what is it about having children that causes women to become inconsiderate monsters?

[Pushkin]

This is neither well though out nor even remotely original post. Please be adults and keep it from becoming one!

As I just walked through my local supermarket, I had to walk into the street in order to navigate around a typical person with a shopping trolley, stopped and chatting but still completely blocking the entire aisle without having made any attempt to move the trolley so that the aisle would be navigable by the multitudes of people trying to get by.

It just reminded me of a trend I’ve seen lately, as I live and shop in this same neighborhood - it’s that all shoppers - literally all of them - are inconsiderate, self-serving monsters who seem to put themselves and their trollies first without any consideration for anyone else around them.

Why?

I’m talking about blocking entire aisle with double-stacked trollies, barging through stores and knocking things over and blocking other people with said trollies, allowing their shopping to bother others and destroy merchandise and make messes with no attempt to prevent or control their behavior, and generally plowing through life with a sense of entitlement and complete disregard for anyone or anything around them.

Why?

I have a few ideas;

• It’s advertising? Maybe something about having a trolley means that the shoppers are flooded with “value” hormones that cause irrational and inconsiderate behavior. It’s some sort of primal “put the money first and screw everything and everyone else” thing.

• My experience/sample is biased; I’m in the middle of a city, so I’m dealing with people who are better off than me so I’m bitter and jealous.

Some combination of the two? Is this a generally recognized generalisation?

[Ellen_Cherry]

@Omniscient

This hypothetical certainly comes across to you as frivolous. That’s the sense of entitlement that pisses us off. That your childrearing is inherently more important that the things that make me happy.

A small point: what’s important is not our status as a parent. That is, our importance because, as someone put it, we are so marvelously fertile. It is about doing for our children. It is important to be there for a child’s recital, baseball game, or (more importantly) when he or she is sick or otherwise needs only the parent – because we are meeting their needs. You must remember, too, that for every ball game or recital there are many more events that we cannot attend, as working parents, because we have to work.

For my part, I don’t expect others to pick up my “slack” unless it’s unavoidable. I, throughout my working-parent career, have taken work home to be done long after children are abed, or on weekends, when the childless may play. I consider it my duty to make sure my work is complete, even if it means sacrifice on my part.

Because that’s what it is to be a parent: sacrifice. We no longer put ourselves first. We put the needs (not the wants or capricious desires) of our children first. There’s no entitlement. No “I’m better than you because I’ve got progeny.”

It is simply this: no matter how you argue it, the raising of children is the most important job in the world. It’s more important than baseball games. How parents meet the needs of their children shapes what kind of adults they will become. The co-workers of the world of tomorrow. Those whose parents flexed their time, went without lunch and hunched over the computer writing stories late into the night so that we could drive them to the play or attend their afternoon concert will have children who remember that their parent – even through they worked – cared enough to take off and come.

I have read many, many threads here where people recount their sorrowful childhoods – and I’m filled with compassion and sadness that they suffered so as wee defenseless children. They’ve grown up to become filled with bitter memories of their childhoods. Stop and think a minute. Might it be worth allowing parents some leeway when it comes to meeting the needs of the children during the day, for the good of society as a whole?

[Malthus]

@Translucent Daydream

Yeah, lets all quit our jobs when we experience something that isn’t right happen to ourselves or someone we know because, you know, there are, like, so many jobs out there. To cut one’s nose off to spite their face doesn’t seem to be a solution to the problem.

Sometimes speaking up doesn’t do much either because the employer is afraid of being sued by said parents for discrimination or some other shite (like previous employer was for me.)

I think that we have come from one extreme, where nobody had any rights, to these days where some well intentioned people are getting raked over the coals by people whom are professional system screwer-and-abusers.

Like I said before, there has to be a happy medium in this whole thing.

Binarydrone , you actually got me on that one, duh…

Well, if you aren’t willing to either (a) do something to stand up for yourself, or even (b) speak up for yourself, who exactly do you think is going to?

