Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Guest posts

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

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:
TheCrackFox · 26/01/2014 14:56

I do think it is totally relevant that the long hours culture kicked in at the same time as women started to want the good jobs too.

BIWI · 26/01/2014 15:00

I'm fairly sure that when we employed a nanny, she was working to support my husband as well as me ... Hmm

Bonsoir · 26/01/2014 15:14

Successful people can afford to buy support - I'm not really sure why they seem to want everyone else to be their cheer leaders too.

Successful people are often driven by recognition. They want to be seen to be successful. Hence wanting others to champion them. It's a version of celebrity culture.

TopBirder14 · 26/01/2014 15:16

I think that child care issues are the main problem. It's fine if you are well-off enough to employ a nanny or fortunate to have family who can take the children to and from school and look after them whenever required.

Unfortunately most working women aren't in that position and have to constantly juggle their working hours around their children. It only takes something like the school being closed because of bad weather or the child being ill to put the working mum in a very difficult position. I've worked in offices which are dominated by women with young children and it causes chaos when the mum has to leave work immediately because there is a problem.

Highlander · 26/01/2014 15:17

Doh, if men can 'have it all', why can't/aren't we?

Because women are still, in 2014, to take on majority of child-rearing RESPONSIBILITIES. And by that I mean taking full respnsibility for organisation ofour children's lives; wrap-around care and associated drop-offs/pick-ups, holday care, homework, organising extra-curricular stuff..... The list is endless, and time-consuming!!

DH is happy-ish to do what I tell him to, but acts like a petulant teenager when I point out that he has a responsibility to get the school calander, work out his AL, find out what care is available and come up with a plan.

His latest fuck-up s failing to book AL for Feb half term.

Want2bSupermum · 26/01/2014 15:26

I agree Bumble. I found that sentence really bothered me on so many levels, one of them being that women, not families are who hire help. While DH earns 10x what I earn and I could stay home if I wanted to, we as a family made the choice to be a dual working family.

My goal is to create opportunities for flexibility for the generation behind me. Here in the US it is tough getting everyone out of the office at a reasonable time. It doesn't help that being in audit, we are working at the client site and when it comes to discussion of fees there is often talk of 'Well your team left early.' We might have left early but we worked from home. The work still got done.

Another real issue is that the move from manufacturing to a service led economy has created issues with regard to income disparity. I have seen that the junior positions in the service industry are much lower in pay compared to the manufacturing industry. Generally speaking, the profits generated by manufacturing companies are much higher compared to service companies. Also, outsourcing has limited the number of entry level positions. This is going to create a problem down the road as we won't have the talent needed to maintain the service economy we now have.

Timetoask · 26/01/2014 15:27

I really think it is almost impossible to have 50/50 shared home management (childcare, house stuff, etc) between two parents. One parent usually has the biggest share of responsibilities in the home and the other parent is usually the main provider.

Both parents can work, but one of them will have to have a less powered job for things to function well and for the children to grow emotionally confident. (Don't know how single parents manage!).

In our case, I want it to be my job to be the main carer for my children, DH is great, he does bath time, reads everyday to them, does the washing up, but I have the patience and motherly intuition that he just doesn't.

I think want we need a new revolution: After mums or dads take a career break, have enough support in place for them to reintegrate into the workplace more easily. How many threads have we read on here about SAHP that want to go back to work and find it almost impossible?

Bumblebzz · 26/01/2014 15:40

Timetoask, I agree that that model (i.e.not 50:50) is perhaps the most common today (though luckily not in our house as our earnings are comparable and my husband is better at housework than me) but I really believe it is common only because of how society has conditioned us.

There is no real reason that anyone can give me why a father can't do more at home and a woman can't earn the same as a man. Leaving aside the maternity period itself, which is really just a drop in the ocean when you look at rearing a child from 0-18years, there is no reason a father can't do 50%. Other than 1. he doesn't want to 2. the mother doesn't want him to (I get that some women want to retain 100% control of domestic and family arrangements, again I put this down to conditioning).
Legally, working fathers enjoy the same employment protection as working mothers, they just don't feel they can ask for flexibility without it affecting their career. This is further complicated when the father remains seen as the main breadwinner, there is too much to lose if his career supports the majority of the family expense. Though there shouldn't be that risk, as the law is there to protect people, including men.

It will be interesting to see the first test cases come through the courts where working fathers feel they were discriminated against for requesting flex working/paternity/parental leave etc.

I guess what I am trying to say, above all else, is that just because things are the way they are today (1950s working fathers paired with 2010's working mothers) does not mean that this has to persist.

annieorangutan · 26/01/2014 16:03

Its not impossible timetoask. Dh does exactly half as do I. Its very easy to organise just by doing stuff as you see it. I dont take sick days with our children usually as dh does that.

merrymouse · 26/01/2014 16:04

Because you can't be a 'power mum' without relying on other women on close to NMW to do your dirty work.

As opposed to men who have apparently relied on women to do these jobs for centuries for no wage at all?

ruthvq · 26/01/2014 16:13

Just because you think 'you can't have it all' why does that have to mean you're not supportive of high achieving women?

I don't think any individual can have 'it all', male or female. If you're going to put all of your time and energy into your career then you can't invest the same time in your family as a stay at home parent can.
That's not me being unsupportive of anyone, I just don't think it's possible!

I run my own company and my partner is the main child carer. I've not spent as much time with my kids as my partner has so I haven't 'had it all'. Doesn't matter what sex you are, it annoys me that its always women who are expected to have it all.

annieorangutan · 26/01/2014 16:18

The way we do it is I drop off and pick up on half the days, dh is at home with them 2 of my working days, and Im at home with them 1. He does 40+ any overtime and I can do up to 55 over 7 days. It works pretty well as whichevers at home does all the cleaning, entertaining the childrens friends, homework, bath etc.

