from the local fish wrap - we need Family-friendly policies

[khan]

http://www.daytondailynews.com/opinion/content/opinion/daily/0118suleimancbc.html

COMMUNITY BOARD OF CONTRIBUTORS

Other Voices: Family-friendly policies provide long-term benefits
Workplaces need to give moms and dads more choices
By Safa Suleiman

For the Dayton Daily News

I have been a stay-at-home mom for almost two years, and recently gave
birth to my second baby boy. I consider myself one of millions of women
out there who have worked hard to succeed. I went to college, was
student body president, worked my way through school, earned two
bachelor's degrees and completed my master's degree. I landed a good
government job and was working my way up to have a wonderful career.

Did I ever think about getting married and having children? Sure I did.

I was committed to my profession, and after three years working, I
suspended my full-time career to stay home after the birth of my first
son. I plan on returning full time to work when my children are older.
Making ends meet with one income is difficult to accomplish nowadays. To
have the choice to stay home and rear my children is a true luxury. Many
women do not have this option because of economic necessity.

There is no doubt that my generation has accomplished and advanced
considerably, thanks in part to the feminist movement. Part of me
appreciates the women (and men) who fought to give women opportunities
to compete equally with men in the workplace. However, a paradox now
exists: the lack of attention to family life or the guilt of being home
after "all that time and money" were spent on our education and breaking
through the "glass ceiling."

Feminism has sidelined motherhood in the equality battle. What now? The
challenge is to change organizational culture in order to incorporate
family-life policies in the workplace. This demands a cultural shift.

As a nation, we are far behind other industrialized countries in the
development and integration of family-friendly policies. There is a true
lack of understanding of the fact that well-raised, confident, secure
and happy children and less guilty parents create savings in so many
different areas (mental and physical health, learning "difficulties," etc.).

For example, Finland pays a woman 75 percent of her salary for several
months after birth (and she's given four paid weeks off before the baby
is born — that can be significant in preventing preterm delivery).
Children are not even allowed in child care until they are 10 months old.

Of course, it's not perfect. There is some discrimination in employment
because employers know that if they hire a young woman, at some point,
they'll be paying her salary and benefits, as well as someone else's.
The whole point is that if we could look beyond the initial investment,
the long-term savings would be overwhelming.

Examples of family-friendly policies include:

• Part-time work — While working a reduced number of hours, a person has
the advantage of continuity of employment and pro-accrual of benefits.

• Job sharing — One full-time job is shared between two employees, with
each working part time on a permanent basis.

• Working from home — Telecommuting enables employees to spend part or
all of their working time at home, on a temporary or permanent basis.
Contact with the employer can be maintained via conference call, e-mail,
or scheduled face-to-face meetings in the workplace.

• Extended parental leave — This could be unpaid leave for an extended
period (greater than 12 months) or a longer period of paid leave.

• Child care provided by the employer — An employer negotiates with a
child-care provider to reserve places in a center for an agreed
contribution amount. Extended hours for child care and emergency-care
facilities may also be provided.

• Allow children at work in emergencies — Examples include providing a
room from which the staff member can work or employing a person able to
care for the child at the workplace.

• Part-year employment/purchased leave — Sometimes called 48/52 schemes,
these arrangements allow the employee to take a number of weeks of
unpaid leave in addition to standard holiday or long service leave.

• Comp time — Allow employees the option of taking time off instead of
being paid for additional or overtime hours that they have worked.

Work-life policies and practices have the potential to enhance
opportunities and productivity for women in the workplace and provide
opportunities for men to be more involved in family life. Ultimately,
employers, employees, families and communities benefit. It pays to care.

Safa Suleiman is the former Women's Treatment Coordinator for the
Wyoming Department of Health, Substance Abuse Division. She lives in the
Dayton area.

Members of the Community Board of Contributors are chosen in the spring
from interested readers who submit applications. Columnists serve for
one year.

[Caelan]

(snip)

Post by khan
For the Dayton Daily News
I have been a stay-at-home mom for almost two years, and recently gave
birth to my second baby boy. I consider myself one of millions of women
out there who have worked hard to succeed. I went to college, was
student body president, worked my way through school, earned two
bachelor's degrees and completed my master's degree. I landed a good
government job and was working my way up to have a wonderful career.
Did I ever think about getting married and having children? Sure I did.
I was committed to my profession, and after three years working, I
suspended my full-time career to stay home after the birth of my first
son. I plan on returning full time to work when my children are older.
Making ends meet with one income is difficult to accomplish nowadays. To
have the choice to stay home and rear my children is a true luxury. Many
women do not have this option because of economic necessity.

(translation from breeder-speak)
After years of taking up a valuable place in a post-secondary
educational facility at the expense of someone who would USE their
education for something other than wiping asses and blathering baby
talk to a barely sentient proto-human, I allowed my skills to
deteriorate after only three years. I intend to return to a changed job
market years later and will demand that my outdated skills be
recognized.

Post by khan
There is no doubt that my generation has accomplished and advanced
considerably, thanks in part to the feminist movement. Part of me
appreciates the women (and men) who fought to give women opportunities
to compete equally with men in the workplace. However, a paradox now
exists: the lack of attention to family life or the guilt of being home
after "all that time and money" were spent on our education and breaking
through the "glass ceiling."

