Posts filed under 'Working moms'
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
Is it just me or does the tail end of this article from The Independent scream, “Ladies, if you wouldn’t spend so much time fussing with your silly little careers maybe you’d actually be able to find a man and get down to the business of procreating”?
See comments from Francoise Shenfield, consultant gyno at University College Hospital London and “an expert in medical law and ethics,” who says:
People have to be reminded that they have to make compromises between children and career.
Though the eggs-on-ice thing strikes me as a tad creepy, I can see how it helps gravely ill women and others in circumstances less run of the mill than your usual ticking clock. But that’s beside the point.
Suppose you’re a single woman who does want to start a family someday. Maybe you would even go so far as to say you desperately want to start a family. (Though I’ve heard such women exist, I can’t attest to being one; I seem to have misplaced my own biological clock.)
In the meantime, how the hell are you supposed to support yourself if you’re “making compromises between children and career” (i.e., prioritizing getting knocked up over getting paid) as dear Francoise implies? Are you supposed to just quit your job and vamp it up in the nearest watering hole in hopes that some sperm donor will come along before your next rent check is due? Gimme a break.
October 29th, 2006
Contrary to popular belief, working moms (and dads) spend more time with their kids than their 1960s counterparts, according to a New York Times report this week. How do they do it? By letting the house go and letting dad pick up some of the slack.
I quote:
The researchers found, to their surprise, that married and single parents spent more time teaching, playing with and caring for their children than parents did 40 years ago.
For married mothers, the time spent on child care activities increased to an average of 12.9 hours a week in 2000, from 10.6 hours in 1965. For married fathers, the time spent on child care more than doubled, to 6.5 hours a week, from 2.6 hours. Single mothers reported spending 11.8 hours a week on child care, up from 7.5 hours in 1965.
“As the hours of paid work went up for mothers, their hours of housework declined,” said Bianchi. “It was almost a one-for-one trade.”
Fathers have picked up some of the slack. Married fathers are spending more time on housework: an average of 9.7 hours a week in 2000, up from 4.4 hours in 1965. That increase was more than offset by the decline in time devoted to housework by married mothers: 19.4 hours a week in 2000, down from 34.5 hours in 1965.
Right on! And take that, Religious Right! Thanks to Broadsheet for tipping me off to this report.
October 19th, 2006
The Working Mother Top 100 list is out. For those not in the know, it’s a list the mag puts out annually to give props to the companies with the most family-friendly policies — you know, flex time, telecommuting, paid leave, and all that good stuff many of us never, ever see in the workplace. To search for a gig at a company like this, check out the mom-friendly filter on the job site SimplyHired. (Do an advanced search, and under Company, select from the Special Filters menu.)
If you’re not a mom, does this mean you’re SOL? Hardly. Yours truly boasts a client on this list and you won’t see me procreating any time soon. (Sorry, mom.) Family friendly means worker friendly, unless of course your employer has the nasty habit of heaping the heaviest load on its childless workers. Some do. One would be wise to avoid those outfits like the plague.
A final note: If you can’t open the Working Mother Top 100 list, you can read it on BusinessWeek too, as Feministing kindly pointed out this morning.
September 26th, 2006
Next Posts
