Childcare is bloody expensive!

bugslet

Comms69 wrote: »

I thought it was very helpful.

I'm not sure what comment Squirrel is talking about.

People were discussing maternity pay and how it impacted work, the conversation had evolved, so I added something that was a different scenario form many of the usual female jobs and the additional complexities of accommodating the needs of a pregnant woman. I though it fitted.

Anyway, I think I can live without the grief, so I'll go back to terrorising my workforce. Miracle they stay 20 years really.....

Red-Squirrel_2

bugslet wrote: »

I'm not sure what comment Squirrel is talking about.

People were discussing maternity pay and how it impacted work, the conversation had evolved, so I added something that was a different scenario form many of the usual female jobs and the additional complexities of accommodating the needs of a pregnant woman. I though it fitted.

The comment I quoted, where you professed cluelessness about what might happen if you employed a woman and she became pregnant. As if that was somehow an exceptional circumstance and you shouldn't be expected to have considered it when setting up in business.

You should have, along with other common employment related issues like long term sickness, or an employee becoming disabled, or how to deal with bullying or conflict etc etc.

Comms69

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

The comment I quoted, where you professed cluelessness about what might happen if you employed a woman and she became pregnant. As if that was somehow an exceptional circumstance and you shouldn't be expected to have considered it when setting up in business.

You should have, along with other common employment related issues like long term sickness, or an employee becoming disabled, or how to deal with bullying or conflict etc etc.

Why? There's no legal obligation to know these things, simply to act accordingly if/when it happens.

fred246

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

I assume that if your wife had a job she loved and wished to continue with it that you would have happily swapped roles then?

I think after we met she told me she wanted to stay at home if we had kids. We couldn't really both stay at home. I was earning more than 3 times more when we had our first child. I would have happily looked after the children if that had helped. The only thing that didn't work out as expected was I thought she might go back to work when the children had left home. No way. She's like a WASPI woman. Work? No thanks.

ViolaLass

fred246 wrote: »

I think after we met she told me she wanted to stay at home if we had kids. We couldn't really both stay at home. I was earning more than 3 times more when we had our first child. I would have happily looked after the children if that had helped. The only thing that didn't work out as expected was I thought she might go back to work when the children had left home. No way. She's like a WASPI woman. Work? No thanks.

She works, it's just not paid...

sulphate

fred246 wrote: »

I am indeed lucky. Thank you.

So lucky you felt it was necessary to brag about your happy life compared to your colleagues' seemingly stressful one.

It's what your anecdote implies that makes me uncomfortable. That working parents churn out unhappy kids who eat crap food and don't achieve much academically. Have you ever considered that your colleagues' kids are just not academically inclined and that's why they aren't studying PPE at Oxbridge, but are perfectly content with what they've decided to do? Presumably you've never shouted at your children or fed them a microwave meal?

Here's my anecdote. My dad stayed at home from when I was 3. He was bored and it was pretty miserable, we never did anything. Most of what I remember is either him shouting or reading a book by himself. I went to a private school but didn't get the best results in the world and went to a poly university. I'm perfectly happy with my career/life path but I guess I should blame my working mum because I didn't get straight As? :rotfl: As for now, I've never been late for work after dropping off my child. I went back to work after maternity in January 2016, since then I've had to take the total of one day off to look after him due to sickness, my husband has also taken one day off.

I think being a stay at home parent is just as stressful, but in different ways.

Red-Squirrel_2

fred246 wrote: »

I think after we met she told me she wanted to stay at home if we had kids. We couldn't really both stay at home. I was earning more than 3 times more when we had our first child. I would have happily looked after the children if that had helped. The only thing that didn't work out as expected was I thought she might go back to work when the children had left home. No way. She's like a WASPI woman. Work? No thanks.

It was a hypothetical question, it seems obvious the answer is no though!

VJsmum

bugslet wrote: »

Well I explained why it's difficult but you chopped the quote.

I employ red-squirrel ( I think you are female IIRC) as a long distrance truck driver. Next week you are going to go to Milan and back, then you tell me you have an antenatal appointment on Thursday morning. You will be around about Dijon at that point.

Do I pay you to stand all week. Shall I park the truck up all week? As Bugs trucking is highly specialised, there are no agencies that can supply the drivers with correct qualifications.

As I said, if you are an office worker, then making provision for antenatal classes is probably relatively easy (never done it, all my office staff are male), but working away all week causes problems.

Or, as is more likely, your female lorry driver will rearrange her antenatal appointment for when she is back.

Comms69 wrote: »

Im not on a mission, just engaging in mostly civil debate.


