FT.com | Dear Lucy | ‘Am I right to go on making a fuss about job-sharing?’

March 13, 2008

‘Am I right to go on making a fuss about job-sharing?’

I am about to return from maternity leave after having my second child. I love my current job but it is very demanding. I have suggested to my boss that I do it as a job share, and have even found a woman who might split it. He claims the job needs to be done by one person and has offered me something else part-time that I see as a step down. I work for a Fortune 500 company that talks a lot about work-life balance, and HR has told me that the company values part-time employees. But I look around the organisation and see no female role models on job shares. Am I right to go on making a fuss?
Manager, female, 35

Lucy’s Answer

Don’t go on making a fuss. You won’t win, and I’m not even sure that you have right on your side.

You say your boss “claims” the job can’t be done as a job share – the implication being that he is a bigoted enemy of the working mother.

Depending on what the job is, he may well be justified. Most demanding managerial jobs in big companies tend to be done better by one person than two. This is why there are no senior “role models” in your company on job shares. Such arrangements can be fine at junior levels, and can sometimes work in craft jobs such as journalism. Sometimes senior jobs are shared in the public and voluntary sectors, but even there the record is patchy.

So, don’t protest, and drop your assumption that your manager is against you. In fact, it sounds as if he is being quite reasonable in offering you something else part time – which I suggest you take like a shot. Presumably the rate of pay will stay the same and, if the work is a bit less stressful than before, you should see that as a blessing. Looking after a baby and a small child is quite stressful too.

By far the most horrible thing about “the mommy track” is its name. Otherwise it is quite a nice place to be. All the surveys find that the happiest workers are part-time mothers – which I suspect is partly because they are not investing their entire selves in their work, and partly because the working part of the week is a respite for the body and a treat for the mind after the demands of the domestic part.

I don’t want to depress you further, but as you are 35 you have nearly three decades of working life ahead of you – which is plenty of time to go back to full-time work, if that is what you want.

March 13th, 2008 in Uncategorised | Permalink

21 Responses to “‘Am I right to go on making a fuss about job-sharing?’”

Comments

I
The amount of fuss which you have the option of making is decided by
1 your irreplaceability–how many others in the organisation or in the market can perform the same job under any existing constraints
2 your job-discrimination lawyer’s invincibility–what you can find and afford versus what the company can find and afford.

II
Fortune 500 or not, work-life balance New Age pronouncements or not, many realities remain:
1 not every last employee demand is as ideal or possible for the business to meet
2 the boss has decision-making options which the employee doesn’t.

GOOD NEWS: Being in the Fortune 500 also means that there are other departments with bosses who may see things differently.

BAD NEWS: Whatever the company, wherever the department, some of your demands will still not be met–just as some expectations of those left behind while you were on maternity leave and some expectations of your boss were unmet, for reasons just as justifiable as yours.
Posted by: HKLivingston, 26, investment banker | March 13th, 2008 at 7:52 am | Report this comment
You are right to make a fuss about it, but making a fuss might not be in your best interests.
Did you work for the same “Fortune 500″ employer when you returned from work after your first child, or did you have the child during a 3 week annual leave period?
So far as I understand it you have the right (within a certain time period) to have your old job back and your employer has the obligation to consider flexible working arrangements. Your boss probably realises that he is offering you more than he has to.
Take legal advice if you feel so minded, but who would want to hire you with a track record of suing your employer who offerred you an alternative job (which was available at the time) when you unilaterally announced that part-time was the way forward for you?
My advice is take the part-time job offerred - it is unlikely to affect your salary rate. Spend time with your kids, they need you more than you need extra stress or a few extrra grand. If other jobs appear for job share in the compnay you should be wellplaced to apply.
Presumably you are in the USA, as you refer to a “Fortune 500″ employer, so please bear in mind that my comments are flavoured by solicalist Britian.
Posted by: Michael | March 13th, 2008 at 8:33 am | Report this comment
Have you presented your job-share solution formally & in detail, with costs & benefits to the company, to your boss & to HR? If it has just been a suggestion rejected without due consideration it might be worth trying more formally. Remember that the comapny doesn’t exist for the sole benefit of the employees, though

