Holding Back

[Wayne Goodwin]

I saw on CBS tonight on 60 minutes where the second in command of Facebook which is a Woman said . Most woman put their future Career for work on hold , taking care of family and kids . In stead of getting great jobs and a better future . 

Can you relate to that ?

[Karin M Fichtner]

No, Wayne, I'm sorry, I can't. I believe raising my four children was the best career I could've had.

[Wayne Goodwin]

I don't blame anyone for taking care of kids . They need the love and nurturing to get then starting in life . Guess thats the way it's supposed to be...

[flippr 2.0]

no sir

[Lifesighs]

Yes, I was a stay at home mom until my son started school, I also stayed at home and left a very well paying job when he became a teen. After my son left home and was living on his own with a job I was able to make a life for myself again.

The between years I was divorced so I had no option, I had to work to support both of us. I felt very lucky to be able to raise my son till he was in school, so many mom's don't get to see all the first's when the children are small and it takes two workers to make it in todays society for most people. I'm old enough to remember when most mom's stayed home.

[crestofwaves]

I think the statement is true for many women.  I stayed home six years with my kids. 

And much of the disaparity between what men earn and what women earn has less to do with inequality( although sometimes it has to do with inequality and discrimination) than with the fact that many women will take time off or take a part time job or can't work as many hours because in many cases, the woman is still the care taker.

[Lucinda Stone]

i've always worked....yes, i also remember when mothers stayed home and i also remember being poor when my mother did that(altho with 7 kids, i'm sure day care would have negated the paycheck) 

and yes, i did miss some of my kids "first's" ... sometimes economics has to be the ruling factor :(  and they never questioned it, it was the way it was... there was always dinner on the table, clean clothes and a roof over our heads.

i still managed to go to night school, get the degree and  good job but truthfully i was not looking to have a 'career' at the cost of everyone else. and definitely not a 'super-mom', i simply do what needs to be done.... my children are self-sufficient, well-adjusted adults, so i guess it is possible to do both...

 

 

[uno,dos,3]

In 1967 my wife's 1st teaching job....or more accurately.....my 1st wife's, first teaching job paid $5,200.00.....males started at almost 10% more, $5,700.00, because men were considered to be 'head of household'.........and that's the truth.

[crestofwaves]

I know.  I worked inCatholic school late 60s.  The men made more money and if a woman complained, the nuns said, "The man is the head of the family."  But that was then.  These things are not supposed to happen anymore, but sometimes they do.

[flippr 2.0]

i was a student in a catholic school in the late 60's.just putting in my 2 cents.

[ProblemAgain]

i should save all the stuff i stumble across but where would i keep it?  that being said there was just an article recently that delved into the pay differential between men and women. in some cases the average pay for women doing the same exact job as men is only 61 per cent of the male rate of pay. thus you have the lily ledbetter laws and other efforts to level the pay scales. and it also explains why the recession was reported to be harder on men than women since to cut costs the employers dumped the expensive employees as soon as possible...leaving behind women making less...and let's not forget the new dictum  (or it really could be dicked'em) to hire only part timers or even better temps to avoid all extra costs...

[T2Friends]

I have never had children so I have never had to make that difficult decision.  But to be honest, I think that using that excuse is a red herring meant to keep women arguing among themselves and internally struggling with the guilt so that we won't focus on the fact that in a large majority of cases, men make more than women (I don't care if it is a penny more) for doing the same job, period and that is wrong.  

Yeah, I get get the voodoo logic behind the argument, women take time off from their careers to raise the kids, miss out on promotions, fall behind in experience and therefore get paid less when hired back into the workforce and never catch up.  Ya know what I say to that B___S___!!!  Here is a good example of why I feel this is a false argument and leads women to put up with lower pay for far too long. About four and half years ago the head of my agency left and a new woman was appointed to head up the agency.  My immediate supervisor left  to take a better job.  At the time I had 20 years of experience moving up the ranks within my department and was well respected both internally and by our outside partners as a problem solver and a go to person to get things done.  The new head of the department appointment me to an acting position for a few months while she conducted an interviewing process for both my position and a comparable position in another division.  I say comparable because the position was at the same level, but it had less than half the staff and perhaps a quarter of the budget as my division.   Within a few months she had concluded the process and recommended me for the position permanently.  When she offered the position to me permanently  I asked for a raise.  Not an outrageous request when you get promoted, right?  She explained that she couldn't do that, due to the budget and so I would just have to wait for my anniversary to get a bump up in my salary.  At that very same time she was hiring a gentleman for the other division.  Smart, fresh out of college, bi-lingual with a hispanic background which would be very helpful in the communities where we work.  Being in the public sector, our pay scale aren't the most dynamic, even in non-union positions, but this fresh faced man was hired at exactly the same salary that I was getting for the comparable position, with 20 years of experience.   At the time, I assumed it was because he had a masters or some advanced degree or training, but eventually found out that is was not the case.   It was basically the going rate for the position.  

There will be those that argue that my case is unique because it is a public not private sector job.  But I actually believe quiet the opposite, there is less flexibility in public sector salaries with grades and steps and the overall public scrutiny to which public employees salaries are subject.  

In my opinion there are two factors at play with an  employer that influence salaries -  what they think it's worth and what you will accept.   I think there are many factors that contribute to the notion that woman in the workforce will accept less or are worth less.  And one of them is this argument that we have less experience because we took time to have children or raise children.  Wrong, the management skill involved in that experience raising children and managing a family alone is a gold mine that can be used in the workforce when they re-enter.  We need to celebrate the choices women make, whether to work or stay home and stop trying to decide if one is better than the other.  There is no right or wrong and men should start listening up and supporting us in this as well.  Because there is no reason this has to be only a woman's choice.  If men want to chose to stay home with their children, that should be an option for them as well.  Families need to make decision that work best for them and should not be penalized or demonized because of the choices they make.

Sorry, I will get off my soapbox now.   

 

[crestofwaves]

No!  Please do NOT get off your soap box.  You make very valid points from personal experience, T.