(translation from breeder-speak)
I will now throw all that the feminist movement accomplished to the
wind and allow myself to be a liability to CF women by working only a
short time before going on maternity leave and milking the company
benefits program for all it's worth. I may or may not return at the end
of my leave.

Post by khan
Feminism has sidelined motherhood in the equality battle. What now? The
challenge is to change organizational culture in order to incorporate
family-life policies in the workplace. This demands a cultural shift.

(translation from breeder-speak)
I want you all to forget about the traditional workplace where people,
you know, work in order to accomodate me and my choices at your
expence.

Post by khan
As a nation, we are far behind other industrialized countries in the
development and integration of family-friendly policies. There is a true
lack of understanding of the fact that well-raised, confident, secure
and happy children and less guilty parents create savings in so many
different areas (mental and physical health, learning "difficulties," etc.).

(translation from breeder-speak)
I don't have a good reason for you all to accomodate me at your expense
so I will spout off some vague BS in order to make you feel guilty.

Post by khan
For example, Finland pays a woman 75 percent of her salary for several
months after birth (and she's given four paid weeks off before the baby
is born - that can be significant in preventing preterm delivery).
Children are not even allowed in child care until they are 10 months old.

Note: check out Finland's tax rate and unemployment ratio.

Post by khan
Of course, it's not perfect. There is some discrimination in employment
because employers know that if they hire a young woman, at some point,
they'll be paying her salary and benefits, as well as someone else's.
The whole point is that if we could look beyond the initial investment,
the long-term savings would be overwhelming.

(translation from breeder-speak)

I know I'm screwing the chances of legitimately ambitious young women
by making them out to look like little more than liabilities on the
company's bottom line, but hey, it's TMIJITW so suck it up. What long
term savings? Um, ah....

Post by khan
· Part-time work - While working a reduced number of hours, a person has
the advantage of continuity of employment and pro-accrual of benefits.

(translation from breeder-speak)

While accomplishing little to nothing, I can work at my convenience and
still garner a cheque.

Post by khan
· Job sharing - One full-time job is shared between two employees, with
each working part time on a permanent basis.

(translation from breeder-speak)
By screwing someone out of a full time job, I can work at my
convenience.

Post by khan
· Working from home - Telecommuting enables employees to spend part or
all of their working time at home, on a temporary or permanent basis.
Contact with the employer can be maintained via conference call, e-mail,
or scheduled face-to-face meetings in the workplace.

(translation from breeder-speak)

I won't even pretend to work too hard as I rewind Barney tapes ad
infinitum and change diapers every 20 minutes, but it's convenient for
me.

Post by khan
· Extended parental leave - This could be unpaid leave for an extended
period (greater than 12 months) or a longer period of paid leave.

(translation from breeder-speak)

I want you to hold my job and keep that temp on the payroll until I
feel like returning to work.

Post by khan
· Child care provided by the employer - An employer negotiates with a
child-care provider to reserve places in a center for an agreed
contribution amount. Extended hours for child care and emergency-care
facilities may also be provided.

(translation from breeder-speak)

I want you to waste time administration's time negotiating something
that should be my responsibility entirely.

Post by khan
· Allow children at work in emergencies - Examples include providing a
room from which the staff member can work or employing a person able to
care for the child at the workplace.

(translation from breeder-speak)

I want you to put the entire office on hold for as long as I want while
I care for a sickly, screaming baby. I won't even pretend to work
during this time, but you're all right there for me to foist my work
off on. How nice of you. Better yet, you can provide the space and the
worker at your expense to parent by ill shitling for me.

Post by khan
· Part-year employment/purchased leave - Sometimes called 48/52 schemes,
these arrangements allow the employee to take a number of weeks of
unpaid leave in addition to standard holiday or long service leave.

(translation from breeder-speak)

I want to take time off whenever I want.

Post by khan
· Comp time - Allow employees the option of taking time off instead of
being paid for additional or overtime hours that they have worked.

(translation from breeder-speak)

I want to take time off whenever I want.

Post by khan
Work-life policies and practices have the potential to enhance
opportunities and productivity for women in the workplace and provide
opportunities for men to be more involved in family life. Ultimately,
employers, employees, families and communities benefit. It pays to care.

(translation from breeder-speak)

I don't care about other women in the workplace who are trying to
advance. I want them all to be hamstrung by all these costly famblee
friendly horseshit policies so that companies are so afraid of hiring
breeding age women that all their resumes hit the circular bin faster
than you can blink an eye.

[ant]

Post by Caelan
(translation from breeder-speak)
I don't care about other women in the workplace who are trying to
advance. I want them all to be hamstrung by all these costly famblee
friendly horseshit policies so that companies are so afraid of hiring
breeding age women that all their resumes hit the circular bin faster
than you can blink an eye.

Good translations, right through the article.
I hate the way these horrible people think. Well, they can try to put these
things into laws and statutes, but the employers will find ways around it.
but anyone with too many X chromosomes will be under suspicion as a
potential breeding-bag because of it.

[Abbie F.]

Post by Caelan
(snip)

Post by khan
For the Dayton Daily News
I have been a stay-at-home mom for almost two years, and recently gave
birth to my second baby boy. I consider myself one of millions of women
out there who have worked hard to succeed. I went to college, was
student body president, worked my way through school, earned two
bachelor's degrees and completed my master's degree. I landed a good
government job and was working my way up to have a wonderful career.
Did I ever think about getting married and having children? Sure I did.
I was committed to my profession, and after three years working, I
suspended my full-time career to stay home after the birth of my first
son. I plan on returning full time to work when my children are older.
Making ends meet with one income is difficult to accomplish nowadays. To
have the choice to stay home and rear my children is a true luxury. Many
women do not have this option because of economic necessity.