[Malthus]

@Omniscient

There’s too many specific points that I’d like to reply to for me to quote them all so I’ll just settle for making a couple of retorts to general themes expressed.

If you’re getting taken advantage of it’s the companies fault, you should quit.
This is silly. There are without a doubt many bad workplaces out there, a few detailed here. You should leave those for certain. To imply that these jobs where parents are unable to work late ever (meaning single people have to) and where parents’ frequent “emergencies” get a a excused absense (where my single, non-emergency lifesytle never gets a excused absense) are totally worthless is dumb. Often these jobs, on the whole, are very good jobs. They can pay well, be enjoyable, be gratifying and overall pleasant workplaces. However, that doesn’t man that these inequities should go totally unnoticed and uncommented on. To suggest that we should quit them instead of bitching is an irrational solution.

In addition, these problems cited are systemic ones, ones which pervade our culture of “family values”. I have no real presumption that by leaving my job to avoid this inequity would lead me to another job which was more fair. Those offices are very very rare in my experience. My theory as to the reason for this is simple. Most bosses and executives are parents. They typically are older married folks and they usually have these “emergencies” and kid-related compromises themselves. To not allow subordinates to take excused leave would make them hypocrites.

Companies should have draconian rules stipulating when all employees should come and go.
I don’t necessarily agree with this. I’d prefer it to the prejudiced world I’ve worked in, more simply I feel everyone should be treated equally. A better solution would be that everyone is allowed the same flexible schedule, without need of justifying their leaving with a verifiable “emergency”, in workplaces where it’s practical.

The problem presents when my coworker asks my boss permission to leave early in order to get home in time for their kids soccer game. That’s perfectly fine if that’s how the company chooses to operate. However, it then should not deny me that same courtesy when I ask to leave early to pick up my car from my mechanic, or to get on the highway early before a long weekend. If the frequency of this leinience is equal, the reason should not matter. In this current world employers always make value judgements on the reasons. Parents have numerous politically correct reasons for getting additional time away, single people do not. That should change.

Just treat everyone the same. Strict policies about work hours, or leinient ones. Either way, just stop telling me “no” because you think my reason is less important.

Just complain to the boss/HR about the problem.
Sure, you can do this in extreme cases. Do you really think that it’ll get you anything but negative feedback when you’re complaining about 30 minutes of inequity a week? I’m not pretending that this is a catastrophic problem. It’s annoying. Just becase it’s not something to make a federal case over doesn’t mean it’s not a valid complaint. Were you seriously to critique a fellow worker for leaving to take a chonically sick kid to the doctor you’d definiately be viewed as a “problem” within the office. To say no to a parent asking you to cover for them would make you radioactive in the world of office politics. They exist, to pretend they don’t is a lie.

The extra suggestion of “suing” over this inequity is flat out stupid. Do you seriously think this is a valid solution? No court would hear it.

Like mentioned before, bosses and higher-ups tend to relate to the married parents more than the single younger people by the simple fact that they are typically like them. Because of that, a complaint to them about a parent being a inconsiderate coworker is likely to simply generate more empathy for the parent than for you.

---

There’s probably a lot more points to make, but that’s all I have for now. Don’t deny the problem exists, it does. You may argue about it’s prevalence, but calling it fictional is fucking ignorant. No one here is claiming that it’s a life or death matter. No one’s comparing it to racism or harrassment, but we have a valid complaint, even if you think it’s a minor annoyance.
Here’s a hypothetical to chew on.

Your boss is a single, 40-something male. He loves baseball, goes to happy hour on fridays and refuses to work late on weeknights because of his active dating life. He gives the 25-year old males in your office permission to leave at 3:00 to head to a early baseball game once a month. He doesn’t expect those single females to work late on a wednesday because they have a hot date to get to. The 40-something married folks are the ones he asks to stay late to help out first, because in his mind their lives are boring and they won’t miss that extra couple hours. Sure, they could say no when he asks, but I’m guessing he’ll remember it. The 20-something single males might ask the married folks to cover for them on a friday evening to hit happy hour. Those married folks with kids go to the boss to complain. Do you expect him to reprimand that single guy when he knows damn well that he was coincidentally at the same bar that night?

