Anonymous wrote:What is scif?
Anonymous wrote:Get real jobs.
My DH is a firefighter and works 2 or 3 24-hour shifts per week. He will retire at age 45ish with a fabulous pension. He is able to participate fully in raising our kids.
My master's is in secondary ed and work as a substitute teacher; I schedule my work days around DH's schedule. My kids have minimally needed outside child care. I traded in full-time teaching when my kids came along.
SMH at these glued-to-their-chairs moaning weenies.
Anonymous wrote:What is scif?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is it ironic that WFH anti RTO people use childcare with no RTO allowed?
I think it's different because people aren't arguing that jobs that have to be done in person should be allowed to TW. For example, someone working in a SCIF isn't advocating to be able to TW nor is someone that is a police officer or a firefighter.
Anonymous wrote:Get real jobs.
My DH is a firefighter and works 2 or 3 24-hour shifts per week. He will retire at age 45ish with a fabulous pension. He is able to participate fully in raising our kids.
My master's is in secondary ed and work as a substitute teacher; I schedule my work days around DH's schedule. My kids have minimally needed outside child care. I traded in full-time teaching when my kids came along.
SMH at these glued-to-their-chairs moaning weenies.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is it ironic that WFH anti RTO people use childcare with no RTO allowed?
I think it's different because people aren't arguing that jobs that have to be done in person should be allowed to TW. For example, someone working in a SCIF isn't advocating to be able to TW nor is someone that is a police officer or a firefighter.
Please translate to English.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s not a lack of childcare that’s the problem; it’s that these women want to have it both ways. They don’t want to pay anyone else to watch their children, they prefer to fleece their employers.
Yes I want it both ways. I have it and am highly productive with a child at home. (Older now but was helpful when younger). You assume that every job is 9-5 and mine (& many) is not. I have a lot of flexibility. And my performance reviews, and many performance- related awards, including in the past year, demonstrates that.
That’s great you have flexibility. Most people are not as fortunate as you. My spouse will have none with rto. So, they will leave at 7 and probably get home between 6-10 pm depending on traffic and dealing with folks on the west coast and all over the world and still take calls and be on call 24-7. That’s dangerous with little sleep. I have a ton of medical appointments so they will burn through their leave. You se the difference with flexibility and no flexibility.
Then he can look for another job. My immigrant parents worked 12-14 hour jobs and never complained.
Of course they complain. Getting a specialized job is not that easy for the same pay.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Another reason why 1950s America was better.
The lifestyle was different in the 1950s allowing more families to live on one income. Houses were smaller. No dishwashers. Often no air conditioning, second car, dining out, vacations other than to their families. Fewer clothes, fewer things. Living on one income is still possible, but challenging in this area.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is it ironic that WFH anti RTO people use childcare with no RTO allowed?
I think it's different because people aren't arguing that jobs that have to be done in person should be allowed to TW. For example, someone working in a SCIF isn't advocating to be able to TW nor is someone that is a police officer or a firefighter.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is it ironic that WFH anti RTO people use childcare with no RTO allowed?
I think it's different because people aren't arguing that jobs that have to be done in person should be allowed to TW. For example, someone working in a SCIF isn't advocating to be able to TW nor is someone that is a police officer or a firefighter.
Anonymous wrote:Is it ironic that WFH anti RTO people use childcare with no RTO allowed?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s not a lack of childcare that’s the problem; it’s that these women want to have it both ways. They don’t want to pay anyone else to watch their children, they prefer to fleece their employers.
Yes I want it both ways. I have it and am highly productive with a child at home. (Older now but was helpful when younger). You assume that every job is 9-5 and mine (& many) is not. I have a lot of flexibility. And my performance reviews, and many performance- related awards, including in the past year, demonstrates that.
That’s great you have flexibility. Most people are not as fortunate as you. My spouse will have none with rto. So, they will leave at 7 and probably get home between 6-10 pm depending on traffic and dealing with folks on the west coast and all over the world and still take calls and be on call 24-7. That’s dangerous with little sleep. I have a ton of medical appointments so they will burn through their leave. You se the difference with flexibility and no flexibility.
Then he can look for another job. My immigrant parents worked 12-14 hour jobs and never complained.