(translation from breeder-speak)
After years of taking up a valuable place in a post-secondary
educational facility at the expense of someone who would USE their
education for something other than wiping asses and blathering baby
talk to a barely sentient proto-human, I allowed my skills to
deteriorate after only three years. I intend to return to a changed job
market years later and will demand that my outdated skills be
recognized.

Post by khan
There is no doubt that my generation has accomplished and advanced
considerably, thanks in part to the feminist movement. Part of me
appreciates the women (and men) who fought to give women opportunities
to compete equally with men in the workplace. However, a paradox now
exists: the lack of attention to family life or the guilt of being home
after "all that time and money" were spent on our education and breaking
through the "glass ceiling."

(translation from breeder-speak)
I will now throw all that the feminist movement accomplished to the
wind and allow myself to be a liability to CF women by working only a
short time before going on maternity leave and milking the company
benefits program for all it's worth. I may or may not return at the end
of my leave.

Post by khan
Feminism has sidelined motherhood in the equality battle. What now? The
challenge is to change organizational culture in order to incorporate
family-life policies in the workplace. This demands a cultural shift.

(translation from breeder-speak)
I want you all to forget about the traditional workplace where people,
you know, work in order to accomodate me and my choices at your
expence.

Post by khan
As a nation, we are far behind other industrialized countries in the
development and integration of family-friendly policies. There is a true
lack of understanding of the fact that well-raised, confident, secure
and happy children and less guilty parents create savings in so many
different areas (mental and physical health, learning "difficulties," etc.).

(translation from breeder-speak)
I don't have a good reason for you all to accomodate me at your expense
so I will spout off some vague BS in order to make you feel guilty.

Post by khan
For example, Finland pays a woman 75 percent of her salary for several
months after birth (and she's given four paid weeks off before the baby
is born - that can be significant in preventing preterm delivery).
Children are not even allowed in child care until they are 10 months old.

Note: check out Finland's tax rate and unemployment ratio.

Post by khan
Of course, it's not perfect. There is some discrimination in employment
because employers know that if they hire a young woman, at some point,
they'll be paying her salary and benefits, as well as someone else's.
The whole point is that if we could look beyond the initial investment,
the long-term savings would be overwhelming.

(translation from breeder-speak)
I know I'm screwing the chances of legitimately ambitious young women
by making them out to look like little more than liabilities on the
company's bottom line, but hey, it's TMIJITW so suck it up. What long
term savings? Um, ah....

Post by khan
· Part-time work - While working a reduced number of hours, a person has
the advantage of continuity of employment and pro-accrual of benefits.

(translation from breeder-speak)
While accomplishing little to nothing, I can work at my convenience and
still garner a cheque.

Post by khan
· Job sharing - One full-time job is shared between two employees, with
each working part time on a permanent basis.

(translation from breeder-speak)
By screwing someone out of a full time job, I can work at my
convenience.

Post by khan
· Working from home - Telecommuting enables employees to spend part or
all of their working time at home, on a temporary or permanent basis.
Contact with the employer can be maintained via conference call, e-mail,
or scheduled face-to-face meetings in the workplace.

(translation from breeder-speak)
I won't even pretend to work too hard as I rewind Barney tapes ad
infinitum and change diapers every 20 minutes, but it's convenient for
me.

Post by khan
· Extended parental leave - This could be unpaid leave for an extended
period (greater than 12 months) or a longer period of paid leave.

(translation from breeder-speak)
I want you to hold my job and keep that temp on the payroll until I
feel like returning to work.

Post by khan
· Child care provided by the employer - An employer negotiates with a
child-care provider to reserve places in a center for an agreed
contribution amount. Extended hours for child care and emergency-care
facilities may also be provided.

(translation from breeder-speak)
I want you to waste time administration's time negotiating something
that should be my responsibility entirely.

Post by khan
· Allow children at work in emergencies - Examples include providing a
room from which the staff member can work or employing a person able to
care for the child at the workplace.

(translation from breeder-speak)
I want you to put the entire office on hold for as long as I want while
I care for a sickly, screaming baby. I won't even pretend to work
during this time, but you're all right there for me to foist my work
off on. How nice of you. Better yet, you can provide the space and the
worker at your expense to parent by ill shitling for me.

Post by khan
· Part-year employment/purchased leave - Sometimes called 48/52 schemes,
these arrangements allow the employee to take a number of weeks of
unpaid leave in addition to standard holiday or long service leave.

(translation from breeder-speak)
I want to take time off whenever I want.

Post by khan
· Comp time - Allow employees the option of taking time off instead of
being paid for additional or overtime hours that they have worked.

(translation from breeder-speak)
I want to take time off whenever I want.

Post by khan
Work-life policies and practices have the potential to enhance
opportunities and productivity for women in the workplace and provide
opportunities for men to be more involved in family life. Ultimately,
employers, employees, families and communities benefit. It pays to care.

(translation from breeder-speak)
I don't care about other women in the workplace who are trying to
advance. I want them all to be hamstrung by all these costly famblee
friendly horseshit policies so that companies are so afraid of hiring
breeding age women that all their resumes hit the circular bin faster
than you can blink an eye.

