Low labour participation by mothers

Childcare costs, difficulty to find childcare, late school start (preschool only cover 3 hours), school organisation (very early finish in primary school without adding additional days off, very long summer holidays in secondary), summer camps that actually require additional childcare, difficult before or after school care, minimum rights for time off work when children are sick, difficulty to find part-time jobs at different levels. Some other countries have been providing services to help around with these issues for more than 40 years.
I also find that a lot of the help or changes in the last decades have been around providing additional time off. While I can see some benefits to thus approach, it also means that women can become disengaged from the workforce. It's not that easy to go back after a year off, with all the pressure/organisation required to make it work.
 
Last edited:
blueband said:
maybe they put taking care of their children ahead of being in the jobs market.......who would have thought!
Click to expand...
Generally speaking, the “burden” (for want of a better word) of day-to-say minding of children tends to rest with women. Whether this has its roots in the caveman theory or whether it’s a reflection of natural maternal instincts, I wouldn’t be qualified to say.

Maybe greater availability of affordable childcare would make a difference but I suspect the main factors are non-financial.

Having gone through the crèche drop-off/pick-up experience for several years, I wouldn’t wish it on anyone. If either partner could afford to be a stay-at-home parent, my own view is that it’s a better option. But why this always seems to be the mother rather than the father is a much deeper question.
 
It’s funny the way society seems to frown on single income families.

Yet when friends or relatives of mine start to make decent money, one spouse/partner tends to then stay at home.

And no, it’s not always the mother.

The point is, in the cold light of day, it’s frequently something that people actually aspire to. It’s just hard to afford.
 
Very curious that it still seems to be the mother 9 times out of 10, even if she is the higher earner.

Would have thought from a practical point of view people would aim for each partner to work part-time, so you would not be dependent on a single job.

You could then potentially increase hours for either person if needed. And both could enjoy extra time with children, which is presumably the whole reason to have a family in the first place. Of course not every job or situation allows for it but would expect to see it more than I do.

Gordon Gekko said:
It’s funny the way society seems to frown on single income families.
Click to expand...

Does society frown on single income families? I think economists probably do but not sure the general public care too much.
 
I totally agree with Premos, it is lack of affordable available childcare, a behemoth of a school system and inflexibility of work which lends itself to this absence of mothers at work.

Childcare is very expensive and hard to find. if you can afford it you make decisions on the number of children you have based on costs, if you have a higher level of education you have delayed having children due to a late start in working life, and trying to establish a career.

Take Scandinavia and Germany, great childcare, low costs to the parents but the staff are well paid. Most staff in childcare in Ireland are young because it is poorly paid.

And the school system is not set up to cater to working parents. No pre-school clubs or after school care which is common in Spain. So many random days off, half days and they only open 183 days of the year when adults work 238 days. Splitting holidays, grandparents, all sorts to bridge the gaps. Parents have to be there for drop off and collection and end up spinning trying to make it all work.

I know it only worked my our family because my husband worked shift and had more time off during the week which cut down our over reliance on childcare
 
At this point my wife has tried everything from stay-at-home status to half-time to 80% and is now back to full-time work. We used a crèche as well as a childminder over the years.

What worked best was her staying home with the kids for a few years when they were young. We were lucky enough to be able to afford it and wouldn’t swap it.
 
One issue I have noticed that just seems to have emerged in the last couple of years is that colleagues cannot get a creche to take a baby younger than a year. So they are finding it impossible to return to work after six months of maternity leave.
 
Firstly, it should be noted that many stay at home mums are actually working, especially on farms or on family businessnes and are probably not being formally recognised by the state as such.

There are a couple of other factors coming to play. One is the inability a lot of families have to being able to live close to where they work and thus the commuting time, the inability to guarantee what time either parent will get home from work to collect a child all have an impact.
 
thedaddyman said:
Firstly, it should be noted that many stay at home mums are actually working, especially on farms or on family businessnes and are probably not being formally recognised by the state as such.

