Working peeves … Can women have it all?

[Roxyoc]

I have two young children aged 1 and 3 . I got made redundant from a client facing job I loved and found an internal support role with the same company . The team are very nice people, it’s quite flexible in terms of number of days in the office which is 1-2 days and my boss is great.

I miss the technical client work so have been looking externally and got called for a final round interview with a rival company for a client facing role. The catch is I would need to be in the office 3 to 4 days per week compared to the 2 days now. It would be a more interesting role with better pay and career prospects but I would not be home as much in the morning /evening as the hours would be longer. I feel really torn as spent years at university and doing professional exams to get to where I am now. . Can we have it all?

I don’t feel like we can .and I am considering withdrawing from the final interview. My friends think it’s right role wrong time and that my children are too young so I should stick with the support role that gives me much more flexibility to work from home , put my kids to bed and log in when needed in the evening . Interested to hear people’s experience?

YABU to use the phrase “have it all”. Does your DH/DP get accused of “having it all” by working? £1000 says no.

I loathe this phrase. It implies that women prioritising their financial freedom are being selfish and it is never asked of men.

That’s not to say you necessarily have to take the role. Maybe not.

But I would ask yourself this question: long term, what will your children value most: a couple of extra bathtimes per week that they won’t remember beyond the age of five or a financially independent and fulfilled mum and a family with more security and disposable income.

Play the long game. Don’t let guilt and other people’s judgment dictate your life.

Here is the article from the economist and women and careers. Economist: how motherhood hurts careers

It doesn't matter what your friends think, or what we think. What do YOU think? And your husband/partner, if you have one and if this affects your general family childcare arrangements.

Nobody in the world can 'have it all'. Men just aren't expected to split themselves in two to try and do the impossible.

Everything is a decision. What do you value more? Physical time with your children while they are little, or your career and it's associated benefits (including the financial benefits to your children)?

There is no right or wrong answer, but you do have to compromise either way.

I think you can only have it all if you can afford fabulous childcare otherwise you end up too knackered and stressed to enjoy it.

No I think it’s not possible. And your decision will depend on your priorities. I wouldn’t withdraw yet though. Go through with. See what’s possible.

Nobody can have it all.
We all need to choose and prioritise.

"Have it all" is a lie women are fed so we go out into the workforce and bring in the money and still do most if not all things domestic.

I think your decision largely depends on whether you have a partner and whether he can step up if you are out of the house more.

Noone can have it all - although i do think across a 45 year working life you might have most of it, just not all at the same time.

My husband thinks I should stick to the flexible job

Why does he think that?

Tbh I think putting your career on the back burner is a bad idea. You find yourself ten years down the line with a massive gap and few up to date skills and it's hard to catch up.

Do you pay into a pension? Will you still have a good pension in your own name if you tread water till your kids are older then have to retrain/catch up?

There's no such thing as "have it all".

There will only ever be 24 hours in the day, and you can choose to divide them as you wish.
You can't magic up more time from thin air.

I don't in any way think of myself as some career woman and yet I find this post a little offensive (not your intention I know OP and I hope you find peace with your decision). As has been said its not language that gets used about men (just as no one says career man). I work 4 days and feel I have been very present for my children's toddlerhood. Perhaps the difference though is that I've not been any more present than my husband; we both have altered our hours and worked a lot of hours here and there in evenings and weekends to get our work done.

I'm quite surprised at your friends' responses - I live in what I'd consider a middling place where my friends are financially secure but few people have City level salaries (so like me could decide to work 0.4 or. 6 or. 8 and be able to afford that) and yet hardly anyone women I know have gone back to work on less than 0.7. I never ever think or having it all or not, it is just life. Some of life is kids going to childcare.

It’s not (only) about what he wants is it?

What do you want? And why should he get to dictate this? It has to be a question of what benefits the broader family.

I’m going to take a wild guess that it suits him for you to be at home “facilitating” his career by ensuring he doesn’t have to look after the kids or do much household stuff.

@Roxyoc am I right?

Of course he does - it makes HIS life easier.

right now, you’re working on a hypothetical situation. Go to the final interview.

then, if you get offered the job , NEGOTIATE to try and make it work more for you. If there is no flex then that’s where your decision point is.

I’ve successfully worked full time from the office forever, including when I was a single parent. So I think you can have a successful career and kids.

dont you dare talk yourself out of something brilliant for you in the basis of everyone else!

