Tag: the sydney morning herald

Categories
News

WHY Are women still underpaid and undervalued

Note: This was about International Women’s Day from 2016.  It is an interesting read and I am not sure if much has changed.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

 

The other week we celebrated International Women’s Day.  Lately, there have been many articles about women and girls; the topics range from equal pay, pocket money, women not being in leadership roles, how women manage money, and more!

Inequality is still a major issue and I’m sure I am not the only one that finds this appalling. Yes, it is 2016 and we are still not treating women and girls as equals. Why is being female such a negative thing? We are strong, we have children, we solider on just like men do, and we manage the household, we manage kids and work and also have a career to boot. Plus some of us, myself included taking time out to do unpaid work of looking after kids and family. This unpaid work is not easy as there are no holidays, sick days, or thanks for the majority of the job. However, if you don’t do something it gets noticed instantly. Have two kids sick and you are ill and struggling, you are on your own. You cannot call in and tell the boss you cannot come in that day. Oh, how I wish this was the case!

Girls and women are more highly educated than ever before and it is reflected in the workforce. More and more women are striving for the top jobs and also entering into industries that were seen once as male-only domains, such as engineering, IT and much more. I for one believe and so does hubby, that jobs should be matched on a skill basis. If you fulfil the skill and job requirements you should be seriously looked at for the role, and your gender should not be a factor to determine if you get a job, or if you get a promotion or if you get a pay rise or paid the right amount of money.

Here is my rant about the inequality that women deal with. Yes, I have my cranky pants on and I’m not apologizing for being angry. Everyone should see this as unforgivable. If you have daughters would you want or accept that they will always be underpaid and undervalued? I would hope not!

Gender Pay Gap Stats. Image from https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/Gender_Pay_Gap_Factsheet.pdf
Gender Pay Gap Stats. Image from https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/Gender_Pay_Gap_Factsheet.pdf

Why are top female sports professionals so underpaid?

The Matildas are Australia’s national soccer team. The team have been very successful in the FIFA World Cup and in the lead up to the Olympics. There has been a pay dispute with FFA (Football Federation of Australia), the team wish to have equal pay like the male soccer players.

For example, Each Matilda player got $500 in match fees for the knockout game with Brazil. However male players receive $7,500 for the same thing. (Convery, Stephanie: September 11, 2015, “The Matildas’ pay dispute could spark real change”, abc.net.au)

The below breakdown of pay is from Fox Sports

SOCCEROOS AND MATILDAS PAY ARRANGEMENTS

MATILDAS

— $21,000 annual contract, or a $150 daily wage

— $500 per standard international game

— $500 per group-stage tournament game, $600 per round of 16-tournament game, $750 per tournament quarter-final, $1250 per tournament semi-final or third or fourth-place playoff and$1500 per tournament final

— Plus an equal share in 30 per cent of all prize money

SOCCEROOS

— A share in commercial profits from matches played and sponsor bonuses

— $6500 per standard international game

— $7500 per group-stage tournament game. $8500 per quarter-final tournament game, $9500 per tournament semi-final or third or fourth-place playoff and $11,500 per tournament final

— Plus an equal share in 30 per cent of all prize money

— Or, $240 daily wage

As you can see a match fee for men that is $7,500 to the women’s pay of $500 is a massive difference. A difference of $7,000 is just not on at all! Not fair if you ask me. Very rude to The Matildas to not value their skill and success and not pay the same as the men are getting.

Just recently Raymond Moore who was the tennis director at Indian Wells resigned over his terrible comments about female tennis players. This is what he said in case you missed it:

“”In my next life when I come back I want to be someone in the WTA, because they ride on the coattails of the men,” Moore said. “They don’t make any decisions and they are lucky. They are very, very lucky. If I was a lady player, I’d go down every night on my knees and thank God that Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal were born, because they have carried this sport. They really have.” (Rothenberg, Ben: 2016, March 21, “Indian Wells boss Raymond Moore says women tennis players should be thanking men”, The Sydney Morning Herald.)

Serena Williams “rejected the notion that Moore’s comments could have been misconstrued.

“There’s only one way to interpret that,” she said. “‘Get on your knees,’ which is offensive enough, and ‘Thank a man’? We, as women, have come a long way. We shouldn’t have to drop to our knees at any point.”

“Williams expressed particular shock that Moore would make such comments after last year’s US Open when excitement over her Grand Slam bid caused tickets to the women’s final to sell out before the men’s final for the first time in tournament history.” (Rothenberg, Ben: 2016, March 21, “Indian Wells boss Raymond Moore says women tennis players should be thanking men”, The Sydney Morning Herald.)

Graph looking at data for full time wages and gender pay gap. Image from https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/Gender_Pay_Gap_Factsheet.pdf
Graph looking at data for full-time wages and the gender pay gap. Image from https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/Gender_Pay_Gap_Factsheet.pdf

Why is it when there is media coverage regarding Hilary Clinton’s race for the white house, the question is, “How do you feel about a woman president?”

Why is being a woman a major issue?

