Low labour participation by mothers

DannyBoyD said:
A. Govt & society shouldn't make it harder
Click to expand...
I agree. Thankfully they have made things much easier than they used to be.
The traditional workplace evolved to suit men. Now it is evolving to suit both women and men. As cohorts they have different needs, wants and drives. We are still finding a way to accommodate all of them.
DannyBoyD said:
B. It seems to be the same people 'giving'
Click to expand...
Are you referring to the people who sacrifice time with their children in order to work hard and pay more of the taxes that find our very generous welfare and support systems?

As a working parent I can say that working longer in order to provide for my children is a sacrifice. Being able to work less and spend more time with my children would be fantastic. I would be very grateful to my partner if she was willing to work longer and harder in order to give me that luxury. I find is bizarre that the people who get to do it think that they are somehow at a disadvantage or discriminated against.

Globally women spend 3 times as many hours in unpaid domestic and care work than men. That means they get to spend far more time with their children than men. Can someone please explain how that's a bad thing?

Women contribute around 35-40% of global GDP but make 70-80% of spending decisions. Of course women are buying for the children and for elderly parents and frequently for their husbands/partners but they are still the ones doing the spending.
Who has the power, the people who earn the money or the people who choose how it is spent?
 
DannyBoyD said:
Try "I was at breaking point..." vs "What worked best was her staying home..."
Click to expand...
That's two different people talking about two different scenarios. It's certainly not a large enough sample size from which to deduce anything meanful.
 
Reactions: Leo
I could try replying Purple, but to be honest, I'm pretty sure I'd be wasting my time.

Your personal experience (from previous posts) is definitely unique; your opinions equally so.
 
Premos said:
Tht means that they work but their work is unpaid.
Click to expand...
Yes, but why should anyone get paid to look after their own children?
When my children were younger I did the housework and washing and cooking and shopping. I did the homework and blow dried by daughters hair. I taught them all (boys and girls) to cook and sew and all that stuff. Nobody paid me to do that and it would be outrageous to think that anyone should. They are my children and that's my responsibility and my job and my privilege. I'd take spending my time doing that over working in a heartbeat. People who get to choose to work less and spend more time with their children are privileged not discriminated against.
 
Purple said:
unpaid domestic and care work than men. That means they get to spend far more time with their children than men
Click to expand...
unpaid domestic work is not "spending time with their children".

Unpaid domestic work is exactly that; it's not taking trips to the zoo or playground.
 
This is tangential.
 
DannyBoyD said:
This is tangential.
Click to expand...
Tangential to what?
The discussion is about women's participation in the workforce. The false premise that parents who get to look after their own children, while the other parent spends more time away from those children, are someone disadvantaged is at the heart of the discussion.
 
I think if we want to encourage mothers from a lower educational background into the workplace we need to to tackle it from several angles.

Remove bias against women. I see several posters suggesting some of the examples given were sexist but I believe they are deeply engrained bias in workplaces and in society. I do believe there are no differences between genders in their ability in education, abilities and skills, and we should as a society as a whole work to remove those biases that still persist.

Make all schools multi sex
Create proper full time before school and after school care.
Make childcare affordable and pay childcare staff well.
Organise primary and secondary schools to suit the needs of the working parents in their opening hours, childcare duties, and number of days worked in the year.

This alone will create many job opportunities for those with lower educational backgrounds. You can work in childcare with a level 6 qualification.

I would say I have looked at only one aspect of complex issue, there are probably many more solutions out there and looking at practices in our European neighbours will give us lots of examples.

I think one of the main barriers to making meaningful change would be teacher unions, ironically a female dominated profession (I think i read somewhere once that 10% of primary school staff are on maternity leave each year). I would say the profession is attractive to women because of the family friendly work hours that synch with the current school system.
 
blueband said:
maybe they put taking care of their children ahead of being in the jobs market.......who would have thought!
Click to expand...
Or ahead of 'what the Irish economy needs'. Many don't care that the exchequer probably wants them to work, get taxed, pay someone else to look after their children out of the net, with the carer also paying tax. Then consider the amount of care the child gets from sharing a care giver with N other children, versus N=1 on average, with a parent who takes on the job themselves.

Edit: There is a value to spending time with your kids for many people also that seems to be missing from this discussion.
 
Exactly what I was thinking.

Can't read the article from OP due to paywall but what is the problem being discussed?

Get more women into the workforce for the sake of the economy (to increase GDP)?
Or get more women into the work force because women want to work and have a career.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register