Please stop assuming women with lower salaries are un- or under-educated

[Anonymous]

To 14:51

"Fine - I'm doing my part by proposing an alternative and reduced schedule (first one in my division), and making it work 2.5 years later,"

How many hours a week do you work? Do you telecommute? How much of a paycut did you take to get the alternative and reduced schedule in place?

I'm not the slightest bit interested in an alternative or reduced schedule that comes with a paycut. Women have enough of a problem being respected equally with their male peers.


"as well as paying attention and acting on any legislative issues that could support positive changes."

Good, but pretty vague.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To 14:51

"Fine - I'm doing my part by proposing an alternative and reduced schedule (first one in my division), and making it work 2.5 years later,"

How many hours a week do you work? Do you telecommute? How much of a paycut did you take to get the alternative and reduced schedule in place?

I'm not the slightest bit interested in an alternative or reduced schedule that comes with a paycut. Women have enough of a problem being respected equally with their male peers.


"as well as paying attention and acting on any legislative issues that could support positive changes."

Good, but pretty vague.

Why would anyone care if you are interested in their alternative work arrangement? Do what works for you.

[Anonymous]

PP would like society to support alternative and reduced work schedules. Why should people who don't need and aren't interested in modified schedules support those who want them?

[Anonymous]

I support public schools, although my child's not in one, because quality education benefits everyone. I support funding for playgrounds in neighborhoods I don't live in. I'm following legislation around school lunches, because I believe all children deserve quality food, not just mine. I think parents, children and workplaces benefit by allowing for work/life balance. The same benefits that allow me to modify my schedule for a new baby may allow you time to tend to a sick spouse or parent down the line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP would like society to support alternative and reduced work schedules. Why should people who don't need and aren't interested in modified schedules support those who want them?

When you responded to the idea of supporting reduced schedules, whom did you have in mind? women or men?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP would like society to support alternative and reduced work schedules. Why should people who don't need and aren't interested in modified schedules support those who want them?

What if you would benefit from it 10 or 20 years from now? What if one of your family members would?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP would like society to support alternative and reduced work schedules. Why should people who don't need and aren't interested in modified schedules support those who want them?

What if you would benefit from it 10 or 20 years from now? What if one of your family members would?

Not the PP, but to add on - what if it would benefit you in that your children could work a modified schedule to care for you when you're old?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP would like society to support alternative and reduced work schedules. Why should people who don't need and aren't interested in modified schedules support those who want them?

It's not about you. Not one little bit. I never said anything about converting all of society to loving alternative or reduced schedules. Plenty of people do support them though. Who cares if you don't?

And your logic is flawed. You seem to think that reduced schedules are holding women back salary-wise, yet study after study shows more women would be in the workforce if reduced schedules were more common.

And really, it's not always about priviliged women wanting more time. It is a fact that rigid work schedules are bad for our health - studies showing long commutes are not good and contribute to obesity, and not being able to get time off for work is a reason many people put off or don't go to the dr. So again, it's not about you.

[Anonymous]

To 12:22

"I think parents, children and workplaces benefit by allowing for work/life balance."

I think working only 40 hours a week in an office IS work life balance. My father has a golddigger to take care of him, my mother is deceased. We'd hire someone to watch our child, if God forbid, he or she became seriously ill.

Isn't there already, essentially, work life balance, because jobs that allow flex hours, telecommuting, etc. pay less than jobs that require 9 to 5 in an office? If you desire some of these alternative arrangements, don't you just look for employment that has it built into the company or nonprofit structure?

[Anonymous]

To 12:33


"When you responded to the idea of supporting reduced schedules, whom did you have in mind? women or men? "

Anyone, either gender.

[Anonymous]

"What if you would benefit from it 10 or 20 years from now? What if one of your family members would?"

Too iffy to know.

[Anonymous]

To 12:54 - I should have enough money so that my kids don't need to disrupt their lives to care for me. I didn't do it for my mom, at her request, and I won't be doing it for my father. Not really our family dynamic.

[Anonymous]

To 14:16

"It's not about you. Not one little bit. I never said anything about converting all of society to loving alternative or reduced schedules. Plenty of people do support them though. Who cares if you don't? "

I thought your goal was to get society to support the creation of alternative and reduced schedules (?) Do you think enough people do support them now, enough to cause real change? Why should we care if we don't want or need them personally?

"And your logic is flawed. You seem to think that reduced schedules are holding women back salary-wise, yet study after study shows more women would be in the workforce if reduced schedules were more common."

I'm not interested in SAHMs working 20 hours a week instead of SAH. I'm interested in the number of women going into, and staying in, balls out full time + careers that can support an entire family. I don't see any way that alternative or reduced schedules help with that.

"And really, it's not always about priviliged women wanting more time. It is a fact that rigid work schedules are bad for our health - studies showing long commutes are not good and contribute to obesity, and not being able to get time off for work is a reason many people put off or don't go to the dr. So again, it's not about you."

I have a rigid work schedule, but a short commute. I exercise at the gym at work 3 or 4 times a week. Although I have a rigid schedule, I can take time off work anytime, for the doctor or any reason at all. Don't even have to use leave if I work 40 hours otherwise during the week.

[Anonymous]

You are part of the problem. You're not interested in helping change things at all, or helping women achieve any sort of workable balance. Don't blame the SAHMs... inflexible, unyielding professional women like yourself make things much worse for the rest of us than those who opt out.

[Anonymous]

"You are part of the problem. You're not interested in helping change things at all, or helping women achieve any sort of workable balance."

I told you, I think working 40 hours a week IS a workable balance. To afford high quality childcare in the early years, you pretty much need to WOH FT to make it worth it. So long as parents aren't working 60+, it is a balance. And I sleep 7.5 hours a night even with being gone from home 50 hours a week, so I know what I'm talking about.


"Don't blame the SAHMs... inflexible, unyielding professional women like yourself make things much worse for the rest of us than those who opt out."

You know what? I think you would have opted out even if you'd been offered work from 10 to 1 three days a week. How badly did you really want to stay in? What were your reasons for wanting to work - career development, cash, ????