I understand that America has not had a female president but you don’t hear the same questioning for a male wanting to be president. I would think that they would find this line of questioning rude and not seeing their credentials for the job rather than focus on gender.

If a woman is successful in her career and life, why is it that she is singled out due to her sex? We can see instantly that she is female and that is not a major thing to notice. Who cares!!!
The only thing that should be looked at and worried about is, can she do the job? A woman needs to be noticed for her skills and achievements not just due to gender.

You never hear in the press, that we have a man in this job and it is a first. I wonder how he will do? Why are men not put through the scrutiny women are? Why are men getting more money for the same jobs?

Why is it when men don’t hit their objectives/KPI’s in their job that they still get higher bonuses than women?

Ridiculous if you ask me. Isn’t the whole idea of the reward system to reward the workers that hit the objectives and performance indicators? Not the person that does not achieve?

This could be a woman or a man, the employee just has to hit their targets to be in the running for a bonus not get one without doing so.

“Despite getting the same performance ratings as their male colleagues, women get smaller bonuses on average, according to a report from human resources consultants Mercer.

Even men who only partially met their performance objectives got bonuses that were 35 per cent larger than their female counterparts.” (Perkins, Miki: 2015, November 4, “Gender pay gap higher in bonuses, report finds”

Looking at the gender pay gap from 1995 to 2015. Image from https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/Gender_Pay_Gap_Factsheet.pdf
Looking at the gender pay gap from 1995 to 2015. Image from https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/Gender_Pay_Gap_Factsheet.pdf

 

Did you know that girls get underpaid with pocket money? YES IT STARTS THIS EARLY!

“Boys earn $13 a week in pocket money on average, while girls get $9.60, according to a survey done for the Heritage Bank and released in time for International Women’s Day this week. The bank made similar findings in 2014. (Fitzsimmons, Caitlin: March 8, 2016, “Girls get less pocket money”, The Sydney Morning Herald)

How atrocious that boys even when little still get paid more! I wonder how this works?

Why would parents pay girls less than their boys? I know I wouldn’t. 

According to the article from the Herald, it says it could be down the types of jobs done by boys/girls or how the child negotiates. Or maybe the fact that girls are expected to just do housework or jobs around the house for no pay… If this is the case that is just horrible! Living in 2016 and just due to your gender you are expected to do things for no pay. Wrong I tell you! Also if this is so and the reason, showing boys that housework or other chores around the house are not to be valued and not paid is not right at all.

 

I don’t understand why having a penis makes you earn more over a lifetime. Maybe I need to get a fake one to improve my chances?????

Why is this discrepancy occurring? As an employer, what makes you underpay women?

Why is it okay to pay female employees less?

Women are equally deserving as men, women have the same education and skill base, women are focused and high achieving, and would like to be promoted and go places just like men. This is not something different.

Just because we are female does not make our wants and desires any different to a man. We are just working harder and for less money!

When I was working in the corporate world, I was keen to be promoted and to progress in my career. I saw the men get promoted but when I put my hand up and showed interest I always got told not now, you don’t have the skills yet (although I was already doing the job but did not have the new title and new pay to accompany it) and much more. During my time at many companies, management changed and this meant it was mostly men that took up positions of power, and therefore brought along their mates, who were of course male. I must say that there were a few powerful and lovely women who did a great job and I greatly admired them.

Why is ambition from a woman seen as a terrible trait to have? If I was a man I’m sure the outcome would have been completely different.

Ambition is a great attribute and I should be rewarded. I wish I would know what it would have been like if I was a man,  would my life and career have looked different? Would I have been the CEO of a company by now?  Maybe it is best not to know, if I knew how it could have been, I think it would make me even angrier.

I was always taught, that you study hard, work hard and do well, good pay will follow. Gender did not come into it. I really don’t see how your sex should determine pay.

Women live longer than men and therefore need more savings to live. Being short-changed in the earnings department means that women’s superannuation is much less than a man’s and even lower if they have had a career break to look after children or other family members.

“The gender pay gap is worst where pay is kept secret and women often find out they are being paid less than their male colleagues after years on the job,” she said.

The gender pay gap is currently at a 20-year high of 18.8 per cent, according to the Workplace Gender Equality Agency. It means that, on average, women earn $298.10 a week less than men. Put another way, they have to work an extra 66 days a year to take home the same amount as a man. (Gartrell, Adam: 2015, August 2, “Greens call for an end to ‘salary secrecy’ to help bridge gender pay gap”, They Sydney Morning Herald)

Pay gaps broken down by state. Image from https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/Gender_Pay_Gap_Factsheet.pdf
Pay gaps are broken down by state. Image from https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/Gender_Pay_Gap_Factsheet.pdf

 

Wow! Women earn $298.10 less each week compared to men! That is a lot to not be earning.

That is a loss of $15,501.20 per year in earnings.

Fancy missing out on 15K per year. That is a HUGE gap! I am not sure what industry that these figures were taken from or if this is just an average of many women interviewed and data collected from the Workplace Gender Equality Agency.

If businesses did not keep pay secret then women would know what men and women in similar roles were being paid.

