bias in the work force against those with no kids

[carpedeum]

Sorry this is a particulary un PC rant but here it goes. We dont have kids and I work in IT - we have a release due out soon and all are working flat out to get things done on time - yesterday I put in a 13.5 hour day - today will probably be the same...
The parents of children - gone after the 8 hours - leaving the rest of us to pick up the flack...

This is just an observation of someone who has been there, bought the t-shirt etc.

I worked for 30 years up until recently in IT for the best multi-nationals. The fact I had children, was the reason I really suffered.

Firstly, because of the demands of IT, my wife (better career, but, less earning potential) was forced to jobshare, resulting in a signifficant loss of monthly income. Admittedly, in the long run and in hindsight ,our children benefitted from her being at home and being able to take part in extra-curricular activities after school e.g. swimming lessons, sport, girl guides & scouts, afternoons at the beach in the summer etc. We also didn't move from our first house to the bigger second house and take out too big a mortgage.

Secondly, I missed out on substantial parts of my children's early childhood e.g. home too late for meals, home too late to say goodnight at bedtime, not helping out with homework, sometimes working at weekends for application rollouts or infrastructure installation, missing school parent-teacher meetings and sports days, basically not being there for them etc.

I worked for an excellent company. I was not on overtime, but, was on a good general package which forced the no-brainer when choosing between work and home life. The big difference I noticed in recent years was that younger people walked out at 5.00pm! They had no interest in overtime if they were offered it. However, they were not on as good terms and conditions as me either. Some were also on contract. Whatever their reason for leaving early, they are right! Employers in recent years have used longer serving staff to burn the midnight oil while paying newer staff less.

Earlier on this year, the sudden availability of a redundancy package dovetailed with the mid-life realisation that I had missed out on a lot of family life. I bailed out! I have enjoyed spending a lot of time with my youngest child (9 years of age). I am still deciding on what to do next!

My advice... buy a smaller house, live nearer the workplace to minimise commuting, leave work early to enjoy a life that passes quickly regardless of whether or not you want children, plan to have your children while you are young and either of you take turns at jobsharing or downshifting (a concept I laughed at 20 years ago!) at different stages. Too many people are putting the big house, SUV/second car, two holidays a year and other transient materialistic rewards first. Identifying what you really need as opposed to what you want is more important. You can work the long hours for the materialistic things when the kids are reared!

The rewards in an IT career are not in the right proportion to the hours worked or the responsibility. My advice to my kids entering corporate life... become an accountant, HR manager or marketing executive!

 

[Trafford]

I bet they're ok collecting the same wage though!

They are probably aware that their bonus will be down compared to their colleagues, and that promotions may be slower coming to them, but are prepared to accept that. Ironcially as they are the ones with the dependants they could probably do with that extra cash more, but that's life!

The way our contracts in work are phrased, is says that while overtime is not paid, extra hours of work do not go unnoticed and will be considered at bonus time, or words similar to that.
Promotions will be warrented based on work done, regardless of what time of day you do it. One manager I had once said that as far as he was concerned, people working late was a sign that they couldn't cope with their workload! I know this is idealistic, especially at deadline time, but it was refreshing to see a manager who wasn't automatically impressed by people, just because they chose to stay late in the evenings.

 

[buzybee]

I would think it unfair that you must stay late at work. You should just start walking out on time.

I know parents have more pressure than you re: children etc, but you may never get the chance to have children if you ruin your health by the stress of working long hours. I also think some parents of young children can be very selfish regarding everything else except their families. They are making the right choices and will get the payback when they are older re: family relationships etc. However, they still want to earn good money and want the people with no children i.e. 'you' to carry them in terms of work. In years to come, they will have earned good money and will have families around them, but the single people who keep 'carrying them' may very well have no children and no relationship.

I have always wanted a family when I was younger. However, I kept getting stuck in companies where I had to either work long hours to keep my job, or else leave my job completely. Because of this, and getting no sick pay, I felt that if I got pregnant & was sick, I could lose my job.

