Possible Debate inspired by Desperate Housewives.

[Puffy2]

I haven't read all this, but in my opinion, "vacation days" should be used by both moms and non-moms to attend whatever they want to attend. When those days are used up - they are used up. Period.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

so for a boss to be truly sympathetic they have to be a parent?
And what about sympathy for those of us who are child free? If being a parent was a requirement for being a supervisor then Child free women would always get the short stick.

Anyone else wonder if these women have "something to prove" because they have to work harder then a man to get recognition and also break the stereotype that women need time off for kids?

~Amanda

Perhaps sensitivity training is in order--they have it for a host of other topics. One need not be in someone's shoes to understand where they are coming from.

Heck...forget children..I had a boss once who didn't treat me seriously b/c I was engaged. I was engaged when I was hired--but my fiance was just a boyfriend to her and she was very condescending about it. Stereotype or not--she was a single woman (unsure of her history, nor is it my business). She had no right whatsoever to behave the way she did towards me in relation to my fiance.

 

[TnKrBeLlA012]

The best thing would be to stay at home and raise your kids. I realize that is not being realistic. I just think we as a society need to have more compassion for people. That's what it really boils down to. The world can be not so nice. Believe me in the end it all comes down to what kind of a job we did for our kids. That's our gradification. The job will love you one moment and the next, your out the door without as much as a thankyou.

 

[septbride2002]

Hate to be the one to break this to you, but life isn't fair. Sometimes it's unfair in your favor, sometimes not. That's just the way it is.

Thank you Mom.

~Amanda

 

[septbride2002]

The best thing would be to stay at home and raise your kids. I realize that is not being realistic. I just think we as a society need to have more compassion for people. That's what it really boils down to. The world can be not so nice. Believe me in the end it all comes down to what kind of a job we did for our kids. That's our gradification. The job will love you one moment and the next, your out the door without as much as a thankyou.

I'll agree with you about organizations not caring about you as an individual but not everyone is able to be a stay at home mom. In my family if I was to quit my job we would be losing 63% of the household income. I would rather work and have my children live in nice neighborhoods, with good schools, clean parks, and safe cars that my money can by then live in a rundown house in a bad neighborhood so that I could be home.

~Amanda

 

[septbride2002]

Well I decided to call my two sisters, who do not have children (I won't say child-free because they wanted to, but couldn't) and asked their opinion.

I was really surprised to hear them say that they agreed that employees w/o children are excessively called upon to cover for those who do.

One sister commented specifically that she was expected to travel more, work longer hours, and cover holiday periods, because she did not have children.

I asked her if she didn't feel that being able to travel and work extra hours hadn't improved her career - and pointed out that I would consider traveling for work to be a perk, not a burden. She acknowledged that yes, in some ways her career did advance because she had more flexbility - but was still stuck on the holiday issue.

The other sister said that, speaking as a boss, it frustrated her to have women asking for time off for various family activities, leaving her to worry about how to keep the office covered. And if she said "no", to such requests, employees became resentful and surly.

I did try to point out that employees can be resentful and surly, even if they don't have kids!

It seems to me though, that this shouldn't be an employees w/kids vs employees w/o kids issue.

Employees shouldn't be setting policy - management should. The company should have a policy in place regarding flexible time off that is equitable for everyone. Holidays should be rotated, and travel opportunities (or burdens) offered to everyone who is qualified.

I am not surprised at all. It is exceptable to many that working moms are given preferentual treatment. And that is the problem - even if there is a policy exceptions can always be made.

Barb - as far as workers minding their own businesses - if we lived in a perfect world that would happen. But it is hard to not get a littly pissy when you have a mounting to do list yourself and you can't get off early because Jill needs to go watch her son's soccer game at the last minute.

~Amanda

 

[Wishing on a star]

But it is hard to not get a littly pissy when you have a mounting to do list yourself and you can't get off early because Jill needs to go watch her son's soccer game at the last minute.

~Amanda

First, why should EITHER woman be expecting to get off early???? I think it is way out there for anyone who is working for a paycheck to think that they can just up and decide to leave early. IMHO, a mounting to-do list is definately NOT any more important than a soccer game.

