Under Pressure: The Great American Work/Life Speed-Up for Men and Women
By Melissa J. Anderson (New York City)
“We have to redefine what it means to be a successful man and a good mother,” said Joan C. Williams, Distinguished Professor of Law and Director of the Center for WorkLife Law at the University of California, Hastings.
Williams, who has just published a new book on the subject of work/family conflict, Reshaping the Work-Family Debate: Why Men and Class Matter, believes that there are several gender and class related inconsistencies that are keeping both women and men from achieving their best at home and work. Williams explained, “While women are under pressure to be good mothers, always available to their children, men face gender pressures, too. Men are judged, to borrow a quote from feminism in the 70s, ‘by the size of their paycheck’ —which makes it very different to draw a line in the sand and say, ‘I need to go home to my family.’”
While the “good mother ideal” is problematic for women in the workforce, men now face similar inconsistencies. In the past, Williams said, men were culturally expected to work long hours to live up to the “provider” role – which fit right in with workplace expectations of what a good worker looked like. But now, men are faced with a new cultural ideal: that of the “nurturing father.”
Williams explained, “Men are now caught between two ideals.” The workplace ideal for men has not yet caught up with changing notions of masculinity at home. And women are unlikely to find male support in changing the structure of the workplace until that workplace supports the new needs of men too.
“Until gender pressures on men change, things aren’t going to change for much of women, either.”
The Great American Speed-Up
Williams pointed out that one reason for these inconsistencies is “a sharp rise in expectations of what parents owe to children, popularly referred to as ‘helicopter parenting.’”
She continued, “It’s a very greedy definition of what you need to give a child in order for the child to be brought up right.”
In a recent Wall Street Journal article, “Mother Madness,” novelist Erica Jong describes the phenomenon, writing, “You wear your baby, sleep with her and attune yourself totally to her needs. How you do this and also earn the money to keep her is rarely discussed.”
It’s the idea that “proper” (intensive) nurturing can produce exceptional traits in children. Jong continues:
“Few of us question the idea, and American mothers and fathers run themselves ragged trying to mold exceptional children. It’s a highly competitive race. No parent wants to be told it all may be for naught, especially, say, a woman lawyer who has quit her firm to raise a child. She is assumed to be pursuing a higher goal, and hard work is supposed to pay off, whether in the office or at home. We dare not question these assumptions.”
Williams cautioned that this style of child-rearing is particular to the wealthy and upper middle classes. But, she said, by and large, parenting has become more demanding. And the trend affects men too. “Most of the new demands are on mothers, but there is a matching set of demands on men, who are increasingly caught up in the new ideal of the nurturing father,” yet, she said, workplaces are not responding to “the great American speed-up” with father-friendly policies. Men are still, for the most part, expected to pull the long hours and late shifts, while their demands at home are increase as well.
Steps Toward an Inclusive Workplace
What can we do? How can we make workplaces better suited toward today’s work/family needs? Williams said, “When we talk about work/family conflict, we talk about professional women opting out – but often they are pushed out, because of all-or-nothing workplaces. But we rarely talk about class. Less well-to-do men and women are one sick child away from being fired.”
In 2000, Williams and the Center for WorkLife Law developed legal theories and public policies to address work/family issues, but, “the last new legislation to address work/family issues was in 1993.”
She continued, “I thought about what it would it take to really help Americans balance work and family: subsidized child care, parental leaves that are longer and are paid, limits on mandatory overtime, the right to request workplace flexibility. Politically, none of these is feasible right now.”
“The US is one of four countries in the world without nationally subsidized paid maternity leave. It’s tough for individual employers to cover their own employees’ maternity leave, and countries that require individual employers to fund maternity leave often find employers reluctant to hire women.” She continued, “We strongly urge employers to offer maternity and paternity leave, but the experience around the world shows the way to accomplish paid parental leave without discrimination against women is to sponsor it at the national level.”