Caelan, that was magnificent!! Reposted in its entirety for extra
emphasis.

A preggo cow-worker asked if there was a policy about bringing in
baybees because she wanted to "show off her boys." See? She admitted
to having no worthwhile reason for interrupting our work; it's pure
vanity. I don't know why the guys indulge her by looking at her sprog
pix. I purposely turn around and do other things.

:: Beavis & Butthead:: heh heh, heh heh "I'd like to show off my boys
too!" heh heh

[ant]

• Allow children at work in emergencies — Examples include providing a
room from which the staff member can work or employing a person able
to care for the child at the workplace.

NO FRIGGING WAY!!!!!!

I hate that! Disruptive, annoying, more disruptive...
Do these people know what a real job with real work is?!
How does a small business provide that?
Are they thinking of all workplaces? No. They are thinking of offices,
schools, hospitals et al. Do most women work in these places? No, but the
middle class ones do! and as usual, that's who they're thinking about. And
they are thinking about the women bringing kids to work, not the men.

[Aynthem]

Post by ant

Post by khan
• Allow children at work in emergencies — Examples include providing a
room from which the staff member can work or employing a person able
to care for the child at the workplace.

NO FRIGGING WAY!!!!!!
I hate that! Disruptive, annoying, more disruptive...
Do these people know what a real job with real work is?!
How does a small business provide that?
Are they thinking of all workplaces? No. They are thinking of offices,
schools, hospitals et al. Do most women work in these places? No, but the
middle class ones do! and as usual, that's who they're thinking about. And
they are thinking about the women bringing kids to work, not the men.

I often wonder if the same moos whining about keeping their children in
the office workplace with them would be as accepting if the retail
workers and food service workers (who are majority female) kept *their*
children with them, as well.

Methinks the office moos would be the first ones bitching and whining
about how their shopping or dining experience was ruined by someone
else's ill-mannered brats running around and screaming. They certainly
would scream at having to pay the extra ten cents a cup coffee surcharge
to pay the overhead of keeping the non-productive daycare space and minder.

Melody

[Rabbit]

Post by khan
For example, Finland pays a woman 75 percent of her salary for several
months after birth (and she's given four paid weeks off before the baby is
born — that can be significant in preventing preterm delivery).

Ummm ... not quite, dear.

The TAXPAYERS of Finland pay the woman.

Taxpayers. As in all of us -- parents and childfree alike.

Rabbit

[Kent_AOL]

Post by khan
http://www.daytondailynews.com/opinion/content/opinion/daily/0118suleimancbc.html
I have been a stay-at-home mom for almost two years

BIG surprise that such an article is written by a SAH Moo, I tell ya!

Post by khan
I was committed to my profession, and after three years working, I
suspended my full-time career to stay home

HAHAHAHA. *Three years* constitutes "commitment to her profession"?
This one's a real loss from the workplace, yesiree.

Post by khan
Feminism has sidelined motherhood in the equality battle. What now?

"Now", Moo-hood has sidelined equity in the baby-worshipping battle.

Post by khan
For example, Finland pays a woman 75 percent of her salary for several
months after birth (and she's given four paid weeks off before the baby
is born - that can be significant in preventing preterm delivery).

You go ahead and start paying those Finnish tax rates--we'll put the
balance into a "maternity account" for you!

Post by khan
Of course, it's not perfect. There is some discrimination in employment
because employers know that if they hire a young woman, at some point,
they'll be paying her salary and benefits, as well as someone else's.

"because employers KNOW..."

Well, good news and bad news that she recognizes this. Good news,
because she acknowledges that she is helping to cause discrimination
against "young women" her very own self. Bad news, because CF women get
painted with the same moo-brush.

Post by khan
· Part-time work - While working a reduced number of hours, a person has
the advantage of continuity of employment and pro-accrual of benefits.

why is this "family" friendly--seems "everybody friendly" to me?

Post by khan
· Working from home - Telecommuting enables employees to spend part or
all of their working time at home, on a temporary or permanent basis.

Yes, we've ALL had encounters with a "telecommuting Moo". Sorry, but
just because the computer is turned on (to update her Hipmoo page)
doesn't count as "working from home" while 3 smeared toddlers scream
and paw on you, drowning out the phone when co-workers call for
business.

Post by khan
Contact with the employer can be maintained via conference call, e-mail,
or scheduled face-to-face meetings in the workplace.

It WOULD be interesting to insist on webcams for telecommuting
Moos...let the whole boardroom see them in their jelly-stained sweats
still reeking of yesterday's spitup, titfeeding one while the other
demonstrates his newly learned skill of standing up to pee--on the
carpet.

Post by khan
· Extended parental leave - This could be unpaid leave for an extended
period (greater than 12 months) or a longer period of paid leave.

I agree with ONE word in the above sentence: "unpaid".

Post by khan
· Child care provided by the employer - An employer negotiates with a
child-care provider to reserve places in a center for an agreed
contribution amount. Extended hours for child care and emergency-care
facilities may also be provided.

You want to pay for it, Moo, and keep the brats in a separate building,
knock your lights out. omething tells em you'd STILL be hauling them
into your own office everyday to show off how they suckle your 3-inch
nipple, however.

Post by khan
· Allow children at work in emergencies

HA--we *all* know what a Moo considers an "emergency"! "Snottly's Sugar
Bombs didn't have a prize inside! It's an emergency, with potential
long-term trauma effects, and I have to bring him to work today!"

