Do you work from home and look after kids at the same time

[Amy8]

I've posted about this on my socials today and many agreed with this article
I was mortified ! Does anyone else find it sexist ?

What would they have done before WFH was a thing? They should do that.

You are right it is sexist. How many men are looking after kids while working. Bet it's a damn sight less.

I don't really understand how people can work with kids at home, not regularly and a normal length day. Mine are 6 & 9 so a bit older but they would interrupt my train of thought all the time. My eldest would be the worst! I wouldn't be able to concentrate on reading reports, writing responses, and I have a lot of team calls I need to speak on. I don't think it would be fair on work, fair on me, or fair on the kids! They need to go out and to have interaction. However, I do know some people who do this all summer hols. No idea how!

@ManchesterLu

But why the hate if they can now wfh ? Perhaps many had to run around more , perhaps they couldn't afford to work and relied on benefits

A few women in my workplace who WFH "disappear" after 3pm. One man does and people tend to be openly critical about him doing it, they don't criticise the women.

I don't really care if children are at home while WFH as long as the work is being done properly. It's shit for the child though. The frustration comes with being expected to work your day around theirs. I have my own stuff to plan around, I'm not considering someone's home life also. For example, I finish work at 4pm, we need a meeting at 3pm, Alex can't make it because of the school run so it needs to be at 4pm. No.

I expect the problem is that the work doesn't get done. I used the example of a meeting. We have staggered school times locally so any time between 8 - 9.30 and then 2 - 3.30 is out for meetings, then you've got to remove lunch so 12 - 2. Leaving 9.30 - 12 for all meetings. It just doesn't work in practice.

Our entire organisation bar a small admin team all work from home and have done for the last 20 years. They work on a task basis. We are expected to carry out our roles fully but not constrained to set times apart from team meetings/training/quarterly meet ups.
I have been doing it since youngest was 8. I do a lot of 7am starts, DH gets kids up and ready and out the door. I can then finish by 3pm and worked the same as an 9-5. I work less some weeks as I have no distractions, no chatty colleagues, no pretending to look busy, far less bollocky meetings. I definitely produce as much if not more work than my childfree colleagues.
Works well for me and my organisation. It probably helps that what we do is a bit of labour of love.

smilesup
The key thing in your situation, and other organisations that have flexible working policies that suit organisational needs, is that it's all above board.

In your organisation's case, they've decided that there's no core hours required for the work to be done to an appropriate standard. You have total freedom on your work hours.

In another organisation they may have core hours of 10-3, or they might say that the working day is 9.30-4.30 and people can take their lunch when they want between 11-1. They'll create a policy that's appropriate for their organisation.

Some organisations might be fully remote, others might be hybrid set days on site, others might be hybrid but flexibility over which days.

Another organisation might work compressed hours as standard.

Another place might pay over time, whereas another organisation might allow staff to built up flexitime to take off when they need to.

In another organisation they might people to be working 9-5 so whilst they're happy with home working and trust people to use their breaks appropriately, the expectation is that people being paid to work are actually working.

The big problem isn't flexible working. The big problem is people in roles they have no intention of fully doing because they think WFM is a nice little way to skive off.

I’ve often seen threads on here where women work outside of the home and also do the vast majority of the housework and mental load. They always seem to be the ones to take the day off (or call on their female family members) when the children are poorly too. WFH whilst routinely caring for kids just feels like yet another nail in the coffin of equality. Their husbands and partners get to swan in and out whilst the wives/girlfriends do the housekeeping, attend to the men’s sexual needs, provide free childcare AND bring in a wage to provide for their families.

How long before the wages for even more jobs start to reduce because employers realise there’ll always be women desperate to get a job to fit perfectly around her man’s needs? And how long before more employers pass over all women for roles because they anticipate they’ll be distracted by caring for children instead of focusing on their work?

I don’t want caring for children alongside WFH To be normalised. It will set all women back and men will be the only ones to benefit.

And yes, NAMALT. But most are.

The "hate" is because they are being paid to work for their contracted hours, not work and bit, entertain the kids for a bit.
If you worked with someone, got paid the same for the same job, but you knew that they did 30% less output than you because they were looking after the kids, you might be pissed too

.

I couldn't have when they were little (dc2 was 3/4 during covid and it was awful, they went back to nursery very quickly, which luckily was available to key workers). DC1 is sick (getting over chicken pox, not yet scabby) and I wfh today while technically 'looking after'. But they're nearly 10, spent almost the whole time in their room reading or drawing and I didn't see them for most of the day except for lunch and snacks. My employer does paid days for ill children so it's actually a bonus for them if people can do some work.

