Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just read an article about women that feel they are so stressed out with work and family duties. The article title says companies do not seem to work with working mothers.
What do you think? Are the companies obligated to work in accomodating them? If so, why? If not, why?
I thnk one of the problems now days ;not just with wrokig moothers;is that people seem to work there wrok aroud their lifes instead of their lifes aroufd their work. This has not always been the case.Its really hard to expect to be given equal rights and not eqaul responsibilties :IMO.
It seems to be the companies have gone a long way in the past 20 years - not sure how these women can justify their argument. Twenty years ago working at home, flexible schedules, mothers rooms were unheard of. Now everyone gets to work "somewhere" between 6 and 9 and leaves between 3 and 6. Twenty years ago there wasn't much flexibility from 8-5 or whatever. Nobody worked at home (no internet).
I just read an article about women that feel they are so stressed out with work and family duties. The article title says companies do not seem to work with working mothers.
What do you think? Are the companies obligated to work in accomodating them? If so, why? If not, why?
Oh please. Somebody call a wahhhmbulance for these whiners. Last I checked being a mother was VOLUNTARY (and yes a "lifestyle choice"), so if you don't want the responsibilities then take a pass.
Maybe if these females were not so busy being helicopter mothers they would not have such "pressure". Keeping up with the proverbial Joneses and trying to prove they are superwomen is not conducive to a peaceful, mellow lifestyle.
Life is truly what you make of it, so if they are blubbering because life is soo haaaaaaaard , then they have no one to blame but themselves. Honestly, that Newsweek would waste space for this kind of garbage makes me shake my head.
It seems to be the companies have gone a long way in the past 20 years - not sure how these women can justify their argument. Twenty years ago working at home, flexible schedules, mothers rooms were unheard of. Now everyone gets to work "somewhere" between 6 and 9 and leaves between 3 and 6. Twenty years ago there wasn't much flexibility from 8-5 or whatever. Nobody worked at home (no internet).
This is a great topic! I have a lot of strong opinions about this!
First of all, I used to feel exactly like Charles does. Look how far women have come! What more do they want?
But here's the thing. Women are in the workplace now. You can't turn back the clock on that. Companies want women to come work for them. That is obvious by the way they complete for female employees and all the perks they offer. Therefore, women are in a position of power. Why should they surrender that power?
Also, there is a certain amount of reverse discrimination that I have witnessed. The company that I work for offers 12 weeks family leave to new mothers AND fathers. However, when a new father takes his leave, they are strongly discouraged from taking the entire 12 weeks. So, on the one hand, they lure prospective employees to their company with this generous leave offer and on the other hand, they discourage them from using it.
And Charles, how do you think flexible schedules and working from home came about? Do you think people sat back and waited for these changes to come about? No, we lobbied for them. Companies compete to get on lists like "Best Companies for Working Mothers". And why compare things here with 20 years ago? If you compare strides we have made with other countries, we are actually far behind.
Some good points. I do not have a problem with companies accomodating employees for the good of the company.
How about if a company provides let us say nurseries so the mom's and/or dad can make it to work on time and also see their kids during lunch. Should the company provide these services at a lower fee so than what they may pay outside? Take care.
Sounds like the working moms need to kick their children's fathers' butts (whether they're still married to them or not) and get them to help out with all those stressful tasks like scheduling the kids' birthday parties and planning vacations.
Some good points. I do not have a problem with companies accomodating employees for the good of the company.
How about if a company provides let us say nurseries so the mom's and/or dad can make it to work on time and also see their kids during lunch. Should the company provide these services at a lower fee so than what they may pay outside? Take care.
Sure as long as they give the childfree employees compensation at the same rate. Fair is fair, after all. Proving your ability to breed does not ENTITLE you to extra compensation of services.
20yrsinBranson
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
