Activistas

Creating Change with Family Forward Oregon ~ Part 2

Over the next several months I will be blogging about my experiences with Family Forward Oregon's "The Economics of Motherhood" discussion/action group.

Second Entry: Learning about Motherhood and Poverty

The Family Forward Oregon action group received reading packets in the mail, close to eighty pages discussing economics and motherhood. The first excerpt, from “The Price of Motherhood” by Ann Crittenden, resonated immediately. My highlighter pen circled and scribbled, covering the margins with notes like, “refreakindiculous,” “aaargh!” and “bullsh*t,” as I commented on the irrelevancy of mothers’ work in our economic culture. I have held many jobs, from the field information technology to working the fields as a farm hand, and truly none have come remotely close to the challenges of being a parent. Yet there it is, highlighted on page 6: “motherhood is the single biggest risk factor for poverty in old age.”

I would love to forget this fact, since my life is full of bigger immediate concerns like grocery bills, laundry, poisonous cadmium in children’s jewelry or how much mercury is in the fish we eat. There are people in my city that are hungry, children orphaned and injured in Haiti, there are family members that I need to hug and laugh and spend time with. And when infants or toddlers are in the picture, life can get widely unpredictable, often filled with overwhelming fatigue. So my retirement is not foremost in my mind. But as much as I’d like to push it further away, the fact remains that if you’re a mother, you’re more likely to experience poverty in old age. This is a great tragedy, and a great loss for our country.

I hear the words “family values” on the news, and I never quite get what it means. As a mother I haven’t felt those values trickling down to my family, to help with the confusion of childcare, preschools, or poorly funded public schools. The mothers I know remark how you practically need a PhD to find a decent childcare facility. Some stay-at-home moms yearn to return to the workforce, yet are unable to justify childcare bills. In the meantime they’re economically considered like children, dependents without the right to collect social security. Working parents yearn for more time with their children, yet are typically unable to secure promotions, consistently earning 20% less than their childless counterparts.

At my first Family Forward Oregon action group meeting, surrounded by six other moms, we talked about trying to keep our heads above water to maintain jobs, find jobs, or reconcile the difficulties of being a stay at home mom. We talked of the unspoken prejudice toward mothers in some workplaces surrounding maternity leave, breastfeeding requirements or the conflict between overtime and child care. We spoke of struggling to maintain a flexible schedule and giving up on the hopes of promotion. We talked about finding preschools within a reasonable distance from work, and how pickups would be negotiated, about lack of after school child care. All of these struggles - and more - are very real day to day struggles parents face. As I listen to the other women in the group, it’s clear we live in a time where the conflicts between work and family are overwhelming, parents are at a very real economic disadvantage in the workplace, and the role of motherhood is undervalued. That’s refreakindiculous, and I'm looking forward to creating change.

Next up: More notes from the margins of the readings.

Family Forward Oregon's Economics of Motherhood Action Groups build on an understanding of the underlying political and economic issues, and generate commitment to action. The groups will explore topics like work, taxes, and child care. The format will combine short readings with an emphasis on ways parents can take action and make a difference.

Creating Change with Family Forward Oregon

Over the next several months I will be posting about my experiences with Family Forward Oregon's "The Economics of Motherhood" discussion/action group.  

First Entry.  Why join?

During the first days of holding my newborn in my arms, I realized what a tremendous loss it was to have my own family 3,000 miles away. Fierce independence was useless to me now, in a life filled with such fragility, vulnerability and hard work. Every small gesture mattered dearly, and when someone I barely knew delivered a bag of needed groceries to my door, I understood that it does take a village to raise a child.

In this era of two-parent incomes and geographically distant relatives, the realities of our culture - structured around the automobile and consumerism - began to clash drastically with what I needed for my family to survive and thrive. The shocks of childcare costs, breastfeeding and lack of flexible jobs were at times overwhelming, and helped me to understand that so much of our country is not designed for families. At the same time I felt a welling of compassion for the generations of mothers before me, who worked so tirelessly to raise their children only to be undervalued in so many ways.

And so it was only natural for me to join Family Forward Oregon. I welcomed the chance to voice my concerns with other moms and work toward creating change. Our first meeting was the same weekend I heard about deadly cadmium being found in children’s jewelry. Years of my heart breaking over e. coli poisonings, lead poisonings and pharmaceuticals in the water supply had only resulted in more gray hairs and tears, not any effective change. This is not what I want for my child’s future or my family’s present. We deserve better.