Post by khan
· Part-year employment/purchased leave - Sometimes called 48/52 schemes,
these arrangements allow the employee to take a number of weeks of
unpaid leave in addition to standard holiday or long service leave.

I actually agree with this, but only if they are available equally to
ALL employees, not just moos. (I know, pipe dream).

Post by khan
Work-life policies and practices have the potential to enhance
opportunities and productivity for women in the workplace and provide
opportunities for men to be more involved in family life. Ultimately,
employers, employees, families and communities benefit. It pays to care.

Where is the "care" for doing your job professionally, Bovina?


Kent

[Omixochitl]

Post by Kent_AOL
It WOULD be interesting to insist on webcams for telecommuting
Moos...let the whole boardroom see them in their jelly-stained sweats
still reeking of yesterday's spitup, titfeeding one while the other
demonstrates his newly learned skill of standing up to pee--on the
carpet.

I once worked in an office which insisted on childcare arrangements for
telecommuting parents. Back when I was a teen, one of my summer jobs was
being the babysitter for a telecommuting parent. In both cases, the idea
was that you can't focus on work in your home office if you're looking
after kids yourself.

[Ilene Bilenky]

Post by Omixochitl
In both cases, the idea
was that you can't focus on work in your home office if you're looking
after kids yourself.

I once had a telephone interview with a "consultant" HR person. The
company was a small startup and didn't have an HR department, so gave me
this woman's number to start the application process. When I called her,
there was a screaming kid in the background the whole time. It certainly
made me think the company was completely lame and fly by night.

Ilene B

[LillyDipper]

Post by Ilene Bilenky
I once had a telephone interview with a "consultant" HR person. The
company was a small startup and didn't have an HR department, so gave me
this woman's number to start the application process. When I called her,
there was a screaming kid in the background the whole time.

You've GOT to be kidding! This is wrong on soooo many levels.

[Ilene Bilenky]

Post by LillyDipper
You've GOT to be kidding! This is wrong on soooo many levels.

Well, Mercury Computers did seem to rebound from this rocky start. My
brief tech writing "career" did not. I couldn't stand the work.

Ilene B

[Merk]

Post by Ilene Bilenky

Post by Omixochitl
In both cases, the idea
was that you can't focus on work in your home office if you're looking
after kids yourself.

I once had a telephone interview with a "consultant" HR person. The
company was a small startup and didn't have an HR department, so gave me
this woman's number to start the application process. When I called her,
there was a screaming kid in the background the whole time.

Had a lawyer like that once, but not for long.

Nothing like trying to arrange a complicated house closing to the
accompaniment of screaming kids and a lawyer yelling, "Where is your
daddy? I said, where is your daddy? Could you get YOUR son out of the
room for JUST ONE minute? I'm talking to a client here!"

Merk

[Michelle in WA state]

Post by Kent_AOL

=B7 Part-time work - While working a reduced number of hours, a person has
the advantage of continuity of employment and pro-accrual of benefits.

why is this "family" friendly--seems "everybody friendly" to me?

Because it's only extended to breeders?

-- Michelle

Please, Don't Breed or Buy While Shelter Pets Die.

[Kay]

Why can't the people who come up with this crap come to terms with the
fact that YOU CAN'T HAVE IT ALL? Why must the business world adopt
policies and practices to make their lives more convenient? Why is
their perspective and justification focused only on parental
obligations and benefits? Some of the ideas would also be good for
those of us with elderly relatives that we may help take care of. But
is that reasoning used? NO! Only reasons pertaining to a
child-centric lifestyle appear to be justifiable.

The world doesn't owe you anything. The business world in particular
doesn't owe anyone anything. If you work hard and prove yourself, you
may be rewarded. Some companies who value you and know your work ethic
may bend the rules to accomodate you. But to make policies like this a
given is just ridiculous. There are already too many women taking
advantage of leave time and pay only to inform their employer at the
last possible minute before they are due to return, that "I can't come
back, I am going to stay home and be a full time mom." You KNOW they
decided sooner, but they milk the system anyway. I have friends who
have done it. It's BS.

OTOH, I also have a friend who knew she wanted to be a SAHM and she
worked out a plan with her company to make sure everything was finished
before she left after the birth of her daughter, and then she went into
business for herself as a consultant. Her company actually hired her
to work for them, because she proved that she was a good, honest worker
and they could count on her to see things through. She did NOT leave
them in a lurch when she had her baby. My point, women (or men) who
want it all should make it happen for themselves instead of expecting
it all to just be given to them. It CAN be done, and if you are so
bright and talented then you will find a way to make it happen. Only
lazy, selfish minded people expect the world to just give them
everything for little or no reason.

[Omixochitl]

Post by Kay
Why can't the people who come up with this crap come to terms with the
fact that YOU CAN'T HAVE IT ALL? Why must the business world adopt
policies and practices to make their lives more convenient? Why is
their perspective and justification focused only on parental
obligations and benefits? Some of the ideas would also be good for
those of us with elderly relatives that we may help take care of. But
is that reasoning used? NO! Only reasons pertaining to a
child-centric lifestyle appear to be justifiable.
The world doesn't owe you anything. The business world in particular
doesn't owe anyone anything...

