Characteristics of a good family life include quality time spent with family, whether that family is children or relatives or even close friends, a distinct separation from one's work life, and the feeling of satisfaction in home life with one's family. The idea that work does not encroach on one's personal life is majorly tied into the balance of career and family life. Boundaries, and thereby expectations for both the employer and employee, that are set upon the realization for more of a balance are key in having a good family life and a good career life. Setting up a work schedule, whether it all takes place in an office, at home, if it includes flextime, telecommuting or a combination of all of the above.
Difficulties arise all over the socioeconomic map when attempting to strike a true balance between work and home. It seems that statistically, people in high-paying positions and those in lower-paying positions struggle most with balancing work and home because of expectations their employers hold for all employees, regardless of the employees' home life. High-profile professionals, lawyers, for instance, are expected to work upwards of 70 hours a week. While low-wage workers are expected to work shifts that are assigned to them, often not schedules that are consistent on a week to week basis. It is telling that the less money one makes, the less options one has as far as flexibility goes. According to the AFL-CIO, "Flextime is available to nearly two-thirds (62 percent) of workers with incomes of more than $71,000 a year but to less than one-third (31 percent) of working parents with incomes less than $28,000."
Across the board, the major transition from the traditional man breadwinner paired with a woman homemaker, to a society with women and men both working. When women fulfilled a role solely in the home and community, while men were the only ones in the workplace, there was a societal norm to which almost all Americans adhered. With gender roles blurred, and many women seemingly questioning their choice to stay in the work force full time, the work landscape is in a state of shambles. Both workers and employers have to make concessions in order to be successful. There is almost a sense of resentment toward women who ask for work concessions to be made once they have children. This is largely a response to women who have worked hard to be men's equals, but then cannot work on the same demanding levels once family becomes important. The result is what is referred to by some as women's choice to opt-out of work, while others call it a push-out. This has also pushed almost half of women who are married or share a household with someone to work a different schedule from their spouses or partners, according to the AFL-CIO. Obviously this attempts to make the family life more harmonious, but actually serves to make it an additional challenge to surmount.
Employers can be sensitive to their employees' family needs and obligations by having an open line of communication between the two. If an employer maintains an open-door policy, then an employee will feel more comfortable discussing alternative work options, like telecommuting and flextime. Employers should be open to alternative ideas and explore the evidence how employees benefit from using non-traditional techniques to achieve comparable, if not improved, levels of success. Positive changes have included increased productivity, higher quality of work and higher rates of material retention. Overall, responses to flextime have been better than responses to telecommuting, although both have the potential to be very potent in assisting people looking to balance their work and home lives.
The support of family members, workers or neighbors would make balancing work and home priorities far easier because having an actual life, outside of work and children or a husband or someone who a worker cares for, gives them more of an initiative to have experiences that are not necessarily just work and home, but also a broader community. Every person has the potential to define their life in whatever terms he or she chooses, but in giving oneself more of an opportunity to experience all kinds of things and people, one can truly become happy and know oneself. Additionally, these types of support will likely push the worker in question toward what is truly best for his or her overall livelihood. It is easy to get or feel trapped in a situation, as a caregiver or worker, but alternative perspectives on any situation can help to realize where a balance lies.
• How can employers be sensitive to their employees’ family needs or obligations?
• How might having the support of family members, workers or neighbors make balancing priorities easier?
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Home and Work, Public and Private
In my family I've seen carework through the actions taken by my parents, aunts and uncles in response to my aging grandmothers. My paternal grandmother has early signs of Alzheimers, and my aunt lives with her and cares for her constantly, in addition to working a full-time job. On my maternal side, my grandmother spends alternate parts of the year with each of her three daughters, including my mother. In both cases, the caring individuals put forth their own money, time, love and effort into making my grandmothers as comfortable as possible. I can only imagine that if the numbers were calculated as they were in the documentary The Love Economy, the proportional wages would be similarly substantial.
In relating that private homelife care to the public sector, I cannot recall any of my family members being able to bring their caretaking situation to a boss at work and come to a solution that works for both the employer and employee, as was shown in Juggling Work and Care. In my opinion, feeling obliged to care for a family member likely comes across as an excuse in the workplace to slack off. This is definitely an American mentality, for the formerly mentioned series takes place in the UK and all parties interviewed said that their employers were willing to work with employees who needed more work flexibility.
American society desperately needs to re-evaluate how women, and men, in the workplace are treated when it comes to balancing their private lives. With more women working, and continuing to work after starting families, men and women are sharing more responsibilities in the home, corresponding to the sharing outside of it. What was previously considered "women's work" has been partially transferred to men, but not entirely. Private work, although not monetarily valued, must exist to balance the public work done by men and women. Without maintaining a home life, the work life will absolutely suffer.
If carers, whether for children, ill people, or the elderly, are not supported in the workplace then there is likely no way for them to continue supporting their families fiscally. Carers in America are forced to either continue working, in a then resentful environment, and give up their caring roles, or hire an outsider to take them on, or the carer can give up their job and somehow figure out how to cover expenses.
In relating that private homelife care to the public sector, I cannot recall any of my family members being able to bring their caretaking situation to a boss at work and come to a solution that works for both the employer and employee, as was shown in Juggling Work and Care. In my opinion, feeling obliged to care for a family member likely comes across as an excuse in the workplace to slack off. This is definitely an American mentality, for the formerly mentioned series takes place in the UK and all parties interviewed said that their employers were willing to work with employees who needed more work flexibility.
