So, what you are saying is, employers should be paying remote employees for watching their children?
Over and over on here, there have been plenty of posts "I want to work from home, so I don't have to pay someone to watch my child(ren)" and more often than not, you'll see people responding much in the same fashion as I did above. I have seen plenty of WFH policies that do require that the employee have some sort of childcare or whatever lined up. Older children, that's fine - they can their own thing (most, not all). And yes, most newborns do spend a lot of time sleeping (not all).
Yes, I do know it is totally different in other countries (and of course, in many other countries, they typically have multigenerational households, too - as some would view it, built in childcare). I wish that were the case here, but it's not. I wish I didn't have to go back when my daughter was 8 weeks because that first year was brutal. No sleep to be had, and the other parent was on an opposite shift. I almost lost my job that first year after I had my child because it is so hard.
If we want change, it doesn't start with employers. Individual employers may take it upon themselves to create some sort of family-friendly workplace policies, paid/extended family/maternity/caregiver/parental leave, etc. Progressive companies will do that, as it can be a great recruiting tool (perhaps it could incentivize people to stay longer than a year or two). But a lot won't. States could be more progressive (I think more and more are following California's lead so that could be good), but this country as a whole could take that on.
This was much longer than anticipated and really doesn't even address the OPs original post, more like highlighting the bigger picture problem.
Share your insight
Join an authentic community that helps women support each other at work. Share your professional experience or ask for advice — you can even post anonymously.
16 Comments
Join the conversation