Up next: About my first Family Forward meeting!

Family Forward Oregon's Economics of Motherhood Action Groups build on an understanding of the underlying political and economic issues, and generate commitment to action. The groups will explore topics like work, taxes, and child care. The format will combine short readings with an emphasis on ways parents can take action and make a difference.

A whole bunch of (good) posts about women & work

Fem 2.0 held a great blog carnival in 2009 about women & work.  Still worth reading 9 months later.

Posts address topics like working smart v. working stupid (Joan Blades of Moms Rising), work-life policies and why they should survive the recession (Joan Williams, Center for Work-Life Law), and finding balance in the big city (Melanie Ross-Levin, National Women's Law Center).  And about 20 others. 

Check it out - and when you're there, see what Fem 2.0 is up to.  Their current campaign to do nothing less than "help change the way Americans talk and think about work and to begin shifting the national narrative away from privileged "balance" and corporate perspectives to one that reflects the reality on the ground for millions of Americans and American families." 

Which I'm good and ready for.  You? 

Because the way we talk and think mightily influences the way we live and vote.

[Thanks Flickr CC & to the Seattle Municipal Archives for the hard workin' woman]

It's motherhood, not sexism, sister.

The Economist recently ran an article titled, "The rich world’s quiet revolution: women are gradually taking over the workplace" (definitely worth a read).  They point out that women now comprise exactly half of the American workforce, and yes, I agree, that's some serious progress.  But.  The thing that gets me is this: if we're taking over the place (literally), why aren't we also making it work better for us?  Or is that just (justifiably) part 2 in this 20th century story of women's economic empowerment? 

The Economist's article notes that while we're physically there in increasingly high numbers, we're definitely not in charge (like REALLY not in charge).  Fact is, only 2% of the bosses of America’s largest companies and 5% of their peers in Britain are women. They go on to suggest why this is (the heart of the matter) - and it turns out that mothering is a clear factor.  Some snippets:

'Many women feel they have to choose between their children and their careers. Women who prosper in high-pressure companies during their 20s drop out in dramatic numbers in their 30s and then find it almost impossible to regain their earlier momentum.'

'Less-skilled women are trapped in poorly paid jobs with hand-to-mouth child-care arrangements. Motherhood, not sexism, is the issue: in America, childless women earn almost as much as men, but mothers earn significantly less. And those mothers’ relative poverty also disadvantages their children.'

HAVE YOUR SAY: WHY ARE WE (YOU?) NOT CLIMBING THE LADDER SO WELL?

On a very related note, the Harvard Business Review is trying to understand the relative lack of women at the top of the work ladder, especially the drop-out factor.  In their words:

Women continue to drop out of the workforce in increasing numbers and many don't seem to find their way back — even when they want to.

Why?  Initially, to have and raise children. They thus lose their place in line among equally qualified rising candidates for promotion. But in the aftermath, their numbers really start to skew. A recent US study by the Center for Work-Life Policy shows that among women who left work for a while to raise children, 93% of them said they wanted to come back to work — but only 74% returned, and just 40% of them to a full-time job.

Their survey takes just 5-10 minutes and is one way to add your experience and thoughts to the mix. They'll present the findings at this year's World Economic Forum.

U.S. Senator Patty Murray (WA) answers Moms Rising's health care reform questions - on You Tube!

My sad but true reaction to the issue of guaranteeing insurance for working mothers: I'm elated that it's even being talked about at this level. Better late than never, I think, is the way to think about all this. Better late than never.

Bad work policies for mothers, by the numbers

According to Jody Heymann, who co-authored the recent (important) report "Raising the Global Floor: Dismantling the Myth That We Cant Afford Good Working Conditions for Everyone,"  the U.S. is an outlier. 

Now, before you roll your eyes and say, "Tell me something I don't know," read on. 

Because Jody spent 8 years researching just how far behind we are - and just how silly that is for all of us, employers included.  And she's got the numbers to back it up (bless her).  Numbers that show how many countries have basic work benefits that the U.S. doesn't guarantee for its workers (like you).  Check this out:

Nations that guarantee paid leave for new mothers: 177.