All of this would suck. It’d piss you off. You’d want to get some equity. But, you love your job and the people you work with are pleasant considerate workers 90% of the time, you’re well paid have a pretty favorable commute. True, you get hosed for maybe 30 extra minutes of work a week so the young folks can party it up. The boss parties himself so it’s not likely things will change.

Do you really expect me to tell you to fucking quit? Do you really expect me to tell you to suck it up because those people are the ones spending money to keep your neighborhood economy strong? Do you think you’d be “frivolously whining” by complaining and calling people on that behavior?

I’m not sure what you were doing in your 20’s, I’m not sure if you got married young or right after college. I don;t know if you honestly can relate, but guess what, this is what it feels like for us. We don’t think you attending little Johnny’s soccer game is any more important or valid an excuse than my going on an early date with a new girlfriend or my hard-to-come-by Cubs tickets.

This hypothetical certainly comes across to you as frivolous. That’s the sense of entitlement that pisses us off. That your childrearing is inherently more important that the things that make me happy.

This is the problem in a nutshell: you are “pissed off” but have worked out a lot of rationalizations as to why doing or saying anything about it will not matter or be positively counterproductive.

I think a little saying from Rabbi Hillel illustrates the matter:

“If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? And if not now, when?”

[Malthus]

Seems to me that this whole debate is an illustration of an attitude, one which I find irritating: a sort of culture of complaint, in which every personal issue, every problem, is something which is other people’s fault and which can in no way be rectified by one’s own actions. It is like we expect society, or a reformation of manners and concience, or something, to come down in Deus ex Machina manner and solve our problems for us.

The fact is that people are going to behave unfairly towards us; people will try to take advantage of us; people will in general (and subject to a lot of exceptions) attempt to do the least work themselves for the most pay and attempt to make you do the most work for the least.

Deal with it of be a doormat, it is up to you.

[catsix]

I think this thread is a perfect illustration of what I’m talking about.

On the one hand, there are posters in this thread who are saying that those of us who are not parents should stand up for ourselves. Sure, bitch about it, but what are you doing about it? If it’s so important to you, the refuse to be put-upon. Stick your foot on the ground and don’t budge.

OK, that’s fine. I reiterate my statement that I’m not doing the work of my 3 coworkers with habitual lateness and leave-early-ness. I’m coming in, I’m doing my job during my working hours, and then I’m leaving. I will not stay an extra half hour so someone else can leave 30 minutes early.

And the response to that has been, from others, that we (the childless and childfree) should give the parents their leeway to come late, to leave early, to leave us their work to do. That it’s worth it, and that we should shoulder the burdens of their jobs because they chose to shoulder the burden of parenthood. Because it’s for the good of society. Please think of the children.

We were asked for suggestions that would make the workplace more fair to everyone. We were told that we should tell our bosses or HR departments of our concerns. When we made those suggestions here, we were met with the exact same responses we got from our HR departments: We’re not being team players because we’re not allowing extra leeway to parents.

Malthus tells me not to be a doormat. Stand up for myself. That’s fine. I’ve said as much to my boss, and I’ve kept my word. I go home at the end of my scheduled work day. I don’t take on other people’s work because they miss an hour of work a day at least twice a week. Not going to happen.

And then I see Ellen Cherry post this:

?It is simply this: no matter how you argue it, the raising of children is the most important job in the world. It’s more important than baseball games. How parents meet the needs of their children shapes what kind of adults they will become. The co-workers of the world of tomorrow. Those whose parents flexed their time, went without lunch and hunched over the computer writing stories late into the night so that we could drive them to the play or attend their afternoon concert will have children who remember that their parent – even through they worked – cared enough to take off and come.

Where it seems that standing up for myself makes me the bad guy. She might as well be channeling my boss.

[Translucent_Daydream]

catsix, I am feeling the same way.

