Why don't WOHMs fight for better work conditions? Discuss.

[Anonymous]

Many DCUM women (and their demographic) and men do have these things, though. They put in their time in their 20s and early 30s and were able to choose family-friendly professional jobs (they do exist) that offer many of these things in their 30s when they had kids. A lot of companies will let highly tenured subject matter experts work from home, for example, while earning a very good salary--because they've proven themselves.

The poster on the other thread who said all WOHMs must be stressed because their DHs are low earners and their employers treat them like crap is wrong about much of the DCUM WOHM population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Other countries have -
Paid maternity leave for at least 6 months to a year
Paid paternity leave
On side childcare
Nursing and pumping areas at work
Sick nurse provision
Equal pay
Flexible schedule and
Remote working


Why are WOHMs not working hard to get these laws passed so that all women have real choices?

Who is going to pay for this? If it is via tax money, are you ok paying a lot more in taxes? If it is your company, then are you ok making less? Having a child is a luxury and choice and someone else should not have to foot the bill. You can have paid maternity leave - I did. I waited many years and saved all my leave/maxing it out and then stretched it by taking 1/2 LWOP and 1/2 paid.

You have health care for a sick nurse. It is not your employers responsibility to provide child care and its costly to have in terms of space, insurance and staffing.

Want remote work/flexible schedule. Find a new job that allows it. Simple.

Other countries are much smaller and pay much higher taxes.

[Anonymous]

PP here. I'm not saying the issues aren't issues as a whole, but I'm saying that the DCUM population might be in a position to avoid some of these challenges because they have negotiating power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact that OP has to ask this question tells me that OP SAH or is child-free.

I think it's the crazy poop SAHM from the other thread.

[Anonymous]

We do. But perhaps you have some tips on how we can convince a bunch of old white men with stay-at-home wives who are running our companies and organizations why these policies are good? Because despite all of the efforts made to date, it's not getting much better. But that must be for lack of effort on our part, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there any actual studies that show that the US 1) needs more children (vs immigrants) and 2) needs all parents of young children to be working? I am NOT arguing against women/young mothers in the workplace. But I haven’t seen a convincing reason to make both childbirth and full employment a national priority. It seems that we could bring in more immigrants to be the next generation, pay for social security, etc. And it seems that all signs are pointing to fewer jobs/fewer hours society wide due to automation.

As a young woman who is married and of child bearing age, SO many of us would be having children or having more children if we had paid maternity or daycare wasn't $1800 a month. It's fabulous that poor immigrants are bringing up our population numbers instead. I'm glad we decided that was a good solution to our declining population numbers.

You can space out your kids or have one parent stay home. We didn't have more as adoption costs are crazy high.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who watches your kids, op? Nanny or daycare? Are they paid a living wage? Do they get good benefits? You have to start there.

My DC org provides 16 weeks maternity leave. It's a tiered system in terms of what's paid. By the time I had my last kid, 12 weeks were fully paid.

My hours are long because I'm in upper management. Back when I was in my old position, it was simply 9-5. Telecommuting once a week is permitted.

In my ideal world, the standard work week would be 30 hours, and everyone would be cool with telecommuting on school days. And we would shut down for a week at Christmas and Easter in alignment with school closures. Plus a week at the end of August when camps are closed.

I'm ready to live in your ideal world! It sounds a bit like some of the European countries. ?

Well, that’s true, but then everyone would need to look at ALL jobs as necessary to the economy, an let people plan towards that. The education system would need to change.

People would need to look at their children in terms of their skills, and not their grades!? How would they ever brag to their friends that Larlo was going to be a Master Baker ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have exactly one vote. And despite voting in every single election I've been eligible to vote in since I turned 18, my one vote isn't enough to do any of the above. Hell, it couldn't even stop Trump.

You could make changes at your company.

You have more than just your vote.

Umm, okay. Because we are all directors, CEOs, etc. who have the power to make changes in our companies. /s

I have no idea what you are supposed to do, but a big criticism of SAHMs (especially educated ones) is that they opted out and, because of that, are no longer walking in solidarity with the working women who are trying to change things. Except the working women aren’t really trying to change things. Good to know for the next time that someone comments with this specious argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that OP has to ask this question tells me that OP SAH or is child-free.

I think it's the crazy poop SAHM from the other thread.

It is—she posed the question there too, and then decided to create a separate thread. Apparently whilst pooping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that OP has to ask this question tells me that OP SAH or is child-free.

I think it's the crazy poop SAHM from the other thread.

Wait, what? Can you summarize this crazy poop thing? I've avoided going into that thread but am fascinated by this description.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that OP has to ask this question tells me that OP SAH or is child-free.

I think it's the crazy poop SAHM from the other thread.

Wait, what? Can you summarize this crazy poop thing? I've avoided going into that thread but am fascinated by this description.

Start at top of p. 14.

[Anonymous]

For all of the PPs (maybe just one?) who keeps pointing out that women and just "space out" their kids and save up paid leave, how does this address any of the other issues working mothers face? Your helpful suggestions involve only the first few months of a child's life. It doesn't address the myraid of battles working mothers face in this country AFTER they return to work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that OP has to ask this question tells me that OP SAH or is child-free.

I think it's the crazy poop SAHM from the other thread.

Wait, what? Can you summarize this crazy poop thing? I've avoided going into that thread but am fascinated by this description.

Start at top of p. 14.

The one that also starts with another mean question about WOHMs, not the Harvard study one.

I'm pretty sure she's all over both threads, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For all of the PPs (maybe just one?) who keeps pointing out that women and just "space out" their kids and save up paid leave, how does this address any of the other issues working mothers face? Your helpful suggestions involve only the first few months of a child's life. It doesn't address the myraid of battles working mothers face in this country AFTER they return to work.

They need to force their husbands to take on the brunt of childcare issues and prioritize the woman’s job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that OP has to ask this question tells me that OP SAH or is child-free.

I think it's the crazy poop SAHM from the other thread.

Wait, what? Can you summarize this crazy poop thing? I've avoided going into that thread but am fascinated by this description.

Start at top of p. 14.

The one that also starts with another mean question about WOHMs, not the Harvard study one.

I'm pretty sure she's all over both threads, though.

Thanks! I appreciate the precise page so I don't have to wade through it all.