As someone whose spouse suffered from terrible PPD after our second and had to handle a toddler on top of doing daycare drop offs, I just sigh. We give each other so much grief in the work place just so we can defend our little piece of the piece.

I was that worker trying to juggle working at 5 am before the kids were awake or sending emails at 11 after that last feeding while straining to help my ill spouse. I didn't advertise it, but we are too hard on each other. Life happens. Illnesses happens. And while I get it, America's a competition and dog eat dog, you just never know when you are going to be that person in need.

We are all better now. I actually have risen to the senior executive levels in my company, and I am probably the most fair, kind leader when it comes to family/work balance because I've been there. Any of could will and inevitably will be because we are all mortals. We're one exam or tumor or stroke away from being the "needy" employee. Marissa Mayer included.

Anonymous wrote:It's a business not a charity how are you going to continue to stay profitable if people are working 1/2 the time. I can understand if you worked for a non profit or the government which are entities not drive by profits and sales. There are certain types of jobs for certain types of personal situations.

I got to work one Monday to find that a colleague had died in a car accident over the weekend. Things happen. Why companies can't set up succession plans understanding that people do need to leave or take time off for various reasons rather than discriminating, I don't really understand. You're a hardass though who doesn't let serious medical complications stand in the way of profits, so I do hope you and all your family members stay healthy forever.

This woman is a terrible person. No manager should treat any employee this way - man/woman/with/without kids.

The whole bit about not objecting when her boss wanted to fire a woman "before she got pregnant": that blew me away. You are fired just because you are capable of getting pregnant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great. So much better than Marissa Mayer, who after become a mother insists that nothing has changed.

No sh*t. If someone had rigged up a nursery next to my office and installed a nanny, my worklife wouldn't have changed much either.

I hate Marissa Meyer more as a WOHM than I did as a SAHM.

No kidding. I expected her to do a 180 after baby was born and quit to start some kind of working mom/work-life balance company, but she has no need to, her life hasn't changed.

Anonymous wrote:I can understand. When I was a young manager we had a guy whose wife was pregnant with twins plus they had a toddler and he was late all the time and having to leave early a lot. Of course I gave him grief over it. After having two rough pregnancies myself and two kids of my own now I realize I was too hard on him. Many don't realizes the juggling act involved with having kids until they have kids.

Kind of apples and oranges here, though, unless the wife was on bedrest.

I have sympathy for a family in which both parents are working and either of them is struggling to pick up the slack, ideally at different times. I'm there myself.

NO sympathy when there's a SAHP who's expecting the WOHP to save him/her all the time. That's why one parent is staying at home. Late sometimes; have to leave early sometimes--fine. Not fine if it's happening all the time.

Anonymous wrote:I was pretty shocked at how crappy she was before. I mean, hell, I didn't have to have kids to not be a judgmental bitch. I may not have understood logistics of day care pick ups but I was never a bitch like this woman admits to being.

+1,000,000

Anonymous wrote:It's a business not a charity how are you going to continue to stay profitable if people are working 1/2 the time. I can understand if you worked for a non profit or the government which are entities not drive by profits and sales. There are certain types of jobs for certain types of personal situations.

Don't be a moron. No one is saying that you should expect people to work half the time they said they would when you hired them. To be successful, a business should be structured with the assumption that the people working there are human, and parents or not, lives will get in the way. Companies are finding that if they are flexible than people tend to stick around more and are more productive. Turnover is horrible for companies and costs a ton of money.

It's a business not a charity how are you going to continue to stay profitable if people are working 1/2 the time. I can understand if you worked for a non profit or the government which are entities not drive by profits and sales. There are certain types of jobs for certain types of personal situations.

I'd be curious to hear from anyone who has worked for Power to Fly whether it's a good company to work for. She can say what she wants to the media. It's not just working parents who have to deal with a lot of discrimination and assumption that they're slackers. Anybody in my office who got sick or had to go on FMLA to take care of a very sick family member has been subjected to that discrimination. It amazes me how nasty and self centered people can be.

I can understand. When I was a young manager we had a guy whose wife was pregnant with twins plus they had a toddler and he was late all the time and having to leave early a lot. Of course I gave him grief over it. After having two rough pregnancies myself and two kids of my own now I realize I was too hard on him. Many don't realizes the juggling act involved with having kids until they have kids.

Anonymous wrote:I was pretty shocked at how crappy she was before. I mean, hell, I didn't have to have kids to not be a judgmental bitch. I may not have understood logistics of day care pick ups but I was never a bitch like this woman admits to being.

Agree.
99% Publicity stunt with 1% remorse.

My wife dealt with a number of 50-something women (and mothers) who were like this woman pre-kids. Their solution was always, "Get your husband to ..."

Basically they were so busy trying to prove themselves back in the 70s and 80s, they ended up alienating their husbands -- most of these women were on marriage #2 or #3 as well and I suspect weren't on the best of terms with their kids.

Anonymous wrote:She was in my year at college. Didn't like her then, still don't like her after this article.

Unlike her, before I had children, I was very sympathetic to people in my office who did have children, often offering to cover the office over holidays and such, thinking that someday it would likely be me who wanted to go home a little early on Halloween to take my kid trick or treating or to go to a holiday program at school. Why it is so difficult for anyone to step outside of their small universe for even a minute is beyond my comprehension.

Agree. She sounds completely intolerant and I'm betting that doesn't just extend to her past judgment of working moms. What bothers me is that since entering the workforce, I've always been aware of people needing to take time off or have a different schedule because of life outside work. Some people are going to grad school and need to leave early to get to class, some people have gotten serious illnesses that have caused them to miss months of work and have to go to a lot of dr. appointments. I've known people who have had to care for aging parents etc.

It's really not a parent thing. Life will get in the way of work for every single person in the workforce at one point or another.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I judge parents all the time. We have two nannies to make sure that childcare is always covered. If you aren't ready to juggle work and kids hen don't have them! The other folks in the office shouldn't have to pick up your slack. This goes for men and women.

If you aren't ready to actually spend time with your children then don't have them.

+ 1

Bravo! Good reply to this obnoxious woman!