Posts filed under 'Overworked and underpaid'
In case you missed 20/20 on ABC last Friday, Elizabeth Vargas — sadly, one of the decade’s shortest-lived evening newscasters — did a story called “Can Working Mothers Have It All”?
While the segment didn’t add anything new to the conversation, acknowledgment from the mainstream media never hurts. And maybe someone watching in, say, Duluth, didn’t know that America is one of four countries of 168 studied that doesn’t have a national paid maternity leave plan. (The other three countries? Lesotho, Swaziland, and Papua New Guinea.)
Plus, seeing clips of syndicated radio asshat Tom Leykis saying he doesn’t want his tax dollars helping working moms was a good reminder of who women are up against. I’m not a parent, nor do I ever intend to be one. But fair flextime policies are not only good for working mothers, they’re good for working dads, people caring for aging or ailing relatives, artists and writers with creative projects outside the workplace, weekend warriors with road trip or mountaineering habits, and so on. (Of course you may be hard-pressed to find a company that will give you several weeks of paid “novel-writing leave.” Damn.)
Other recent media coverage that should make working moms stand up and cheer:
The Christian Science Monitor‘s Marilyn Gardner looks at the truth behind women opting out, complete with the subhead “Two reports show a weak labor market and inflexible work policies as the main reasons women are staying home” and nuggets like this:
“Most mothers do not opt out,” says Joan Williams, director of the Center for WorkLife Law at the University of California, Hastings. “They are pushed out by workplace inflexibility, the lack of supports, and a workplace bias against mothers.” In one recent survey, 86 percent of women cited obstacles such as inflexible jobs as a key reason behind their decision to leave. (Published 10/30/06)
ABC News’ Betsy Stark did a depressing segment on tag-team parenting — couples working opposite shifts so they don’t have to pay for pricey childcare (or worry about seeing each other Monday through Friday). I was shocked to learn that about a third of dual-income families employ the eminently more affordable tag-team tactic when it comes to childcare. Of course, the less well-off you are… well, you know the drill. (Aired 10/31/06)
The New York Times ran a piece by M. P. Dunleavey in the Business section on how this country is lagging far, far behind its European counterparts in terms of giving new parents a break. I’m glad the Times is finally starting to move past the whole opt-out thing. (Published 11/4/06)
If any of the above makes your blood boil and/or you want to do something about corporate and government attitudes toward working parents, check out MomsRising.org. You’ll find a book, documentary, and burgeoning political movement to partake in.
November 14th, 2006
While we’re on the subject of career change and the possible financial or lifestyle trade-offs that can come with it, I thought I’d share this recent article from CareerJournal.com on when relocating for a new gig is and isn’t worth it.
I relocated when I was 30, but it wasn’t such a radical move — San Francisco to Seattle. I knew Seattle well, having a sister, a college buddy, and an ex-beau up here. So I had plenty of time (years, in fact) to check out le new surroundings before packing everything I couldn’t bear to sell into my Civic and making the 850-mile drive north for good.
I must confess, my move wasn’t solely for the job; it was for the simpler, more affordable lifestyle I’d surmised Seattle would allow me. So when the job ended after a year (it was an indefinite contract job, only somewhere along the way, the company instituted a three-month “break in service” policy that meant I had to leave the gig after twelve months), I wasn’t left thinking, Damn! I moved here just for the job and now I’m hosed. Also, I had my former freelance clients to fall back on for work when I was, for all intents and purposes, laid off. So getting the axe was hardly devastating.
What do you think? Have you ever jumped ship and started anew elsewhere for a job you couldn’t refuse at the time? How did it turn out? What would you do differently if you could hit rewind?
November 10th, 2006
Since I’m busy reviewing my final page proofs for the book today and yesterday’s post was so agenda-heavy, here’s a little light reading for you: a Mad Libs letter of resignation by humorist Rob Bloom from the online version of Monkeybicycle, a fun lit journal I read periodically.
In case you’re not currently looking to tell your boss where she or he can stick it, Rob has thoughtfully provided other prefab letters (also written in the helpful Mad Libs style) you can use to dump your high-school flame, drop out of school, or ditch your fiance.
(Also, please vote Tuesday. And please help convince others to do so if you have the time.)