You tell us not to “whine,” complain to the supervisors.

The supervisors acknoledged that it is a problem.

Nothing happens, supervisors feel sorry for parents and apparently expect less from them.

You tell us that it isn’t parents fault, it is the supervisors fault, so quit your horrible mistreatin’ job.

Can’t do that. Been hungry once while I lived in a broken down car, not going through that again.

Then we are told that parents need this slack, they have much more important things to do than we do.

Well if you read some of my previous posts in this thread, I have really important shit to do as well. I would bet that I need to be gone more than Little Timmy’s mommy does.

But I stay and work because if I try to miss for these reasons, I get an unexcused absence.

Not all parents behave in such a way, and my beef is not with them. It is with the large percentage of the ones in my experiece that do. I fail to see how the blame can be completely shifted from the parents that screweth over to the supervisor that lets it happen because, after all, the parents are the one doing the screwing. I don’t blame the IRS for not thinking of all the ways that a millionaire could abuse the system by hiding money from them. I don’t blame Wal-Mart for selling the 12 gauge shotgun shells that killed the convience store owner because they made it SO easy to get.

I am all for Little Timmy getting his mommy to take him wherever he needs to go during the day, but I want some retribution for pulling mommy’s load while she is off doing that stuff.

[Malthus]

@catsix

I think this thread is a perfect illustration of what I’m talking about.

On the one hand, there are posters in this thread who are saying that those of us who are not parents should stand up for ourselves. Sure, bitch about it, but what are you doing about it? If it’s so important to you, the refuse to be put-upon. Stick your foot on the ground and don’t budge.

OK, that’s fine. I reiterate my statement that I’m not doing the work of my 3 coworkers with habitual lateness and leave-early-ness. I’m coming in, I’m doing my job during my working hours, and then I’m leaving. I will not stay an extra half hour so someone else can leave 30 minutes early.

And the response to that has been, from others, that we (the childless and childfree) should give the parents their leeway to come late, to leave early, to leave us their work to do. That it’s worth it, and that we should shoulder the burdens of their jobs because they chose to shoulder the burden of parenthood. Because it’s for the good of society. Please think of the children.

We were asked for suggestions that would make the workplace more fair to everyone. We were told that we should tell our bosses or HR departments of our concerns. When we made those suggestions here, we were met with the exact same responses we got from our HR departments: We’re not being team players because we’re not allowing extra leeway to parents.

Malthus tells me not to be a doormat. Stand up for myself. That’s fine. I’ve said as much to my boss, and I’ve kept my word. I go home at the end of my scheduled work day. I don’t take on other people’s work because they miss an hour of work a day at least twice a week. Not going to happen.

And then I see Ellen Cherry post this:

Where it seems that standing up for myself makes me the bad guy. She might as well be channeling my boss.

Well, it seems to me that you want to stand up for yourself and have everyone think that you are justified in doing so.

It should not come as a surprise that this ain’t gonna happen. Part of ‘standing up for yourself’ is a willingness to risk being seen as a jerk, or other unpleasant consequences. It is not a risk-free exercise.

After all, I assume from what you say that the people taking advantage of you feel totally entitled to do so - they are not going to stop doing it, if you politely allow them to. Why should they? They are getting something (your labour) for essentially no risk or cost whatsoever.

The difficulty is that they are right either way you slice it. Either this world of business is one of cut-throat competition, in which we must all look out for our own interests (as I believe), in which case they are justified in taking advantage of you because they can, or this world of business is governed by some sort of rules of social fairness or equity (I am not particularly of this opinion), in which case they are arguably right in prioritizing child-care over your non-child-related pursuits - as society (represented by your HR people) seem to have so decreed.

This is why labelling the situation as “unfair!” isn’t going to work. It is certainly unfair to you, but people who are concerned about “fairness” are not necessarily going to be all that fussed - because such people are, in general, more likely to prioritize childcare highly (as society/your HR people seem to do). The correct response, IMHO, is to take the opposite position - that in this world of work, you are not going to have your interests put behind those of someone else, you will do something about it, and the hell with what people think is fair or right.

