, perhaps, say about 10% of the time the childless employee could get some choice in the matter rather than it being 100% of the time an employee who is a parent gets what they want.

I always did cover for emergencies (sickness etc) and the majority of the time was happy to work the unpopular dates like Christmas Eve and NYE. I rarely booked leave in school holidays or half terms, and then only when unavoidable (e.g. funeral, home emergency). BUT - in return to just occasionally being able to plan something for myself outside these times without being told my wants came well below the desires (note not needs) of someone else because they were a parent.

It's not that I don't think parents of school age children don't need flexibility, but it's EVERY FUCKING TIME I would have to step up to the plate and they NEVER considered that maybe, just maybe, I could be given a bit of flexibility.

They even tried to cancel a paid for overseas holiday I had booked at virtually no notice because a parent in the team wanted a day off in that week for a child's school activity.

That's completely unacceptable but it's also very unusual - I've never worked anywhere where that would even be contemplated.

That's completely unacceptable but it's also very unusual - I've never worked anywhere where that would even be contemplated.

Maybe not by management but I have certainly seen a level of expectation / entitlement from some parents for child less employee to do exactly that.

@DillonPanthersTexas

That's completely unacceptable but it's also very unusual - I've never worked anywhere where that would even be contemplated.

Maybe not by management but I have certainly seen a level of expectation / entitlement from some parents for child less employee to do exactly that.

Yes, me too. I had pressure to cut my honeymoon short because it was in school holidays. Dh is a teacher. It was a bloody nightmare every year trying to get time off together because parents deemed their request for holiday (not essential childcare, holiday) more worthy than mine even though we all wanted time off with loved ones. Don’t get me started on Christmas. I’m so relieved we’re both teachers now so I don’t have to be treated like a total bitch for wanting school holiday time off.

What some pp are saying is that an employer should view both those requests as equally valid. Surely it would be totally unfeeling and inhuman to toss a coin and potentially agree to the hobby request and turn down the parent?!

Both requests are equally valid.

I know and have met sports people up to international/Olympic level. If the employer was choosing between them then yes they should toss a coin.

Incidentally what more likely happens in rl with inflexible employers is both employees end up quitting their jobs. With flexible employers, who are large enough they can and do work around both. With small employers they wouldn't hire one of them in the first place or push one - most likely the parent - out.

There are total chancers among any group of workers.

@tailendofsummer Well sure. But one group has a protected characteristic argument and the other doesn't, which can make a huge difference (my workplace introduced its family friendly COVID policy due to an intense fear of being sued on the grounds of sex discrimination, which was somewhat ironic given that it then had an adverse affect on another group of mainly women).

It is completely unfair to prioritise Xmas and summer holiday requests made by those with kids over those without.

The real culprits are the managers who refuse flexibility on the basis of 'business need' when it's because they can't be fucking arsed to manage it. Lazy bastards.

My need for flexibility was never going to diminish.

In the end it was my female HR boss, (who had benefitted from every flexible working practise) who bullied me out because it was too much like hard work for her.

Summer holidays generally (ie not last summer) have good options for holiday childcare assuming your child is not at school and under 5. It's not cheap but it generally does exist. Under 5 and at school is an issue because they count as U5 for ratios and supervisory requirements and often aren't allowed to attend more than 2.5 hours in a day unless the provider is specifically registered. But they're school ago so not part of a nursery setting unless that setting does wrap around for that school. It's a relatively rare problem basically affecting young summer born kids.

Christmas holidays are an absolute pig to cover as some settings and more to the point many of the buildings often hired for holiday clubs will be shut down. Some workplaces close completely which hopefully helps some couples. Doesn't stop it being a difficult holiday to cover as so many nurseries shut as well. Fortunately for me DH's rota tended to give me a couple of days I could work midweek between Christmas and New Year and I'd volunteer for days he wasn't working...

Easter has a good number of holiday camps as do most half terms.