On second thought, maybe the people who come up with this crap are trying
to do the same thing for themselves that the business world is doing for
itself? You know, trying to increase what one takes and decrease what one
gives in return for it and not minding how it affects others? Hmm...

[Ilene Bilenky]

Post by khan
Work-life policies and practices have the potential to enhance
opportunities and productivity for women in the workplace and provide
opportunities for men to be more involved in family life. Ultimately,
employers, employees, families and communities benefit. It pays to care.

For better and/or worse, the current cutthroat U.S. work environment
isn't going to do jack for anyone, never mind institute new benefits and
favors. And as much as some men might *claim* they want a more
family-friendly environment, they don't seem to really want it or
support it or take advantage of it.

Women who have kids continue to be one man away from welfare, or one
old-aging away from poverty.

Ilene B

[Sharon]

Post by Ilene Bilenky

Post by khan
Work-life policies and practices have the potential to enhance
opportunities and productivity for women in the workplace and provide
opportunities for men to be more involved in family life. Ultimately,
employers, employees, families and communities benefit. It pays to care.

For better and/or worse, the current cutthroat U.S. work environment
isn't going to do jack for anyone, never mind institute new benefits and
favors. And as much as some men might *claim* they want a more
family-friendly environment, they don't seem to really want it or
support it or take advantage of it.

Yep. I'm struggling through a small book on corporate politics right
now that adresses this (sort of). Struggling because half of me is cynical
enough to agree and understand what the author's saying, and the other half of
me is screaming at how flipping wrong it is.
Anyway, one of her points is that most HR programs are put in place for
two reasons, 1) to make the company look proactive and caring, and 2) to
protect the company against employee lawsuits. For example, she cites the
sexuall harrassment program that most U.S. companies have these days. She says
that it's a job-killer to ever actually use the official grievance procedure if
you find yourself being sexually harrassed. She says that you should do
everything you can to handle it privately and not bring attention to it, and
under no circumstances should you bring outside attention to it for example by
bringing suit against the company. My teeth were grinding at this because
beyond a certain level there's nothing you can do privately other than just
quit, and if you're not the person who is in the wrong you shouldn't have to
quit. But also I do see her point that from upper management's perspective,
you're not a victim, you're a rabble-rouser and too much trouble to be worth
keeping around.
I think she also briefly mentions that family-friendly policies aren't
actually meant to be used by employees. (Also things like workplace wellness
or company-sponsored counselling, drug or alcohol services.) Reason? They
cost money when you use them. Much better from the cut-throat corporate's
point of view if you don't use them but smile and agree publicly that you're
glad they're there and how wonderful corporate is to offer them!
The whole thing makes me sad and rather frustrated. I hate being this
cynical.

- Sharon
"Gravity... is a harsh mistress!"

[Michelle in WA state]

Post by Sharon
Yep. I'm struggling through a small book on corporate politics right
now that adresses this (sort of).

Title? Author?

-- Michelle

Please, Don't Breed or Buy While Shelter Pets Die.

[Sharon]

Post by Michelle in WA state

Post by Sharon
Yep. I'm struggling through a small book on corporate politics right
now that adresses this (sort of).

Title? Author?

Ack, sorry. Let me get back to you on that. It's at home. I did a quick
amazon search and couldn't find it, but I'm at work and can't risk being
though "shopping" while on duty.

- Sharon
"Gravity... is a harsh mistress!"

[LillyDipper]

Post by Sharon
Anyway, one of her points is that most HR programs are put in place for
two reasons, 1) to make the company look proactive and caring, and 2) to
protect the company against employee lawsuits.

Sad but true IMO. I also once heard that anything you tell a
company-sponsored counselor could be used against you by the company.
Your conversations aren't uber-private and protected by the same laws
that govern private sector counselling sessions. Supposedly the
company pays the counselor so they own the records, so to speak. I'm
not sure how true this is so if anyone with a leg up on the legalities
can let me know if this can really happen.

[Sharon]

Post by LillyDipper

Post by Sharon
Anyway, one of her points is that most HR programs are put in place for
two reasons, 1) to make the company look proactive and caring, and 2) to
protect the company against employee lawsuits.

Sad but true IMO. I also once heard that anything you tell a
company-sponsored counselor could be used against you by the company.
Your conversations aren't uber-private and protected by the same laws
that govern private sector counselling sessions. Supposedly the
company pays the counselor so they own the records, so to speak. I'm
not sure how true this is so if anyone with a leg up on the legalities
can let me know if this can really happen.

Yep. What gets me is that they lie about it: "Your information is
100% confidential". Yeah, right.
Like a couple of years ago when my company apparently hired one of
those contracting nurse companies to provide telephone support for medical
questions. They did announce the program in a flyer. But then a couple months
later I got a phonecall at work from someone who told me that she was from the
program and got my name from the company in a list of people who might have
arthritis, diabetes, or heart problems. She asked me if I or anyone if my
family had those and I promptly told her no. I politely gave her the heave ho
off my phone.
And how in the world does my company know I have arthritis if they
don't look at my medical records???? eh?

- Sharon
"Gravity... is a harsh mistress!"

[Gillian White]

Post by Sharon
And how in the world does my company know I have arthritis if they
don't look at my medical records???? eh?

When a friend of mine in the US got pregnant, she started getting junk phone
calls from baby-centric companies before she had even had the chance to let
all of her relatives know that she was expecting.