American society desperately needs to re-evaluate how women, and men, in the workplace are treated when it comes to balancing their private lives. With more women working, and continuing to work after starting families, men and women are sharing more responsibilities in the home, corresponding to the sharing outside of it. What was previously considered "women's work" has been partially transferred to men, but not entirely. Private work, although not monetarily valued, must exist to balance the public work done by men and women. Without maintaining a home life, the work life will absolutely suffer.
If carers, whether for children, ill people, or the elderly, are not supported in the workplace then there is likely no way for them to continue supporting their families fiscally. Carers in America are forced to either continue working, in a then resentful environment, and give up their caring roles, or hire an outsider to take them on, or the carer can give up their job and somehow figure out how to cover expenses.
Major Concepts and Theories on Gender Inequality
"Sex segregation" means the separation of the sexes within the workplace based on specific jobs, and more broadly in occupation. According to Paula England and Lori McCreary's "Gender Inequality in Paid Employment," "This segregation is attended by a sex gap in pay, with most 'male jobs' offering higher earnings than most 'female jobs.'" While socialization absolutely plays a role in how we act and what jobs we desire, statistics from the American Association of University Women reveal that even when men and women are counterparts in the workplace, women make up to 89% of their male co-workers.
Sex segregation at ASU is seen in simply who runs the university: a white male. A white male has always held ultimate power at Arizona State. This also exemplifies hegemony that has been so ingrained at ASU that it seems many fail to notice. This leads into the point made by a CNBC report which notes that women represent only 2.5% of Fortune 500 CEOs. This might be explained away by either sexism, namely that a woman cannot successfully hold a powerful job, or "women's choices" to take time off or work less for more family time.
In my personal socialization, I've always been taught that, regardless of anyone else's opinion, I can do anything I want, whether that means being a CEO, a teacher or an artist beatnik hippie. As previously mentioned, I grew up with a single mother and seeing her major success in the newspaper industry, open her own business and then work in a Fortune 500 company has made me feel ultimate freedom in my choices. I have held ultimate authority jobs, and ones where I've ranked highly. My experiences relate to patriarchy in that my family life growing up was an absolute matriarchy, in a girl power sort of household. When this was translated into outer male-dominated world, I have successfully translated my own ideas of how the world should work into action.
The NPR report “Moms Become Breadwinners As Job Losses Hit Men,” explained that although more men than women have lost their jobs in this recession, women still "make 77 cents to every dollar males make." Additionally women who didn't have jobs are working part-time, while full-time workers have taken on multiple jobs. Men still dominate the normally union-based and higher-paying jobs where health care and retirement plans are factored in, while women are in lower paying jobs without such benefits. I work three jobs, not out of necessity (although extra money is nice, and certainly nothing to complain about), but out of the desire to do more and learn more. I definitely can sympathize with women taking on more work and more jobs because they have to take ultimate responsibility for themselves and their families: if they don't take care of their interests, no on else will. I also know women my age who, despite the increase in women breadwinners, cannot find work, or want to find more work but overall there is little hiring going on. This could be attributed to either the jobs that they are looking to take on, due to socialization, or perhaps a simple shortage in the economy. Either way, the situation, while interesting, is nothing to celebrate.
Sex segregation at ASU is seen in simply who runs the university: a white male. A white male has always held ultimate power at Arizona State. This also exemplifies hegemony that has been so ingrained at ASU that it seems many fail to notice. This leads into the point made by a CNBC report which notes that women represent only 2.5% of Fortune 500 CEOs. This might be explained away by either sexism, namely that a woman cannot successfully hold a powerful job, or "women's choices" to take time off or work less for more family time.
In my personal socialization, I've always been taught that, regardless of anyone else's opinion, I can do anything I want, whether that means being a CEO, a teacher or an artist beatnik hippie. As previously mentioned, I grew up with a single mother and seeing her major success in the newspaper industry, open her own business and then work in a Fortune 500 company has made me feel ultimate freedom in my choices. I have held ultimate authority jobs, and ones where I've ranked highly. My experiences relate to patriarchy in that my family life growing up was an absolute matriarchy, in a girl power sort of household. When this was translated into outer male-dominated world, I have successfully translated my own ideas of how the world should work into action.
The NPR report “Moms Become Breadwinners As Job Losses Hit Men,” explained that although more men than women have lost their jobs in this recession, women still "make 77 cents to every dollar males make." Additionally women who didn't have jobs are working part-time, while full-time workers have taken on multiple jobs. Men still dominate the normally union-based and higher-paying jobs where health care and retirement plans are factored in, while women are in lower paying jobs without such benefits. I work three jobs, not out of necessity (although extra money is nice, and certainly nothing to complain about), but out of the desire to do more and learn more. I definitely can sympathize with women taking on more work and more jobs because they have to take ultimate responsibility for themselves and their families: if they don't take care of their interests, no on else will. I also know women my age who, despite the increase in women breadwinners, cannot find work, or want to find more work but overall there is little hiring going on. This could be attributed to either the jobs that they are looking to take on, due to socialization, or perhaps a simple shortage in the economy. Either way, the situation, while interesting, is nothing to celebrate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)