Parenting, work and gender - who takes the day off?

[Beach Mama]

I get sick leave, as a subby DH doesn't so it falls to me and always has based on that alone. Now though DH is SAHD and works part time and I'm full time so kids stay with him if needed although it's much less than when they were wee squids getting sick all the time at crèche.

[Ca Plane Pour Moi]

We have a fairly simple rule. If I'm at home, I deal with it. If I'm not, then DH deals with it.

Having said that, I work on-site only in school terms, so have the school holidays at home. And have applied to cut down to part-time in a few months too.

It really irritates me when I'm the third person on the emergency contact list and am the first one called. No. Call DH. He's the Daddy, he can leave work, he can take calls while he works, call him. Not me. And even if you cannot contact DH, you call contact #2 on the list (PiL). Don't come straight to me because I'm the Mamma. Call contact #1, then #2. Then me. That has happened before and work insisted that I go. I was really mad: I shouldn't be in that position, nor should work. I was looking forward to my afternoon. DH was also angry, he should have been called.

DH's work are really OK with it: he can work from home and will make up some of the hours if he needs to. He is contactable by phone. He will go in during the evening after I get home from work for a couple of hours to deal with stuff. So DH doesn't really get "time off" for Liebs being ill, but he gets something.

DH and I would probably like to have a chat to some of those men interviewed too!

[Floweryfields]

It really irritates me when I'm the third person on the emergency contact list and am the first one called. No. Call DH. He's the Daddy, he can leave work, he can take calls while he works, call him. Not me. And even if you cannot contact DH, you call contact #2 on the list (PiL). .

Just in response to this, in my line of work, the parents are always the first contact before anyone else. I kind of understand if it's a case of your child being ill, but in an emergency, say an ambulance had been called, would you really want you PIL called before you? It would always be our policy that parent 1 and 2 be contacted before anyone else on the list.

[Ca Plane Pour Moi]

Just in response to this, in my line of work, the parents are always the first contact before anyone else. I kind of understand if it's a case of your child being ill, but in an emergency, say an ambulance had been called, would you really want you PIL called before you? It would always be our policy that parent 1 and 2 be contacted before anyone else on the list.

DH should be the first call - if he passes it to me, then fine. He'll get it in the neck, not the childcare centre. If an ambulance were to be called, then DH should be called. And this was for a messy nappy and a temperature, not an ambulance. (I know, we weren't talking specifics.)

Actually, yes, I would like PiL called before me even for an ambulance. The reason being, I am a teacher. I work in a classroom. I do not keep my phone on me. I wouldn't hear the call, get to the phone, leave the building etc. I'd want someone who can easily drop everything and be with my son to be with him, so he was not scared and alone. That means that PiL would be there before I even knew about it, even if I were called first. And I'm OK with that.

Thank you for making me think about it.

And while DH's job is great at him leaving for an ill DS, or going to school plays, or working odd hours, they're rubbish at looking after me. So I need to work, can't do school drop off... tough, DH is going abroad for a week. In term time. Despite me providing a list of holiday dates and saying "in these weeks please". Has never, ever happened. Ended up in a place I'd rather not be, just so I can do the school run if needs be. His work can cope with Daddy looking after children, but not a man with a working wife. Bizarre.

[wysiwyg]

Flexible working, is definitely a 'family issue' not really a women's issue - although it does predominately impact women at this point in time (but if it is impacting women it is impacting their family too you would think?).

I think overall the real problem is there is still such a perception that more hours = better job getting done - (which is far from the truth) - I am not sure that it really matters why you are part-time (children or no children) but is the fact you aren't there all the time. Most of the time why people can't cope with you not being there all the time - is because they can't be organised enough to make sure things happen along the right time-lines corresponding with your working hours - part-time working involves more planning and thinking ahead (if you aren't there at their beck and call - it is seen as a problem caused by you, not by their time mismanagement). It is like working with offshore companies, there are cost benefits, but there are also then requirements for a specific way of working, and far more organisation and documentation than otherwise required. It is quite odd to me that employers don't actually do a cost-benefit analysis on it, yes they could be unorganized and have you at beck and call all the time but that is actually costing them money (sometimes to me it seems like they think they are paying you full-time for part-time) and maybe for an extra half hour of planning on their part they could save a days wages. It seems ridiculous to me, in my line of work they would rather pay someone for 40 hours a week who only have 3 years experience, rather than pay someone with 10 years of experience for 25 hours a week who can achieve the same amount of work - why they would rather pay an extra 15 hours of wages just to have my bum warming the seat for those extra hours is beyond me.

Another element of it for men and women is it is very difficult to get a job that is considered to be 'beneath' your previous positions. For some people (myself included) - I don't necessarily want to work at the level I have previously at the moment, I have other priorities which take up brain power so I don't want to expend myself to the same lengths as I might have before, for me yes the reason would be children, but there are all sorts of reasons people might want to take up a position that is not at the same level (responsibility, salary etc) as a previous one.