We are not talking about a Dr.s appt here, or something else important that has come up.

Sorry, but I think that it is just ridiculous for either woman in this situation to feel that they can just decide to take off early. IMHO, Neither of these women are respecting their employer. And, then to get 'pissy'....

I am sorry, but I have yet to personally see an employer who would let employee's just walk out early at will. Man, if I found an employer who would allow this, ... then I would be thanking my lucky stars!!!! NOT flaming the other mom for taking full use of the lenient policies!!! This kind of leniency is just begging for this type of negative, competitive 'catty' environment.

This goes back to my whole point.... Something is definately wrong when employers are paying good money to employees to be 'Moms', or to 'Get their hair done', etc..

The whole idea that EITHER of these things are to be expected to be allowed/encouraged by an employer is really getting ridiculous.

To me, it sounds like many women are wanting special treatment, just because they are 'Women'.... (we have a to-do list... we have more responsibility in the home.... we are 'moms'... etc... etc...)

I can see it now... "OMG!!! I broke my nail!!! My manicurist can get me in at 3:15..... TaTa!!!!!"

Man, we woman have become our own worst enemies!!!!

 

[dzneprincess]

Your post reminded me of something that a few of us at work were discussing.
For maternity leave I would receive 13 weeks 100% paid time off. For adoption leave I would receive only 8 weeks paid time off. I think that is a bunch of bull as well.

~Amanda

I havent read all the replies, so I am not sure if this is addressed..but the difference in time is for the revoery time for the birth. Most companies give 5 weeks to recover from a reg birth and 6 to recover from a C section. Consider yourself lucky...I worl for a very large cooporation, we only the the 5 weeks recovery time paid. Anyhting after that is Care of a new born child leave and it is unpaid.

 

[dzneprincess]

. But it is hard to not get a littly pissy when you have a mounting to do list yourself and you can't get off early because Jill needs to go watch her son's soccer game at the last minute.

~Amanda

Where do you work at? I would love to be able to "get off early" on a whim. WOW. As a mother of 4, yes 4 kids, who works full time, I know that I am expected to be at my place of employment from 7a to 4pm. Unless an emergency comes up, I am there. I have been employed for 8 years by this company, and being only 30 yrs old, you can imagine this is really the only real job I have had. I just never knew there were jobs out there, where one could leave early to catch JRs game and take off at the last minute. Bottom line, everyone should be given the same consideration for events that happen in life. Moms or no MOMs, dads or no dads should make no difference. If a request for time off is to be granted, it should be granted in the order the request was made, as business needs allow it.

 

[janette]

I think it is up to the employer. Thankfully since I've had kids I've worked for companies that allow me the flexibility to not be in the office 9-5 and to work my schedule around my kids.

I've always told my supervisors that the flexibility means more to me than raises or promotions. It does, in return for that flexibility I work often late at night, weekends and usually get a few phone calls while I'm on vacation. I'm lucky enough to work at something that I can do from home and don't have to punch a time clock. Sometimes I might put in less than 40hrs but others I'm putting in many more. I've always said the worst part of working from home is that you don't have that time when you put it away and are finished for the day.

There are people who resent my hours and flexibility. I've never really understood it, it's not really the childless people just the ones that seem to think there is only one way to do a job and that is to sit in your office so many hours a day. None of those people would be lining up to take my job if I was to leave, we sometimes joke that my job security is that no one wants my job.

And to those childless folks out there, some of my childless relatives and co-workers have taken time off when they've had a sick pet. If you have an office that can be flexible than it should be extended to all.

 

[mbw12]

This whole issue is clear cut to me....

It should NOT matter WHY any person takes/receives time off. I should not have to explain my personal time off to my boss, and have to get his/her approval.