Nations guarantee paid leave for new fathers: 74.

Nations that ensure breastfeeding breaks at work: 132.

Nations that provide paid sick leave: 163.

Nations that guarantee paid time off to care for children's health: 48.

Nations that provide leave that can be used for child education needs: 41

Nations that provide paid leave to care for adult family members: 33

Why, exactly, is this?  An outdated myth about what makes our economy strong and an unorganized constituency, if you ask me (which you didn't).  Well, Jody blows the first out of the water in this recent Washington Post guest blog (and the report it draws from).

The other is less and less true every day, isn't it, mamas?  Because we are so. far. ahead. as a movement (yes, we moms are now a movement) of where we were 6 years ago when I lugged that breast pump on the airplane for a work trip when my first child was only 4 months old, setting the hotel alarm clock every 3 hours to pump (yes, midnight and 3 AM, too) so my supply wouldn't dry up AT 4 MONTHS.  

Thank you, Jody, for the numbers.  Because a movement rarely gets anywhere without them. 

Moms Rising takes on Walmart: Join 'em

Ever feel compelled to head to work when you should be home with your sick child?  Like you're making decisions about handling your child's illness based on the demands of your work?  Honestly, what parent doesn't? 

But in the case of Walmart employees, there's something unusual to worry about: getting fired because you take too many sick days - even when you're earned them!  According to Moms Rising,

Recent news reports by the The New York Times, Washington Post and ABC News have revealed that the megastore colossus has a practice of issuing what are commonly called demerits, or “occurrences” to employees who get sick and take sick days.  Accruing enough occurrences can lead to dismissal. 

As a result, many Wal-Mart employees feel compelled to go to work sick and are unwittingly exposing their co-workers and customers to the flu and other contagious diseases.  In response to media coverage of this practice, Wal-Mart said it would issue a memo altering the policy for employees who had to take time off because of being sick with the H1N1 flu.  In an ABC News report, a Wal-Mart memo was quoted saying, "we must be clear that no one will lose their job if they get H1N1.”

Why does Moms Rising frown on this (childlike) policy?  Co-founder Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner explains it this way:

"Wal-Mart’s practice of providing earned paid sick days and then giving employees demerits for using them is perplexing and fundamentally unfair.  If taking earned paid sick days can result in losing your job, then the sick days policy isn’t meaningful.

We’re particularly concerned that Wal-Mart is willing to risk the health of its employees and its customers with this practice.  It is shocking that a company as concerned about profitability as Wal-Mart would risk the health of its workforce by encouraging sick, contagious employees to show up at work. Studies show that presenteeism – coming to work sick – costs companies about $250 per employee each year."

So, not surprisingly, Moms Rising is doing what only it (and its 1,000,000 supporters) can do: Launching a campaign urging Wal-Mart to stop giving employees demerits for taking sick days, regardless of the health reason.  And they're not alone - far from it.

What can YOU do?  Get in there and give Wal-Mart their own “demerit badges,” of course!  How?  Just sign their petition urging the company to change its practice.  More than 40,000 moms and others have already signed the petition and handed out (virtual) demerit badges, which MomsRising will deliver to Wal-Mart executives at their headquarters in Arkansas.

Wanna know more?  I did, too.  Moms Rising has an excellent, clear explanation of the whole sordid story, why it matters, and what's next.    

On work-family balance: I don't want to be lucky. Do you?

How many times have you said that you're lucky to have some morsel of work-family balance?  As in, "I'm really lucky to only work 30 hours a week."  Or, "I'm lucky to have a job where I get benefits for my whole family."  Or, "I'm lucky that we could afford for me to take the full 12 weeks of (unpaid!) maternity leave." 

That is not luck, mamas.  [As in, I just won a $1M in Vegas. That's luck.]  No, they're backwards, behind-the-times policies and cultural attitudes for mothers.  Period.

Yes, relatively speaking, compared to the many, many mothers in this country who have none of that, I have it good.  Relatively good, that is. 

Because actually, I don't have it that good.  I had no paid maternity leave, I worked while off to keep up, I don't have enough time off each year to cover the number of days my children are not in school, I must work a certain number of hours to earn health care for my family (more than I'd choose otherwise), I risked my boss's negative opinion when I asked to work fewer hours, I didn't get a workload reduction even though I worked fewer hours, our daycare bills were sky high and far exceeded the tax deduction, you know the drill.  

