What is the definition of an ideal worker?
“It’s someone who is always available when the employer needs them,” says Joan Williams, director of the Center for WorkLife Law at the University of California, Hasting College of Law. And unfortunately, she adds, someone with family responsibilities doesn’t quite fit the mold.
The whole model of the work world today is designed around a husband with a stay-at-home wife, maintains Williams, who is author of the forthcoming book, “Reshaping the Work-Family Debate: Why Men and Class Matter.”
So, it turns out we’ve evolved beyond the farmer and his wife, but maybe that agrarian model was more modern than what we have today. Everything is all well and good for employees who have a spouse at home baking bread and tending to the farm, but if you don’t, tough luck.
Seriously folks, if an individual has to take time off to care for a child or ailing family member, there are few if any laws that protect them. Family responsibilities discrimination, aka “FRD,” is OK.
Basically, parenthood, among other hoods, is largely unprotected under our nation’s labor laws.
There are protections for certain classes. For example, you can’t just start firing everyone of a certain gender or race. if an employer started firing all the women who take time off to care for kids, or all the black men who go home early to care for a sick parent, then the employer could end up in legal hot water.
But, if the company is an equal-opportunity, family-responsibilities discriminator, there are no federal laws that explicitly frown down upon the practice, according to the Sloan Work and Family Research Network study on FRD.
There is currently no federal law and only two state laws (Alaska and the District of Columbia) that expressly prohibit FRD.
Instead, employers are being sued by employees for FRD under approximately 17 different legal theories pursuant to almost every
federal employment law, state leave and antidiscrimination laws, and common law causes of action.
So, if you live in Alaska, being a parent is a protected class. But in most other places, you’re on your own buddy, or should I say mommy and daddy.
And, not surprisingly, the number of family responsibilities discrimination cases are skyrocketing:
The dramatic rise o nearly 400% in the number of FRD cases filed between 1995 and 2005 as compared to the previous decade underscores the prevalence
of this type of discrimination, according to Sloan’s research.
While recent numbers aren’t available, all signs point to a further spike in such cases during these tough economic times. Discrimination complaints in general to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission approached record levels last year.
Working women and men shouldn’t have to haul employers into court to get what they deserve — a fair playing field in the workplace. Our society is supposedly civilized and should take into account the family responsibilities we all have to deal with today.
The federal government doesn’t like this type of bias, especially in this tough economy, but they can do little beyond encouraging employers to be nicer.
Yes, there are still a lot of men with wives who stay at home and care for kids and ailing parents and parent-in-laws, but the vast majority of us have to figure out how to juggle two careers and family. It’s about time the system caught up with the workplace reality!! Right??
If you fire a white guy because he had to take Friday off to make sure his dad who has lung cancer could get to his chemo session, then you should have to face the wrath of the law.
If you demote a mom because her son broke his foot during the big scene in the school play and she took a half day off to take him for X-rays, then the government should come a knockin.
I know, work has to get done. But in the majority of cases I hear about, and know about personally, the employees end up getting the jobs done and then some.
The labor laws and Corporate America just have to catch up with how the vast majority of workers, men and women, play the work game today.
Women have had to endure this type of bologna for years. And now, thankfully, men are stepping up and doing more with the family. That means, men will, and are, also being sidelined for straying at work when family calls.
Williams told me that men who behave in the traditional way — have kids but pretend they don’t when it comes to work — end up doing well in their careers. But, she adds, if a dad takes even a short time off, such as family leave after a child is born, he gets “the flexibility stigma.” In fact, sometimes men get more stigmatized than women, she maintains. “In many environments, men are discouraged from taking leave while women are granted it routinely.”
No matter how you slice it, FAMILY=F*CKED at work.
Sorry folks, that’s just how it is; and it won’t change until we start demanding change on a broader scale — from the politicians who are supposed to represent us. US!! The people that work and pay taxes. There’s been so much attention paid to political movements in this country lately that are fighting for a host of things — lower taxes; less government, etc.
Where are the working folks who have family responsibilities? They are the ones with the shortest end of the stick. Forget the tea party! How about the “famiLY” party; or the “I’m-caring-for-Jr.,-mom,-dad,-and me” party?
I know, we’re all tired, overworked, and ready for a long vacation, but it would be much easier for us all if we weren’t penalized for being fathers, mothers, daughter, sons, brothers, sisters, etc.
According to Sloan’s research, several states have introduced legislation to stop FRD bias. Has your state?
Find out and call the members of Congress that represent you. Take time out of your busy day. It may be worth it in the end.
July 19th, 2010 at 9:55 am
Even though familial status is not yet a protected category by EEO laws, sometimes it can be brought as a gender discrimination claim. So those who have been discriminated on this basis might still want to consult with a skilled employment lawyer.
July 19th, 2010 at 10:10 am
Eve, you wrote “No matter how you slice it, FAMILY=F*CKED at work.” Well, there is one other way to approach it–one can choose work over family, and then the family gets screwed.
You also wrote, “So, it turns out we’ve evolved beyond the farmer and his wife, but maybe that agrarian model was more modern than what we have today.” I couldn’t agree more. While there were often “traditional” divisions of labor, both parties were working together, in the same basic environment, for the same common goal (the survival of the family). I believe those folks who are self-employed and whose spouses are a part of the business enterprise, live closest to that model today. I was self-employed for a number of years, and my wife not only provided me tremendous support (handling everything from call scheduling to shipping and receiving), but she also describes it as one of the most fulfilling times of her life. It’s not just that she was working, but that we were working together.