This ignores the structural problems with childcare though. There just aren't the places, very few asc places now and fewer child minders. In our case we can only use asc as child 1 has some SEN which makes a childminder environment difficult to cope with. We used to have asc places but relocated and the new school has a massive waiting list after they cut their provision post covid. So they go to breakfast club, and the parent who is wfh that day can start work at 7.45, take a break at 3.30 to pick up and they get parked in front of the TV for an hour. Sucks but until we get places, that's the way it's got to be and it is equally shared and we both work in the office a few times a week. They're old enough to be no trouble. We both feel guilty they're bored though.

The new changes to childcare are likely to lead to the closure of more provision as the payments don't cover the cost. So for people with preschoolers it's about to get a lot lot worse. What should people do then? Why aren't employers agitating for change? Guaranteed if cheap, quality, subsidised childcare was available, it would be used. All the maths shows it would be hugely beneficial to the economy.

Guaranteed if cheap, quality, subsidised childcare was available, it would be used. All the maths shows it would be hugely beneficial to the economy.

Afterschool doesn't even need to be subsidised beyond the 20% tax discount. I'm still on the old voucher scheme. So not 100% sure how the new scheme works.
What it really could benefit from is Government / LA help to get services up and running. Once running they should be self funding.

@Sugarfree23 there was an announcement earlier this year on new startup funding, apparently the ambition is that all schools have wraparound by 2026. Whether there are a) enough places (will schools actually use it to expand?) and b) whether it will be inclusive (to children with SEND, of poorer parents) remains to be seen. It's a good move in principle though.

@missmollygreen

Who's judging the productivity
Usually managers who are deadwood

Good managers would be ok with it so long as work is done

For the jobs that can't allow it - people don't do it

I do but mine are 12 and 9. I don’t see my 12yo at all unless I knock on her door and ask what she’s doing. I check her during my breaks. She’s too young to be left all day at home but she’s no bother. 9yo is pretty good too and will never open my office door when I am working. But I don’t have her home 5 days a week during the holidays with nothing to do. DH and I take our annual leave separately so 9yo never have two TV and games days in a row.

@Amy8 time will tell who's judging, who gets the promotion, who gets laid off when redundancies hit.

People are doing it and thinking nobody notices or cares when really they do care.
Some managers will be loathed to say anything incase they are accused of discrimination etc and they might tolerate it while work is plentiful and they know trying to recruit won't be easy.

But recession will hit. Numbers will need to be cut, tough decisions will be needed. That's the day when you'll see what managers, who's prime concern is their own back, and making sure they stay supported by their best people, really think of wfh and mid afternoon school run breaks.

Spoken like a true capitalist

I think it depends on the child. During COVID my children were 3 and 5, I worked two days a week and my husband was wfh. He’d have hour long meetings a few times a day and I’d leave my children activities to do, toys out and the TV on. They were amazing and kept themselves busy! I know that wouldn’t work on all children.

Now they are older if there’s an inset day they’ll just stay at home whilst my husband wfh.

@1AngelicFruitCake I think the big difference is during covid when schools and nurseries were closed everyone was in the same boat, inc bosses, wfh with kids wasn't about saving money it was about muddling through. Nobody was running of at 2.45 to do the school run.

@Amy8 not so much Capitalist just a Realist.

I am reading a book atm called Toxic by Sarah Ditum about women, fame and the noughties.

The writer makes interesting points at the beginning about the public and private spaces women occupy. Much of it is about how the expectation of privacy for women was eroded during the decade she is describing. But she begins by saying that when public toilets became a thing in the 1900s, there was outcry about providing some for women as they just weren't supposed to be out in public. She says that there is scant evidence that Jack the ripper's victims were prostitutes !85 because they were out at night, people assume they were.

And as I was reading, I was thinking that to me there does seem to
Be an element of wfh being a retreat back into the domestic sphere for women, and not being present in the public sphere, where they have long had to fight to be accepted. Lots of women saying they like it because it makes it easier to do the school Run or stick the washing on. You don't hear as many men talking in these terms. So I wonder if it is really as good for women in the long term.

But last time I made this point on here I got shut down and everyone said it was the best things that has ever happened to women.

During lockdown my friends toddler daughter would watch Frozen on repeat whilst her parents wfh. Now lockdown is ended they are not allowed to wfh if their children are also at home.

@Parker231 ...how do they know if the children are at home?

Their HR policy was amended to reflect you couldn’t work from home with your children at home. Two people in her office got found out - crying children in the background/child coming into the room whilst a Teams call- their wfm was withdrawn.

Be an element of wfh being a retreat back into the domestic sphere for women, and not being present in the public sphere, where they have long had to fight to be accepted. Lots of women saying they like it because it makes it easier to do the school Run or stick the washing on. You don't hear as many men talking in these terms. So I wonder if it is really as good for women in the long term.

I could not agree more.
There is emerging research to support this too. Women who WFH and take on increased caring responsibilities do see an negative impact on career progression.