We Kid You Not Childfree Forums

Full Version: Breederific Career/Workplace Article
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Does Married or Single Matter at Work?
By Kate Lorenz, CareerBuilder.com Editor

Do you feel like the single workers without kids in your office have an advantage over you because they can work late and get more time to suck up to the boss? Does it seem like all the plum projects are going to this gung-ho set of go-getters? These observations could be legitimate complaints, or maybe they're just another excuse for you to grouse about work.

Here's a look at some long-held assumptions about marital and familial status in the workplace and how they hold up in today's corporate environment.

Assumption: Employees who are married with children utilize more benefits at the expense of the organization.

Reality: Not true. Today most companies offer a wide array of benefits to appeal to a diverse set of employees. Whether it's a temporary leave of absence to study for a professional certification or paternity time off after an adoption, companies today are working to appeal to many different segments of the working population.

"Most companies today examine the demographics of their employee base and design their benefits accordingly," says Frank Scanlon of the Human Resource Society of America. For instance, if there is a need for on-site daycare or continuing education assistance, a company usually will look into providing such a benefit. This type of responsiveness to employees' needs makes for happier, and therefore more productive, employees.

"It's important for companies to support the whole person, not just the work person," says Marna Hayden, president of Hayden Resources, a human resources consulting firm. "When companies show an understanding for the need for work/life balance, they create an extremely loyal and dedicated workforce."

Assumption: Flexible working arrangements are dead-end options for workers on the "mommy track."

Reality: False. Telecommuting, job sharing and flexible scheduling are increasingly being utilized by more traditional employees, not just those seeking to keep a toe in the corporate pool while they are home with their kids.

Tina, an underwriter at a national insurance firm, was single with no children and was able to set up a telecommuting arrangement based on her outstanding performance record. And more and more, sales representatives work out of a home office, especially when extensive travel is required.

Assumption: Working parents take too many sick days to care for their children who seem to catch every virus that's going around.

Reality: Yes and no. Scanlon notes that more companies are moving away from applying specific labels to time off and instead are creating "banks" of paid time off for each employee. That way everyone gets the same amount of time to use as they wish, whether it's vacationing in Italy or tending to a sick little one at home.

In addition, Hayden notes, "many employees now have the option to work at home if a child is sick," therefore decreasing the amount of work missed due to family illness.

Assumption: Employees who have family responsibilities don't put in enough hours.

Reality: Not true. While working parents often must leave the office promptly to pick up their children from daycare, laptops and e-mail allow these employees to continue their work at home in the evening, often once their child is safely tucked in bed. It's an arrangement Scanlon says he and his wife take advantage of frequently with their young child. All in all, companies seem to be making an earnest effort to be fair to all their employees. And while it's true that some benefits are structured for working parents, while others are a better fit for single workers without family responsibilities, it all seems to even out in the end.

http://msn.careerbuilder.com/custom/msn/...45576-TZ-5

PrairieGirl

Love that hard data they provided. I call bullshit.
I love the way the whole "working at home" excuse is used. Yeah, SURE the breeders are working when they are at home, especially if Snotley is sick.

And notice how they dodged the issue of parents taking more sick days. They cleverly put up a smokescreen of "nobody really knows if it's a sick day or not because it comes out of a pool of days". Um, that STILL does not answer the question of HOW MANY MORE days they are taking than the childless employees!
And who says employees without children aren't putting in those same hours at home?
And I'm sorry but this whole flex time and non-traditional schedule stuff is just something employers put out there to make themselves look good. In reality, I've never seen it happen. In fact a friend of mine who still works at my last company, made an arrangement to work from home half the time because her husband's job moved them across the state. So she's been commuting and actually not even working from home half the time. She is responsible for 7 facilities, 6 of which are out of state. They recently told her want her more visible at the in-state facility and they aren't willing to work with her. Her boss told her that the new parent company (a HUGE multi-billion $ company) isn't really into people working from home. The fact is, companies want every dollar they pay squeezed out of employees. She obviously told them she will be leaving. This is a 27yr old dynamo who changed the face of safety in the organization and has saved the company hundreds of thousands in her work with their previously existing worker's comp. cases but in the end that won't matter.

Hell in a past review my supervisor brought up lost time when I was dealing with my mom's kidney failure, my process to donate and my subsequent diagnosis ! I never lost a full day, but that didn't matter.

It's all BS IMO. I think a lot of companies put that out there, but the reality is, they want a body in the seat from 8-5 so you best be prepared to deal with that. If people have kids, then daycare is in order.

Also I like how they say companies are moving to a bank of time so everyone gets the same. BS again! I'm sorry but when kids are involved, it's not necessarily lost FULL days. It's lost hours. And that is up to the discretion of their supervisor usually. If they are salaried, it's not counted 99% of the time in my experience.
A long time ago, I applied for a job, but that first company delayed in hiring and I found a reasonable other position ( industrial first aid) at a second company.
The first employer hired me part-time as a facilities manager, while I had that second full-time job ( 3pm-11pm).
After some time decided they want me full-time, but the pay was low and the hours had to be until 5pm, so I proposed job-sharing, where I would work 9am to 1pm and another person would work 1pm to 5pm.

It worked out fairly well.

I was able to get some time between 1pm and 3pm to nap, do errands, do housework, pay bills and work out.
It was a small town, with little of interest going on in the evenings, so the main afternoon shift suited me fine.
Reference URL's