You're the ones who CHOSE to have children

The BBQ Pit
41

If that’s what it appears that I’m saying, then so be it. Looks like she’s getting the shit end of the stick at work, so why not sling some back?

What I’m trying to say is that it does not appear that she has taken any initiative whatsoever to stand up for what she feels is fair. She would rather get taken advantage of at work and whine about it in a message board than take a stand in defense of fairness to herself and go to management with valid concerns.

If the situation is truly as bad as she makes it out to be, then perhaps finding another job is an option.

42

Where in the heck are the dad’s in the this picture? Are they covering for Dr.'s appointments and losing work time for a recital.
You need to go to your bosses.

If that doesn’t help, you can always take any work that is left piled on your desk courtesy of the guilty mom, and pile it back on hers. ( I’ve done this) and tell her, nicely ( if you can) since you don’t get overtime and you never can have her do a favor for you of working late at a future date, that she needs to figure out how to budget her time better.

YMMV, but it solved my problems.

43

Manda JO, you make an awful lot of sense – I’ll give the calm, reasoned approach a try in a week or two, when I’ve amassed enough data.

But…in the meantime, the job hunt starts tomorrow, because I really don’t hold out much hope. Human nature being what it is, no one likes to give up anything good that they’ve gotten used to having, even if it’s pointed out that they really aren’t entitled to it.

Casey1505, in my own defense, it was sort of like that old wife’s take about gradually boiling a frog – if you raise the temperature slowly, the frog accustoms to it instead of leaping out at once. Back when there were 8 women in the department, there were only three with children, two married w/o children, and three single. Having the mothers slip off to tend to crises wasn’t as big a deal: it didn’t happen as often AND there were many more childless workers to cover as needed.

All along the women with children haven’t been expected to put in extra hours. It’s been done that way long enough it seemed ‘right’, you know? Even to the non-mothers. That’s just the way things were. Because, honestly, I do understand that parenthood makes enormous demands on your time and energy. When it was a matter of having to put in a few hours, once or twice a month…well, no problem. Fine.

But, step by step, things changed. Personnel changes, additional births (and three children have three times as many activities/crises as one), layoffs…now it’s 4 mothers and 1 non and the water is bubbling up around me. :frowning:

So. As I said, I will speak with my boss and see if the situation can be fixed, but my optimism is easily contained.

44

Like my wife, the lovely CrazyCatLady above, I never plan to have any kids. Up until now, particularly in my chosen profession, parents have been the exception among my colleagues. Now that I’m on the backside of twenty and gainfully employed, it’s more of a concern. That’s why I purposefully steered away from residency programs that stumbled over themselves to proclaim their “family-friendliness”, and I took note of the happiness levels of the parents vs. non-parents.

Truth be told, though, this isn’t tolerated very much in the world of medical residency, and probably not in the private world, either. We have a set amount of work to do, and just about every man-hour accounted for (with the occasional intern slinking away while the unit’s quiet to post on a message board). We cut each other some slack when we can–just last week someone spotted me for a couple of hours so I could go see Tori Amos–but we know better than to take more than we give.

I know of one resident in my med school’s OB department whose daughter had a fairly serious illness that spent a lot of time taking her around to various doctors to treat. The other residents (four of them) finally banded together and told the program director that they felt bad for her, but they just couldn’t keep taking up all her slack. The program offered her two choices–start pulling your weight, or take a year off. She was indignant for a while–she was kind of a bitch anyway–but she eventually relented and got some help with her daughter at home.

Not many people get into medicine without understanding that you’re going to have to miss a lot of those ball games, and you won’t be there every Christmas morning. It’s the way it is. It may become an unfortunate side effect of the trend toward splitting up hours among doctors and sharing responsibilities–those of us with “less noble” ways to spend our free time may get the shaft. I’ll be on the lookout, though.

Dr. J

45

Allow me to clarify my position, Manda JO. I think your suggestion is the smartest, most tactically advantageous one on this thread (and I’m glad to see SBS is planning to try it). But human nature being what it is, and the average person being as self-centred and selfish as s/he is, I just don’t see much hope for success from my cynical perspective.

46

I have to take exception to this language. All the evidence indicates that the OP was writtne to garner additional info and opinions before acting, something I do myself sometimes when I am dealing with a tough problem. This is constructive activity, not “whining.”

I generally find the use of the term “whining” to be a crappy excuse for debate or discussion as well. The person of discussion boards is discussion, and a considerable portion of that discussion will be about stuff people are unhappy about, almost all of which can be, and often will be interpreted as “whining” by someone. Hence, saying someone is ‘whining’ is a very nearly meaningless comment.

