Blogs > This Working Life blog > February 2013 > The cost of caring
One of the major causes of insecure work for women is lack of options to balance work with family responsibilities. Australia can afford to do better, and unions are campaigning to build on recent gains for family friendly working arrangements.
by Eleni Hale
WOMEN continue to be propelled into insecure work as many employers fail to modernise their approach by offering flexible hours to staff with family responsibilities.
Unions are concerned that a lack of compromise and forward thinking is pushing many women into work where they earn less and don’t have security or leave entitlements.
ACTU President, Ged Kearney says gender discrimination is alive and well in Australia and action is needed to protect pregnant women, mothers and those caring for disabled and the elderly.
“Women are much more likely to be the ones who are forced to forfeit careers and stay at home with children,” she says. “They are also the ones who usually cut back on work to look after elderly parents. What we see is that women have less super saved for retirement, earn less over their lifetime and are much, much less likely than men to hold senior company positions. You could say caring costs women a hell of a lot.”
Research shows that women on average earn $1 million less over a lifetime compared to men.
Unions have welcomed the Government's recent ‘right to request’ announcements.
“Women and men have to be able to say to their employer, ‘I need time to care and time to work and I need you to genuinely consider my request for flexibility in my hours so I can do both’,” says Kearney.
This issue is a personal one for many women. Many women find it difficult to talk about this publically as it can jeopardise their employment prospects.
One woman (who asked not to be named) says: “Being a carer for my elderly mother, I need to take time off regularly. I find employers say they understand but in the long term they just see you as a burden.”
Another was forced to resign. “I asked my employer (if I could) return to work from maternity leave for four days a week and one day working from home, I was told there was nothing for me…there was no other option but to resign,” she says.
When it comes to balancing work and family responsibilities, it often seems like two steps forward, and one step back.
Last year, when Melissa Mayer was appointed CEO of the internet giant Yahoo! and also announced at the same time that she was pregnant, there was widespread acclaim that we seemed to have entered a new, enlightened era.
Unfortunately, it proved shortlived. Mayer took only two weeks off work after having her baby in September, and this week, in a controversial staff memo, banned all Yahoo! employees from working from home to balance their caring responsibilities. Predictably, it has created a storm and sparked a new round of debate about how to balance work and family responsibilities in the modern era.
However, not all employers are stuck in the yesteryear. Blogger Bub Hub, said he has seen some big changes in his workplace.
“I have known a number of senior law firm partners who were dead-set against part time employees, [but] were pleasantly surprised and openly admitted that they were wrong and that they could now see how well it could work,” he says.
Research shows that those who find a way to accommodate the changing needs of the modern family reap real rewards as people, not only appreciate the flexibility they are offered but, find that now they are a carer they are much more reliant on that employment.
Kearney says what is needed is a reasonable approach.
“Consider your business model and whether there are changes that could be made that would allow flexible, yet secure, working arrangements for women,” she says.
“Who knows, you might find your staff appreciate this so much they work harder for you.”
Posted by ACTUadmin on 28/02/2013 5:42:16 PM
Filed under: care, caring, childcare, children, family, family-friendly, Ged-Kearney, Marissa, Mayer, pregnancy, pregnant, right-to-request, time, to, work-life, balance
The real problem is the conflict between the growing need to maximise profit in the private sector or to reduce 'costs' in the public sector allied to the centuries old conditioning of women by the 'establishment' and major religions that they are to be subservient to men and not to question their ordained role in society.Of course Australia can do better! There is enough wealth in the country to provide meaningful work for all who want it and to provide flexible conditions to enable family commitments to be accomodated in the workplace. There is also enough wealth to provide adequate incomes and support for those women who either by health or by choice would rather remain at home raising their family in the 'traditional' manner advocated by that same establishment and religions.The impediment is of course the woefully inequitable distribution of that wealth. As long as society tolerates the likes of Clive Palmer being able to boast that he has enough personal wealth (gained his exploitation of Australias, that is our, resources) to build a replica of the bloody Titanic regardless of what it eventually costs (in the multi millions if not billions) for the exclusive enjoyment of those members of society who have accumulated the exhorbitant amount of spare cash to be able to idle away their time in a world cruise on this tribute to ostentatious extravagance then our calls for better treatment of women in the workplace and in the home will be farting in the wind of capitalist greed.
Yes, and there is more info on the new WHS legislation and...
My name is Craig and i was wondering if i could get an email...
Sorry, but an ellipsis is THREE dots. It does not add any...
Public .you believe abbots changed from his workchoices days...
Powered by community engine