November 3rd, 2006
Your company gives you $300 to pimp your cube any way you want. No permission slip required. What would you do? A Simpsons memorabilia museum? An Out of Africa theme? A soothing seascape?
Here’s what the folks at a Fort Worth ad agency came up with. If I worked at this place, I’d probably go for an EMP-inspired rock-memorabilia theme. Or maybe, in honor of Jersey’s same-sex marriage ruling, I’d go with a Garden State rocker theme. (For more Jersey Girl pride, see my homestate sister Judy McGuire.)
It’s worth noting that the cube dwellers given $300 to pimp their pods any way they pleased say they like coming to work more, which I guess makes their management pretty dang schmart.
October 29th, 2006
Tuesday, October 24, is Take Back Your Time Day, an annual North American initiative started several years ago by some very balance-minded folks. According to the TBYT people, we’re all too damn busy working too damn much, not to mention spending too much damn money, which leads to more bouts of working too damn much, and so on and so forth.
One of my favorite TBYT stats is that today’s Americans clock in more hours at work than medieval peasants did. So in honor of TBYT day, I’m going to actually eat breakfast, lunch, and dinner on Tuesday — sitting down. I’m also going to walk my dog for an hour before work and an hour after, as well as spend the evening with my sweetie, during which I will do my darndest to not bring up work every other minute.
How about you?
October 23rd, 2006
Earlier this week, The Korea Times reported that 1,400 women in Korea have filed a lawsuit against their employers, “arguing that they should be paid for the days they are allowed to take off during menstruation.” The article goes on to say, “In June 2004 the labor law was revised to allow firms not to pay women taking this special leave.” In other words, the labor law previously called for companies to pay women for this — ahem — special leave. What’s more, this is not the first suit of its kind in Korea and analysts are predicting more to come.
This is mind-blowing on so many levels. We’re happy if we even get more than two paid weeks off a year in this country, let alone maternity and paternity leave. I can hear the men grumbling as they read this, scheming about how they’d adopt monthly sympathy cramps or rally for football-viewing days off. I’m with Salon’s Broadsheet blog, which proposes equal days off for both sexes (assuming, in our little fantasy world, it suddenly becomes de rigeur in the good ole U. S. of A. to claim time off for one’s monthly bleed).
I’m all for equal benefits in the workplace. For starters, it’s fabulous to see more companies embracing the twenty-first century and granting the same benefits to their gay employees as their straight ones (in other words, the same health coverage and family leave). But as a single who doesn’t plan on procreating, it’s always ruffled my feathers that I could not put, say, my mom or my sister on my health plan, or that they couldn’t put me on theirs. I guess I could shack up, wait for the common-law marriage thing to kick in, and then claim my piece of the “more benefits for those headed down the picket-fence path” pie. But I don’t think I should have to make a lifestyle change I wasn’t prepared or planning to make just to get as much money as the woman working in the next cube.
And don’t even get me started on how most companies designate the Christian holidays as their year-end days off. I’m a Heeb, OK? I don’t believe in Jesus (though I did think he was hot in The Last Temptation of Christ.) I have nothing to do on Christmas except tag along with a friend for the family ham dinner, which everyone knows always gives me hamps. I would rather work and subsist on the offerings of the company cafeteria — because god knows, nothing else is open on Dec. 24th and 25th, except 7-Eleven and a couple of greasy takeout places. And I would rather take my days off on Hanukkah, or the Jewish new year, or Passover, so I could actually go visit my mom (who lives a couple hours away) instead of saying, “Sorry, I have to work that day.”
Of course, I guess all this is moot since I’m currently freelancing from my home. But still. I’ve certainly experienced the family/Christian workplace bias before as a temp and wage slave. And I think it’s time to nationalize floating holidays and give the same benefits to singles as we give to those who choose to shack up/and or procreate. C’mon, people — wake up and smell the diversity!