Gillian

[deering24]

Post by Sharon
For example, she cites the
sexuall harrassment program that most U.S. companies have these days. She says
that it's a job-killer to ever actually use the official grievance procedure if
you find yourself being sexually harrassed. She says that you should do
everything you can to handle it privately and not bring attention to it, and
under no circumstances should you bring outside attention to it for example by
bringing suit against the company. My teeth were grinding at this because
beyond a certain level there's nothing you can do privately other than just
quit, and if you're not the person who is in the wrong you shouldn't have to
quit. But also I do see her point that from upper management's perspective,
you're not a victim, you're a rabble-rouser and too much trouble to be worth
keeping around.

...which means that upper management 1) isn't worth squat; 2) don't want
to really address this problem if they are still playing that "blame the
victim" shit; 3) deserve everything they get. :P Most harassment
victims don't claim harassment because it's fun or because they want to
cause trouble. They just want that mess to _stop_, and if management
won't handle the responsibility of putting an end to it, they deserve to
be sued into living in boxes.

C.
**

[Sharon]

Post by deering24
...which means that upper management 1) isn't worth squat; 2) don't want
to really address this problem if they are still playing that "blame the
victim" shit; 3) deserve everything they get. :P Most harassment
victims don't claim harassment because it's fun or because they want to
cause trouble. They just want that mess to _stop_, and if management
won't handle the responsibility of putting an end to it, they deserve to
be sued into living in boxes.

I agree with you. Her point is that all they care about is the bottom
line in terms of dollars. Lawsuits cost money, media attention costs money,
even dealing with the problem internally costs money in terms of the labor
hours of managers diverted to meetings or whatever is needed to solve the
problem. She also points out that management values the managers more than the
worker-bee employees, which also tends to be true but is still wrong.
Overall she's obviously an HR drone who only sees one side of the
issue and suggests generic "solutions". One that's pretty well-known but she
mentions it in her book also, is that you should never be negative.
I'd love to get her alone in a room and ask her to solve a few specific
scenarios in only positive terms. There are many situations where
management decisions actually have an adverse effect on the bottom line. There
are times when managment should listen to the worker-bees, yet they never do.
Typically they realize that there's a serious problem only when it reaches a
scale large enough that it causes a blip in quarterly earnings.

- Sharon
"Gravity... is a harsh mistress!"

[mroo philpott-smythe]

Post by Ilene Bilenky

Post by khan
Work-life policies and practices have the potential to enhance
opportunities and productivity for women in the workplace and provide
opportunities for men to be more involved in family life. Ultimately,
employers, employees, families and communities benefit. It pays to care.

Yaknow, I'm gonna reveal my furr'nness right here -- what's wrong with
having a labor-friendly workplace, goddammit? Somewhere back along the
line, we all lived off the land, making our own lives. The Industrial
Revolution occurred. It dispossessed a lot of peasants, who then had to
find paying employment. And now we find ourselves all either wage slaves
or entrepreneurs. I don't want to dampen entrepreneurism - that's how
civilization moves forward. But what the fuck is wrong with people making
enough money to afford a decent life? What the fuck is up with
"unaffordable housing" for the working class when the wealthy live in
McMansions (on the credit card, of course)???

It is SO FUCKING WRONG that people have to pay a million for a fixer-
upper, which they get on a dodgy credit scheme.

I don't have the answers. Just questions. But it's time we questioned the
status quo. Even if it does benefit mooos by accident. Because I sure
would like to have more time off to relax and get my stress levels down,
and, oh, I don't know, do my laundry, or cook, or write that fucking
novel.

Post by Ilene Bilenky
For better and/or worse, the current cutthroat U.S. work environment
isn't going to do jack for anyone, never mind institute new benefits
and favors. And as much as some men might *claim* they want a more
family-friendly environment, they don't seem to really want it or
support it or take advantage of it.

Oh, well, men need to realize that the world has turned into this giant
hamster wheel of the Free Market where all our jobs can and will be
outsourced any old time. The fact is, those of us who still have jobs
need to lobby for better labour laws that will penalize corporations for
stupid behaviour like, oh, I dunno, offshoring when they're making all
their profits onshore. Or Enron lying to their employees to get them to
invest in the corporation even as the directors were selling off stock.
And if you try to tell me that the law *already* provides for that, let
me just ask you when that piece o'shit "Kenny Boy" Lay actually goes to
trial, and does his multimillion dollar Colorado property go on the
auction block to, maybe, reimburse some of those working stiffs who got
so unregenerately stiffed by his doodah?

Post by Ilene Bilenky
Women who have kids continue to be one man away from welfare, or one
old-aging away from poverty.

That needs to be written up in 10-foot high letters and hung as a banner
on every goddamn freeway. Why don't they get it? If you pop a sprog, you
are *forced* to interact with the other sprog-poppin'-party for the rest
of your life. So if you don't want to spend, oh, twenty or more years
with someone, you better fuckin' use protection if you plan to fuck 'em.
I mean?

OK, I'm done rantin' now. For now.

sq

[deering24]

Post by mroo philpott-smythe
And now we find ourselves all either wage slaves
or entrepreneurs. I don't want to dampen entrepreneurism - that's how
civilization moves forward. But what the fuck is wrong with people making
enough money to afford a decent life? What the fuck is up with
"unaffordable housing" for the working class when the wealthy live in
McMansions (on the credit card, of course)???