47

IMO, where’s the ambiguity?

No employer worth spit would be caught dead giving out free passes based on the private lives of employees. Trading off time? Sure, go for it. Figure it out among yourselves. Cutting some slack in emergencies, with time to be made up later? Rock on, as work load and fairness permit.

Work is a commitment, and work sure as hell doesn’t just conveniently go away because individual needs draw people aside. Pisser, but true. Can’t pull the full load? Then don’t don’t sign on. Flexibility works in all directions and meets work needs without crying favorites.

The alternative is Oprah territory: sick child, aging parent, SO in crisis, late taxes, chance at true love, in-law arrested, beloved pet dies, whatever. Employees are people, all of ‘em, with people stuff constantly goin’ on. Everybody has a private lif outside of work. Granting lighter work loads and preferential leave time based on personal circumstances is just plain wrong, IMO, not to mention crashingly stupid.

And IME those–of any category–who treat cow-orkers with respect tend to get it back.

Veb

48

Actually, in your post Veb. Maybe because the weekend is drawing to a close, maybe because the damn noise of the Grand Prix has been assaulting me all day, maybe because I’m just dense sometimes, but for whatever reason I couldn’t quite get your point in your post.

Can you enlighten me here?

:slight_smile:

49

Maybe I’m a bit thick but I don’t understand how those parents can possibly have that many emergencies. Performances you’d know about ahead of time and sporting events likewise.

I’m a SAHM because there isn’t an employer on the planet who would tolerate the amount of time off I need with my pair of kids. It sucks but I can’t work outside the home and I can’t even count on being able to work freelance as I know at any time things could turn to custard and I will be shuffling stuff at speed to make things work.

Eh I’m not sure of the point of my post. I’d be pissed off to at being asked to cover so much so often. One day I will get out of the saltmines which are my daily lot and get to play with the big kids again and no quarter will be given I tellya!

50

I agree with you to an extent. I’ve used the boards to gain advice before doing anything, as well. It is a useful tool.

However, portraying the work atmosphere as one in which mothers get all the time off and she gets none is likely a gross exaggeration, and lines like “…MY time has no value…” and “…nothing I have planned can be at all important…” are exaggerations as well as childish.

It is entirely possible to vent about the situation at work without making broad generalizations such as these. It is possible to vent about your job (or spouse, or childres, or neighbor, etc.) without coming across as being whiney:

“Here’s the situation at ABC Company. It seems that parents get to leave early while I (not a parent) have to stay and cover in most every instance. Parents seem to get prefrential treatment as far as scheduling time off for holidays. I have addressed these concerns with management, but they don’t seem to be taking my concerns seriously. Are there other options that I could take?”

Making sarcastic coments such as "Mommas HAVE to be with their children all day on Christmas and Thanksgiving and so forth, you know. It’s the law I guess. " are not valid argument points, and undermine the OP.

51

IANAL, but some of this is codified into law.

There is the Family Medical Leave act - you can take 12 weeks unpaid to care for a sick child.

In Minnesota, I believe, a parent is allowed to use their own sick time to care for a sick child. In a company like mine - where salaried employees don’t have formal sick time and salaried employees are permitted to take time for doctors and dentist appointments as part of that informal sick time - this means that I can just leave in the middle of the day for my kids doctors appointments (I try to schedule them late in the day or first thing in the morning).

(Now, sick time doesn’t cover Little League games - the parents I work with - male and female - who need to do this have been able to adjust their schedules to fit - one of my coworkers works 5am -2pm so he is home about the same time his kids get home from school).

I take the kids to almost all their appointments - my husband takes the very seldom. In our family, this is due to the difference in our jobs. I have a job that I can do in 35 hours a week. I can do some of it from home. I seldom have days full of meetings. My husband has a job that he doesn’t get done in 50 hours a week. (He was at work yesterday- Saturday - and just went in again this morning). He is almost always completely booked from 9am to 5pm with meetings. He also makes about 30% more money than I do. I don’t know what SBSs coworkers situtation is - it could be like mine, or it could be the simply sexist assumption that mom does these things, even if Dad is sitting on the couch collecting unemployment checks.