In fact I was let go from my last job because I only worked 45 hours a week and couldn't get the work done fast enough. It may not necessarily be a bad thing if you start leaving work on time and if you are let go from your job. At least then, you can search for another job, try to build on your experience, and you may get into a better company, where lots of hours are not expected, or at least where you are rewarded for all these hours.

 

[triplex]

Pinkybear,

so glad you posted this - i work in an office of 5 people where 3 of them are on 3 days a week because they 'have kids'- as the only person in the office without kids, i am ALWAYS at the back of the queue when it comes to annual leave, days off etc.. AND they always take 13 weeks in the summer when i've been told i can't take holidays then...

discrimination i calls it!

 

[truthseeker]

Pinkybear,

so glad you posted this - i work in an office of 5 people where 3 of them are on 3 days a week because they 'have kids'- as the only person in the office without kids, i am ALWAYS at the back of the queue when it comes to annual leave, days off etc.. AND they always take 13 weeks in the summer when i've been told i can't take holidays then...

discrimination i calls it!

Triplex - I assume the people on a 3 day week are on a different contract and different terms to you? If that is the case then they probably have less days annual leave available also.
There is no logical reason why you should be at the back of the queue?

How do anyone get to take 13 weeks off every summer? Annual leave is normally approximately 20 or 25 days a year - on a full time contract.

 

[casiopea]

Pinkybear,

so glad you posted this - i work in an office of 5 people where 3 of them are on 3 days a week because they 'have kids'- as the only person in the office without kids, i am ALWAYS at the back of the queue when it comes to annual leave, days off etc.. AND they always take 13 weeks in the summer when i've been told i can't take holidays then...

discrimination i calls it!

Its not discrimination, Im in the same situation as you and Pinkybear. Children have a right to spend time with their parents (though noone my organisation can take 13 weeks paid) and in this day and age with ridiculous mortgages people cant afford to stay at home fulltime and have to resort to working.

To me it sounds like poor project management. If you or pinkybear were on my team I would want you to come and talk to me about this - go talk to your project manager, or as other posters suggest change organisation where your contribution is valued.

 

[MandaC]

The same happened in our office about a year ago. The set hours of the office are 9-5.30 with an hour for lunch. A new girl started and she was given the option of either 9-5 with a half hour for lunch or 9.30 -5.30 with a half hour for lunch, as she had to drop/collect her child from creche.

It was unfair on the other Secretary who was there before her and not given the option of taking the half hour lunch.

It didnt bother me in my position because I usually stay later anyway, but it caused bad feelings with the two secretaries.

 

[truthseeker]

The same happened in our office about a year ago. The set hours of the office are 9-5.30 with an hour for lunch. A new girl started and she was given the option of either 9-5 with a half hour for lunch or 9.30 -5.30 with a half hour for lunch, as she had to drop/collect her child from creche.

It was unfair on the other Secretary who was there before her and not given the option of taking the half hour lunch.

It didnt bother me in my position because I usually stay later anyway, but it caused bad feelings with the two secretaries.

Why didnt the secretary who had been there longer ask to be given the same options?

If she DID and was refused then that is completely unfair, but if she DIDNT and then its her own problem that she didnt speak up

 

[Trafford]

Why didnt the secretary who had been there longer ask to be given the same options?

If she DID and was refused then that is completely unfair, but if she DIDNT and then its her own problem that she didnt speak up

This is true. Every contract is negotiable and it sounds like the new employee negotiated terms which suited her and her employer.

Regarding the 13 weeks off, that sounds like parental leave, which those employees are unpaid for so really they are much worse off than those in the office, in the long run. Again, they have negotiated a position which suits their situation and which must suit the employer also.

 

[michaelm]

Doing extra hours without pay, recognition, shares, a bonus, time in lieu - more fool you; and all because you take pride in your work? Naturally for parents, their children are their number one priority, it's not their fault if you choose to stay late. I suspect that most parents, indeed most people, work to live rather than live to work.

 

[Pique318]

Doing extra hours without pay, recognition, shares, a bonus, time in lieu -

...welcome to the IT industry !!


Oh to be a Public Sector worker....

