Comments on: Are Michelle Obama and Corporations on the Same Page for Working Families?

By: PunditMom

PunditMom — Wed, 27 May 2009 17:12:38 +0000

Palymama, Thanks! What is that? Clicked on your link but it didn’t go anywhere.

By: Becky

Becky — Sat, 16 May 2009 18:18:00 +0000

The response at the private meeting? From MEMBER COMPANIES of this "organization" put together to "promote what's good for working families." And Ellen Galinsky? She's on its board of trustees.

Actually, the organization was put together to promote what it deems best for businesses. It speaks in a "voice" loud enough and promotes "benefits" so it can avoid legislation that would actually benefit working families.

For? Lactation rooms (and increasing sales for advertiser that makes breast pumps).

Against? FMLA, SCHIP, paid sick leave, paid vacation and other things employees (whether in "working families" or not) desire.

Does it have any individual mothers and fathers in working families on its member roll? Nope.

By: April

April — Sat, 16 May 2009 00:09:00 +0000

I still haven’t read the book, but I did see the special that MomsRising put together where they visited certain companies (large and small) that had implemented more family-friendly policies, and they all said that they felt it helped their bottom line. If nothing else, they saved on turn-over from having happier employees. Of course, now is a terrible time to try and implement such changes with so many people out of work. I hope that she at least makes some progress in the next 4 years.

By: Jeni

Jeni — Fri, 15 May 2009 21:26:00 +0000

Sure there are great advantages to having quality daycare, on site, even better, but that’s going on the assumption all workers are employed by big corporations who can actually put something like that together for their employees. The trouble is not everyone -I have no clue what the numbers would be by comparison -work for big corporations who offer benefits like that. Too many work, as Mrs. Obama said, with no safety nets of any type. How are these programs of any benefit to the ones really in dire need of insurance, child care, even a reasonable living wage?

By: PunditMom

PunditMom — Fri, 15 May 2009 19:01:00 +0000

The big accounting firms seem to have figured this all out — flex time, day care, sick leave AND ongoing training & mentorship for parents who step off the track for a couple of years, so they will be up to speed when they return to the office. Because those accountants KNOW that it costs less money to do that than to have people leave and retrain people all over.

By: Palymama

Palymama — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:28:00 +0000

I’ve nominated you for the highly “coveted” Splash Award. Given to those bloggers I most want to emulate!
I look forward to seeing YOUR list of blogs to read. BTW – another thought provoking read, I like the fact you make me THINK.

By: anniegirl1138

anniegirl1138 — Fri, 15 May 2009 15:04:00 +0000

I agree with the professor, money is bottom line. However, control is an issue too. Employers feel they have a right to micromanage all aspects of employees lives simply because they employ them.

I worked for a school district that was actually very good to working parents, but they loathed job-sharing and part-timers, and they tolerated uneven application of the rules. In some schools principals were great and in others they were tyrants.

This still gets back to the fact that women are the main caregivers and we are still supposed to “act like men” in the workplace even though there are differences that make this difficult to impossible. Until the world is ready to admit that what is good for the gander doesn’t serve the goose and that there is nothing wrong with that – just different – nothing will change on the scale it needs to.

By: Professor J

Professor J — Fri, 15 May 2009 13:36:00 +0000

“Show me the dollars saved by these programs.”

That’s what it is all about, isn’t it?