And she said, “It’s crucial for any high hours profession to have a nonstigmatized 40 hour work-week. At too many companies, employees are reluctant to use flexible work arrangements because of the flexibility stigma—the fear that actually using the policies will be a career stopper or staller.”
Because policy directed towards these outcomes seems unlikely in the short term, Williams said, one approach is to focus on changing workplace structure and culture – to respond to the needs of men as well as women. After all, a truly inclusive workplace policy would be gender-blind to flextime and parental leave offerings.
We do ourselves a disservice to cast the work-family debate as a “women’s issue”. Not only do we relegate the crux of the issue to the woman’s to-do list, we send a wider message that women, and only women, can develop strategies for a healthy and productive work-family dynamic. Williams continues to add value and insight to the ongoing discourse of how to address the very real dilemmas faced by working families in the US today. As to changing culture, the combined forces of GenX/GenY appear to be reshaping the landscape, with the mantra of working to live, rather than living to work.
Well written article. The workplace has certainly evolved, and there are many inconsistencies that many find themselves encountering. Persons with disabilities, too, are in need of more inclusive and supportive workplaces*. I see hope, though!
*https://www.disabilitytraining.com/wpblog/disability-employment-strategies/
This discussion is 40 years old. In the current recession, companies are not going to “give” and women and men are afraid to “ask” for flexibility.
40 hour workweek? Who does that — other than hourly employees? Until “40 hour workweek” and “hourly employee” stop being associated with each other, no exempt-level professional, highly paid or not, is going to work any less than 24/7.
It’s interesting that the solutions don’t seem any clearer than they were in the past decades. At one point, we thought smart phones and laptops were our tickets to freedom from the office. Rather (for both moms and dads) they seem to be an invisible 24/7 chain that keeps us in the work world while struggling to be present in our personal lives. In fact, the availability of the technology may very well be the definition of flexible work arrangements for many employers and employees.
Is it any wonder then that many women (and men) are feel that their balance options being limited to two: deal with the corporate environment that exists or opt out? As Williams notes, this deals with only part of the problem. For a culture that believes technology is the answer to the conflict or balance issue, this is not a huge surprise althought it continues to be a very frustrating one.
The important thing for anyone wanting more life from their work is to know that they always have a choice. In my coaching work with aspiring leaders, I’m often surprised at how we’ve backed ourselves into corners that our companies have never dictated or that our lives don’t require to be successful or happy. We forget we have a choice because we assume a more negative consequence than may really happen.
For those feeling stuck in technology, I highly recommend William Power’s engaging book, “Hamlet’s Blackberry,” which shows us how this isn’t a new world challenge–and there are simple ways to create change. I’m also happy to send anyone my own article, “Click Less to Connect More,” which offers specific tips. We can tackle this issue in our generation–but we have to shake up how we think about our lives at work.
We are all presented with a great many choices. It’s a question of how we prioritize. If we feel strongly that family comes first, we will join others who feel that way and prioritize that way. So many people leave the corporate world for that reason. Eventually there will be companies that wake up and see the brain drain and develop less punitive programs for people who demand work/life balance. Gen X and Y and women are certainly leading the charge. If we cower in fear, of course, nothing will happen. If we show courage and ask the important questions that surround our priorities, then we inspire others to do the same and change happens.
Flex time and parental leave is not a women’s issue, but rather a family issue. The workplace has a lot of catching up to do on how today’s modern family operates – families come in many shapes and sizes. While the needs of women with families have begun to be acknowledged in the workplace, the needs of fathers who have caring responsibilities (or desire to spend more time with their kids) have largely been ignored. The corporate culture in many organizations assumes that a traditional family structure exits, although in reality it only represents a small minority.
Flex time and parental leave is not a women’s issue, but rather a family issue. The workplace has a lot of catching up to do on how today’s modern family operates – families come in many shapes and sizes. While the needs of women with families have begun to be acknowledged in the workplace, the needs of fathers who have caring responsibilities (or desire to spend more time with their kids) have largely been ignored. The corporate culture in many organizations assumes that a traditional family structure exits, although in reality it only represents a small minority.