Talk

Flip

MNHQ have commented on this thread

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 15 16

MNHQ have commented on this thread

Guest posts

Why is society so unsupportive of high-achieving 'power mums'?

393 replies

KateMumsnet · 24/01/2014 16:12

Nigel Farage has hurled himself into the debate about equality at work with a typically thoughtful, modern and nuanced view: City women with families are "worth less" than their male counterparts. UKIP-madness-as-usual, you think. Until you look at polling data which reveals what society really thinks about women in senior roles - and are forced to wonder whether his comments are smarter than they first look.

At a Jericho Chambers debate last week, chaired by Zoe Williams of the Guardian, the research company Populus shared a resoundingly miserable take on public views of women in top-level jobs.

Of the 2,000 people they asked, very nearly half think that our society has suffered as more women have worked out of the home. A whopping 57% agreed that 'when it comes to the work-life balance, women can't have it all, however much they may want it'.

So while many of us blithely assume that everyone sane wants broadly equal numbers of women and men at senior levels of business and government, we may not be right - especially if the women in question happen to have children.

A year ago, fed up with a corporate world of retro alpha men, I set out to interview some ‘power mums’ and ‘power dads’ about the choices they've made to get their senior jobs, for Management Today. I was looking for potential role models - but it wasn't that straightforward. Yes, the mums do generally love their jobs. But they also work long hours, miss their kids, feel quite stressed a lot of the time, feel judged at the school gate and judged at work - and most concede that they are surviving rather than thriving.

In contrast, the dads feel no social censure, express few regrets and are free from the racing mental ticker-tape of things they must remember (‘online shop, wash PE kit, plan birthday party, book haircuts, cancel swimming….’) which even the women with the most help keep on a loop. Unlike one of the dads, none of the mums has yet confessed to inventing breakfast meetings to escape the chaos of Cheerio throwing.

The response to the publication of those interviews has, if anything, been even more striking - particularly the judgement cast upon the female high-fliers by other women. On Facebook, a woman commented on a power mum with four children and a long commute: "She may be powerful but she is no mother"; an ambitious 20-something friend said: "when I read that they only see their kids two nights a week, I think 'shame on you' - and then I hate myself for thinking it".

In our frank debate last week, the self-confessed 'enlightened' CEO of Costcutter Supermarkets Group, Darcy Wilson-Rymer, was brutal on the business realities of the subject. Four-day weeks don't work - because women end up doing five days for 20% less pay, and then getting frustrated and doing something else. Job shares can work, but are not ideal at the most senior levels.

After the debate, a woman who read about it sent us an infuriated email, arguing that we were missing the point: "it's actually NOT about the Power Mums who have made it in their careers by getting up at 5am, working out, working a 10-hour day, getting back late feeling guilty and employing loads of staff to help them through. Its about the average professional woman who can work maybe 20 to 30 hours a week but who doesn't want power or even career progression”.

Which is of course brilliant for everyone it suits. But - news flash for Mr Farage - some women do want equality and power and progression. Even some who have had a baby, or two or three. And if the men work 70 hours a week and the women half that, it won't happen. Find me a FTSE-100 CEO who works 30 hours, and surely we'll find an exquisitely wrapped carriage clock ticking under their PA's desk.

We can spend all the time we like dissecting equality and discrimination, childcare options and our hours culture - but until society puts quality of life and families on a more equal footing with business needs, this is just how it is.

So until that time - unless we agree with Nigel Farage and his mates - we need to be supportive of the women who are making the sacrifices to get to the top, and ensure that those women are heard. If they are not, what hope do we have that our daughters will face less stark choices?

OP posts:

Report

CandyKate · 24/01/2014 21:01

I used to have a very high-powered professional job where you were basically on-call 24hrs a day, 7 days a week. People often got their planned holidays etc cancelled. Anyone who had children were immediately written off as not serious about the job. The only women who were at the top level did not have children.

Personally, I found the whole lifestyle, atmosphere, values abhorrent. I always knew I didn't want to be there long-term but it fulfilled a part of me that wanted to be a high achiever. As soon as I had children I resigned, and was lucky to find a PT job that is challenging and fulfilling but only 9-5 and no expectations outside of those hours.

I could never go back to that former lifestyle, even once the DCs were grown up. I personally find it a very toxic environment to be in.

However, I think it is sad that my female former colleagues have to make a very stark choice between working FT with all that pressure and not being around their children, or choosing to be a SAHM or try to find a good PT job, which is rare.

I agree with whoever has said that it is the business culture that needs to change to become more holistic and acknowledge that workers with a good work/life balance are more productive. I'm sure there was a recent study that said if you have to restrict your working hours to 7hrs a day you actually get more done than working 12+ hours. Can't remember where I read it though...