If it is to get my hair done.. FINE
If it is little Juniors first day at school.. FINE

This has NOTHING to do with special treatment... When you take a job, you are given XXX amount of time. It is yours to take as you please. As long as an employee is following policy, then it should be a complete NON-issue.(quote)

OMG....my thoughts exactly!!!!!! I am a woman, work outside the home, and have two kids. I am given a certain amount of vacation time, sick time, and personal time. I use that time to be at things for my kids. I don't care if a single person is using theirs to get their hair done or not. As long as you have the time, take it!!!!!!!! I work with a single woman with no children....and she uses her time to take her animals to the vet, etc....that is her business....and like I said, she has the time and can use it however she pleases. The problem arises if someone tries to abuse the system. Just a little advance palnning and things can work out. (of course there is alwasy somethign unexpected....but that is what sick time can be used for at my work)

I think the main issue with the storyline with Lynette is that she JUST STARTED THIS JOB....and is already asking to leave early, take off, etc. You need to earn it a little.

 

[Puffy2]

When I was a single person and working, I got annoyed when co-workers with children would whine and pout and ask the others to cover for them on holidays like Christmas. Single people enjoy the holidays too. I'm older now with children of my own, but I still feel that this is inappropriate.

If someone volunteers to give up their Christmas holiday so the other person with kids can have it off is fine, but don't try to put a guilt trip on others just because you have children.

 

[goofy4tink]

While I can see both sides to this argument...I really think that working moms need to 'save' as much of their vacation/personal/sick time as they can. Those without 'non-work' obligations shouldn't be expected to continually pick up the slack for those who have other obligations. This is something you usually know about when you start a job. The moms I have an issue with are the ones who work outside the home, and then say...but, I have kids and it's important that I be there for Jr.'s game, or Sally's poetry reading...yet refuse to give up any of their 'leave' time. I had to use my sick time or personal time if I wanted to be away from my job. Or I had to stay late....as long as I had my 40 hrs in for that week.
My ds used to work with the physically/mentally challenged in a group home. On holidays guess who ended up working two shifts in a row?? Yep, ds. Because he was told that 'well, you don't have family..like kids or anything'. Sure he made a ton of money and at times he actually volunteered to do the extra shift so that a mom could be with her kids on Christmas/Thanksgivng, but it sure would have been nice to see MY child on those days.
We all make choices....you can not have it all. Sorry if this upsets someone, but you can not give 100% to both you job and your family. Something has to suffer. Lynette was a bit over the top....a case of wanting 100%. Wanted the top job yet wanted to be there for her kids. You just might have to "settle" for a slightly lesser job in order to have the ability to be with your kids when you have to be.

 

[septbride2002]

First, why should EITHER woman be expecting to get off early???? I think it is way out there for anyone who is working for a paycheck to think that they can just up and decide to leave early. IMHO, a mounting to-do list is definately NOT any more important than a soccer game.

We are not talking about a Dr.s appt here, or something else important that has come up.

Sorry, but I think that it is just ridiculous for either woman in this situation to feel that they can just decide to take off early. IMHO, Neither of these women are respecting their employer. And, then to get 'pissy'....

I am sorry, but I have yet to personally see an employer who would let employee's just walk out early at will. Man, if I found an employer who would allow this, ... then I would be thanking my lucky stars!!!! NOT flaming the other mom for taking full use of the lenient policies!!! This kind of leniency is just begging for this type of negative, competitive 'catty' environment.

This goes back to my whole point.... Something is definately wrong when employers are paying good money to employees to be 'Moms', or to 'Get their hair done', etc..

The whole idea that EITHER of these things are to be expected to be allowed/encouraged by an employer is really getting ridiculous.

To me, it sounds like many women are wanting special treatment, just because they are 'Women'.... (we have a to-do list... we have more responsibility in the home.... we are 'moms'... etc... etc...)

I can see it now... "OMG!!! I broke my nail!!! My manicurist can get me in at 3:15..... TaTa!!!!!"

Man, we woman have become our own worst enemies!!!!

It was just an example of priorities.

~Amanda

 

[septbride2002]

Where do you work at? I would love to be able to "get off early" on a whim. WOW. As a mother of 4, yes 4 kids, who works full time, I know that I am expected to be at my place of employment from 7a to 4pm. Unless an emergency comes up, I am there. I have been employed for 8 years by this company, and being only 30 yrs old, you can imagine this is really the only real job I have had. I just never knew there were jobs out there, where one could leave early to catch JRs game and take off at the last minute. Bottom line, everyone should be given the same consideration for events that happen in life. Moms or no MOMs, dads or no dads should make no difference. If a request for time off is to be granted, it should be granted in the order the request was made, as business needs allow it.