So why am I lucky, then?  Why do I hesitate to complain?  Of course the answer is obvious: because I have it better than so many others.  Am I supposed to sit tight and be grateful, then?  Are you grateful for the morsels you have?  Or do you actually have it good? 

Good like they do in other countries, I mean. 

Support for working fathers: Is there any?

Working fathers. Does anyone really *say* that? 

I mean, in our society isn't it assumed that a father is a working father?  No need to waste your breath on 2 words when you could stick to "father" and the meaning would be the same. 

Not so "working mother."  

Honestly, I rarely ponder the plight of the working father.  I should, since I parent with one.  Lack of family forward work-family policies for him = lack of family forward work-family policies for me, right?  Maybe I'm just lazy and selfish, but I fixate on the state of work-family policies for mothers.  Possibly because they so often suck.  So much time spent fixing them there's no time to even think about the next layer. 

But I'm happy to report that someone IS thinking about (un)supportive policies for working fathers in the U.S., and I'm even happier that it's the impressive Sloan Work & Family Research Network at Boston College.  Their new brief, Opportunities for Policy Leadership on Fathers, discusses "the current state of policy relating to working fathers and explores legislative trends in the United States. The brief also compares policies in other countries around the world, many of which are on the cutting edge of implementation of father-specific policies."

It covers an interesting range of topics:

• Fatherhood and work and family—policy facts
• The changing face of fatherhood
• Parental leave and other policies for fathers
• International comparisons
• Statutory frameworks
• Where you can get more information

A few (unsurprising) tidbits worth sharing:

• 78% of surveyed fathers reported that they liked caring for their child and wished they had shared parental leave more equally with their spouse or partner.
• Nearly 1 in 4 working dads (24%) feel work is negatively impacting their relationship with their children.
• Men incur wage and career penalties if they emphasize communal values and do not appear fully committed to work.
• The availability of paid leave is a key determinant of which fathers take leave after the arrival of a new child. Most fathers (74%) only take leave when it is paid. Those that are paid usually are not paid from a source specifically set aside for parental leave; instead, the vast majority use vacation time (61%), personal days (17%), or sick leave (11%).

Before I give the whole thing away, you better read it for yourself.  It's only 3 pages! 

I wonder what the "working fathers" in your life (if there is one) think of all this?  It's all good?  They wish it would change?  And finally, what I really want to know is: are we moms going to push to improve working father policies - or will they? 

I wish I didn't already know the answer.

Gloria Steinem talks about paid sick days in NYC

On November 17, A Better Balance, a NY-based legal team fighting to give American workers the time and flexibility they need to care for their families (right on), joined Gloria Steinem (remember her? she's still at it!) and a good many activists on the steps of City Hall in New York City to support paid sick leave for all New Yorkers, which the city council is currently considering. 
 
According to A Better Balance, so many turned out that security guards turned people away at the gates of City Hall.  Gloria Steinem told the crowd, "you have never been here in your lives for a cause that's more just and overdue than this cause." 

Hear Gloria for yourself:



Then ask yourself whether Oregon has paid sick days (answer: no state does).  Do you?  You should.

Learn more and take action @ the National Partnership for Women & Families, a DC-based organization that works to promote fairness in the workplace, reproductive health and rights, access to quality affordable health care, and policies that help women and men meet the dual demands of work and family. Another great group.

With the National Partnership, you can share your personal story about paid sick days and urge Congress to pass the Healthy Families Act, which would guarantee up to 7 paid sick days per year for workers to recover from their own illness or care for a sick family member.  Here's what your email to Congress could say:

Working people shouldn't be forced to risk their jobs to take care of themselves or their families.  Yet, nearly half of private-sector workers do not have a single paid sick day to care for themselves or a family member when they are ill.

When workers get sick--or need to take care of ill children, or take elderly parents to medical appointments--millions lose pay or even risk losing their jobs.  Without paid sick days, working people are have no choice but to go to work sick, risking the spread of illness.

Paid sick days are important to me, and the health and well-being of my workplace, my family--and my community.  Currently, there are no state or federal laws that require workplaces to provide paid sick days.  I support updating our labor laws so that they reflect the realities of today's working families. 

'Nuff said.