I recently turned down my dream job. My salary would have doubled, I would have been able to afford the additional childcare but I couldn't bear the idea of having my child in 7am-7pm childcare 5 days a week, plus 20% business travel on top of that.

I'm a lone parent with no family support so I think that makes a big difference, but either way, I didn't have a child to only see them at weekends, it felt too hard for me, so I had to make a very very difficult decision.

Just to add, this was very personal to me and my situation which is challenging and unique. I still have a successful career, just not as illustrious as the one I turned down. Nothing but admiration for those who manage it.

Great post.

How does your dh's time work out? How is his career developing? With your flexible job do you do more of the child pick-ups/drop-offs? Are you more likely to be the one who takes time off if your dc are sick? How is the domestic load shared between you?

In short, does it benefit HIM that you remain in this role, rather than benfitting you?

Of course you may both think it might benefit your dc, BUT if you'd not been made redundant from your client facing role would either of you have been thinking about you changing to a less fulfilling support role? Probably not.

As a pp said 'having it all' is about the long term. In my own experience I found that finding/arranging childcare for small children was very much easier than when they were at primary school. So if you stay in the more flexible role now I can only imagine you will stay in it for a good deal longer - maybe until your dc are in secondary school and more independent. At that point would be likely to get a client facing role or would you have diminished your skill set?

I changed from a part-time role to a more fulfilling one (and with better prospects) when dc1 was 18 months. It wasn't plain sailing and dh had to step up in terms of sharing all domestic responsibilities - he was not at all happy about that! However, for me it took me into a career where I felt valued and where I flourished. My mental health improved and I trusted that a happy me was good for my dc. As my dc reached their early teens I was in a senior role, and that gave me much more flexibility - much needed as one dc needed me more at home. Several of my contemporaries were at that time struggling to embark on their careers.

Later in life I have a good pension and could retire slightly early to help look after dgc, thereby helping my dc establish their own careers.

@Roxyoc taking the now role does not mean that you are NOT prioritising your dc, it might mean you are prioriting other phases of their lives when they also need you.

Of course he does and that’s how men have it all time after time, what do you actually want regardless of any other chatter from anyone.

In 30 years time you will realise what a monumental moment this was, way or the other.

3-4 days is still part time so a good deal I think

I think your kids are only 1 and 3 once. The days may be long but the years are short. In the blink of an eye they'll be much older and won't mind you not being around all the time. Personally, I would stick with the flexible job for now and move in a few years.

No one gets it all at the same time, but it’s not a question men generally have to answer.

Assuming you have a partner, talk about it with them - you are working anyway so might as well be interested in it and getting prospects.

Maybe if your partner can step up and you negotiate a bit more flexibility from them, you can have this job.

At least interrogate it and don’t be afraid to negotiate with the employer.

If your mum friends are PT or SAHP I would be wary of taking advice from them - it may be a way of justifying their own choices.

And what about the OP’s husband? The point about the kids being small for a short time applies equally to him.

Yet this argument is never directed at men.

@Roxyoc there Is a legitimate argument for scaling back work when your kids are small and if you hated your job and didn’t want to work he might have a point but that’s not the situation you are in.

You clearly are smart, well qualified and ambitious and you want to advance and your husband is pressuring you to work less because it suits him.

Be honest with yourself about this.

The people I know of made different choices all with some sort of sacrifice/ compromise.

Some work full time, climbed the career ladder. They had to pay £££ for childcare, miss school events. One now has adult children and is reaping that sacrifice.

Others were sahm. And now dc older finding it hard to get back in job market.
Others part time. Compromise every which way. No matter what option.

My kids are slightly older but here's my story
I "leaned out" until they were 5. By "leaned out" I mean I worked 4 days a week on a flexible basis. I'm a lawyer and this is very much not the done thing. It's possible but it impacts upon career progression (and I've been at a few different places and have a lot of friends at different firms and everyone has the same experience).
It was a struggle to keep my "hand in" but I did it part time to keep my pension contributions up and let's face it, a 4 day lawyer salary isn't shabby.
It was hard because a business will take what you are prepared to put in so drawing my own boundaries as to what a four day week looked like, was hard

As soon as the youngest went to school and I had holiday club cover and before and after school club it was like a light switched and I leaned back in. Within 4 months I was Head of Department having doubled my salary and 8 months after that I left for a much bigger firm, bigger salary (and better flexibility actually).

So my advice would be to wait. If you have a flexible job, keep it and keep your pension contribution and something on your CV. You are a long time in work and you can afford to wait for 3-4 years if you want to.