Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know. I even tried to talk to her and see if there was an alternative option, but she said she HAD to use this certain daycare (that was 45 min away) and her husband wouldn't take the kid because he "didn't like getting up early"!
I don't mind helping people out but this cut into my school and affected my grades, and that's major to me. And my job is very no-no on overtime, and my hours are already at 40 to begin with so when I would go into overtime I would be the one getting b****ed at by management, and they would cut them later in the week.
We have a guy who is always trying to get everyone to come in early and stay late for him so he can go to the bar (or because he's hung over from partying the night before), and another girl who likes to roll in 5 minutes late on her shift every day...just because. Neither of them have kids. So yes, it does go both ways.
Sheesh.. sounds like her husband is the problem.. not the mom.. ah.. in the end she did what she had to and you what you had to because it was a situation that wouldn't work. Obviously you couldn't and obviously your employer was unwilling to (in regards to the extra time you were putting in).
Obviously that job was not right for that mom because they could not work out something where she would come in a 1/2 hour later. I'm sure if she could put her kid in daycare earlier she would, but most start at 7am. Had you not had classes that needed to start at 8am, then you would have probably remained that extra 1/2 hour 45 minutes and (if on hourly salary) would be compensated. If you worked 5 days a week that is 2 1/2 hours extra in you paycheck every week. Your "picking up the slack" in that situation was not unrewarded (unless they weren't paying you, in which case you would have or should have pointed that out). As it turned out your situation was not open to that extra 1/2 hour and so it could not have worked for either of you. Because she was the one looking for special consideration, she was the one that ultimately had to go. I'm sure she quit because they told her she needed to be on time or else, in which case that was impossible and she then had to make a choice.
What exactly did you expect her to do? Leave her child on the street corner or at the door of the not yet opened day care? She did the best she could. Had she done that she would be an unfit mother. Had she not worked as a result then she would be chastised for not working and be called lazy.. blah blah blah.
Hopefully she was able to find a job that was a little more accommodating to her situation.
Her lateness had NOTHING whatsoever to do with her work ethic or lack of ethic. Would you have felt her work ethic was better if she had shown up on time, but as a result her child was left waiting in front of a daycare center that was not yet opened?? What's more important.. her responsibility as the caretaker and protector of her child, or getting to a job on time. When one has to be sacrificed for the other, she made the correct choice. The job wasn't the right fit for that working mom period.
As far as other people "picking up the slack" for working parents that too does not always go unrewarded. The "extra" that you do will most likely put you in head of the line for pay raises, promotions etc. If you work hourly and are working overtime for a mom or dad that can't stay beyond their regular hours to complete something you are being compensated and so are therefore being rewarded. Yes, if you are the employee that doesn't have a family you are going to be the first one they go to to cover holiday shifts or extra type stuff. That's a part of YOUR choice to remain childless. But again, you are also compensated and hopefully recognized for that.
I would only consider someone "picking up the slack" if the person that is working their regular hours is not producing the work they should forcing you or others to produce more or make up the difference. THAT is picking up the slack.
I wouldn't expect anyone to leave their child on the corner. Did I really come off that way?
The problem is that she expected me to put my priorites on hold to cover her responsibility. She basically expected me to miss class or at least be late and have my grades suffer (if my grades suffer, I could lose my scholarship, blah blah). Another problem I had was her attitude about it-she never once apologized, and she told me she didn't understand why my missing class would be a big deal.
Management did try to accomodate her; they offered to give her the 3-11 shift but she didn't want to do that. Bottom line, it just wasn't a good fit.
Sheesh.. sounds like her husband is the problem.. not the mom.. ah.. in the end she did what she had to and you what you had to because it was a situation that wouldn't work. Obviously you couldn't and obviously your employer was unwilling to (in regards to the extra time you were putting in).
I don't think it's abnormal in that you're defective for not wanting them, but evolutionarily speaking, you're only here on Earth to duplicate yourself.
What happens in old age? That's the thing. Who's going to take care of you, and love you enough to make sure you get treated well when your spouse passes on? I don't want to be shut-up somewhere in a nursing home with no visitors.
I'm not saying that you are implying that you should have kids so that they can take care of you when you are old.
But having a child or children doesn't even guarantee that they will be there to care for their aging parents (for people who may think that way) because unfortunately something could happen to all of their children- like a tragic accident or something. Nothing in life is a guarantee.