This would help negotiation for salary and make sure that women are not being underpaid. Making pay transparent would also help everyone, not just women. Not knowing what certain roles are being paid and what you can ask for is definitely hard.

If you know what the value of roles are, you are so much more informed, plus employers will, of course, get highly trained individuals that will work hard and wish to grow with the organisation.

The Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, has been focusing on innovation and technology. My girls are very interested in the STEM subjects, Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths. Hubby and I have encouraged this as we believe that the jobs of the future will have some or all of these skills. Also if the twins focus on these subjects and are good at them, they can get a job that pays well in the future. Why are girls not participating in these areas as much as boys? Why are we not encouraging girls to give it a go?

“A recent OECD report found less than one in 20 girls from OECD countries considered careers in science, technology, engineering and maths. In 2013 in New South Wales a tiny 1.5 per cent of girls took the trio of advanced maths, physics and chemistry. Yet a recent study by PricewaterhouseCoopers revealed that in the future 75 per cent of the fast-growing occupations will require STEM – science, technology, engineering and mathematics skills. We are locking ourselves out of the workforce. If we are going to earn the same as our pipsqueak brothers, we will have to think hard about the choices we make.” (Clarke, Ruby, 2015: June 28, “Teenage girls need to change themselves to affect the gender pay gap”, The Sydney Morning Herald)

How low is 1.5% of girls participating in STEM subjects in New South Wales! We need higher numbers. What do you think?

There is also the argument that women work in part-time roles or choose not to work due to kids and other commitments. That might be true.

However, for the women that wish to work, it is rather difficult if you do have kids as well. Juggling motherhood, career and life is tough. Not horrible but just more things to organise and get lined up to make sure everything happens.

I for one would love to work part-time or say full time. A couple of days in the office and the rest from home. My jobs have all been online and therefore can transition to work from home roles. I can put kids in care for the days that I’m at the office but don’t want to have kids in full-time care. Firstly it is too expensive and, secondly, I will never see them.

I don’t have the luxury of living near relatives and therefore I am the one that does all kid-related activities. School run, and after school activities is all down to me. Being the only one doing all this is limiting and therefore I have created my own opportunities with my blog. My own online presence, to hopefully build my empire! (You can only put it out there. You never know right?)

“Sure, if women are simply choosing to work shorter hours in lower-status jobs in lower-paid industries – perhaps because they choose to take on the bulk of the task of looking after children and the home – then there is no problem here.

But – and here’s the rub – perhaps these are not choices freely made.

Perhaps women don’t want to retire with no superannuation or other savings after all. Perhaps they would like to earn a pay-packet the equivalent of a man’s, but they’re too busy looking after those male’s kids for free.”  (Irvine, Jessica, 2015: July 31, “Apples and oranges: Gender pay gap is worse than you think”, The Sydney Morning Herald)

Many women would love to get the job after kids to fit into their new lifestyle, however, many companies are still stuck with the mindset that you have to physically turn up to a job in an office.

How about job share? Part-time in the office for 2 days and work at home for 3 days. Work some hours in the day and some in the night and weekend? Flexible hours as long as the work gets done.

Understand if you need to be online or on the phone for meetings or in the office. You can always have a catch-up meeting every fortnight or month?

Depends on the business and workload.

With technology, I don’t why more places embrace telecommuting. It would save the company money and also allow them to get quality employees that will stick with the company due to allowing them to be flexible and work from home.

Think about all the women with fabulous skills that are itching to get the job that businesses are overlooking!

businessmanager_web
“Clearly society has to change in order for women to rise, but we, the teenagers of Australia, also have to change our attitudes and perceptions. Major corporations must set targets to increase women’s participation in managerial positions.

Men additionally need to take more responsibility for child care and share the load. Unionised workforces also tend to be higher paid workforces so if women join unions, their rates of pay should increase.

But. It’s also down to you and me, ladies. We need to change, too. We need to think about what kinds of lives we want. What kinds of jobs will get us more money? Are we going to be in charge of our own futures or are we going to rely on men to pay for them? If you want to work with children, how are you going to pay for a house in Sydney now the average price has hit almost a million dollars?” (Clarke, Ruby, 2015: June 28, “Teenage girls need to change themselves to affect the gender pay gap”, The Sydney Morning Herald)

When I see a role that is just perfect for me and of course will pay a full wage. Why is the money for child care seen to only be taken from my wage?

Why is child care seen as something that the woman needs to sort out in order to work?

Isn’t child care an issue for both parents?

Having an extra wage would help out the whole family and therefore it is an issue that the family need to address not just one person.

I agree that men need to take more responsibility for child care and help with this more. Some men do this and there is no issue here. However the more equal it is, the more easily women can re-enter the workforce and contribute to the family, society and build for their future as well as their families.

It is 2016 and sex is still seen as an issue regarding pay. I would have thought that this would not be the case.

I hope for my girls that this is not the case when they are older but I would have thought that it would have been already resolved by now. So I’m not holding my breath, however, I can live in hope.

As I have said before, gender is not an issue for pay. The only important issue is, can you do the job, and do you have the skills?

Pay for the role not because someone has a different anatomy than another.