Again just an example, not saying I am actually allowed to do this.

 

[Maleficent13]

Does a boss need to have kids to be sympathetic? No but I think it helps to see the full scope of what a working parent goes through.

I was a boss for 10 years without kids. I am now a boss with a kid. I have made no change in the way I view my employees, nor in the way I grant time off, leniency for issues, etc. I think whether a person has the ability to understand the full scope of anything has more to do with their ability to think and less with their ability to parent. In other words, a good boss has nothing to do with whether or not they have kids, and everything to do with their management abilities.

And FWIW, as a boss I HATE it when someone comes in my office whining about "so and so" getting to do this or that or whatever and IT'S NOT FAIR!!

How do you know it's not fair? Were you in my office when the conversation between me and other employee took place? My bet is no. Just like she was not in my office the last time you asked me for a favor. Nor do I share the circumstances of those conversations with others. It's none of anyone else's business. It's my job to manage my department, not their job to manage it. Nothing bugs me more than when someone appoints themselves the "fairness police".

This is NOT directed to anyone specific on this thead.

 

[Wishing on a star]

And FWIW, as a boss I HATE it when someone comes in my office whining about "so and so" getting to do this or that or whatever and IT'S NOT FAIR!!

Nothing bugs me more than when someone appoints themselves the "fairness police".

Amen!!!!!


All goes back to my points that time off is a matter of 'Policy'....

Any discussion about Moms-vs-Childless, or 'Fairness' is nothing but negative, competitive, CATTY, immature behavior!!!

 

[septbride2002]

And FWIW, as a boss I HATE it when someone comes in my office whining about "so and so" getting to do this or that or whatever and IT'S NOT FAIR!!

Nothing bugs me more than when someone appoints themselves the "fairness police".

Amen!!!!!


All goes back to my points that time off is a matter of 'Policy'....

Any discussion about Moms-vs-Childless, or 'Fairness' is nothing but negative, competitive, CATTY, immature behavior!!!

Lets get something straight - I asked this question based on a TV show and not about myself personally. I find your comments to be rude.

~Amanda

 

[Wishing on a star]

I am sorry if you take such personal offense....
like Mal, my comments were not directed to anyone personally.

(BOY,that was some quick response!!!)

I am very aware that you were taking off from the TV show...

However, this is indeed a HUGE personal issue and cultural debate for women in our society today. Which is EXACTLY why it was written into the script... and why there is such a 'lively' discussion going on!!!

 

[snoopy]

Any "perks" that I received by being a working mother were completely outweighed by the significant slowdown in my career.

Yes, I may have been able to come in a little later, because I had to take a child to school, or left a little early, because I had to pick up a sick child from daycare - but I also missed out on travel opportunities, overtime, important networking time with my boss and my boss's boss.

I was not promoted as quickly, nor given raises as often, as my childfree counterparts. I didn't begrudge them their promotions and raises, it was part of the trade off. The more you can do for your company, the more they will do for you. While my employer liked me, and felt I did excellent work, they did keep the woman who was hired to fill in for me on maternity leave - and they promoted her ahead of me. Because she had the time and flexibility that I did not.

So no, I don't think it is discrimination to allow parents occasional time off for family purposes. Rather than seeing it as "picking up slack" I would look at it as an opportunity to really show my skills and make myself invaluable to the boss.

BTW, I left my job about six months after returning from maternity leave, for family reasons. I am now ready to go back to work, and the gap in my resume has hurt my prospects. I used to be in management - now I may be starting over again as a supervisor or entry level, due to my absence from the workplace.

Don't have to read the whole thread to say I agree. I'm on the "mommy track" -- its understood that in exchange for moving up the career ladder, I'm given a decent amount of flexibility and leeway. There are hundreds just like me in my building alone. Although my company is very good when it comes to work/life issues and allows for plenty of personal time, regardless of parental status.