I wouldn't expect anyone to leave their child on the corner. Did I really come off that way?
The problem is that she expected me to put my priorites on hold to cover her responsibility. She basically expected me to miss class or at least be late and have my grades suffer (if my grades suffer, I could lose my scholarship, blah blah). Another problem I had was her attitude about it-she never once apologized, and she told me she didn't understand why my missing class would be a big deal.
Management did try to accomodate her; they offered to give her the 3-11 shift but she didn't want to do that. Bottom line, it just wasn't a good fit.
No.. I don't think you came off that way. I was just trying to figure out what you expected her to do with few options.
3-11 wouldn't have worked either. After all, the child needs to be fed and tucked in and sounds like the Dad (from what I gather of your post) wouldn't deal well with that.. and also doing that is more imporant to her than the job.
Yes.. she shouldn't have assumed that your problem was any more/less frustrating.. her attitude probably had more to do with her frustration at the situation more so than her truly believing that you and your situation were less important.
My husband and I do not want children-ever. We've always felt this way but made the firm decision when he came home from Iraq. We are the only married couple inside of our circle of friends without children.
When I told an acquaintance that we weren't having children, she gasped and said "Oh my God, that is so abnormal. Is there something wrong with you?"
Why is it so hard for some people to comprehend that in this day and age, there are people who don't want kids?
What are your opinions?
I think this article I just came across says it all:
"This is the real controversy at the heart of the "culture war" on which women's bodies are the battlefield. Although mothers are subjected to their own "truckload of judgmental bullsh*t from people who have no business interfering," as Hortense put it, women who choose not to have children, before or after becoming pregnant, are still believed to be immature, naive, misguided, mentally ill, untrustworthy, and/or downright evil. There is relentless pressure from society, the media, and healthcare professionals -- not to mention religious fundamentalists and the anti-choice movement -- to keep women from making an informed, rational decision not to devote our bodies and futures to childbirth and child rearing. As Vernon says, "Childlessness is going to be a feature in many of our lives; we need to start seeing it as a choice, a valid option, rather than a failing. We certainly need it not to be taboo." But as long as we don't, as long as we keep pretending that the debate is only about "killing babies" and not about whether women should have the basic right to control our own fertility, that common ground will remain elusive."
Last edited by bellalunatic; 06-16-2009 at 02:22 PM..
as far as the "covering for" issue that is going on, this is not an issue of parents vs childless people. this is an issue of miscommunication on most accounts (i'd bet money on it), and an issue of lazy/stupid people on the rest of them. you all know as well as i do that childless people are as lazy as anyone else.
stupid generalizations like that don't serve to help anyone or to fix any problems. if you have had to "cover for a coworker" because of their child, then it is an issue of them being stupid human beings even before it is an issue of them being stupid workers or stupid parents. but again, i would bet that the majority of the time, it is miscommunication.
Yes, if you are the employee that doesn't have a family you are going to be the first one they go to to cover holiday shifts or extra type stuff. That's a part of YOUR choice to remain childless.
I must have missed that explanation during the new employee orientation:
"All right everyone, listen up!"
"All employees get two weeks paid vacation and all federal holidays off."
"However, those of you who are bereft of children will be expected to cover holiday shifts and other extra assignments so that all of the mommies and daddies here can spend wholesome quality time with their family. I am sorry if this inconveniences you in any way, but you should have been fruitful and multiplied as God intended. Whether you made a decision to remain childless, or whether you are childless due to medical reasons is of no consequence. Your lives pale in comparison to all the wonderful mothers and fathers employed by our company and you must suffer the consequences."
But YOUR criteria of one parent being able to stay home is not feasible in this nation and in this economy at this time. i don't know about the rest of the world. if that was a criteria we would all follow it very well may be that the human race would die out.
If that was the criteria, there would still be people being born--and it's possible that employers would have to pay a decent wage, since only one person would be working. They'd lose about half their workforce, and their supply would decrease, while demand would be constant. Hence, the "price" would go up.
Those who claim that they are picking up the slack for a co-worker often aren't. Even so, picking up the slack for somebody at work has nothing to do with whether or not the persons involved have children. It has to do with individual work ethic.
I'll grant you that it's not ALWAYS about the kids. Whenever someone calls in sick or takes a vacation, those left behind have that person's job to do on top of everything else. They should have more respect for their coworkers...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