October 13th, 2006
Three mainstream media articles on women’s work/life balance that made me cheer (had I not been suffering from my own work/life imbalance last week I would have posted them sooner):
Miami Herald columnist Cindy Krischer Goodman (no relation) and blogger examines how more workers are jumping on the temping bandwagon, not because they can’t find anyone else to pay them but because they want or need the flexibility to pursue other avenues of their life (elder care, child care, small businesses, creative endeavors). As Goodman writes, “More people see the appeal of staffing agencies, and they’re not just the unemployed trying make ends meet. The Bureau of Labor says the U.S. staffing industry will grow faster than any other industry over the next decade, adding nearly 1.6 million jobs.” (Published September 27, 2006; registration required)
Reuters recently reported that most businesses owned by women are home-based. Also of note: Forty-nine percent of U.S. businesses are run from the home, and 75 percent of U.S. businesses are one-person ventures with no employees (you know, independent writers, accountants, programmers, craftswomen, and other kitchen-table entrepreneurs). But I have to disagree with Robert Drago, professor of labor studies and women’s studies at Pennsylvania State University, who says in the article, “Home-based businesses tend to be uncertain sources of income…” I know and have interviewed many women whose home-based business earns them (and their family) a fine living. Drago also blathers on that “…working at home is difficult with small children and married women’s home-based work tends to be taken less seriously than their husbands’ jobs outside the home.” First of all, many women have told me that working outside the home when you have small children is equally if not more difficult than working inside it. It all depends on your kids’ age/temperament, your support system, and your personal preferences (or chaos threshold). Second, I spoke with many female business owners who work from home and pull in their family’s main or — gasp! — sole source of income, while their partner tends to the house and kids. And yes, Prof Drago, many of these women are in heterosexual relationships. (Published September 27, 2006)
And finally, ABC news covered how more companies are helping high-powered working moms who want to leave the fast track keep a toe in the corporate pool so (a) these megacorps don’t lose their superstar “talent,” and (b) these moms can pick up reasonably close to where they left off, after they’ve taken their (on average) 2.2-year leave to devote time to family. All well and good, but I’m left a bit cold by the last anedcote in the piece, where Anne Erni, chief diversity officer at Lehman Brothers, sings the praises of her company’s program and one satisfied mom who was happy to come back to a less-senior part-time role in the company. (“How often can you get someone with great maturity and judgment to step into a more junior role and be really happy with it?” Erni says.) It would be nice if (a) these options were even available to employees on the lower rungs of the corporate ladder, especially lower-income wage slaves, and (b) a woman could work part-time for her employer without having to take a demotion in title and pay. (Published October 2, 2006)
October 11th, 2006
Just came across this Associated Press tidbit:
A worker at a new, Eugene-area bakery was pinned face down in a trough of dough, unable to breathe, and was hospitalized in critical condition.
Bryan Byrne somehow was pinned between a Plexiglas machine guard and the trough of dough, which was moving slowly down a conveyor line, said Kevin Weeks, spokesman for the Oregon Occupational Health and Safety Division.
And you thought your job was taking a toll on your health. Still, if I had to get critically injured at work, being suffocated by a gigantic mass of cookie dough would be right up there with my top picks. Hopefully it was chocolate chip.
October 7th, 2006
Sad that we live in a time where taking lunch at work could be considered bad form. But at least the Associated Press has some pointers about how to eat lunch somewhere other than your cubicle without looking like a slacker. Of course, they’re recommending you start small, as in, eating lunch outside the cube just one day a week.
I’ll add my own suggestion to the list: If you’re only able to escape the clutches of your cubicle one lunch hour a week, then devote those 60 (or 30, or 15) minutes to your pet project of choice. You know, penning your memoirs, helping your local Democrats get elected this November, or — here’s a concept — looking for a new job in a more relaxed workplace.
October 6th, 2006
A couple uplifting articles I just read:
Washington Post columnist Amy Joyce looks into just how closely that megacorp you work for is monitoring your calls, emails, web surfing, IMs, and even your tracks. In other words, if you think no one knows that you’re not really at your desk from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. like you’re supposed to be, or that no one’s noticed all those dirty emails you send your boyfriend from your Yahoo! account during office hours, you’re dead wrong. Although, Joyce does write, “This reporter could find only one company, in Ohio, that implanted chips in its employees’ arms.” Well, that’s a relief. (Published 10/1/06)
And if you think your bean-counting boss is a buzzkill, you’re in very good company. Slate columnist Daniel Gross serves up these Idiotic Examples of Corporate Cost-Cutting and More Idiotic Corporate Penny-Pinching Measures. Note to caffeine junkies: You may want to start bringing a thermos of coffee or an espresso maker to work. (Published 9/25/06 and 9/29/06)
October 1st, 2006
Next Posts
Previous Posts
