Balancing Act: Today’s fathers feel neglected by their employers
Roland Warren of the National Fatherhood Initiative and I are quoted on the problems faced by working fathers in Cindy Krischer Goodman’s Balancing Act: Today’s fathers feel neglected by their employers (Miami Herald, 6/17/07). My point is that I feel that ”Fathers are stretched thin”–we’re still expected to be the family breadwinner (in an era of expanding workweeks), yet are criticized when we don’t do as much as mothers do in the home.
Goodman writes:
“Fathers today don’t want to be the dad in Harry Chapin’s song Cat’s in the Cradle. They don’t want their son to ask, ‘When are you comin’ home, Dad?’’
“Although employers are attempting to respond to work-life balance needs of fathers, they are having little or no meaningful effect.
“A Monster.com survey of working fathers found that 58 percent think their employers should do more to accommodate the demands of fatherhood.
“Why is this?
“Most work/life programs were created with mothers in mind, experts say.
Read the full column here. To write a Letter to the Editor of the Miami Herald, click here.
|
| More from Glenn Sacks
Stumble It!
June 19th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
just about all programs were created for women. end of conversation.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:05 am
To: cgoodman@MiamiHerald.com
Cindy,
Good evening.
Refreshing piece on fathers in article “Balancing Act: Today’s fathers feel neglected by their employers.” Rare in feminist (man bad, woman good) driven media.
I hope you do not lose your job or jeopardize your career.
Blessings,
Mark Ruffolo, MS, MBA
Chicago, IL
June 20th, 2007 at 8:33 am
One way companies could be more father friendly is to give men the same child-centered company benefits that they offer women.
They could offer men paternity leave in the same way they currently offer women maternity leave, for example. When my first daughter was born in 1983 my Fortune 50 employer allowed me to be away from work in the birthing room on the actual day of her birth. But then they told me I had to come in and work overtime to replace that day I was gone. By the time my second daughter was born in 1986, they had “liberalized” the policy and I was able get the actual day of her birth off without having to work overtime to replace it. But that was all the time I was allwoed to take. In both cases I had asked for a week off but was flatly denied. By contrast, both then in the 1980s and now in 2007 women were and are allowed to take up to 12 weeks off after the birth of a child, even though only 4 weeks or so of that time is for actual physical recovery.
These same kinds of anti-father policies apply in other child-centered areas, where my company makes accomodations for moms so they can spend more time with “their” children, but then they deny these same benefits to dads. As an example, almost all telecommuters in my company are are moms of pre-school children. Moms also represent the lion’s share of part-time workers, and part-time work allows them to be home when their school age children go to and come home from school. Ostensibly, the company has a policy that discourages part-time employment. In reality that policy only applies to men.
And on it goes.
June 20th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
I think the hardest thing that comes with the change for men is that it is expected that they do not take time off. A man who may take some time off or tries to take care of his kids is not as good a worker as a single man would be. So the man cannot take time off for fear he would be fired for a more productive worker.