There is the matter of priority for the parents as well. Once again, I don’t know about SBS’s coworkers, but my boss is perfectly aware that I want and need flexibility in my job due to my kids and has been happy to give it to me. If I don’t get the flexibility I need, I have the luxury of being able to live quite comfortably off hubby’s paycheck and become a SAHM. If the flexibility I require is too much of a burden, he can let me know and I can make the decision on whether I’ll leave or stay with new rules.

All my coworkers have kids as well, and all take advantage of this on occation (as your kids get older - less and less - and more if the kids are little and both parents work). A single person coming into the team might feel that they are being taken advantage of - but we’ve been working this way for the three years I’ve been there just fine.

52

Here’s one point to be made: the parents aren’t taking time for THEMSELVES. They’re taking it for their KIDS. If a kid throws up at school, WHAM, that kid needs to go home. He can’t just suck it up and go back to “work” and hope he feels better, like a grown-up at a job can. In my high school, if you threw up you had to go home, period, paragraph, end of story. My dad was a consultant, so he pretty much made his own hours, but he still had to leave a client in the lurch to come pick me up - from an hour away - on at least two occasions.

He didn’t leave because he had something better to do. He didn’t leave because he wanted to go to the pool. He didn’t leave because he wanted to take advantage of his client’s “family-friendly” heart. He left because he HAD to. Then he spent the evening making phone calls and working on the computer and frantically trying to minimize the fallout.

My husband isn’t allowed to take his vacation around Christmas this year, he has already been informed. He’s disappointed, but he’ll be all right. I’m disappointed, but I’ll be able to deal. I get to field the questions. “Why isn’t Daddy home? Why does Daddy have to work while we’re on vacation?” Last year during Christmas vacation when he had to go in for a day, one of my kids was incredibly sad because there was nothing he could do to “make Daddy home sooner.”

Most parents aren’t selfishly taking time off to make their job easier or to make your job harder. They’re taking it to be decent parents to their kids. You’ve got people screaming on one side, “What’s wrong with kids these days???” and on the other, “Parents get too much time off because of their kids!!!” You can’t solve the first problem while bitching about the second, sorry.

I think one of the “problem(s) with kids these days” is that the 80s were a time of workworkwork and FUCK the family…and those are today’s wild, unruly, disrespectful teens and young adults who think all adults are untrustworthy and unreliable. Hrm. Wonder how THAT happened.

53

Sounds like your employer is unfair, but to what extent has this been brought to their attention? I mean, the thing about the people with kids getting holidays off when you don’t; that’s patently ridiculous.

About the unscheduled overtime, though; my thought would be to discuss with your employer a variety of ways to distribute work more fairly. If the child-related obligations that will have your co-workers out of the office are predictable, then what’s to stop them from coming earlier or working through lunch to make sure they will have the time to pull their weight? Is the work you do something that can be done from home to any extent?

Obviously, a kid vomiting at school is an emergency; a softball practice is not. If you know your kid has softball practice, I respect your desire to attend, but then you should come in earlier that day or stay later the next day so that the same person isn’t screwed all the time.

BTW, do the co-workers with kids all leave at 5:00 on the dot every day? Or do some of them manage to juggle obligations some of the time so that they’re helping with the overflow at least some of the time? Sounds like you guys need a better coverage plan. Providing they aren’t all single mothers of preschoolers, why can’t the daddies cover some of the childcare slack?

54

Hama, you usually seem pretty sensible, but I think you’re getting a little (well, a lot, really) melodramatic on this one.

Your dad tried to cause as little disruption as possible, and he wouldn’t be the sort of parent we’re bitching about. He would count as one of the good cow-orkers.

As for your Christmas example, there’s a huge streak of me that wants to say, “Well, * waaaaahhh*.” Lots of companies don’t allow vacations at the holidays. Hell, lots of people don’t even get the holidays themselves off. This Christmas I’m already scheduled for a 9-hour shift, as are most of the other emergency/icu techs. Last Christmas Dr.J was at the hospital from 7am-10:30pm. When I was a kid, we were tickled that Dad got Christmas Eve and Christmas off, much less having our whole break off.

Oh, and somehow my parents (and those of my husband and friends) managed to make it through the workworkwork and screw the family 80’s as damn fine parents, even while working 60 hours a week or more. Personally, I think what’s wrong with kids today (and I mean kids, not young adults) is that a shocking number of parents kowtow to them rather than parenting them.

55

I might venture to guess that a lot of them spoil the kids because they’re guilty about not being there to parent them.

Not really, considering what I’ve been given to work with.

I’d imagine that when you go into a medical field, you take into account that you’re not going to have much free time, or malleable free time.