[Syntropy]

Hm. Did we get moved to the Pit overnight while I wasn’t looking?

@TranslucentDaydream

You tell us not to “whine,” complain to the supervisors.

The supervisors acknoledged that it is a problem.

Nothing happens, supervisors feel sorry for parents and apparently expect less from them.

Well, then, I’d say your supervisor is a bit of a wimp for caving and letting it happen.

You tell us that it isn’t parents fault, it is the supervisors fault, so quit your horrible mistreatin’ job.

Can’t do that. Been hungry once while I lived in a broken down car, not going through that again.

No, I’m telling you go over your supervisor’s head to HR. They’re supposed to enforce those policies. It’s what they’re PAID to do. They certainly aren’t there for the worker; they’re there for the company.

Then we are told that parents need this slack, they have much more important things to do than we do.

Well if you read some of my previous posts in this thread, I have really important shit to do as well. I would bet that I need to be gone more than Little Timmy’s mommy does.

But I stay and work because if I try to miss for these reasons, I get an unexcused absence.

Good lord. Just for future reference, each sentence doesn’t require its very own paragraph. Nobody is saying you don’t have important things to do, or that your absences shouldn’t be excused. Just that you’re laying blame where it doesn’t belong. I understand this aspect of your job sucks, but that’s not the fault of the people taking advantage of the system. That’s the fault of the idiot supervisors allowing it to continue. And, of course, blaming is easier if you have a handy scapegoat. Which the parents are, because they are not in a position to change the policy, now are they?
Look. It’s like this. No matter what you go, no matter who you work for, no matter how much you love what it is you do, there will always, always, ALWAYS be parts of your job which suck. Which Malthus pointed out earlier. This is the way life is. Nobody ever promised it was going to be FUN. At least, nobody ever promised it to me.

Not all parents behave in such a way, and my beef is not with them. It is with the large percentage of the ones in my experiece that do. I fail to see how the blame can be completely shifted from the parents that screweth over to the supervisor that lets it happen because, after all, the parents are the one doing the screwing.

And the supervisors are letting them. Look, if you could take two hour lunches and still get paid for only taking one hour, can you tell me with complete honesty that you would NEVER under ANY circumstances take advantage of that? And if others try to do the same and aren’t able to, is it YOUR fault they were told “no” when you weren’t? Or the supervisor who applied the policy unevenly?

I don’t blame the IRS for not thinking of all the ways that a millionaire could abuse the system by hiding money from them. I don’t blame Wal-Mart for selling the 12 gauge shotgun shells that killed the convience store owner because they made it SO easy to get.

Well, why the hell not? Why not make the correct people responsible for the actions? Especially when it comes to money. Holy crap, people are going to take every cent they can get their hands on. How do you think they got to be millionaires? Luck? If the IRS doesn’t enforce their policies, then they deserve to get shafted. If WalMart doesn’t run the requisite checks they should for selling guns and ammo, they deserve to get blamed in a wrongful death suit.

I am all for Little Timmy getting his mommy to take him wherever he needs to go during the day, but I want some retribution for pulling mommy’s load while she is off doing that stuff.

And there, in a nutshell, you have it. You don’t want fairly applied policy. You want “retribution.” Revenge. Because she’s “off doing that stuff” (which I can only assume you think is wayyy crazy fun and not, in fact, a commitment) and you aren’t allowed to.

[catsix]

Malthus said:
Well, it seems to me that you want to stand up for yourself and have everyone think that you are justified in doing so.

So I am not at all justified in expecting that I not be treated like a doormat because someone else has a problem being able to manage their commitments?

After all, I assume from what you say that the people taking advantage of you feel totally entitled to do so - they are not going to stop doing it, if you politely allow them to. Why should they? They are getting something (your labour) for essentially no risk or cost whatsoever.

And from what you said above, I am in no way at all justified in insisting that they not and then following through with my not being a doormat.