Let me know your thoughts.

Thanks for reading my HUGE post about this issue!

Sign up for my newsletter

Stay current with all the things that are happening on Mummy to Twins Plus One. Don’t miss a thing by signing up for my newsletter. This newsletter will list all giveaways and fabulous things that are happening.

 

This post has affiliate links

Categories
News

Thanks Joe the Answer is Higher Pay!

Thanks so much Joe Hockey for letting us know how to buy a house or to upgrade to a bigger one. The answer is a better paying job. It is that simple. Are you excited? I know many of you feel a weight has lifted with now knowing how to break into the Sydney property market or just the property market at all regardless of where you are based in Australia.

If only getting a higher paying or better job was that easy. It is not like these roles are falling from trees where I am. What about you?

Some people might not be able to get a higher paying job due to skills. Some are still studying to transition to a better role. Some are already earning a lot of money and are struggling to make ends meet with a mortgage, expenses and if they have kids this can add to the expense.

New house. Hopefully it is not too expensive to buy!
New house. Hopefully it is not too expensive to buy!

Maybe one person is at home taking care of a child or they have to pay for child care. Whatever the situation there is a cost to both decisions. Loss in wages while being a home carer to your child or high childcare fees to allow you to work.

You could be in a regional area where higher paying jobs are few or hardly available. Travelling to the city to commute for a job might take more than a day in travel and not be convenient for you due to other commitments, kids, family and study. Telecommuting is not offered so often and therefore skilled workers lose out on high paying jobs due to employers not being flexible on working remotely.

This is not the first stupid thing that Joe Hockey has said. Last year he announced that “poor people don’t drive cars“. Wow, what a thing to say. Now he wants everyone to go out and get a higher paying job to allow them to afford a house. Hockey has no idea how the average person lives and these comments show that he clearly has no idea!

Wages have not doubled or come close, although houses in Sydney have doubled in cost and for most they are unaffordable.

In an article in the Sydney Morning Herald, “Joe Hockey doesn’t grasp simple economics”, Robyn Lewis said:

“How silly to go for a job such as teaching or nursing. All you school-leavers take note of Joe Hockey’s advice – go for a good-paying job. It’s no use being altruistic; it doesn’t pay. We don’t need caring people here.”

If everyone had high paying jobs there would be no one to work on other jobs that don’t pay a lot of money. For example if all the nurses, teachers and the like decided to work in higher paying positions how would schools and hospitals function? They would not.

Building your new house or the second one. Hopefully it will not break the bank.
Building your new house or the second one. Hopefully it will not break the bank.

Or maybe our thinking here is flawed. We should just pay everyone more money! Thats it! Increase everyone’s salary across the board and then all is good.

Once your salary has been increased then you can buy the Sydney house and all is good in the world. Right? You can all thank Joe Hockey if this happens. Maybe we need to have a vote in parliament to make this actually happen. I would vote for it, would you?

I must admit that hubby and I were lucky when we purchased our house. However we did not buy in the city due to the costs then. Now they are just extreme to shocking! We purchased our house in the Blue Mountains in 2002. We sacrificed a cheaper cost of house for travel into the city for work. On a train it takes 2 hours to just get to central and that is only one way. So over 4 hours of travel and very early mornings (I had to get up at 5am to be at work for 8.30-9.00am)  was what  I did, and hubby still does. We were happy to do this to get started on the property ladder.

We have some equity in our house and plan to eventually build a bigger house for our family. However we don’t want to spend a fortune on the house and due to this we are limited on what we can do. The new house will have to be done in stages although I hate that idea as I would like it all done at one time.

For us we sacrificed living away from the city to get our chance to own our own home. I know this is not for everyone but it helped us. However Joe Hockey would be in for a rude shock, there are many people here that are not rich and drive cars. Being in the Blue Mountains having your own transport is essential.

Here is a list of how you can get into your first home sooner. It is not a serious list it is a funny look at ways according to Joe Hockey we can all be in our North Shore mansion.

Are you saving to get your first house or apartment? Or are you upgrading for family reasons? Are you finding it difficult to get what you due to cost?

What are your thoughts of Joe Hockey’s great idea to just get a higher paying job? Do you think it is that easy? I don’t, not really for everyone.

Send in your comments and let us know how you feel.

 

Categories
Work

Well said Richard Branson!

On Monday I read a great article in the Sydney Morning Herald, where Richard Branson out rightly states that Yahoo’s ban on home workers is a huge mistake. Right on I say!

Branson went on to say that unless you have a job that requires you to fly a plane or the like, you probably can do your job remotely. He even went on to say, “Companies that forbid the practice, such as Yahoo, put pressure on families and limit opportunities for women, according to the Virgin Group founder.”

Brilliant. Yes you have hit the nail on the head! Many women myself included are highly skilled and educated. They wish to give back but due to family commitments it makes things difficult. Working from home is ideal. You don’t have travel. You can focus on the tasks at hand and of course get more done. There are so much on offer now to make telecommuting easy for all. There is Skype, Google Docs, Dropbox and more. Why not hang onto your best assets and knowledgeable employees that want to work and will go above and beyond.

