Low labour participation by mothers

[Leo]

unpaid domestic work is not "spending time with their children".

Weird, ours was able to get involved in much of that domestic work as a 2 year old. Even before they can play any active role, it's perfectly possible for parents (of either gender) to multitask and carry out domestic chores while simultaneously minding and entertaining children.

Suggesting that excursions such as just going to the zoo or a playground are the only ways to spend time with children smacks of of part-time parenting, generally limited to the separated parent who does little parenting or those who have a nanny!

 

[DannyBoyD]

Refer you back to post #50

 

[Leo]

Refer you back to post #50

Refer who? As I was the most recent to quote you, I'll assume you meant me, but post #50 makes no sense in that context.

 

[Gordon Gekko]

There’s no hard and fast rule. Some people want to work and have a career and some people don’t. To be blunt, if my Mrs was earning a small fortune a year, I wouldn’t have a major issue staying at home with the kids.

 

[Silversurfer]

Or ahead of 'what the Irish economy needs'. Many don't care that the exchequer probably wants them to work, get taxed, pay someone else to look after their children out of the net, with the carer also paying tax. Then consider the amount of care the child gets from sharing a care giver with N other children, versus N=1 on average, with a parent who takes on the job themselves.

Edit: There is a value to spending time with your kids for many people also that seems to be missing from this discussion.

Yes of course there is a value in spending time with your children. Though is there a need to spend 18 years? This discussion is primarily about choice and the consequences of this choice.

 

[RonnieShinbal88]

Yes of course there is a value in spending time with your children. Though is there a need to spend 18 years? This discussion is primarily about choice and the consequences of this choice.

My point on value is that, if you chose something you prefer and get a value from, then it can come at a cost. I don't think there is a need to spend 18 years from the child's perspective. But there is obviously a cost to being out of a career/training etc. for years and it's hard to go back at a lower level than ex-colleagues etc. or for people without specific training, going into e.g. retail to work with teenagers is hardly attactive as a parent of teenagers yourself.

 

[Silversurfer]

My point on value is that, if you chose something you prefer and get a value from, then it can come at a cost. I don't think there is a need to spend 18 years from the child's perspective. But there is obviously a cost to being out of a career/training etc. for years and it's hard to go back at a lower level than ex-colleagues etc. or for people without specific training, going into e.g. retail to work with teenagers is hardly attactive as a parent of teenagers yourself.

To progress what you said on N=1. This is not always the case. Families where the children are close in age do not fall into that category. Likewise where there is only one child they need company. It is usually not viable for women to work as childcare/Gaeltact/summer camps are required even as the children grow older. You are correct in that skills diminish especially in Ireland where 67% of the population have third level education. I note that the women in Iceland went on a 24 hour strike even though they have the gold standard in parental leave.

 

[Karina]

Miscellaneous Comments
This harkens to my thread on pensions and the challenge in trying to ‘catch up’ when you’ve been on no/lower pay.

But to address the point of the thread, the skill set developed raising children is not immediately obvious as an employable one. (A bit like an Arts degree is treated in some places.)

Reskilling (with requisite piece of paper) takes time and is a serious juggle while also working in paid-employment part time and unpaid employment doing ‘home duties.’

The default is for the burden to fall on mothers and that’s why the participation rate is low for women. The latest Nobel Laureate for Economics confirms the workplace structure of ‘longer hours = greater reward’ is at the heart of the issue.

 

[Purple]

The default is for the burden to fall on mothers and that’s why the participation rate is low for women.

Is it a burden though? I’ve never seen it as a burden. I agree that those mothers can and frequently are disadvantaged from a work and career perspective but if they are then they share in their husbands/partners income. If they are divorced then the law supports them and rebalances things. I’m genuinely asking, I really don’t get the narrative that the parent who has the privilege of spending more time with their children should be financially compensated for having that privilege.

The latest Nobel Laureate for Economics confirms the workplace structure of ‘longer hours = greater reward’ is at the heart of the issue.

If two people of the same ability work in the same job and have the same productivity levels is it not reasonable that the person who works longer should get paid more?