The correct response, IMHO, is to take the opposite position - that in this world of work, you are not going to have your interests put behind those of someone else, you will do something about it, and the hell with what people think is fair or right.

Except that you have allowed for absolutely no situation in which I can put my foot down and put my interests first. Either I don’t say anything about it, and I get walked on, or I do say something about it, and I get walked on. Apparently from your previous statement, I’m in no way justified at all in taking care of myself and not being a doormat, either.

Why do you think that it’s justified and right for them to put their interests ahead of mine, but when I stand firm about mine, I’m not justified? Why is that?

Maureen said:
Which the parents are, because they are not in a position to change the policy, now are they?

Those parents who are being blamed are being blamed because they abuse every inch of leeway that is allowed for emergencies and then some. The ones who don’t abuse it, obviously, are not being blamed.

Why not make the correct people responsible for the actions?

That would be the one who did the action: showing up 30 minutes late and leaving 30 minutes early two or three times a week.

You want “retribution.”

To be handed down by management for flagrant and continuous rule breaking. I’d like to see the policy the rest of us are supposed to follow - 3 late shows and you’re fired - be enforced for everyone, and I don’t care if you think that makes me a bitch or that it isn’t justified.

[Syntropy]

No, I think it makes you guilty of only seeing the tiny little snippet of my post which pisses you off, instead of the entirety, including the part that agrees with you that the policy should be enforced unilaterally. But if the boss isn’t doing anything to change it, and the others aren’t doing anything to change it, and you WANT it changed, then it’s in your court to get it changed. Go. To. H. R. Or continue whining about the unfairness of it all, and turn yourself into the victim you so rigidly refuse to be in other areas of your life.

[Malthus]

@catsix

So I am not at all justified in expecting that I not be treated like a doormat because someone else has a problem being able to manage their commitments?

And from what you said above, I am in no way at all justified in insisting that they not and then following through with my not being a doormat.

Except that you have allowed for absolutely no situation in which I can put my foot down and put my interests first. Either I don’t say anything about it, and I get walked on, or I do say something about it, and I get walked on. Apparently from your previous statement, I’m in no way justified at all in taking care of myself and not being a doormat, either.

Why do you think that it’s justified and right for them to put their interests ahead of mine, but when I stand firm about mine, I’m not justified? Why is that?

I don’t think anything of the sort.

Whether I happen to think you are “justified” or not is not even in issue. Indeed, what I think doesn’t matter in the slightest, as I am in no position to change your situation.

I am simply saying that you are making a sort of argument to the people that matter (namely those at your work) that is bound to lose (“I’m being treated unfairly!”) rather than taking action which is more likely to actually get results.

I glean this from what you are telling me - namely, that those who have the power to affect change are not sympathetic. This does not suprise me in the slightest, as those who are swayed by “fairness” type arguments are far more likely to sympathize with working parents. Remember, this isn’t something I made up, but something you have told me.

It may not be “fair” to you, but that unfortunately is life. The best way to deal with this is to fight for your rights, knowing that there are risks involved and that others may think that you are being unfair or selfish.

Sometimes, you can’t get what you want and be liked. You have to decide which is more important.

[Translucent_Daydream]

@Maureen

No, I think it makes you guilty of only seeing the tiny little snippet of my post which pisses you off, instead of the entirety, including the part that agrees with you that the policy should be enforced unilaterally. But if the boss isn’t doing anything to change it, and the others aren’t doing anything to change it, and you WANT it changed, then it’s in your court to get it changed. Go. To. H. R. Or continue whining about the unfairness of it all, and turn yourself into the victim you so rigidly refuse to be in other areas of your life.

You really seem hell-bent on everyone going to Human Resources… but not everyone has a human resources deparment. Unfortunate and tragic as it is.

Of the 4 professional jobs that I have had, only T-Mobile Wireless had a human resources department, and come to think of it, this problem wasn’t rampant at good old T-Mobile. I really miss being a tech…

[catsix]

Maureen said:
I am simply saying that you are making a sort of argument to the people that matter (namely those at your work) that is bound to lose (“I’m being treated unfairly!”) rather than taking action which is more likely to actually get results.