Happy that she has a work from home job
Happy that she has a work from home job.

If you find that one or a few staff members are not pulling their weight. Well you give warnings and then you make the decision to either let them go or forfeit the telecommute option.

I for one would give 120% to be able to work remotely in a good job with great pay. (I have noted that lately some work from home roles are underpaying for what they expect you to do. One full time role was a management role and expected 40+ hours a week, conference calls overseas via Skype and to manage maybe 100+ websites. This they were paying at least 60K less than the going rate for this position. Not sure if it was the company or the fact that since you are working from home they have undervalued everything. The work is still the same, the job is still the same so therefore the pay should be the same as well. What do you think? I do accept that you don’t need to travel anywhere for your role and that is a bonus but why should you get short changed?)

Employers are doing themselves a disservice. Brain drain is a big issue. It does not have to be simply mothers or fathers wishing for a more flexible family friendly lifestyle. If you don’t treat people well, they walk. Loosing staff that know all your processes is tough. It takes a long while before you can train new staff to know what the former staff knew inside and out. This is a cost to the business in knowledge and also to money. You need to retrain and rehire.

Many employers offer you the world and then don’t deliver. They promise flexible work and telecommuting options, however whenever you seek to use this option there are myriad of excuses for why it cannot be applied to you and your role. You have not been here long enough was what I always got told, and another amazing one, we need you here to manage things.

One place I worked for I was there five years and I lived the furthest away. A day here or there would have been amazing, but no it was not to be. The girl who lived less than 30 mins away was always working from home. You would have thought three years somewhere and putting in extra hours and working on projects that were successful would have qualified. No it did not.

I wonder what the magical number is that qualifies you to work from home from a corporate or organisations point of view. Is it what value you can give them? Or more like is it seen as a perk and not a value to the business?

In February 2013, Marissa Mayer, Yahoo’s Chief Executive put a stop to employees working from home. She believes that working side by side is better and more helpful for business and staff members. I do understand that interaction is nice and having catch ups is always something to look forward to. This can still happen if you have a fortnightly or monthly catch-up with say a team that is working from home and see how everyone is going. Maybe on these times you get everyone to come into the office to touch base and have a day in the office, although the rest of the work is from home. Now there’s an idea. What do you think?

Marissa Mayer is not the only one that has adopted this notion of side by side working. In the Sydney Morning Herald article it also mentioned that Patrick Pichette who used to work at Google as the Chief Financial Officer has also the belief that working side by side is more productive. How did Pichette work somewhere where they encouraged working remotely with “Google Apps” to allow employees to work from home to now saying that working side by side is more productive? In the article Pichette says the following:

“”The surprising question we get is: ‘How many people telecommute at Google?’ ” Mr Pichette said at a talk in Sydney on Monday. “And our answer is: ‘As few as possible’.

“It’s somewhat counterintuitive. People think, ‘Well, because you’re at Google you can work from anywhere.’ Yes, you can work from anywhere, but many just commute to offices . . . Working from the office is really important.”

Coffee and tools to work from home. Off to get a lot done!
Coffee and tools to work from home. Off to get a lot done!

I do understand that brainstorming and bouncing ideas off people does help a great deal, however quiet time to reflect and think is needed also. Maybe it could be a bit of both, some days in the office and some days working from home?

It is 2015 and more kids are tech savvy and will be wanting flexibility when they enter the workforce. I want it now and I’m not considered a kid. Why are we still that rigid when it comes to having staff work from home? As long as the job is getting done that is the main thing.

From the businesses point of view it is a cost saving if staff don’t have come to the office and have a permanent desk, phone and computer. They don’t need to provide this if you have a remote role (I know some places might give you a phone or laptop but that is rare). All they need to do is to maybe have a hot desk when you come in for team meetings and catch ups with your manager or team. Easy really. I just don’t see why it is so hard, especially in this age of technology and options.

I believe companies that don’t offer work from home and flexible options will not attract the right people in the future. We are moving to a work environment where you don’t have to be in an office. You could be on a beach or in your house with your pj’s on. As long as you are hitting your KPI’s the rest does not matter. For major corporates to not look beyond an office job is silly in my book, there are a lot of people with excellent skills that can do a great job from a home office, they just need a chance to show you they can.

What are your thoughts? Have you tried to work from home? Were you successful? Do you have a job that is a telecommute role? If so please share how it works for you.

Let us know your thoughts. Why not continue the discussion on our Facebook and Twitter pages.

 

Categories
News

Why is this still happening?

I am shocked at what I have been reading in the papers. Chief Executive Paul Heath of JBWere told a pregnant exec that, “in his experience a woman’s IQ halves when she falls pregnant.” Also in another article Evan Thornley says that “Women like men, only cheaper.“

Slide from Mr Thornley's presentation.
Slide from Mr Thornley’s presentation.

It is 2014 and nearly 2015. There are more women than men in Australia and other countries have more women also. We need to be treated fairly. I don’t get why we are still faced with this discrimination? As a mother of girls I hope that this is not still happening when they join the workforce. Belittling women due to sex, underpaying them due to their sex and for no other reason is just wrong!