Doesn't help that the NHS is notoriously shit at planning rotas so where a couple with children are working Christmas Bank Holiday shifts they'd be scheduled in such a way that could not work (overlapping rather than with a gap) where a bit more thought could have made it work...

Doesn't help that the NHS is notoriously shit at planning rotas

NHS rota planning is so bad you’re pretty much guaranteed to be working any time you’ve told them in advance that you’re not available.

@PurpleDaisies

Doesn't help that the NHS is notoriously shit at planning rotas

NHS rota planning is so bad you’re pretty much guaranteed to be working any time you’ve told them in advance that you’re not available.

That's what I'd heard from multiple sources ... like a deliberate objection to having any kind of "not work" life!

I don’t work for the nhs any more but when I did, one time there were three of us getting married in a three month period and every single one of us was put down to work our own weddings. That was despite all of us having told them well in advance of the rota being done.

@MrsBobDylan

It is completely unfair to prioritise Xmas and summer holiday requests made by those with kids over those without.

The real culprits are the managers who refuse flexibility on the basis of 'business need' when it's because they can't be fucking arsed to manage it. Lazy bastards.

My need for flexibility was never going to diminish.

In the end it was my female HR boss, (who had benefitted from every flexible working practise) who bullied me out because it was too much like hard work for her.

Depends on your circumstances. If you're constrained by timings with or without children, then it's reasonable to be flexible about that - whether it's a single parent to young kids wanting to have a week off during school holidays, or someone who (with or without kids) wants to attend a one off event like a concert or a family wedding or religious celebration, or wants to take a week off with a wider family group that includes kids so needs to be during the Easter break.

Most of the rest of the time, lots of us can flex. The bad examples people are sharing tend to be down to terrible management, not terrible colleagues.

I remember a former manager of mine overhearing higher management saying (about him) "J. can work between Christmas because he doesn't have a wife and children".

To which he replies "And how do you expect me to find a wife if you keep making me come into the office?"

He was given the time off, and they asked for volunteers. Surprisingly - a number of parents were keen to have time away from their children!

@Brefugee “And yet again in what way shape or form is it the childfree colleague to step up every bloody time. EVERY TIME. Feelings shouldn't come into it. The parent of the child MUST put a robust system in place. And if they want all this one-way flexibility you have to accept that your promotion chances should also be reduced. Don't notice anyone queuing up for that.”
I’m not suggesting that the child-free person ‘step up’ to anything at all and there are many parents who take liberties. I have managed a lot who think that once they have a child that they shouldn’t be made to work any time that isn’t entirely and absolutely convenient to them. I’ve got no patience for that at all.

However, in the scenario above, would you be prepared as a real life manager to face the parent and tell them that their request has been refused (which might well mean that they have to give up work and go on benefits). But, that the other person’s request has been approved.
Feelings always come into it and there is a moral element without a doubt.

@Readyforthegoodlife no manager would tell you the other person's request has been accepted because they aren't allowed to tell you personal information about the other person.

For all you know that other person could have a disability and their "hobby" is actually rehabilitation/part of a course of treatment for that disability.

Let me make a provocation -

It could be argued that actually, a single childless person needs time at Christmas (or other family-oriented holidays) MORE than those with families.

Because people with families, live with them all the time, and have 'family time' all the time. For single people without children, holiday times may be the rare occasions they get quality extended time with their families (or friends). They live without the day to day support system of a family, so need to reconnect at family holiday times.

The same might be a good reason for seeing that the non-parent employee in the scenario given above

So, say you’re the employer of a lone parent of a young child with severe special needs and they make a request for flexibility. Another employee, with no caring responsibilities, requests the same flexibility because they want to take up a new hobby. You can’t agree to both requests due to business needs.

The hobby might be an essential way of that employee having a life outside of work, and keeping a good state of resilient robust mental health, thus enabling them to keep working (and being single means no back up income, remember!).

Just a thought ...

@RedMarauder in the size of company where I’m a manager they wouldn’t need telling, it would be obvious.