Anonymous wrote:Both my husband and I have "parent tracked" ourselves. Or maybe just value life over work, even though we both enjoy our jobs (ofr the most part). We live close to work, work 40ish hours most weeks. We make really good salaries, though not DCUM good. Living the dream.

Same here. DH has the more lucrative job and I am the default parent, but we still put in a lot of effort to have dinner at home nightly, drive kids to events, afternoon school pickup, grocery, etc. We both WAH except for occasional in-office meetings or trips.

Both my husband and I have "parent tracked" ourselves. Or maybe just value life over work, even though we both enjoy our jobs (ofr the most part). We live close to work, work 40ish hours most weeks. We make really good salaries, though not DCUM good. Living the dream.

I’m pretty sure the “mommy track” came about from law firms. Women who asked for reduced hours were on the mommy track, not the partner track.

I was on the mommy track, now work in house with extremely reasonable hours and great work/life balance. Most importantly, my kids are healthy and doing fine.

You can’t outsource your mom/dad role. What you do and the time you spend with your kids matters. They soak up the time and attention from you. I’ve seen some messed up kids from parents with big jobs. So call it whatever you want, I’m glad I scaled back.

Statistically unlikely to have ever made partner anyways.

Anonymous wrote:A mixture. A bunch of us in government did not mommy track. That seems to be the common thread, but understand that means topping out at what to me is a great salary as a liberal arts major, but might not be such a great salary for others.

It's all relative. I would consider any level fed job mommy-tracking, because I left BigLaw in a crazy corporate practice. Others would consider a GS-14 a huge ramp up. Both are fair perspectives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ho many people that you think mommy-tracked would have actually ended up in senior exec type positions, though, really? Very few.

Correct, I would skip having kids, skip marriage, work 14 hours a day and still not even make director.

This. I haven't even broken six figures in my field yet (expect to just barely in 2023). If I hadn't made compromises for my family, I would have been able to take jobs anywhere in the country and might be in a much more prestigious role...but my income probably wouldn't be that much higher, because the cultural sector doesn't pay. So for me, "mommy tracking" meant taking jobs where we could live in the same place, and had good enough pay and benefits that I could provide financial security while my partner took risks, instead of both of us taking the risks and coming together in a "more perfect" situation later. We have friends who did that, and I do envy their lives, but we also have friends who still live in different cities and have not been able to have kids.

Anyway, I think this discussion fails to recognize that most people don't become leaders of their organizations or even make UMC incomes, and so it's maybe an unrealistic default.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, of course. Women were sold a myth that we could have it all. It was a lie. To be a good parent, you must scale back on work. You can’t do both. I cut back and changed career trajectory. I am with my kids out the door to school and when they get home. So happy about that

Do you mean to be a good mom? Because I’m OP’s example, the dads did not scale back.

It’s easier for them to find another wife and make more offspring than for us to deal with not taking care of our kids.
Cruel but true.

I have been married for forty years.

"mommy track"

Many of my friends did this and then hubby decides to leave and they have no way to support themselves they are stuck.

Having your own money is way more about you having control over your own life. Money talks. Fact.

I have two daughters and four boys. My girls will always work. I taught them to be self sufficient. My boy's wives same.

Believe me, I know it is hard. And I am not putting down women that choose a "mommy track" I just think it's short sided for them.

Women need their own self-worth. Staying home with the kids is great til it's not......

I think it’s hard to say what “mommy track” is from person to person. I suppose I could say I mommy tracked myself because I went to a highly ranked university and took a partner track job with a large consulting company out of college. I stopped traveling and switched to federal clients when I got married and then went “in house” once I had my 2nd kid. I have no regrets. My hours-stress : pay ratio is a good fit for me and my family.

I know lots of women who work part time or have non-managerial roles and I don’t think of them as mommy tracked. They don’t seem ambitious and as far as I know, they never wanted or sought out more. They are happy and it works for them.

Mommy track implies to me that someone was on track for a partner/SVP/C suite role and chose to or was asked to step back - it also implies to me that they have been sidetracked and want to be back on track for that role eventually. In my case, I am happy and have no plans of ever going back.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Depends what you call mommy tracking.

For example among my friends, most of us of both genders left biglaw after a few years because we wanted better work-life balance. That was before any of us had kids and some still don't and don't plan to.

I think mommy tracking is a pejorative term that encompasses a lot of choices. If I make $300k for a WFH job where I am viewed as an expert in my field, am I "mommy tracking" because I'm not trying to be the CEO and I'm happy with my current schedule?

This is me. I’m 35 and have two kids. I make close to $300K and WFH FT. My husband makes slightly more and needs to be in the office 4/week and travels. I want to have a third kid and plan to keep working. Would not consider going back to an office unless I was doubling my salary. I want to be home for my kids (we have a FT nanny and they are in preschool, but it would be harder if a parent wasn’t home) but mostly I want to have less stress, go for a run in the middle of the day, and hang out with my dogs.

Can I ask what you do? I’m a fed work from home and only take 130K with kids would love to increase that.

Anonymous wrote:Yes, of course. Women were sold a myth that we could have it all. It was a lie. To be a good parent, you must scale back on work. You can’t do both. I cut back and changed career trajectory. I am with my kids out the door to school and when they get home. So happy about that

Do you mean to be a good mom? Because I’m OP’s example, the dads did not scale back.

Yes, most of my friends with kids have mommy tracked themselves. The SAHM I know with kids in high school or older seem lost about what to do with their days, dabbling with different careers/projects.

Most of my friends have successfully found good careers that give them work-life balance. My job is mostly WFH and usually 40-50 hours a week, and I mostly really enjoy it. I'm a fed with a law degree, so I could've likely made quite a bit more had a taken a different route. I've consciously decided to stay put rather than pursuing advancement. But the salary is enough, and DH makes more than I do. I do 95% of the kid stuff.

Most women who reach senior exec positions do so because of family money, connections, the right private schools, privilige

For the rest, there is no alternative than to mommy track. Children are a gift and your life, it is tough when you cannot afford a nanny, to deal with the daily grind of day care, work, cook dinner, bath kids, clean house, grocery shop, dr appointments
Even harder if your work doesn’t tell you ahead of time that you need to work overtime, if your spouse is a 40 min drive away from day care, if you struggle to get time off for their medical appointments

We’re dual feds and both leaned in a bit to get our 14s and 15s. But we needed the money and couldn’t afford to stay at home. I think Dh was a 13 when we had our first kid at 30 and made about 100k. We did prioritize location so we’d have under 15 minute commutes and refused other jobs that came our way to maintain that.

With baby 3 I find that I’m the one who stays home more when they’re sick. I’m actually more senior and it’s easier for me

A mixture. A bunch of us in government did not mommy track. That seems to be the common thread, but understand that means topping out at what to me is a great salary as a liberal arts major, but might not be such a great salary for others.

Anonymous wrote:Ho many people that you think mommy-tracked would have actually ended up in senior exec type positions, though, really? Very few.

Correct, I would skip having kids, skip marriage, work 14 hours a day and still not even make director.