Also you need to be very honest with yourself; if you are now intending to give less time & commitment to your job & more to your children (perfectly reasonable, laudable even)you must be willing to compromise too. You chose to have your children, others in your department didn’t & don’t have a responsibility to pay for your choice.Stop thinking of the part-time job offered as a step down, it may be a good staging post while your children are young or until you find another job-share which suits you better.
Posted by: Elizabeth, 44, fund manager | March 13th, 2008 at 11:10 am | Report this comment
Carrot & stick
Hit ‘em hard, but only if your talents are critical to the role. If so, in a very confidential conversation with your boss note that two heads are better than one, and modern EM, IM and synchronized CRM all support effective collaboration.

Then calmly and very supportively (allowing it is 100% his call), give him a choice: be the guiding light for the new era of job-sharing, or reap a load of opprobrium for a ‘whiff of’ gender discrimination tainting the company. (Leading, yet less than an overt threat of legal action.) Based on what you’ve said, there may well be ample evidence to win a discrimination suit, and they may wish to avoid the bad PR.

Admittedly a game of ‘chicken’, and in case it goes wrong you must decide if you want to play it out before you begin; especially regarding legal expense and reputation .

Even if you get what you want, it may end up a case of being careful what you wish for. The real politik is the boss grudgingly accedes, and then undermines you to create a negative case for future job sharing requests as well. So make especially sure you’ve got those job sharing ducks in a row, and if it is succeeding heap compliments on the boss at every turn; that’s part and parcel of the ‘guiding light’ role you put on the table.

Are you comfortable with that particular deal with the Devil?

Alan, consultant, male, 58
Posted by: Alan | March 13th, 2008 at 3:24 pm | Report this comment
Ignore anyone, including/especially your lawyer, who tells you that you are “Irreplaceable” unless your maternity leave was for only three weeks. For several months you have been replaced.
Find out how well your temporary replacement has done the job in your absence.
Ask yourself whether you could do your job just as well, adequately but less well, or inadequately if you had repeated attacks of amnesia that covered two days of every week. (You know your job better than anyone; your boss knows it pretty well; we don’t know it all).
If you think that you could do your job better as a serial amnesiac than your temporary replacement, and that your selected job-splitter could also do, then prepare a case for your boss on this basis, as Alan suggests.
I suspect that the weak link in your argument will be that the potential job-splitter that you have found needs to be significantly better at your job than the replacement that your company provided in order to compensate for lack of continuity, which would imply that you are better at HR than the company’s HR department.
So you need to convince your boss before HR get involved in the discussion.
If not, then negotiate with your boss for the most interesting part-time job he can find you.
John 61 male consultant
Posted by: John | March 13th, 2008 at 7:50 pm | Report this comment
Two things first of all:

1. Choosing to have a child is exactly that, a choice, and
2. Job sharing is not an entitlement, it’s a privilege.

It sounds as if your boss has actually been pretty reasonable, in taking the trouble to find an alternative (albeit part time) role for you and it is reasonable to assume from this that he does value your skills and experience. In offering you a part time role he has acknowledged your wish to stay at the company whilst ensuring your children do not miss out.

I think you really only have two options: take the part time role and make the best of it that you possibly can (with an eye to resuming a full time role once you feel that your children are old enough), or reject your boss’ offer and leave the company. The second option will have financial implications and it might a little time to find another employer who’s prepared to take you on in either a part-time or job-share position.

Standing on your principles and ‘making a fuss’, as you put it, will do you no favours at all. I hope this helps.
Posted by: GLH, female, manager | March 14th, 2008 at 1:19 pm | Report this comment
I suppose you could always grow up.

Instead of complaining about how unfair life is you could always look upon it as a result of your choice to have a child.

Unless of course your company forced you to have a baby in which case I take it back.
Posted by: Stuart - FD | March 14th, 2008 at 9:49 pm | Report this comment
This is the time to call upon your skills as a manager–to compromise.

And while there is one woman who ‘might’ be willing to split your job, she may be mindful of Benjamin Franklin’s words–she is not necessarily as willing to testify on your behalf and against the company before an Employment Tribunal.