The fact is that employers set working hours for many reasons. and some of those reasons, I am afraid,
is to exclude / inconvenience women Some roles are very flexible, but others do require one to be in the workplace. Whether that's down to customer needs, or to engage with colleagues, etc. Not all roles have customers -
or not customer facing; engaging with colleagues can take place in many ways - phones are good, I hear as are ipads / laptops etc.


Similarly meetings can be arranged at that time for many reasons, people have different schedules. And managers different management styles. Yes, sometimes it might be but, again, many times it is done to exclude women


As far as social events go, that's outside of work. I hold no stock in such things, but if you feel aggrieved, why not arrange your own event? but in male-dominated industries, men often give jobs to other men, based on friendship, or just the fact that they KNOW them better, even if they aren't friends as such.
Or informal meetings take place so more information is passed over making the men look better informed. i'm not saying it's even deliberate but it DOES happen

I work in construction - one of the most male-dominated of industries. I ran 3 sites whilst pregnant. My workload did not go down because I had antenatal appointments - I simply took it home with me and caught it up then (granted, not every job can do that), there was no-one else to do my work at those times... I bloody loved being a woman on site - had no major issues with the blokes, who tended to be very considerate (to the point where I had to watch MY language :rotfl:). And there are HUGE advantages for women like me - firms like to get their "quota" of women up and so, at times, it was easier to get a job. The competitiveness was more with colleagues than bosses, who didn't want to see a woman rise up the ranks - hence early morning meetings, and social visits to "gentlemen's clubs" and golf courses ...

Comms69

VJsmum wrote: »

I work in construction - one of the most male-dominated of industries. I ran 3 sites whilst pregnant. My workload did not go down because I had antenatal appointments - I simply took it home with me and caught it up then - It sounds like you were senior management, so quite normal, how would you react if one of the labourers decided to come on to the site at 7pm after leaving early? (granted, not every job can do that), there was no-one else to do my work at those times... I bloody loved being a woman on site - had no major issues with the blokes, who tended to be very considerate (to the point where I had to watch MY language :rotfl:) - so you were welcomed in a male dominated environment, given a position of authority and well respected? . And there are HUGE advantages for women like me - firms like to get their "quota" of women up and so, at times, it was easier to get a job. - So despite 'men giving men jobs', you found it was actually easier? The competitiveness was more with colleagues than bosses, who didn't want to see a woman rise up the ranks - hence early morning meetings, and social visits to "gentlemen's clubs" and golf courses ...

Like I said, social visits are nothing to do with you. If people want to socialise outside of work, you have no right to be there.



-
The fact is that employers set working hours for many reasons. and some of those reasons, I am afraid, is to exclude / inconvenience women - That may happen, but I suspect it's very rarely the case. Some roles are very flexible, but others do require one to be in the workplace. Whether that's down to customer needs, or to engage with colleagues, etc. Not all roles have customers - or not customer facing; engaging with colleagues can take place in many ways - phones are good, I hear as are ipads / laptops etc. - No, but the vast majority do - even if not customer facing. Yes that can happen, but why would your colleague who works 9-5, want to speak to you at 7pm?


Similarly meetings can be arranged at that time for many reasons, people have different schedules. And managers different management styles. Yes, sometimes it might be but, again, many times it is done to exclude women - Again I doubt this is the case. If you are needed at the meeting and don't work at 08:30, then you say that time isn't convenient.


As far as social events go, that's outside of work. I hold no stock in such things, but if you feel aggrieved, why not arrange your own event? but in male-dominated industries, men often give jobs to other men, based on friendship, or just the fact that they KNOW them better, even if they aren't friends as such. - Do you have any evidence of this?
Or informal meetings take place so more information is passed over making the men look better informed. i'm not saying it's even deliberate but it DOES happen - Giving a friend a job is really not an issue. I mean it's often stupid, but perfectly legal.

fred246

sulphate wrote: »

So lucky you felt it was necessary to brag about your happy life compared to your colleagues' seemingly stressful one.

It's what your anecdote implies that makes me uncomfortable. That working parents churn out unhappy kids who eat crap food and don't achieve much academically. Have you ever considered that your colleagues' kids are just not academically inclined and that's why they aren't studying PPE at Oxbridge, but are perfectly content with what they've decided to do? Presumably you've never shouted at your children or fed them a microwave meal?

Their kids are not unhappy and I never considered their food was crap. It was always from Marks & Spencers and cost a fortune. He used to tell me how they spent a fortune on food. Their children did do very well at school. I was just fascinated by our different behaviours. They had so much money but no time. They were just desperate for time. We had time but much less money.