Share this Job
I read an article about why women can’t have it all. It makes sense and is something I’ve been saying for years: If you are going to have children, they absolutely have to be the priority in your life. The article was speaking specifically to highly educated, seriously ambitious women. I’m talking to you guys, too, but more so to the rest of us.
It’s not that you can’t have a cool job, maybe even a demanding job if you are the kind of person with uber-energy. Most of us, even those of us with good energy, find a full-time job, parenting, taking care of ourselves (exercise, new shoes, social-emotional connections, learning opportunities) and a little entertainment to be the full extent of what can be done. And, then, we try to do more because “everyone else is”. Except everyone else isn’t. And, sometimes, those that are doing more are paying a price with their family that doesn’t seem fair to me.
Women try to plan their child-bearing and rearing to maximize promotions and advancement even though they will take some time away from business. Having kids early has problems – you don’t get started in business with your peer group, although your children will be out of the house by the time you are in your mid-forties and there is lots of time for business advancement then – if you can get in. Having kids later has the problems of biology not always cooperating, time out just as things are taking off, or your child’s adolescence right when you are most busy with work.
I have a suggestion. Why not make the work week 56 hours. That’s 7 days a week, 8-hour days. Law offices, advertising firms, large corporations where the top people are all working 56 hours a week anyway would get recognized and paid accordingly – which often happens now. The hours could be distributed however the employee preferred but like a truck engine with a governor on it that prevents speeding, the employee would be required to stop and get some balance at 56 hours. This is not radical.
Where I get a little, teeny bit radical is the suggestion that most of these jobs would be shared. Each person in the job share would be expected to put in 27.5 hours per week. Hours could be organized in whatever way was best for the job-share partners, the company, and the client. Salaries would be paid at full-time levels for the 27.5 hours. These folks would have a little bit of leeway to put in overtime – if their job-share partner agreed to release some of their hours to them. The highest number of hours that could be worked for that job would be 56 hours in aggregate.
Tadaa! Women would be able to have it all because they could fulfill their parenting impulses, desires, responsibilities, commitments, and not be penalized, or thwarted, in their ambition. The lid on 56 hours of work for everyone, and recognition for the job done by job-share partnerships, would level the playing field. Women would find it much easier to serve on boards, be Heads of State, hold responsible government positions, or be chief executive officer in a large corporation, because the work would get done. Because the school play that is happening on Thursday afternoon at the elementary school can be part of the week with work eddying around the “interruption”.
I think, once upon a time, that society thought that people should be home for dinner with their children and companies, firms, all manner of productive organizations supported this. For the middle class. For those wanting to be in the wealthy or elite class entry needs to come with ways to still show up for dinner.
Maybe a full-time job-share is the way to go.
Interesting concept – I need to chew on it a little while.
Job-sharing *does* seem like a move in the right direction, so long as the partners can actively cooperate, and one seldom feels the need to ‘re-do’ the other’s work for some reason or other.
Where was that article? I’ve seen a similar headline in the new Atlantic Monthly, but haven’t found the story yet…
MIML* is currently working *hard* 58.5 hours over 6 days, every week. Another body-with-a-brain who could do parts of the job would definitely improve both quality of life and of results, but so long as The Boss thinks “You must be here whenever we’re open”, his hours won’t be reduced…
MIML? My Intimate Mate & Lover?
Aack! I knew I couldn’t reply to your comment, immediately, Karen J! I ended up lost in http://curvesnangles.wordpress.com for a while and now the alarm has gone to say this is absolutely the last moment to take the dogs out or you will be late for work.
Quickly, though … depending on the business, job partners might not have to cooperate any more closely than colleagues currently do. And, yes, we’ve all had difficult people to work with and this could happen in this situation, too. Intelligent companies (and bosses) will listen to people when they suggest the pairing is not a good fit, but they will also notice when they are asking someone for 58.5 hours and 6 days/week. Nothing is without “danger” but in many instances – like my own – for the next teaching year job-sharing can be marvelous! (We will actually team teach – both full-time, both in the same classroom. A slightly different concept and it DOES require much compatibility for my continued level of sanity/insanity.)
“My Intimate Mate & Lover?” – that’s equally good. I forgot to complete the *asterisk, didn’t I? What I meant was “Man In My Life” – ‘cuz we haven’t made many overt definitions yet.
More thoughts on the overall concept, still percolating.
Interviewing a potential ‘part of my life-style support system’ shortly – see, Joel, I *didn’t* call it a j-o-b!
Love you guys – Happy monday! K
Happy Monday, for sure! It is the stat holiday for Canada Day – there may even be fireworks to mark the occasion. And, there definitely is no j-o-b. (Well, unless you count the 40 minutes I was at work doing things today. 40 minutes doesn’t really count does it? When it infinitely relieves stress about being prepared for the next day.)
I’d say that’s one of those purple-with-polka-dots areas ~ 40 minutes to clear up what could easily take 2-3 hours to get done, if there was anybody else there? “No Brainer” …
And if you *walked*, you get extra gold stars
I love it. It’s freelancing, it fits right into the preface of my next book.
I’m not worried about capping hours, though. Feel no compulsion to legislate common sense for those who eschew it.
But job-sharing for freelancers who want to work part time at a full time job? Yeah. The logistics are the easy part. Culture is the challenge. I’m hoping my little manifest will prod more than one person to action–something very much like what you’re describing.
Cue spooky shark music… doo doo doo doo doo doo doooo. Must be something in the air. Manifest away! (In both senses!) As always, I await your wisdom.
O
ManifestO
as in this one: http://joeldcanfield.com/my-books/you-dont-want-a-job/
Would you like to be an MP if you could job share? Watch the video by John McDonnell MP on http://www.disabilitypolitics.org.uk and contact JOhn if you would like to stand as an MP on a job share basis.
There’s been a rumour that Joel is going to try to take over this space at some time in the future…. That’s because people who don’t have a J-O-B have time to do things like that. Oh, and write books. Which is what he’ll talk about – his book about the dreaded J-O-B – when he does his take-over.