I wonder what the outcome would have been if Paul Heath had told a man that his IQ halved when he had kids? Would he have been punched in the face? Would he then be told to F Off? Or watch what he says? I am sure he would not dare to say these things to a male colleague but a woman is fare game.

Fancy this being said to you by your manager:

“Mr Heath was also accused of asking Ms Thorton to turn around in March 2009, while she was pregnant, and then allegedly saying: “yup, you are having a boy because your bum has blown out.”

Evan Thornley’s talk at the Sunrise Start-up conference was hugely popular and of was mainly made up of men. I wonder if they are now going to do exactly what Mr Thornley was preaching? Use women in their businesses and pay them cheaper than the men? Mr Thornley did say that he gives women a chance, gives them more responsibility and gives share options. All great. However why would he say “Women like men, only cheaper” if he did not mean it? I do like the fact that he is saying he sees the potential in women who are high achievers in the tech sector. However that should come with the same and equal pay, bonuses and extras like the men have. All equal. Same role, same pay!

I do understand that if you negotiate for a bigger bonus or if you have extra skills to bring to the table you might get a bit extra, however for the same role your pay without extras should be the same.

Below is a snippet from the Sydney Morning Herald Article about Evan Thornley:

“Call me opportunistic, I just thought I could get better people with less competition because we were willing to understand the skills and capabilities that many of these women had,” he said.

“There’s a great arbitrage there, we would give [women] more responsibility and a greater share of the rewards than they were likely to get anywhere else and that was still often relatively cheap to someone less good of a different gender.”

While Mr Thornley said he wasn’t advocating that the gender pay gap should be perpetuated, he said it provided “an opportunity for forward thinking people”.

What are your thoughts?

I personally think it is terrible that this is still happening.  I do believe that you can do jobs and get paid well regardless of your sex. As long as you are qualified, do your job well and can hit your targets all is good and you should be rewarded fairly for it. Not underpaid and not treated as a second class citizen.

I wish we could give men a taste of what they dish out and see how they cope. I know the majority of men are not like t his and it is just a few. It only takes a few to spoil it for the many. My male friends don’t think like this and hubby would love me to be out earning him. One day when my book is written and is widely popular you never know right????

Have you had something like this happen to you? If you are happy to share I would love to hear your story.

This might be the girls one day. Fairy Doctor Specialists. Or at the very least a doctor. Image courtesy of stockimages at FreeDigitalPhotos.net
This might be the girls one day. Fairy Doctor Specialists. Or at the very least a doctor. Image courtesy of stockimages at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

What can we do?

As I am mother of girls I am giving them experiences that are not gender specific (I hate the ironing board and cooking things for kids. Although my kids play cafes and cooking). Lego, building things, we learn about science, maths and all sorts of things. I make sure that I give them all sorts of toys to foster development and I don’t want to just focus on homely toys. I do hate toys that are all pink and girly but the twins love some of that. I have a bit of the girly toys and others that allow them to learn all different things. A mixed bag for toys at our place.

I am making sure that the twins know that they can be whatever they set their minds to. As long as they apply themselves they can achieve.

 

How a simple Doctors Appointment Changed how the Twins think:

After our specialist appointment for the girls ears nose and throat specialist (Dec 2013)  I was unhappy as they only told me the appointment would cost $200. However when I went to pay I was told I owed $400. It was $200 per child! Yes annoying. I paid and grumbled all the way to the car. When I got to the car Julia asked why I was unhappy. I told her that it was very expensive and I was not expecting it to be that much. She said that the naughty man took all our money. I told her no he was not naughty but in actual fact very clever. He earnt $400 for less than 15mins work. She asked what type of doctor he was. I told her he was a specialist. Julia for a long time has wanted to be a Fairy Doctor. After this appointment she told me she wants to be a Fairy Doctor Specialist.

How interesting, it was that after a doctors appointment that both girls want to be specialists with what they do when they grow up. I wonder how this will influence their career path? Will they both be Specialist Doctors? Only time will tell.

What do you do to show that girls and women can paid well? Let us know.

Categories
News

Why Super is Not Super

Our new piggy bank
Think the coins will come in handy!

I for one would love to have heaps of money in my superannuation account, but alas due to the GFC and also looking after kids this is not be so. Hopefully it is just for now, and the bank account will rise in the future. I for one have been listening with interest about the call to tax higher income earners for their super, but it appears that the lower income earners are not having it easy either.

I do understand that taxing the rich more is sensible but I for one have never understood why our money that we are saving for our old age is taxed so heavily. Why can’t we just save this money with little tax threat, or maybe none at all? The more you can squirrel away the better, and the less you would rely on government pensions. I for one think that if you make saving for your retirement harder it ruins what you are trying to achieve. What about you?

My personal opinion is that you should not be taxed on any of it, and it should be able to provide for your old age. People are living longer and things in life are much more expensive. Grown up children are staying longer and longer with their parents, so adding to the costs of older parents who by this stage might not be working and only relying on their super for income.