“For the want of a nail, the shoe was lost; for the want of a shoe, the horse was lost; for the want of a horse, the rider was lost … all for the want of care about a horseshoe nail.”

Job-share is the nail. Healthy children, stable job, cooperative co-workers and generous boss are shoe, horse and rider.
Posted by: J Michael, private banker, 39 | March 15th, 2008 at 3:28 am | Report this comment
As an employer, job shares are easy to accept when the job is relatively low skilled or when there is a larger pool of people doing similar work. It is almost impossible when it is a knowledge or skill based position and people (customers, clients, colleagues) need to access that knowledge /skill for the full week. If you are in the former category, your employer is being unreasonable. If the latter then it’s you.
Posted by: Mark | March 15th, 2008 at 8:05 am | Report this comment
I’m not sure how effective job-share is when the role is client-facing and/or very demanding - I haven’t come across this in reality in the UK. I think what you are asking for is more time with your family - in which case take the part-time role and move back to full-time when you feel the time is right.
Posted by: Andrew | March 15th, 2008 at 10:38 pm | Report this comment
What I find very strange is that you believe the corporate propaganda. What company do you know that actually says they do not value part time workers, or that they don’t believe in work-life balance? They probably do value part time workers, just not as much a full time workers.
If you want to see how much the company values its part time workers, find out what benefits they offer them.
It’s very difficult to answer your question. “Manager” could mean anything. It could be a job where the tasks are easily divided among two people, or where it is impossible to do this. Remember, the job was created as a full-time position for a reason.
Posted by: Alan Z. | March 17th, 2008 at 11:25 pm | Report this comment
Commenting on your situation is difficult given there isn’t much detail about your role; however, let me provide two examples where part-time/job sharing has been requested after returning maternity leave with varying degrees of success.

Situation 1: I used to work in the investment banking division at one of the ‘bulge bracket’ banks (UK based) that touted work/life balance and valuing part-time employees. After returning from maternit leave, I was given a trial part-time arrangement of 4 days per week. It was obvious from the start that management weren’t keen for this to work (in reality, only HR had part-time and job sharing roles), and I was honest with myself that working part-time in a client facing role is sadly not possible. Whilst I did have ‘legal options’ and could have sought out a part-time position elsewhere at the bank, I opted to leave for a part-time position at one of our clients and have not regretted my decision one minute since. I think it is easier to work part-time when you’ve never worked in the position full-time as people’s expectations are different.

Situation 2: A friend of mine works in marketing at a US Fortune 500 company and was able to arrange a job share for her position; however, her job share partner is not as strong. As a result, they are each given discreet projects on which to work, essentially making it two part-time positions with some overlap. Recently, the position above the job share has become open; however she is unlikely to be considered for the position because her managers do not want to promote her job share partner as well.

