Note how "mommy" is still a synonym for "engaged parent"

A tip of the hat to the blog Monster Thinking, with its recent post, "What Employers Can Do to Recruit & Retain Working Mothers," for this point:

This Is Not Just A Woman’s Issue.

It is vital that employers regard this as a company challenge—important for all individuals and for the health of the organization—not only an issue for female employees. Paternity leave and flextime are often not as readily available to men, and men don’t feel as comfortable taking it. Companies should encourage male employees to engage in the work-life conversation.

If we level the expectations for both genders, we will not have such an insurmountable disparity in the opportunities available to men and women. This TED talk by Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg offers a powerful perspective on leveling the playing field.

Fun fact: If you live in California and you're a new dad, you can usually get six weeks of paid family leave for bonding with your child. It may not be full pay, but it beats a sharp stick in the eye.

But to get to my point: So long as we still refer to workers struggling with job/life balance as being on the "mommy track," we're perpetuating the idea that only women are responsible for caretaking their family members. And that may continue to send the message that men who take time to care for a new baby or aging parent are somehow weird or abnormal.

As it stands, the American workplace profits from the assumption that every household runs on a gendered division of labor. This hurts both men (who miss out on family life) and women (who become financially vulnerable because they lose earning power). The question I have is: What is stopping us from uniting against the common enemy here?

Comments

[Aluson]

Part of what is stopping us is how men and women think about their pay packets. In my experience, many men in relationships think of their pay-packet as supporting a family, whereas women think of theirs as theirs. I think we need womens role as breadwinners acknowledged, and we need to teach girls that getting educated and getting a job means being able to support a family, not just yourself. (And I say all this as a woman who earns 50% more than her husband and has trouble thinking of that money as being used to support him)

[Mary Ann]

Paid Family Leave is not job-protected. I imagine that's a major reason why it isn't used more.

Another reason is probably the one week waiting period (which, yes, you might be able to use accrued sick/vacation/PTO to cover if you have it and your employer lets you. Your employer might also require that you use up to two weeks of vacation or PTO prior to receiving benefits.)

For Americans, we're spoiled here in California, but if your employer has fewer than 50 employees (and more than 4), then the only person getting any job-protected leave for becoming a parent is a woman who is pregnant (or who is disabled from the aftermath of pregnancy.) Not adoptive parents, not non-pregnant female spouses, not parents who use a surrogate, and not fathers, just women who are disabled by pregnancy can have up to 4 months of job-protected leave. (And the short-term disability payments that go with it.)

And, for the US, that's really quite generous.

I'm not sure what's stopping us from doing something about that.

[verucaamish]

One thing is that we often struggle in isolation. For many women I know, they feel it's a privilege to work and raise children so if they have to stay up late finish a project that's what they "chose" to do.

[free lance writer]

One element is that we often battle in privacy. For many females I know, they experience it's a advantage to function and increase kids so if they have to remain up overdue complete a venture that's what they "chose" to do.