Skip to main content

knocked up, not down

a few years ago, i was working for a company and a woman from my department went on maternity leave. shortly after she left, the "big boss", under the guise of making casual conversation, sauntered through the offices of all the female employees in their late twenties to mid-thirties and chatted about how incredibly disruptive it was to a company when a woman went on maternity leave- how she was really making it difficult for the whole company to keep working.

those who know me know that i made a choice to be a non-breeder long ago and have never wavered. however, that doesn't mean it wasn't incredibly insulting to have someone talking to me about all the problems i'd cause if i were to have a child. to say nothing of the fact that i knew other women at that company who wanted to have children. it was a tricky situation.

on the one hand, i know that what he was saying was true. in canada, parents are entitled to a year off in maternity/ paternity leave. [that is, they have one year total. generally the mother takes it, but it can be divided between the mother and the father, as long as they don't take more than a year combined.] that's a long time to go without an employee. you can hire a replacement, but there is always a training period and there will always be some slowdowns. and the smaller a company is, the more it's going to be affected by maternity leave.

but knowing that and saying it, particularly when you're in a position of authority, are two very different things. there were women who felt threatened when they got this little "friendly chat", or who felt like the company was trying to guilt-trip them into delaying starting a family at the least. companies aren't supposed to do that. but they do.

in fact, while companies are required to give returning mothers their same- or an equivalent- job upon returning to work, many have no compunction about changing the specifics of that job, or offering them a lateral move to a job they'd then have to learn from the ground up. in point of fact, that's exactly what happened to the woman who went on maternity leave at this particular company: she was offered another position in another department and a replacement hired for the position she held previously. i never talked to her about whether or not she wanted this other position. i suspect she didn't. but it makes things kind of difficult when your old job is occupied.

that doesn't make the decision a bad one, but it does illustrate the dangers to career women who want to start families. even with legal protection, you are still vulnerable to employers who believe the uterus is a time bomb, waiting to derail their corporate growth.

which is why it was both surprising and heartening to hear that yahoo's brand-new ceo is not merely a woman but a pregnant woman. the media reported that both her new job and her condition were revealed this week, but since she's apparently six months into term, i'm guessing that a few people might have figured it out already. and yet yahoo looked past the short-term issues and apparently saw someone who they believed could handle the job of reversing their floundering fortunes. it's a bold move and it's difficult to overstate just how bold it is.

one would hope that this might "normalise" the concept of hiring women for key positions regardless of whether or not they are starting a family. i suspect that it won't be quite so quick to catch on, however and that a lot of ceo's will shrug at the story and think [or say] "i wouldn't do that". but even if it takes a while to catch on, this establishes a precedent that's difficult to ignore. if melissa mayer succeeds as yahoo ceo, she will become a thing of legend. if she doesn't, she actually won't have done any worse than any of the other ceo's who have shuffled through yahoo in recent years.

way to go, sister. get back to us on which of your two new jobs is more demanding.

Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

presidenting is hard :: these people are not your friends

hello mr. president! a while back, i promised that i would periodically be giving you some advice on how to do your job, since you seem a little unclear on how everything works. i didn't mean to go so long between missives, but the fact is that i've been busy and you're administration has been in overdrive giving me things to write about. what i've realised is that many of those things are ones i can't help you with: if you or anyone in your immediate circle worked with russians to compromise the 2016 election, that shit is done. robert mueller is going to find that out, because he's the kind of person who looks like the theme from dragnet just automatically starts playing every time he enters a room. so that's your problem. i'm just here to talk to you about what you can do now that you are, by law, the president. because, while chief detective mueller is doing his thing, we all need to live with your decisions. i'm even less happy about that than…

write brain

i was talking to a friend of mine about coffee, specifically about our mutual need for coffee, yesterday and, literally as i was in the middle of a thought, an idea occurred to me that i felt like i had to note. so there i am, scribbling a note to myself that was really just a word salad of related terms, which i later transformed into a weird but more comprehensible note that i could refer to later. [i don't want another beatriz coca situation on my hands.] i feel like this idea isn't a story on its own, but something that i could incorporate into a larger project, which is good, because i have a few of those.

now, of course, i need to sit down and do research on this, because it's become terribly important to me that the details of this weird little idea that i'm planning on incorporating into a larger thing be totally plausible, even though no one but me is ever going to care. i'm increasingly convinced that the goal of every writer is to find someone who will t…

luck of the irish?

i like st. patrick's day. i like the fact that there is a holiday that celebrates celtic-ness and drunkeness at once (you could argue they were pretty close to begin with). in fact, it's probably second only to halloween as my favourite publicly recognised holiday.

so every year, i have to have my little ritual and that ritual involves visiting a pub and partaking of the cheer. i've made attempts at watching parades in various cities, but i've more recently given up that practice because a) eight out of ten times, it's freezing cold and/ or snowing in canada on march 17th and b) the parades seem to consist entirely of trucks carrying people who are as drunk as i would be, if i weren't freezing my tush off watching them. so i've backed off the parade in recent years.

however, a visit to the pub, the longer the better, is still an important thing for me.

next year, however, i'm going to have to plan things a little better.

first of all, i didn't …