There are a couple of other factors coming to play. One is the inability a lot of families have to being able to live close to where they work and thus the commuting time, the inability to guarantee what time either parent will get home from work to collect a child all have an impact.
Click to expand...
Yes dropping kids to creche waiting for it to open at 7.30 and struggling to be back by closing time at 6.30 is no fun.
 
A lot of it depends on how you want your family life to be. Creche is a one drop off and one collection day, and while not amazing, is manageable with planning of split drops and collects and once you are home in the evening then that is it. Typically if two working parents, getting involved in school activities, after school sports and matches etc becomes very challenging. School aged kids might have multiple of these plus the potential requirement for pre school care as well. It really becomes a logistical nightmare, it can be impossible to get childcare that can work around that. So it often comes down to that, if we want our kids involved in things other than school, a parent needs to be around more. Also some families have kids who need more support with homework, maybe things like speech therapy etc that again require in person parental involvement and can't be outsourced. In an ideal world the working day and the school day would better align (giving a longer lunch break/more PE to kids as an example, allowing parental leave to be taken in the afternoons another example).

Then on the other side, anecdotally most families I know have 3 kids...that is 3*maternity leave, potentially 3* time off during pregnancy for illness, ??? of years of lack of sleep. Not all of those impact the working fathers so it is here that working mothers can fall behind their potential career path, meaning their compensation is lower and then when all of the above comes into play and one parent is needed at home more it becomes a financial choice. And once out of the workforce it can be really hard to get back in, depending on the industry and the willingness of the family to step back up again when used to having someone home to manage home and kids life.
 
Rather than focusing on women's working experience when they become a parent, perhaps we should look at men's working experience when the same event occurs.

www.bbc.com

The hidden load: How 'thinking of everything' holds mums back

When it comes to household responsibilities, women perform far more cognitive and emotional labour than men. Why is this, and is there anything we can do about it?
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
 
Last edited:
arbitron said:
Would have thought from a practical point of view people would aim for each partner to work part-time, so you would not be dependent on a single job.

You could then potentially increase hours for either person if needed.
Click to expand...
It would require a massive overhaul of working practices to afford all parents anything close to that level of flexibility. Part time roles are more common in some lines of work than others, and where available, increasing hours isn't just a personal decision.
 
When economic constraints are removed and societies become more socially liberal women tend to move more towards what are considered their traditional roles. In general terms women and men are equal but different. Women are far more likely to want to spend time with their children when they are young. That's why women are more likely to spend more time with their children when they are young.
It really is that simple.
That's not to say there are obstacles to choice or societal constraints or economic pressures but when all of those things are removed we are just hairless Apes and evolution is the main driver of how we behave as a society.
 
DannyBoyD said:
So the break in employment, short working hours etc., had no career impact and she achieved the same promotions / status as you?
Click to expand...
He said it was the best solution - not a perfect solution. Something has to give but the question is why it almost always seems to be the mother’s career that’s put on hold.
 
Salvadore said:
Something has to give but the question is why it almost always seems to be the mother’s career that’s put on hold.
Click to expand...
Because it is almost always the mother that wants to put her career on hold.
The issues here are around choice. Without the economic need to work most mothers will choose to stay at home with their children. Most men will choose to work.

Because of our very generous welfare system those families on low incomes, especially the ones who have won the social housing lotto and have a council house, don't both have to work. So they don't.

Because of our very high childcare costs and very high marginal tax rates on modest enough incomes it makes no financial sense for many middle income families to have both parents working. Mothers are far more likely to want to give up work and stay at home with their children. So the mothers do that.
 
Going back to the original question, I don’t think it’s necessarily helpful to point to the low participation rate of mothers in particular. There are other cohorts (e.g. over 60s) that could also be drawn upon to fill labour shortages.

What’s really required is a more imaginative and progressive approach to work that provides opportunities for those who can’t work within traditional confines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top