To ask if you earned the same or more as your DC's father when you gave birth to your first child?

[MissHoneysHappyEnding]

Personally I did. I was in a managerial position. Couldn't go back part time after mat leave as the role didn't exist part time. Ended up moving down a pay grade.
What I want to know is how many women already earn less pre children, therefore making them the ones to sacrifice their careers (temporarily) and how many do so because they want to be the ones who stay at home due to enjoying raising children more, breastfeeding, PND, birth trauma etc.
I have no agenda, just curious

Put of interest, when you have the much better earning potential why don't you work full time and he part time?

It's so interesting cs this thread shows that women evidently just prefer to be at home and go part time etc, which is why a lot of the pay gap data is not accurate,

Women often often for fewer hours and more flexibility

This sounds traumatic! Where do you live? Are you all okay now?

I was, and still am, the breadwinner. I went back to work when DS was 5 months and DH stopped work and was a SAHD for 3 years. About six months ago DH got a new job but I still earn more.

I earned more than DH at all times until I retired. He's got the higher income now, but I've got more in savings/investments.

Regardless of what I earned, it never occurred to me or DH that there was any question of me sacrificing my career purely because I’d been the one to carry and give birth to the baby we both wanted.

i earned more before Mat leave and more after Mat leave

I earned more than DH when DC1 was born, I had intended to return to work when she was 6mo then I thought 12mo. I quickly realised I really didn’t want to return to work, my job meant 12 hour days away from her and if I went p/t 3 days a week after travel and childcare I would be out working for £400 a month. DH had returned to uni and was building up his career plus I had the most desire to SAH. We moved back home to the other end of the country where housing was a lot cheaper and lived on one salary, it wasn’t easy we had one car, one IK holiday but it was our choice. I was a SAHM for 11 years then I went back to uni and retrained. In the meantime DH worked his socks off and climbed the ladder quickly and now we are very comfortable. We have been lucky I have never regretted having those years at gone with the DC.

Earned a good wage but nowhere near what DP does, he has his own business.
Going back half of my hours as don't want to be away from DD longer than I have to.

I am also interested.

childcare is also always framed as being taken from the woman’s salary “my wage doesn’t cover childcare”.

I also note that long term implications such as pensions never seem to be taken into account. We are getting to a point where one pension is not going to cover the living costs of a retired couple.

I do know from dh’s job that sometimes it can be harder for a man to negotiate part time, compressed hours etc. where as for a woman such a request is very normal.

i think most people would give up work/go pt if they had the choice. I would, and I know dh would (and did). So maybe it’s that women see the opportunity and grab it?

I earned a lot more and didn't take (unpaid) time off. Ive always been FT.
I agree with the PPs though - the whole discussion is framed economically rather than holistically considering the desire of women (generally) to spend time with their children - whilst changing funding for childcare would offer more choice it doesn't tackle that fundamentally being FT at work and spending time with your children are incompatible

I am the main earner, dropped a day a week after mat leave because I wanted to have the time at home, even though financially it would’ve made more sense for DH to do it (he wanted to but so did I and we couldn’t both).
I still out earn him on 4 days though by a considerable margin.

When DD starts school I am going to consider full time again with DH dropping hours. But it’s not a definite.

I've always earned more than DH, he'd pretty much caught me up but I'll be starting a new promotion in the summer. It did mean we lost the best part of 30k by me taking mat leave for a year, and I got an enhanced maternity package. At the time we could've lived fairly well on just my salary, but not just on his, we just saved up in advance to cover some of the deficit

When I went back we both switched to ft over four days, so we both get a day in the week with DS plus weekends

I earn almost double what my husband does so have the potential to earn more through natural pay progression before promotions are taken into account so I'm not the one dropping any hours or days.

We earned about the same. Now I earn approx 1/3 to 1/4. And mine has gone up by 50%. His has sky rocketed. But I have way more flex for the dcs. One of us needs that.

I earned around half of DH's salary (he's older and is in a different industry) and still do. However neither of our careers have suffered disproportionately. After a year's Mat leave I remained full time, we're both equally constrained but only by not wanting to relocate/work away significantly and also by having to work around the other for any nights we are away.
All helped by my having DS later, earning enough that full time nursery did not swallow my whole wage and it always was a clear advantage to work.

I earnt a tiny bit more and now I earn maybe 1/3 more, 3 children later. I did a few months part time on return to work to phase back in with my first two but then went full time again. I’d love to earn enough more it seemed sensible to suggest he drop a day or two but I don’t think he’d be that keen long term! He’s on parental leave for a few months now with our youngest.

To those who say 'why does it matter? We're a team' well you are until you aren't.

Splitting up and then finding they don't contribute adequately, they are even less compelled to take sick days, school holidays off, you can't meet the affordability criteria for your mortgage, as the resident parent you have to list the dependents on your mortgage application whilst he can rent or buy without having to declare them, you have less help around the house, less help with DC's, you won't be as comfortable after retirement, you might have missed out on NI contributions.

Not to mention that your dp/ dh's meteoric career rise is due to one of you doing more than your share of the parenting. Therefore making things harder for working mums looking for the same opportunities, who might get the 'it sounds like you have a lot going on' comment in interviews like I did.

Fair enough if you want to stay at home but so many women underestimate how much of a benefit this mindset is to men who want less competition in the workplace.

I earned more but husbands earning potential was more so over the years he has rapidly overtaken me

i did have a long break at home though

I did then, there was a period of about 3 years when he outearned me (I was part timel) then I overtook him again. When the DCs were primary age we both deliberately earnt a shade under £50k in order to avoid HRT and also keep CHB, they had a parent at the school gates 4 nights of week. I went ft when DC1 went to senior school (2015) my salary has nearly doubled since then and I am the higher earner by a comfortable margin.

I earned very similar before then went part time and whilst I have still progressed it’s been slower (than dh salary increases) and always part time. I’m about to go full time again and another step up so whilst it will be much closer to what dh earns I am unlikely to ever match.

Earned less before as I was newly qualified in my profession.

Having children certainly held me back, I worked part time shifts around DH to avoid childcare costs but no regrets.

I earned basically the same as DH before he stopped working, now I’m the higher earner.

DH quite a bit older than me so had been working longer anyway. I had kids fairly young so no established career, just starting out in the workplace really. He earned more than me pre kids, and earns more now (but not by much) both work full time. Both on shite wages.

OP your point isn't actually about how much you earn though is it? Asking if you earn more or less is only really the right question if you're the same age with the same qualifications doing the same job in the same industry, or at least very close on these things. What you're really asking is, have you compromised your career to facilitate your OH's, by working part time, not seeking promotion, changing roles etc. Often this is a choice. There may be some genuinely "big" jobs that require the other parent to be much more available but I think more commonly this is just a social acceptable or even expected choice? I could perhaps work part time, have spent more time with DS, but I was clear that I was not the "default" parent and that everything was a shared responsibility.

I'm sure all the people judging the early retirees on some other active threads wouldn't bat an eye at someone choosing to be part time or underemployed for years with kids; to me that's the same! I'm choosing the former (hopefully).

I earned more salary wise but our salaries were within about 10% of each other. The original plan was for us both to work 4 days but DH had to change jobs and the new role insisted on full time.

I went down to four days initially, then down to 3.5. DH has since been able to cut his hours a little and does 4.5 days.

I love the balance between work and the time I get with DD. I have no desire to go back to full time and love that when she starts school next year I should be able to pick her up every day by doing my 3.5 days spread over 5.

My FTE salary is still slightly higher than DH's but probably not for much longer as he's job hunting again.