 

[Trafford]

...welcome to the IT industry !!


Oh to be a Public Sector worker....

Indeed it is a reality of many industries in the private sector, not just IT. I work in an in-house legal department and it is not uncommon for people to work through the night if a deal is time critical. It's just the reality of working for a living for a lot of us. It doesn't bother me to be honest. I worked a weekend a couple of weeks ago, and then left early afternoon the following Friday as I was going away. It's all about balance. In the leaner times we are out the door at 6 too.

 

[Caveat]

...welcome to the IT industry !!


Oh to be a Public Sector worker....

Indeed - haven't noticed any posters (in relation to all the above) saying things like "What?! - that's mad - get on to the union - I can go home when I like..."

 

[RainyDay]

I can't resist from wondering if the parents who disappear at 5pm spend as much time reading/posting on AAM during working hours?

However, in my experience the customer only really begins to focus on their requirements as the deadline approaches and they seem to think nothing of making major changes or adding extra features practically at the last minute.

Sounds like you need to have some discussions with the project manager about scope control. Allowing major changes and extra features to be added at the last minute in an uncontrolled manner is unprofessional. It puts delivery of the agreed product at risk, and puts the profitability of the business at risk. If the major changes and extra features are really important, the customer will pay for them and will wait for them. If they are not worth paying/waiting for, they are not worth you working unpaid overtime for.

 

[MandaC]

Why didnt the secretary who had been there longer ask to be given the same options?

If she DID and was refused then that is completely unfair, but if she DIDNT and then its her own problem that she didnt speak up

She did speak up, to say that she would prefer to do those hours as well, and if they were an option that she should be given first choice, as she was there longer.

She was basically told that that was the hours the new girl had negotiated and that she was being unreasonable as she only lived down the road (and had no kids) and the other girl had to collect her child from creche. She stated that this was discrimination against her as people with children should not get preferential hours. What used to happen too was that she would end up with the work that was either last minute and had to go out, necessitating staying back even later as the other girl had to be at the creche at a set time and literally just picked up her coat and went at clocking off time.

It caused some amount of friction in the office in general as both girls were doing the exact same job (one had to cover for the other)with most people taking the side of the older secretary (not personally, just about the principal of the thing) and the new secretary felt embarressed and did not settle in because she knew everyone was cheesed off(even though it was not directly with her), so the situation did not work out and ended up with the new girl having to leave.

 

[Persius]

pinkyBear, if there is a serious downturn in the state of your company, remember you are as likely to be made redundant as the parents. And if the company goes bust, you all will be made redundant. So don't waste more energy than you're contracted to for your employer. They owe you a wage, and you owe them 7.5 hours hard work per day.

As to the posters who talk about "doing their time" when they're childless, and then expecting to be able to work standard 7.5 hour days later when they've children, I find that hard to believe. Do ye expect to be working for the same employer and even same line manager for all this time? Otherwise all that unpaid overtime in your youth is just "water under the bridge" which will be quickly forgotten. It won't get you any credit later on.

In short, life is too short. Don't waste it all on work when it goes unrewarded.

 

[truthseeker]

She did speak up, to say that she would prefer to do those hours as well, and if they were an option that she should be given first choice, as she was there longer.

She was basically told that that was the hours the new girl had negotiated and that she was being unreasonable as she only lived down the road (and had no kids) and the other girl had to collect her child from creche. She stated that this was discrimination against her as people with children should not get preferential hours. What used to happen too was that she would end up with the work that was either last minute and had to go out, necessitating staying back even later as the other girl had to be at the creche at a set time and literally just picked up her coat and went at clocking off time.

It caused some amount of friction in the office in general as both girls were doing the exact same job (one had to cover for the other)with most people taking the side of the older secretary (not personally, just about the principal of the thing) and the new secretary felt embarressed and did not settle in because she knew everyone was cheesed off(even though it was not directly with her), so the situation did not work out and ended up with the new girl having to leave.

