There has been a lot of chatter this year about the Paycheck Fairness Act which was proposed back in 2009 to counteract the issue of women making 77-86 cents (depending on whose data you read) to every dollar a man makes. It has faced significant road blocks since its inception and continued to be blocked via filibuster (what hasn't these days) earlier this year. It seems like a no brainer to me. If a woman does the same job as a man, that pay should be equal. Why wouldn't it be. I know that's idealistic, but it makes sense to me.
One of the push back issues for the Act is the fact that women often take time off or leave the workplace for extended periods of time to have and raise a family. Women who do this often come back with a wider gap between their pay than that of their male counterparts who didn't take the time off. While, I understand the rationale to a point, it goes back to - if it's the same job, the same performance standard, it should be equal pay, end of story. Determining that is another matter entirely, but the pushback on the Act itself was kind of confusing - fair is fair.
This past week, my work colleagues and I met in our staff meeting room to schedule parent/teacher conferences which are coming up in a couple of weeks. Trying to make it more convenient and increase the chance of our parents showing up to the meeting, we try and schedule sibling conference times close together. For about 30 minutes, right after school on a Tuesday, we engage in sort of a free-for-all of scheduling. Identifying teacher colleagues with siblings in their class, locating those colleagues by calling them from across the room, lining up to wait for the teachers on the list to become free, coordinating 2 or more times that match up by fifteen minutes can be anxiety ridden for the faint at heart. This year I had multiple with three siblings at school and one with 4 (5 kids in all to schedule with 5 different teachers). Usually, I'm right in the middle of the action to get my times booked, but this year I was hot (it was 107 degrees outside that day) and tired, so I sat at one of the tables and waited for them to come to me. I spent that 30 minutes nodding and saying, "That's fine," when someone asked me to set a time. But I digress...
Anyhow, while I sat at the table working with someone, another teacher (I'll call her teacher A) came up to book a time with me. While she waited for me, another teacher (Teacher B) came to her and I caught bits and pieces of the conversation. The gist...Teacher B wanted to book a time with Teacher A. B already had a pretty full schedule so asked A for a later time (we are contractually required to be available from 3:00 - 6:00 on that particular day). Teacher A responded with, "No, I'm a mom and won't stay that late." At first I wasn't fazed. The mom card is played on a regular basis by a member of my team so I'm pretty much used to it anymore. But since then, I've kind of been obsessing over it. You won't stay that late even though those are the required hours? So because you are a mom you're not required to be available for that time block like the rest of us? What about the teachers who are Moms (like teacher B) who are booking times later in the day as per their contract...does that make them a bad mom? There are so many things this person is saying when she says, "I'm a mom so I won't (fill in the blank) at my job."
Since I'm not a mom, this is just my view looking in on the situation, but I'm thinking this is part of the reason we can't get equal pay for equal work. Some of us (women) are not willing to do the equal work due to family/home commitments or the perception of them anyhow. Which is certainly their right to do. However, how can we expect to be paid the same if we play that card and men usually don't. Just something to ponder.
Now, in my own little world of teacher compensation, we are paid equally - men and women. Our salary is based on number of years taught and number graduate units attained. It is placed on a salary schedule and everyone has equal opportunity to attain the highest salary level if desired. The comment made above irked me a bit because of that salary schedule. Teacher A is getting paid essentially the same as the rest of us, but when refusing to work the expected hours that she is getting paid for, it is not equal work. Heck, I don't want to stay until 6 either, but I often do work that late, even when it's not a contractual day like this one is. And I don't have a Mom card to play. I have other cards though...plans, appointments, exhaustion, LIFE. Why is it that we accept one, but not the others?
My intent isn't to bash moms. In fact, women as a group spend enough time second guessing themselves they don't need anyone else doing it for them. I know the working mom (part time and full time) vs. stay at home mom is already one decision that gets a lot of judgement from those looking in. I'm not trying to add to that. With that being said, I would expect someone who has chosen to work at a paying job to do that job in order to get paid, regardless of them being a mom. Am I being unreasonable here?
three on thursday
4 hours ago
This is definitely a three hat argument. Or even a three hander, as in, on this hand, on the other or another.
ReplyDeleteBut never mind all that. The truth is if you've noticed then someone is taking advantage. And probably needs to be reined in a bit.
None minds if someone has to cut out of something to nurse a child. Nor in truth if someone has to go fix a catastrophe like a sitter getting sick, kid getting sick or other such unforseen headwrecks.
In a way this is quite different. Here is something entirety predicted. She knew she needed provision to cover her absence.
Yes, definitely a conscious decision to not work those contracted hours. And no, it is never something that I've even worried about before. People gotta do what they gotta do. But that comment was such an FU on a few different levels. I've been obsessing over it all week. So... good to vent about it. :)
DeleteYeah, that about sums it up. It takes a kindness and change's it to a presumed right.
ReplyDeleteYou'll make an enemy if you do anything, but since I am fairly certain with that degree of presumption you'd not much of a workmate either, who cares. Still, check out if there's something reasonable to the stance. She may have an autistic son or something.
Nope, I just think that's who this person is. The gossip about that attitude preceded this first hand experienced. She's not someone I spend any time with, which is probably best. :) I'm still the new kid on the block at my new school, so there is NO plan to ruffle feathers.
DeleteIt's kind of interesting, now that I'm thinking about it, that maybe it's not the "mom" thing after all. I know plenty of moms who do their job, while I also know of many who do it with less vim and vigor than the rest of us. They would probably be that way, mom or not - using a different excuse instead. Perhaps an interesting sociology experiment.
Being a mom myself, I think that if I am hired to do a job then I have to fulfill the requirements of doing the job. In your case, that is having conferences until 6:00. I'm surprised that your administration allows this and that parents don't complain.
DeleteOur admin is very cool about people needing to do what they need to do, but I'm sure this would come across as taking advantage. However they weren't around...it was something that I simply overheard. I think if it had been me she was turning down about a later time, I probably would have said something to her about it. However...not my circus, not my monkeys. I'll just blog about it! :)
DeleteYou don't have to turn in your feminist card. A feminist (mother or not) would not want to see women take advantage of their roles as mother to skate on duties. This isn't to say that generally when someone's child is ill or a parent has a child-related emergency, we wouldn't want to be compassionate and give each other leeway, just as if a non-parent had an emergency family illness or emergency situation. BUT. When a worker is required to be available during certain hours and they would rather be doing something else? Well, who wouldn't? But being a mom, while understandable, is not a reason to go home early. You're on point here, in my opinion. And I have been a working mother who had to put in the same hours as the next worker (and all of us would have liked to go home early). It is not always easy, but that's the job, the role, and the requirements of both. No, what you're talking about here is someone using her role as a mother as an excuse to go home early. Equal pay for equal work means just that. And when it isn't equal -- and it's not -- it isn't because of women who cheat the system. They aren't messing up the system; they are treating their employer and coworkers unfairly. We still need to fix the system.
ReplyDeleteVery well said, thank you. I was hoping I wasn't just suffering from sour grapes. Even with this group who is taking advantage, equal pay (if the work is equal) should still be a no brainer. I don't understand how congress, even the old, rich, white guys, can keep blocking this one and still get voted into office each time.
DeleteMe either. But I'm not understanding a lot of stuff lately. :-(
Delete