We started this particularly working pattern when dc 2 was 7 months as we both started managerial roles. I am planning to do a masters degree as well from September. Its really not that difficult and we do it without family or cleaners. If we can do it I dont see why its that big of a deal in any other family.

BIWI · 26/01/2014 16:32

timetoask - that's nonsense! Of course you can do it 50:50. It's exactly what we did.

And who is the main earner in our house has changed virtually every decade. It has all depended on the jobs we have been in/roles we have had as our careers have developed.

Minnieisthedevilmouse · 26/01/2014 16:36

Powermum - ah so that makes every other mum what? Lazy?

IMO it's only the sodding pm's that anyone ever gives a shit about. Holding it up as the ideal is ridiculous. It's the normal levels that need sorting out because that will have knock on effects for all women at all levels. Achieving something for a CEO level woman achieves little to nothing for anyone else in the organisation. It becomes a one off agreement. And this woman has power/money to arrange her own contract. It helps no woman in middle management or lower achieve a flexi working schedule and often ends up working against as it's a special it's not intended to be repeated.

It also hasn't escaped notice that hr is often predominantly staffed by women. Arranging agreements on advice of a few men and male requirements and male views on work. It's not generally a feminist environment. Often very opposite. Particularly when aimed at lower ranks of women. (I had to fight and act like a man, you can too). It's depressing.

Ubik1 · 26/01/2014 16:40

And is it really society's problem? Certainly public sector organisations seem to be more sympathetic and there are family friendly working practices in place - I gave 4weeks paid parental leave per child available to me working fur the NHS. I can also take unpaid leave. Thus in some part makes up for some of the vicious shift rotations.

Are these 'power mums' organising themselves into some sort of campaign group? So that men and women can benefit from policies which are more supportive of families in general? Is there a union? In the end it's up to employers to improve their policies.

BoffinMum · 26/01/2014 17:25

Here's the elephant in the room. It doesn't help when half the world seems to be taking Fridays off for work life balance reasons, and refusing to do anything at all at the weekend. This means it's really tough to see my (male) dentist, (female) dental hygienist (Wednesday bloody mornings only? That's not a job, it's a fucking hobby), (male) GP, in fact get any routine healthcare at all, when I think about it, without taking annual leave (difficult when that is also multiplied by the number of children I have, because they need me at their appointments too at least half the time), see my (female) solicitor, or see my (male) accountant, all of whom also pretty much work part-time these days.

Add to that my colleagues who also decide a full week's work of 40 hours is just that little bit too taxing for them, leaving the rest of us to shoulder the really tough stuff and the out of hours work. Someone has to be there when the shit hits the fan or we will be closed down. We can't all be at yoga or sailing or playing bloody golf. The world does not run to a part-time timetable, in fact the way my industry is going it is now global, 365 days, 24/7, with ever tighter margins. Like most businesses. So professionals should be bloody well responding to that, and organising themselves according with a bit of flexibility.

Sometimes I feel bitter that half the graduate world seems to be cruising along in non-ambitious, work life balance mode (especially most bloody dentists and certain GPs, YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE AND I DON'T MEAN THE WORN OUT INNER CITY PRACTICE PEOPLE WHO POST ON HERE) leaving the rest of us professionals to bloody run everything that they then take advantage of quite happily. It's bonkers, that's what it is.

I am starting to sound like that Lean In woman. Forgive me.

ClarissaG · 26/01/2014 17:31

I've just started this talk thread. Anyone out there?
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/employment_issues/1979002-High-earning-mothers

Bonsoir · 26/01/2014 17:32

If you are sharing housework and childcare 50:50 you aren't a power mum or a power dad though.

Piscivorus · 26/01/2014 17:43

Article in Times yesterday about a high powered city woman with 9 children who states you can't have it all. Buried in the article is the fact that her DH gave up work to look after the DCs so coming back to the fact that many of these successful partnerships are role reversals as someone said upthread

Who says we need to have it all anyway? Surely most things in life are about choices and compromises anyway

Paintyfingers · 26/01/2014 17:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BIWI · 26/01/2014 17:53

No, you're right, Bonsoir. We had a fulltime nanny and a cleaner twice a week.

Nevertheless, there are still housework chores to do and children who need to be looked after at the beginning and the end of the day.

annieorangutan · 26/01/2014 17:56

Yes definitely bit surely if most mums and dads can manage both working full time+ with multiple children, in all sorts of roles very easily with no staff, cleaners, nannies or family help with then I really dont see how you couldnt do it if you were very rich and could employ who you wanted.

Commander6 · 26/01/2014 18:01

Does some of these problems come back to men not taking time off because they are then seen as weaker employees if they do?

Weak as in job wise, presenteeism, and weak in a macho sense amongst their male colleagues?.
And actually, they also feel weaker, by their own ego?

TheCrackFox · 26/01/2014 18:04

I know loads of families where the couple are working opposite shifts, weekends, night shifts, 4am starts and rushing to the childminder on ad hoc days and zero opportunity to work from home and no money for a cleaner. In comparison, power mums have it easy so I really don't see why they need society's support.

wordfactory · 26/01/2014 18:11

theCrackFox

If we don't try to support women in demanding positions then we will have no female judges, politicians, CEOs, scientists, financiers. Our media will be entirely run by men and all our creativity will be led by male energy.

How on earth can that be good for society as a whole?