I also found this line incredible in Peter Martin’s article today in the Sydney Morning Herald, see below:

“A middle earner on the average male wage gets $1293.”  

Why are we setting out differences between male and female earnings?  Why are we still making the distinction that men have a different wage compared to women? What would be the average middle earner wage for women? Where is this scale? I hope that I have not earned a female wage ever, just a wage. I don’t want to be treated differently due to gender. I would like to be just paid accordingly to my skills and ability. Maybe if I was paid a male wage my superannuation figures might look healthier? Who knows? People would never admit to giving you less money for being female. Interesting line in the article don’t you think? What are your thoughts?

If you are like me and your eyes glaze over when all intricate details of superannuation is discussed, this page from Wikipedia about Taxation on Superannuation might be of assistance.

I would make the rate that everyone pays the same for superannuation, as the more you put in only helps the individual and takes the stress away from the government to provide. So they are doing themselves an injustice to stop us saving more money.

Why not continue the discussion on our Twitter or Facebook pages.

Categories
News

Accept the Breast

Breastfeeding your child is natural and is not news, however when a woman in Queensland was forced to leave an aquatic centre it becomes news and an issue. It is 2013 and women have the right to breastfeed in public and it is not against the law.

The woman in question had her other two older kids at the pool and she was feeding her 11 month old baby girl while she had her feet in the pool to keep cool from the heat.  A staff member came up to her and told her that she had to stop feeding in the open.

The staff member offered alternatives such as going to a change room or putting a blanket over the baby. As it was a very hot day a blanket would not be appropriate and according to the article the baby pushes them off so it would not have worked. The older kids were happily playing in the pool and if like me you are the only adult to supervise; this would mean making the other kids get up and come into the change room with you so you can feed the baby. Not ideal at all.

Breastfeeding in public is legal and that should be that.  In an article in the Sydney Morning Herald it discusses that asking women to leave or move while breastfeeding is still happening, although it is inhumane.

I think the lady in article, Liana Webster should have stayed there and refused to move. I would have. What would they have done, call the police?  I do understand wanting to leave and being so upset that she just upped and went home. I can relate. It is not the same, but my local aquatic centre has stopped one of the sessions for the crèche, which means that days that I have the kids and a fitness class is on, I cannot go. I was in tears as I only got told after paying to go, to then find out that I was not able to do it due to no child care. (I got my money back thank god for that, but I am still very upset about it and left the centre in tears)

I am amazed that we are still so backwards in our thinking. We can look at the naked body, or a woman in a bikini but a woman feeding a baby is bad and considered something to cover up. I for one think that a mother feeding their child to be a great sight and a lovely image.

Breastfeeding is covered under Australian Federal Law and this is an excerpt from the Australian Breastfeeding Association’s website:

“In Australian Federal Law breastfeeding is a right, not a privilege.

Under the federal Sex Discrimination Act 1984 it is illegal in Australia to discriminate against a person either directly or indirectly on the grounds of breastfeeding. Direct discrimination happens when a person treats someone less favourably than another person. For example, it is discriminatory for a waiter to decline to serve a patron who is breastfeeding. Indirect discrimination happens when an apparently neutral condition has the effect of disadvantaging a particular group, in this case women who are breastfeeding. For example, an employer may impose a requirement on all employees that they must not make any breaks for set periods during the day under any circumstances. Such a condition would particularly disadvantage women who need to express milk” (https://www.breastfeeding.asn.au/bf-info/breastfeeding-and-law/legalright)

Organisations should follow the law and not create a climate that makes mothers want to leave, if any other patrons of the pool had an issue with it they should either move away or look away for the required time it takes to feed the baby. Why is it that the mother needs to relocate, why it can’t be the person who finds it offensive? I for one don’t think it is offensive but if you don’t want to be around it, leave. Why make the mother and the kids leave.  She has every legal right to be there and so has everyone else, we just need to have a broader acceptance and understanding of others.

Has this happened to you when you were breastfeeding? What did you do? Send in your comments.

Categories
News

Rainy Holiday Monday

Rain rain go away!
Rain rain go away!

Today it has not stopped raining. It has been nice to have the garden watered and the seeds for the grass growing well, however parts of the country are flooding so I am not happy about this and would like the rain to stop now. It was nice to spend the day inside with the hubby and kids. We tidied up a bit, although the areas that I would have liked are still a mess, but I suppose with kids bored and it raining what can one expect?

So if you are in the zones for the bad weather please be careful and stay safe. The bad weather is due to ex-tropical cyclone called Oswald bringing flooding to parts of Sydney and Queensland. According to the Sydney Morning Herald article about the weather states:

“A severe weather warning has been issued for large swathes of NSW for destructive winds, heavy rain, abnormally high tides and damaging surf, with the north of the state already copping the brunt of the bad weather.” The prediction tonight is that rainfall could hit 150mm and wind speeds will get to 100km/hour so bad weather and best to stay indoors.

Bundaberg is being dealing with extensive flooding and as has Ipswich, Brisbane and the Gold Coast. So bad weather all round. According to a Courier Mail article about the bad weather it states:

“Government expecting major flood damage in Bundaberg with the Burnett River running at 40 knots – so fast that rescue by boat will be very difficult and the force of the water is such that houses could be completely washed away.”

