Are we morally obliged to work ?

[Justthisonce12]

630,000 economically inactive people in the UK not claiming benefits. Early retiree’s I guess.

Hunt plans to tackle this and encourage work force participation to allow businesses to grow. ie cheap labour I presume ? But also preventing a brain drain.

Will be interesting to see how he plans to address this.

But if childcare swallows up one wage, then it does not matter if you theoretically apportion it to both salaries. You are still no better off with two going out to work than one.

As per my first post, you are in the longer term.

But if your work is in minimum wage jobs then best to just wait until that time.

This.

@antelopevalley

Both parents? What's the point in anyone working a mw job then? Might as well just claim benefits

Having your own income, not having to ask DH if you want to buy new underwear, not having to rely on a man, having a life separate to the kids, having the interest a job brings (though that can come from a voluntary role too).

I am surprised that any school does not have after-school care these days, whether after school club or childminders. My ds' school didn't and doesn't have an after-school club because the local childminders lobbied against it, but did and still does have a breakfast club. Maybe parents need to get lobbying too. I know covid affected things, but it's time to get the wraparound care back.

Not in the short term but you will be in the long term.

You really are missing the point. The reason many use the woman’s wage as a reference is because women are still often paid significantly less than men, so it would make more sense for the woman to give up work. Any many women are stuck in jobs that they can’t advance in. I think perhaps you are further ahead than many and don’t quite realise that.

Even when entitled to free childcare hours, it isn’t readily available, there aren’t enough providers or spaces.

Does the Tory rhetoric of “get a better job” sit well with you? Because it’s just not possible for many

No, but but neither does the sexist rhetoric of women are slaves to the wage gap.

Or the sexist rhetoric of 'it makes more sense for women to give up work'.

You seem to be confusing dont agree with and don't realise/don't understand

It's true, the stuff about the longer term benefits of working simply isn't applicable to all jobs. Plenty of roles aren't a career, don't involve much if anything in the way of skills, don't pay enough pension contribution for the person to be able to avoid relying on the state, don't provide financial independence and do nothing positive for mental health. It should not therefore come as a surprise to anyone that when people have the opportunity to take a few years away from them, they take it.

And if you are on a minimum wage job, in most cases you can get back into work fine if you take time out.

Mmm. And the reality is that those jobs don't allow everyone in them to progress either. Sometimes, people (usually women) really are making the most sensible economic decision available to them when they give up work for a few years.

Ha ha ha ha ha not confused at all.

You see when referring to a specific set of circumstances, which I have, it does make more sense for the woman to give up work. Of course if the woman was earning double the man’s wage it would make more sense for him to give up work, but these circumstances aren’t as common.

Sexist rhetoric, are you a man?

if it wasn’t true then women wouldn’t be suing employers/ex employers and winning; just because you haven’t experienced something doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. I’d bet than many women on here have.

Example, I worked in an industry for over 15 years, in 2006 I earned £1k less than I did in 2018. In 2006 I had the ability to earn unlimited commission but my basic salary was enough to live on. In 2018 I had no ability to earn overtime, commission or bonuses, my basic pay had not increase significantly but my living costs had more than doubled. A colleague at the next desk was a school leaver with no experience and was paid the same basic salary as I was, was not very good at his job, sat and talked all day, wouldn’t turn up after nights out and wasn’t productive at all, but promoted very quickly. What was the difference between us? I was efficient, productive, highly experienced and knowledgable, female, and pregnant. Other women who were also better at the job, more reliable and mature also took forever to be promoted. I have witnessed similar in a number of workplaces over the years and been part of discussions where male employers have admitted taking on men or women over child bearing age with the assumption that women of age could already be pregnant at the time of employment. That is what I would call sexist

@Battyfumworts

Yeah you do seem confused because you're arguing against points I haven't raised.

Of course women face sexist discrimination in the work place. I haven't said other wise.

But largely, the wage gap doesn't exist prekids and yet its still women giving up work and not men. Even when women are the higher earners its still more likely to be them who give up work.

We need to be asking why so many men are seemingly earning double what their female partners do before they even have kids and why in reality the stats don't back this up.

Not really, there are points you have raised further up. I’m not responding to every post individually and adding in further info and context doesn’t make me confused.

The stats are skewed to suit, just like the average wage being whatever they are claiming it is nowadays. Ultimately if any of these figures were true there wouldn’t be such a huge need for food banks, winter fuel payments, cost of living payments etc. And this claim of return to 2010 austerity levels, well plenty of people never left 2010. This government can’t lay straight in bed so I would take any figures with a very large amount of salt.

My Mums one of these. Effectively forced out of her job of 25 years at 62 as she wouldn’t study for a degree they were adamant her role needed. It took her a year to emotionally recover, then covid hit and within those 2 years she’s become an unpaid carer to her parents. She’s living off my Dad pension.

Agreed.
And the average wage only includes those on full time contracts. Not anyone working part-time, or on zero hour contrasts but working full time. The calculation excludes those who are most likely to be on low wages.

Why would you ask your husband to allow you buy underwear? Unless you married a bully, but you don't need to be unemployed to experience financial abuse in this case.

@Battyfumworts

The stats don't come from the govt.

It's statistically rare for a man to be earning double his female partner pre kids. Most couples will be earning similar amounts.

And yet its still women giving up work and going part time

🙈🤷‍♀️

I am surprised that any school does not have after-school care these days, whether after school club or childminders. My ds' school didn't and doesn't have an after-school club because the local childminders lobbied against it, but did and still does have a breakfast club. Maybe parents need to get lobbying too. I know covid affected things, but it's time to get the wraparound care back.

I live rurally, our village school is large for the area with 70 odd children. There is no pre or post school provision and we struggle with childminders as there aren't many locally and they can be spread over multiple schools.

It's statistically rare for a man to be earning double his female partner pre kids. Most couples will be earning similar amounts.

We were 37 when dc1 was born. Dh earned more than double my salary when his bonuses were factored in. I worked for the LA doing something of societal value and loved my job, he works in IT. We both pursued promotions and were on similar trajectories, mine just had a much lower ceiling but I got more job satisfaction. Most of my friends (accountants/doctors aside) had a similar discrepancy. Obviously if we'd had kids earlier then our earnings would have been closer together but we didn't want kids in our 20s.

I doubt many men are earning double what their partners do pre kids, it's a smaller gap than that. There isn't much difference between what men and women of the same age earn before that, but the female partner is usually younger.

Additionally, it's important to remember that looking at data pre kids misses out the discrimination that happens to women when they get pregnant. The relevant figure isn't actually the one pertaining to the period before the woman does the thing that's liable to have an impact on her earnings.

The reason many use the woman’s wage as a reference is because women are still often paid significantly less than men

It would be more accurate to say that wives earn less than husbands. Women have a tendency to marry men who are slightly older than them, and who earn more than them. Wives can earn less than husbands even if women earn the same or more than men.

Even when women are the higher earners its still more likely to be them who give up work.

This could be evidence that though almost as many men as women say they want children, when it comes down to what sacrifices you're willing to make to have them, it turns out women want them more. (I don't know that this is true, it's something I suspect is true, that I wish I could find some evidence for.)

I doubt he has a problem with people who don't work and don't claim any benefits. Why would he? It's people who COULD work but choose not to and then claim benefits, he is concerned with. As should we be.