And it doesn't make sense that to make a decent living, one has to
become an entrepreneur. That's the standard
libertarian/right-wing/corporate-booster retort, and it's as unrealistic
and ignorant now as it ever was (as well as one that ignores the fact
that if everyone takes that advice, there will be no more middle class.
Not everyone can be an entrepreneur, and it's ridiculous to think that
being so will automatically make you successful.) You can _not_ have a
functioning society without people who just want to do their jobs and
make a good living doing so. And on the most basic level, if those
people don't get paid enough to live on, who is going to buy the goods
this country lives and dies by?

Post by mroo philpott-smythe
Oh, well, men need to realize that the world has turned into this giant
hamster wheel of the Free Market where all our jobs can and will be
outsourced any old time.

People who support this shit never, ever, ever think the hammer will
fall on them--or that they won't get financially blindsided in some way.
They _can't_ afford to think like that, else they would realize the
system they support is flawed--and that would cause too much
introspection and straight-up fear. Better to blame those flaws on those
losers who weren't smart enough to get into a high-paying field. Or be
born to rich parents. Or screw everyone else over. Or affirmative
action. Or...

Post by mroo philpott-smythe
And if you try to tell me that the law *already* provides for that, let
me just ask you when that piece o'shit "Kenny Boy" Lay actually goes to
trial,

That will be this week, actually--g! Monday, IIRC.

Post by mroo philpott-smythe

Post by Ilene Bilenky
Women who have kids continue to be one man away from welfare, or one
old-aging away from poverty.

That needs to be written up in 10-foot high letters and hung as a banner
on every goddamn freeway. Why don't they get it?

For the same reason their business counterparts swear up and down that
the free market is uber allies. They don't want to believe it and they
can't believe it, because if the systems of security they live by are
shown to be flawed, what will they do? They are taught to be afraid of
being poor/alone--and then are taught that marriage is the only true way
to solve that. And when that proves not to be the case, they are given a
whole batch of folks to blame--gays, feminists, liberals, whomever. They
never stop to think about all of this--or figure out whether it is what
they really want.

C.
**

[elizabeth]

"People who support this shit never, ever, ever think the hammer will
fall on them--or that they won't get financially blindsided in some
way.
They _can't_ afford to think like that, else they would realize the
system they support is flawed--and that would cause too much
introspection and straight-up fear. Better to blame those flaws on
those
losers who weren't smart enough to get into a high-paying field. Or be
born to rich parents. Or screw everyone else over. Or affirmative
action. Or..."

I think a certain jason should read this. But he won't get it, anymore
than the moos will get it. Cognitive dissonance is a bitch I guess. I
was somehow spared the OS flaw that lets a person be so illogical that
they will keep making the same mistakes over and over and over again.
This is why the failure of feminism was aided and abetted by
capitalism, which is 'the philosophy of cancer' because it assumes that
growth can be maintained indefinitely.

These business leaders and breeders have all the thinking ability of
cancer. The organism is in its terminal stages, and there is nothing
that anyone can do about it.

Remember the stages of acceptance of death? Denial, anger ... I've
gotten to the acceptance stage. There is no future, the wilderness I
loved is destroyed, and I just don't care anymore, other than
melancholy at the loss of so much beauty.

It's The Children who have No Future. I hope they ask their breeders
why. I'lll just laugh.

[Michelle in WA state]

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:20:35 -0000, "mroo philpott-smythe"

Post by mroo philpott-smythe

Post by Ilene Bilenky
Women who have kids continue to be one man away from welfare, or one
old-aging away from poverty.

That needs to be written up in 10-foot high letters and hung as a banner
on every goddamn freeway. Why don't they get it? If you pop a sprog, you
are *forced* to interact with the other sprog-poppin'-party for the rest
of your life.

I suspect that THAT, right there, is at least as common a reason for baby
rabies as actually *wanting* the squalling little monster itself.

They think they've "got" the babydaddy as a permanent fixture once they
Have His Baybee. Never occurs to them that they might eventually decide
that babydaddy ain't such a prize. (Or, of course, that he'll just split
and leave his pwecious famblee high and dry.)

Codependence, fear of abandonment, inability to tolerate being alone are
powerful motivators for a *huge* majority of the female population.

-- Michelle

Please, Don't Breed or Buy While Shelter Pets Die.

[Sharon]

Post by Michelle in WA state
Codependence, fear of abandonment, inability to tolerate being alone are
powerful motivators for a *huge* majority of the female population.

Every now and then I hear that women still think they can change their
men, too. That's one of the *biggest* stupid mistakes anyone can make. Can
anybody speculate on where this idea comes from and why it's perpetuating? I
sure have no idea.

- Sharon
"Gravity... is a harsh mistress!"

[The Rocket Scientist]

Post by Sharon
Every now and then I hear that women still think they can change their
men, too. That's one of the *biggest* stupid mistakes anyone can make. Can
anybody speculate on where this idea comes from and why it's perpetuating? I
sure have no idea.

Probably from the same place where men get the idea that their women
will NEVER change. Personally, I'm really glad that DW has changed
over our 33 years together. I doin't think I could have tolerated her
the way she used to be. (I wouldn't mind us having our 20-year-old
bodies, though!)

Guys, your lady will mature, she will grow, she will advance, and it's
a GOOD thing. Get used to the idea.

Bill Sullivan

The worst part about being a curmudgeon is seeing all of your dire
predictions of disaster come true.