By Tina Vasquez (Los Angeles)

Last week, we discussed the motherhood penalty, a startling trend in which employers avoid hiring mothers out of the assumption that they won’t do their job as well because of their family obligations outside of the office. If, by chance, an employer chooses to hire a mother, that woman often gets paid much less than female, childless co-workers performing the same duties. Studies have actually shown that the pay gap between working mothers and childless women is actually greater than the pay gap between men and women. According to a new study by Regus, the global provider of innovative workspace solutions, a new trend is brewing and it’s one that actually favors mothers looking to get back into the workplace … if they’re willing to settle for part-time, that is.

The global study, which was commissioned by Regus, surveyed 11,000 corporations across 15 countries and found that 44 percent of companies worldwide plan to hire more mothers for part-time jobs over the next two years. Among U.S. companies the numbers are even higher, with 46 percent reporting plans to recruit more mothers into 2012.

West Region Vice President for Regus, Sande Golgart, believed this study to be of particular interest to Regus because many of their clients are working mothers and he believes providing part-time work to women with children can assist them in managing the work/life balance issues that plague so many women. “We think that there is much work to be done in making the transition from maternity leave back to the workforce as smooth as possible. Allowing mothers to take advantage of workplace flexibility demonstrates an understanding of the challenges that they face and paves the way for them to be more productive and less stressed at work,” Golgart said. “One of the most significant factors in improving employees’ work/life balance is offering the flexibility to work remotely, either full or part-time. Flexible workplace solutions are now available that allow corporations to offer those mothers returning to the workforce the ability to work full or part-time from home, along with a whole host of other workplace possibilities. By taking advantage of such measures, businesses worldwide will be better positioned to attract and retain the most talented personnel to their working environments.”

Read more

By Tina Vasquez (Los Angeles)

We’ve all heard the saying there are two sides to every story and that’s never been more true than with the seemingly new phenomena that has been deemed the “motherhood penalty,” which asserts that working mothers get passed up for raises and promotions at a higher frequency than single women without children. Not only that, but recent studies have also shown that working fathers experience no such professional limitations or wage penalties as a result of having a family.

Women in the corporate world have had to contend with these issues for years now, so the results of the award winning Cornell study entitled, Getting a Job: Is There a Motherhood Penalty, weren’t very surprising when they were published in the American Journal of Sociology. According to the study, experiments found that “mothers were penalized on a host of measures, including perceived competence and recommended starting salary. Men were not penalized for, and sometimes benefited from, being a parent. The audit study showed that actual employers discriminate against mothers, but not against fathers.” None of this, of course, is an issue of contention among working women. What’s creating the real controversy is who is getting the shorter end of the stick in terms of pay and promotions: working moms or women with no children.

In Defense of Working Mothers

One of Getting a Job’s co-authors, Shelley Correll, was recently quoted as saying that she wasn’t surprised to find that mothers were discriminated against, but was “very surprised by the magnitude of the discrimination.” Correll and the other researchers sent out fake resumes for both a childless woman and a mom; both were equally qualified and the only difference was that the mom’s resume listed “Parent-Teacher Association coordinator” under the heading “other relevant activities” as a discreet way of informing employers that it was a parent’s resume. The researchers quickly discovered that the moms were viewed less favorably than the non-moms and were less likely to be hired. Even more disturbing, mothers were offered an average of $11,000 a year less in compensation than the childless job candidate with the same qualifications.

Read more

By Liz O’Donnell (Boston)

Four law firms made the Working Mother magazine Top 100 companies this year. Considering the legal profession’s reputation, this is encouraging news.

Washington, D.C.-based Arnold & Porter is on the list for the tenth time, and the sixth consecutive year. Says Managing Partner, Richard M. Alexander, “Working mothers are a vital part of our work force. Our goal is to have programs and benefits in place to enable them to balance their professional life with the needs of raising a family.”

The firm was recognized specifically for its unique on ramping/off ramping policies. The practice lets lawyers leave for up to three years and encourages them to keep in touch via development opportunities. Arnold & Porter also offers generous flexibility and child care at its Washington headquarters and close to its Manhattan office. And, particularly relevant this winter as the H1N1 virus is expected to cause turmoil for working parents, Arnold & Palmer lets employees take six paid weeks of leave. Their strategy is clearly paying off. Forty percent of the firm’s managers, 50 percent of its top earners, and 32 percent of its directors are women.

Read more

By Jennifer Gonzales-Frisbie, Esq. (New York City)

Over the last year, in large law firms across the country, associates have lived in fear of losing their jobs, accepting and even seeking out longer hours at the office in the hope that if they can accumulate enough billable hours, their jobs will be spared. Unfortunately, such a practice is leading to growing dissatisfaction for all involved. Associates are worn out and resentful of their current predicament. Clients are becoming fed up with large legal bills which reflect the work of several attorneys billing a significant number of hours in order to produce a single piece of work product. Law firm partners are struggling to maintain and bring in business since clients are going in increasing numbers to smaller firms where the same legal work can be done for a lot less.

In this time of high unemployment and economic hardship, should we consider work-life balance a luxury, available only when economic times are good, and just be thankful we have jobs at all?

Although the answer from many quarters seems to be “yes”, others believe that sacrificing work-life balance is not the best strategy to surviving a tough economy. Lisa Gates, life balance coach and author of “Are You Ditching Work-Life Balance Because You’re Afraid of Losing Your Job?” explains that balancing work and personal life in a down economy is important, not just for your well-being outside of work, but to ensure you remain mentally and physically prepared to successfully carry out workplace goals and make sound decisions in your career.

Read more