Well that sounds incredibly unfair MandaC. When the new secretary left did the older one change to the new hours or stick with her old ones?
I can understand that the new secretary had negotiated these hours as part of her contract - but I dont think the older secretary was being unreasonable in asking for her own contract to be reviewed in light of someone else doing the same job having different (and sounds like more advantageous) hours. Would there have been a case here for the old secretary to take the company to the labour court I wonder?

 

[casiopea]

As to the posters who talk about "doing their time" when they're childless, and then expecting to be able to work standard 7.5 hour days later when they've children, I find that hard to believe. Do ye expect to be working for the same employer and even same line manager for all this time? Otherwise all that unpaid overtime in your youth is just "water under the bridge" which will be quickly forgotten. It won't get you any credit later on.

It was me that said that, but I think youve taken it up slightly wrongly. I dont think my employer "owes" me anything. I know from my contract that I am not owed overtime or even time in lieau.

The comment was more about myself and what I owe myself, I personally feel I have done those hours in effort to support my employer, I wont feel bad in future doing the the standard contracted hours (and receiving my contracted salary) and then leave to pick up a child. Its more of a personal statement.

Do ye expect to be working for the same employer and even same line manager for all this time?

Absolutely yes.

In short, life is too short. Don't waste it all on work when it goes unrewarded.

I completely agree, I also think this is something that you learn. Its easy to sway to pressure from your peers, I did cancel holidays when I was first working for projects now kids or no kids there is no way I would do that.

I strongly agree with the project manager comment from Rainyday above.

 

[Purple]

Yes, people with no kids do get preferential treatment and no, it's not right.
If you choose to have a child that’s your own business, you shouldn't expect your colleges or employer to cover for you.
I have three children so I am aware of the demands which that places on parents but just as it's not OK to pay men more than women for the same job it's not OK to pay people with children the same as those with none if they are not doing the same job (i.e. hours, holidays, flexibility etc).

 

[casiopea]

I have three children so I am aware of the demands which that places on parents but just as it's not OK to pay men more than women for the same job it's not OK to pay people with children the same as those with none if they are not doing the same job (i.e. hours, holidays, flexibility etc).

I agree with you but we arent talking about people leaving early, we are talking about people leaving at their contracted time to leave and not being able to do overtime because they have to collect children who would be left without care. It is not discrimination, there is nothing stopping me getting up and leaving at 6pm either even though I dont have children.

If a parent has arranged extra holidays, flexibility (say half days) or part-time work their renumeration and contract will have be adjusted to reflect this, they would not be on the same salary as someone working fulltime.

If you are willing to work hours and hours of overtime unpaid there is a high chance you will be exploited by your organisation and no gaurantee you will be renumerated.

I work in project management and in the irish team we have 12 people, 4 of whom have children and arent available after 5:30pm or 6pm (depending on the individual). I know this when I created my project plan. Just as I know that most of the irish team will take all of christmas off, most of the american team will take time at thanksgiving, most of the chennai team had last week off for a festival. As PM I need to evaluate who and where my resources are and schedule accordingly so no resource is unduly taxed. The quality of the work produced by the four parents referred to above is very high, they are very dependable - I would be lost without them. Since the start of the project I have lost 3 resources (with no children) to another organization (after they had been trained for this project) - this is a risk with that group, they have no attachments and are more likely to move. I cannot tell them to stay, they arent discriminating against me or anyone else. Some of us will at some point have to work some overtime, I will have to ask one of the parents to take some calls at home probably over go-live (as he has a skill not shared by the others), but all things being equal it is my responsibility to track tasks and schedule the project in such a manner that no-one is in till midnight. On go-live, should the project be successful, bonus's will be divided in percentages based on contribution, I will get along with another PM to recommend who I feel should receive what percentage. At least 2 of the parents will be up in the high end of the bonus's because the work they do is of such a high quality and they also contribute so much more (in the way of mentoring).

Sorry I am rambling a bit, but this thread has really baffled me. I simply dont understand why leaving at your contracted time is regarded as discrimination. If Pinkybear were on my team, I would want him/her to talk to me about this.

Also, working overtime is a cultural thing. Its very prevalent in american organizations. Here in Switzerland there is a very different attitude to working overtime and very few people do.