To which MissBungle might reply, “And SOME PEOPLE are battling CANCER!!” It’s all relative.

And when I was a kid, my Dad was in education so he had the whole vacation off…but I couldn’t have cared less if he hadn’t. Again: it’s all relative.

I’m pleased that you and your husband and all of your friends are so well-adjusted, CrazyCatLady. I and most of my friends are not. shrug I guess differing points of view come from different circumstances. WHO’D A’ THUNK IT???

56

I have to question this. You seem to be saying that if the reason people aren’t doing their jobs is because of their children, that somehow makes it okay. You don’t really want to go there, do you?

57

Without a doubt, there will always be people who take advantage of others and of a situation if they can. I do not think leaving work early to watch softball practice is reasonable. I do think leaving work to pick up your vomitting child is.

As an educator, I have the advantage of having most of the same holidays as my children. My husband works at a local university, so he, too, has those same holidays. In the event that I have had to leave for a sick child, dentist, doctor appointment, parent-teacher conference or once a year play/presentation, I am required to take my sick or personal time and arrange for a substitute to cover my classroom. I find it difficult to fathom that similar guidelines are not enforced in any work place. If you have to leave at lunch? Hey, that’s half a sick day. As far as leaving ‘early’, well, I can honestly say I don’t ever have that option. There is no such thing as leaving a few minutes early if you’re a teacher, but my husband does on occasion. He leaves early on Tuesdays and Wednesdays for his Master’s classes, he also can take off early to pick up a kid or transfer them to their play practice, etc. On the days when he knows he’ll be cutting out early, he skips lunch and works straight through. He also spends lots of weekends and nights at work supervising one event or another.

Most parents are like this, and I think it would be unfair to judge the world of ‘breeders’ on a few opportunistic folks who seem to be working the system. Instead of raging at people with children, it seems to me that you should discuss this issue with the management. People will do whatever they can as long as they can get away with it. It’s almost a law of nature, and it applies to everyone, not just parents.

58

I don’t understand your point that, “no person alive gains FULL benefit form every tax-dollar they pay. It mostly evens out though”.

But obviously you didn’t get mine either.

Elementary school has been extended from K-6 to PK-6. Instead of 7 years, it is now 8. Except that the first year (pre-K) is VOLUNTARY. Meaning that the voters DIDN’T decide to make public education one year longer. They voted to use the entire DOE infrastructure to administer a VOLUNTARY day care.

This has nothing to do with education. If it did, the year of pre-K “schooling” would have been mandatory.

The cost of education in this country is about $6,000/student/year. That means that this state-run day-care is going to cost an additional $6,000 for every student that is enrolled. The school year contains only 180 student-days, but the calendar year contains about 250 week-days. This day-care will only babysit these kids about 70% of the time.

So Mommy “you have to help pay for the children I decided to bear” now receives “free” child-care in the form of everybody else paying twice the market rate.

:mad:

59

Where dd that come from? Besides left field?

They didn’t extend school to pre-K in order to hand parents another freebie. It’s based on the belief that kids do better with a head start. It’s for the children. Not the parents. It’s still voluntary in the U.S., yes. Parents can choose other options or keep their kids are home.

As for your “mommy” comment, hasn’t that sort of sniping comment been well-addressed throughout this thread? Surprise, Daddy is part of the picture too. And newsflash, parents don’t have kids to get handouts. And public funds don’t go towards childcare and schooling because parents want taxpayers to help pay for their children. You say you understand that, and then you throw this comment in again.

Since this end of the discussion is going nowhere, let’s discuss remedies. What do you folk think the right way to do this is?

60

What bit didn’t you understand? Let’s say I pay $100 tax. Some of that money goes to the health system (from which I benefit), some goes to infrastructure (from which I benefit) some goes to paying for overseas jaunts by pollies (from which I’m supposed to benefit :D) and some goes to subsidising middle-high income earners to enable them to claim extra tax-deductability when they buy an investment property. I can’t really understand how I am meant to benefit from this but, maybe they don’t utilise the health system as much as I do. THIS is how it all evens out.

You SouthernStyle might be able to gain benefits from the tax system that others might point the finger at and say, “Hey, not fair”. Mostly though, apart from some blatant inconsistencies like some of the very wealthy minimising their tax burden to virtually zilch, and the very poor shouldering a disproportionate responsibility, the tax system at least tries to allocate funds equitably. And I have no gripe whatever with investing in our childrens education. I just don’t understand why YOU’RE so disgruntled.