You have obviously not been paying attention.

There is no HR here. My supervisor is the president of the company. There’s no board of directors, because it’s a privately held company. I have actually put my foot down and I’ve lost out on raises and bonuses because of it. I face the repercussions of not kissing parent-ass on a daily basis.

Don’t lecture me about whining. I took action, and I live with what that means. If I want to share My Humble Opinion about these things in the designated form for that, who are you to tell me not to whine?

[Syntropy]

No, I’m telling you to blame the appropriate people. You’re making the parents the scapegoats because your boss treated you unfairly.
There’s no HR? Take his ass to court. Seriously. Sue. Force him to change his policy. Just don’t sit there insistent that it’s your coworkers to blame for your boss being an ass. It’s HIS fault he’s an ass. Damn, after what you just posted, I’d think that’d be evident.

[Syntropy]

@catsix

@Maureen

I am simply saying that you are making a sort of argument to the people that matter (namely those at your work) that is bound to lose (“I’m being treated unfairly!”) rather than taking action which is more likely to actually get results.

You have obviously not been paying attention.

Also? I don’t think I ever said that. After going through my posts, I’m still not finding it. Which post was that, exactly?

[Syntropy]

@Translucent Daydream

You really seem hell-bent on everyone going to Human Resources… but not everyone has a human resources deparment. Unfortunate and tragic as it is.

Of the 4 professional jobs that I have had, only T-Mobile Wireless had a human resources department, and come to think of it, this problem wasn’t rampant at good old T-Mobile. I really miss being a tech…

I’m a firm believer in going through channels to fix a problem. Probably the military training. You go to the boss and report the problem. Problem gets better or problem stays the same or gets worse. Problem gets better: No further action required. Problem remains the same or gets worse? Go back to boss, request formal meeting. Document. Repeat step two. If problem continues or gets worse, then boss is part of problem. Go to HR, report problem. And so forth. If the job is important enough to you, and the problem is big enough, these are steps that are worth going through.

[Balduran]

@Malthus

I glean this from what you are telling me - namely, that those who have the power to affect change are not sympathetic. This does not suprise me in the slightest, as those who are swayed by “fairness” type arguments are far more likely to sympathize with working parents. Remember, this isn’t something I made up, but something you have told me.

This would not suprise me as usually the bosses are older and so have quite likely also been through the “working parent with young children” stage of life.

[Binarydrone]

@Maureen

No, I’m telling you to blame the appropriate people. You’re making the parents the scapegoats because your boss treated you unfairly.
There’s no HR? Take his ass to court. Seriously. Sue. Force him to change his policy. Just don’t sit there insistent that it’s your coworkers to blame for your boss being an ass. It’s HIS fault he’s an ass. Damn, after what you just posted, I’d think that’d be evident.

You know, I really am trying but I am just not getting you. How is it that 100% of the blame goes to the boss and none to the people that are selfishly taking advantage of others? It seems to me that this should at least be a 50/50 proposition.

Also, can you not see that this position that you are advocating is nothing more than professional suicide.

[Malthus]

@catsix

You have obviously not been paying attention.

There is no HR here. My supervisor is the president of the company. There’s no board of directors, because it’s a privately held company. I have actually put my foot down and I’ve lost out on raises and bonuses because of it. I face the repercussions of not kissing parent-ass on a daily basis.

Don’t lecture me about whining. I took action, and I live with what that means. If I want to share My Humble Opinion about these things in the designated form for that, who are you to tell me not to whine?

I’m giving you advise. Whether you choose to accept it or not is, of course, up to you.

After all, I’m not the one being abused - you are; if you choose to accept that abuse, that’s your issue.

It just seems odd that you are so pissed at your parental co-workers rather than your boss. If I had lost raises and bonuses unfairly, I’d be outta there. They obviously don’t appreciate your hard work, so find someone who does.