While much of our society still reflects a framework based on a primary breadwinner model, I despise the way the industrial revolution pushed a majority of families into adopting the model that had parents (one or both) working outside the home. Now, to do anything else is much more difficult. My wife and I consider ourselves blessed to be in a situation where she can choose to stay home, but I’d much rather be working alongside of her once again.
It seems that many businesses and individuals in our age are motivated primarily to become more productive and wealthy. Anyone content with the concept of simply doing a good job and earning enough to put food on the table is somehow viewed as suspect, as lacking drive or ambition. As I’ve gotten older, I’ve realized that there’s more to life than the accumulation (and subsequent maintenance) of stuff. I’ve turned away from many job opportunities that would have doubled my family’s income because they would require extensive travel. It’s just a price we’re not willing to pay.
July 19th, 2010 at 10:14 am
You know HikingStick, I took that line out about the agrarian model, but thanks to your comment I’m putting it back. I wasn’t sure people would get what I was saying but you seemed to get it.
And Scott, you are sooo right. People who think they have been discriminated against in this way should always try to fight it if they can. Often times, experts have told me, these types of bias cases are gender based since women are still the main caregivers in most homes.
July 19th, 2010 at 5:15 pm
The Employment and Labor laws are quite behind the times, but I don’t always think that governmental force is always the answer. I’m of two minds about this. One I think that there should be more protection that employees can’t be fired for having a sick kid, but they can’t expect their nice hours to be waiting for them when they get back (if gone for a long time). I had almost full time at my job before I had my daughter. Afterwards I barely got any hours! They hired someone else because they needed someone and I was out in the cold. It was a LONG hard battle, but it was worth it to me to fight for my position back. And I’m still not where I was. So as those people leave or retire or move on, I have been inching my way back up the ladder. It was worth it to me to fight.
I can see how unfair it is to parents who work hard and companies just about want your soul and a pound of flesh to go with it. I’m all for fighting it! But also remember companies need to do things that work best for them and if they can’t give you tons of time off (I’m talking the extreme) they aren’t the bad guy for putting their foot down. Parents shouldn’t be punished for wanting more to life than work and companies shouldn’t go under for having to deal with everyone’s family issues. There needs to be a line drawn somewhere. I’m just not convinced it’s the government that needs to decide that for us.
Like I said, I’m of two minds about this.
July 19th, 2010 at 6:00 pm
You are right Mandalynn252, companies have to keep doing business and they need employees who are there for them to do it. If you have a job you have to put in the hours to do the job. But sometimes parents get stigmatized before they even take an hour off for family reasons. That’s the biggest problem I see.
July 19th, 2010 at 9:53 pm
Parents do get stigmatized a lot. And while some companies will say it’s okay to take some time off if their kid is sick or when their employees talk about their kids, but really cut these employees off as unreliable. I say parents can make better workers, b/c parenting in of itself is a full time job.
July 20th, 2010 at 8:05 am
Thanks, Eve, for focusing on this important subject and for mentioning the Sloan Network. I hope our topic page on FRD, as well as others on Gender, Single Workers, Flexible Work Schedules, and Family Leave will be a helpful resource to your readers.
July 20th, 2010 at 10:24 am
I have yet to read an article on this topic that adequately addresses the other side of this equation: the single or childless employee(s) who must pick up the slack.
July 20th, 2010 at 10:28 am
I don’t think single or childless employees should ever have to pick up the slack. I’m not arguing that parents get a pass at work. I’m arguing for more understanding and a good effort to provide workers with flexibility if the job can adapt to that. And even single, childless workers have family members who may need them someday. I remember interviewing the CIO of a major health insurance in Pennsylvania and she never had children, nor wanted them. She was in her late 50s and was struck that when she suddenly was in the caregiving role taking care of her ill parents, her star at work suffered. You just never know what family issues will arise. But if a worker gets her job done she shouldn’t be penalized because she also has family care giving responsibilities. That was my main point.
July 21st, 2010 at 12:09 pm
Eve,
Great post!
You wrote that, “the vast majority of us have to figure out how to juggle two careers and family. It’s about time the system caught up with the workplace reality!”
Yes. It’s crazy. Why is it been allowed to perpetuate?
It seems that employers (in general) are only about 15 years behind.
The Franchise King®
July 21st, 2010 at 3:20 pm
I was just talking to someone about the Americans With Disabilities Act Joel and she said these things take years to really make a difference. But in the case of the ADA, at least there is a law to protect disabled workers. And even with legislation though, the unemployment rate among this group is more than 14 percent. Our we just so hard headed? I don’t know.
July 21st, 2010 at 5:50 pm
I am the only working mom in my department and I feel this undercurrent of discrimination from my boss. She is my age, unmarried, no kids, and she makes it clear that she’s not a “kid person” which I don’t care about, but I’m wondering why she feels the need to make snide comments about “mommy bloggers” and about how once people have kids their Facebook posts become all about the kids. She’s also said snarky things about colleagues in other departments who’ve taken time off for family leave and a woman who started a new job w/o telling her new boss she was pregnant. is she clueless? I’m wondering if I should start documenting this stuff.
July 21st, 2010 at 9:08 pm
Though I am sympathetic to family discrimination, I also thing there’s a deeper root cause at work here. Work can and should be more flexible for ALL workers, ala the Results Only Work Place (http://gorowe.com/) This would encompass much of the family care conflicts.