 

[GAAmam]

The tax system doesn’t encourage both parents to work. if I gave up my job my OH gets my tax credits and although we’d only have one income, in net terms that income is higher than his income when we both work. Take away childcare costs and some couples may be better off.
A friend recently went back to work following a 4 year break post her second child, her husband kept her tax credits. She had to get a second car to facilitate her commute, pay a minder and be gone from the house 4 days a week. She was bringing home pennies in net terms. She lasted all of 6 months.
In this country for 2 working parents with small children and childcare costs you need 2 very well paid jobs to be worthwhile both parents going out to work

 

[Karina]

The tax system doesn’t encourage both parents to work. if I gave up my job my OH gets my tax credits and although we’d only have one income, in net terms that income is higher than his income when we both work. Take away childcare costs and some couples may be better off.
A friend recently went back to work following a 4 year break post her second child, her husband kept her tax credits. She had to get a second car to facilitate her commute, pay a minder and be gone from the house 4 days a week. She was bringing home pennies in net terms. She lasted all of 6 months.
In this country for 2 working parents with small children and childcare costs you need 2 very well paid jobs to be worthwhile both parents going out to work

This is the conclusion I also came to when the kids were younger. On a lower wage, the cost of childcare is not offset. On a higher wage, extra hours are taxed at a higher rate meaning household net income is the same PLUS you are paying others to raise your kids. And that's without mentioning the challenges of trying to align the school day / year/ holidays to a working day/year. The issue is structural. If you don't have family supports with free/flexible labour (I seriously miss having my mum close by!), then purely on financials, it makes sense to have one spouse at home.

 

[Karina]

Is it a burden though? I’ve never seen it as a burden. I agree that those mothers can and frequently are disadvantaged from a work and career perspective but if they are then they share in their husbands/partners income. If they are divorced then the law supports them and rebalances things. I’m genuinely asking, I really don’t get the narrative that the parent who has the privilege of spending more time with their children should be financially compensated for having that privilege.

If two people of the same ability work in the same job and have the same productivity levels is it not reasonable that the person who works longer should get paid more?

I see you have strong views on these points @Purple from your earlier posts. At the risk of arguing semantics...

Raising my kids has not been a burden in a negative sense, but it has led to is an opportunity cost far larger than I was aware it would be and that did not have to be as insurmountable as it has become. The fact is, the Home Duties spouse takes on far more than raising the kids. The division of household and emotional labour is unequal. Numerous studies support this.

Yes, in the simplest terms, my husband gets to focus on his job because of my work and we both share his income. But, damn, I wish we could BOTH work and BOTH share raising the kids equally and, although that was our pre-kid intention, it has proven impossible to implement.

I personally put a value on my time by working out what insurance would need to cover the expenses accrued if I fell ill/died because my husband could not have kept his job and done everything when the kids were little. (Some people can do work full time and raise kids - it would seem you're one of them. Most people are not so able or lack family supports.) Frankly, the cost of replacing me was more than my husband earns. This labour is a social contribution even if not otherwise valued financially - I think we can all agree on that.

Re your second point on same job / productivity levels / longer hours. The reality is that productivity is not measured. Were that the case, your point would hold. But if you read Claudia Goldin's papers, it is apparent that HOURS are measured. Even when women with the same skillset and job/role work longer hours (after returning to work), they do not close the gender pay gap. This builds on previous empirical studies over the last 20 years on the "Paternity Premium" and "Male Marriage Wage Premium".

 

[misemoi]

Can we agree that taking on the responsibility of child rearing full time plus most of the household tasks is often the polar opposite of what most women were doing before. So financial circumstances often make them the parent working at home. Caring for young children is hard work, can be mind numbingly boring, isolating and it can be hard to escape as you live at your work. That is an unseen cost, the lack of intellectual challenge, the lack of socialising with peers other than other work at home parents, the difficulty in getting back into the workforce. For some parents, part time parenting is actually a desired outcome to maintain mental health. And that's not something you know until you become a parent.



And to be pretty much forced into full time parenting because of finances and all the structural issues already outlined can make life very hard for some people. We all do better are when we more in charge of our own destinies.

















































And yes women are l