If I were in your situation, I’d opt either for the part-time position or look externally. If your boss isn’t 100% supportive of a job share from the outset, then he will grudgingly accept it and look for every opportunity to demonstrate that it has failed.
Posted by: City Worker | March 18th, 2008 at 3:51 pm | Report this comment
Your having a child is your choice and your employer has no responsibility for its effect. It has a business to run. If you don’t want the part-time job, you’re always welcome to find another one.
Posted by: Brian | March 18th, 2008 at 7:18 pm | Report this comment
Dear Brian,
Please put your flint axe-head in your locker before entering the office.
The questioner works for a Fortune 500 company, which implies that US laws, rather than common-sense, apply.
Even in the UK the EOC has rarely been about genuine equality (the notorious Cammell-Laird case, which it won, involved a cook who was being paid more than a foreman working outdoors in the snow, sleet rain and occasional sun claiming “equality” because one clause suggested that he was being paid at a higher hourly rate when his adverse conditions bonus was consolidated into his basic rate whereas her nominal hourly rate was based on something like a 45-minute hour. I was surprised that his Trade Union didn’t follow up with a more justified claim for equal pay).
Posted by: John | March 19th, 2008 at 7:39 pm | Report this comment
Thanks John, I appreciate the advice. Companies of all sizes in the private sector are governed by the same laws. The “Fortune 500” factor means nothing. I expect the 35-year-old mother of two is desirous of receiving the same pay and benefits while performing half the job and that’s just nonsense.
Posted by: Brian | March 19th, 2008 at 9:52 pm | Report this comment
Dear Brian,
If the latter was the case, your view would receive more sympathy but she has implied that she wants to share the salary pro-rata with the job.
The problem is that she believes and wants to believe that the job can be done properly (and if not equally well, well enough to justify her share of the salary) split between two people but her boss does not. I don’t know because I don’t know the details but it is quite possible that he is right.
What I find more probable is that splitting the job will mean it will be done significantly less well (see earlier post). In addition to those obvious points, when I started working “part-time” (my wife complains that is more hours than she works “full-time”) my productivity dropped because nearly all of the non-productive junk I had to handle and most of the background I needed to read was invariant so the work that I actually did dropped by a larger %age than the hours that I worked. I see no reason why this should apply only to men.
Apart from her reference to “Fortune 500″ her assumption that a “very demanding” job is suitable for a job-share implies to me that she is American and my comment referred to the difference between US and UK laws rather than to company size.
Posted by: John | March 19th, 2008 at 11:13 pm | Report this comment
Have you considered an option of a “timesharing” your household responsibilities with your partner: this one yields itself naturally to a time share as both parents need to play a key role in children’s lives. This might allow you to keep your job full time.
Elina, 30, female, Investment Banking
Posted by: Elina | March 20th, 2008 at 4:52 pm | Report this comment
Bravo, Lucy! I liked your answer.
Posted by: Tory Torrison | March 21st, 2008 at 8:27 am | Report this comment
Yes you should make a fuss, presuming you really want to return to this job/company, as it sounds like you do.

Several replies have given very constructive advice as to how to “make a fuss” in a constructive, assertive manner.

I find the antagonistic tone of some other replies hard to believe. And I’m astonished that Lucy advised you to accept a job that you feel is below your capabilities and feel oh-so grateful to be employed at all.

There are far too many companies talking the talk and not walking the walk re valuing work/life balance and encouraging career advancement of working mothers.

For an employer to walk the walk requires imagination, flexibility and foresight. If your employers are lacking in those departments, you can help them by laying out your case, using the advice other readers have given.

Last time I checked, it took at least two people to make the decision to have a child, not one. So why should one of those people be penalised in terms of her career advancement? In Africa they say it takes a village to raise a child. Yes, and that village includes high-profile city companies for whom childrens’ mothers work.

It may not be pleasant being the one who seeks to break the mould. It takes confidence, particularly in the light of negative voices whether in your head, in your company or on this page, saying “don’t bother”. But I think it is worth bothering with and the rewards will be there - for you and your employer - in the end.
Posted by: Katherine | March 31st, 2008 at 4:24 pm | Report this comment
Fair enough, it may not be appropriate for this particular role - hard to judge with so little detail. What I find amazing though, is that Board of Director members can apparently do a great job in a day or half a day per week, yet for something much less demanding it is not possible to arrange a job share! The inability of organisations to introduce more flexible working seems to me to be more about british conservatism and lack of creative thinking. Many of the most successful people are those who do several different jobs on a part time basis!
Posted by: Alison | April 9th, 2008 at 5:03 pm | Report this comment
Don’t give up yet! The first step is to assess if your role is suitable for job-sharing. Is it a proactive role, can you define your medium term objectives clearly and do you have control over how you spend your time? If the answers are yes there’s a good chance you can create a job-share successfully.

The reason that job-shares are not more common in the private sector is because managers know very little about how phenomenally well they can work. There is an art to finding a job-share partner and structuring the role optimally between two partners. I guess that your manager has virtually no experience of job-sharing and knows little of how it could work. A pair of job-sharers is 30% more productive than one full time employee.

Eat Your Cake can help you and your manager to create a job-share and find a job-share partner. Go to www.eatyourcake.co.uk

Managing Director,34, Female.
Posted by: Azita Qadri, Eat Your Cake Ltd | April 16th, 2008 at 4:25 pm | Report this comment

Answers may be published in the Financial Times newspaper. Please include your first name (surname is not needed), email address, gender, age and job title. Want to report an offensive or unsuitable comment? Our comment guidelines, including reporting procedures, can be found here.