“Premier Campbell Newman, said the velocity of the water flowing through north Bundaberg meant houses could be swept from their stumps.”

Hubby said that 40 knots is  74km/hour so that is fast water indeed.

So I am hoping that it stops raining and people stay safe. Hope you are all o.k on this rainy day.  Have you been affected by the bad weather?

Categories
News

Would You Survive?

I don’t believe I could survive on $35 a day, could you? In The Sydney Morning Herald “Jenny Macklin, federal Families Minister, has told reporters she could live on the Newstart allowance of $35 a day.”

According to the article, “more than 80,000 single parents were moved from the parenting payment to the lower Newstart. The Australian Council of Social Services chief executive, Cassandra Goldie, said the changes would leave vulnerable people – the majority of them women – between $60 and $110 a week worse off.”

Prices of food have gone up, electricity prices have gone up, and other essentials are not cheap. I think $35 a day would be very hard for a person by themselves and impossible to live well, but factor in looking after kids as well. All the things that a child needs would not fit into this budget as well as caring for an adult as well.

God help you if you got sick and needed to buy medicine. I recently went to the chemist when the twins had tonsillitis and the medicine and painkillers cost well over $50, so that is the daily allowance blown already. You would hope that you had food in the fridge and pantry, as trying to feed yourself and the family is hard with nothing. That said, what about when it gets cold or too hot. How do you make sure that your little ones don’t boil or freeze.  Paying for electricity or gas might make it impossible to have these services at all, so going without is the only option.

Living with this budget would mean that there would be no extras just the basics to survive. No presents or treats, no replacements for things. If you have kids that have constant growth spurts, you would need to purchase or find new clothes and shoes for them. It is a tough ask on $35 a day.

In the Sydney Morning Herald article it states that having a “low rate of Newstart could be a barrier to people getting employment.” I agree as, you need to present yourself in the best light to get a job. Organisations won’t hire someone that does not present well, and has not got the means to get to the job. If you have limited finance, you cannot purchase a suit/dress/skirt/makeup/pay for transport/pay for childcare/food to stay well to enable you got get the job and also not get sick, and much more. Money helps you get the job, and gives you more help to get to the next step.

I do understand that some people don’t get jobs or want them. However the majority want to be off the allowance and better themselves via a new job that allows more financial freedom, for them and their family. The government needs to increase the allowance so it is not under the poverty line and more able to keep up with the standard of living in 2013.  I do agree that Jenny Macklin should live on $35 per day for a month, but not in her house that she is used to. She should be in controlled conditions and this for example would be a flat or house of a person that has to survive on $35 a day.  Also being limited to her new surroundings, she would need to not have credit cards or any help, only the money from the allowance would be allowed. If this experiment does happen, I am sure she would not like it or survive. It is an unrealistic ask and only a rich politician who has never had to do it would would state stupidly that she could live off $35 a day.

So Ms Macklin I challenge you as well to live off $35 a day and see how your fare! I think you need to give it a go as you have already told the world you can do it. Your supporters and party will not appreciate the fact you are not backing up what you say.

According to the article, “The acting Greens leader, Adam Bandt, whose Melbourne electorate has the highest proportion of people in public housing in the country, said he would spend a week living on $35 a day next month.” Well done Adam Bandt, politicians need to do more of this. I hope you are not going to be in your house but somewhere less well off to replicate what it would really be like.

What are your’re thoughts? Send in your comments and why not continue the discussion on our twitter or facebook pages.

Categories
News

Chocolate Makes You Brainy

Chocolate for an improved you!
Chocolate for an improved you!

If you looked at the heading of this post, you would say “really does chocolate make you smarter?” Well according to “The New England Journal of Medicine in the October issue contains a paper written by Franz H. Messerli M.D. on the relationship between the per capita number of Nobel Laureates that a country has produced and its level of chocolate consumption.” Yes there is a relation to how much chocolate a nation eats and its cognitive performance as a population. Interesting right!

I know it is hard to believe but it all comes down to flavanols. “Flavanols have been shown to slow or reverse the drop in cognitive performance that often accompanies aging. It so happens that cocoa is a rich source of flavanols.” (Kasey Edwards, How chocolate makes you smarter)

Don’t think that Australia is up there as a huge chocolate consumer or even having the highest number of Nobel Laureates, we have 13  and as you can imagine Switzerland has the highest chocolate consumption and of course nobel laureates. Maybe eating more chocolate high in flavanols is a good idea.

In Kasey Edwards article, “How chocolate makes you smarter” she asks how much more chocolate do we need to eat to make us smarter? Well…

‘The minimally effective chocolate dose seems to hover around 2 kg per year, and the dose–response curve reveals no apparent ceiling on the number of Nobel laureates at the highest chocolate-dose level of 11 kg per year.’ “In short, the good doctor is telling us that the more we eat, the cleverer we get.”

So when you are eating chocolate this holiday season or at any time during the year, you are improving yourself by eating the chocolate and each bite will hopefully make you smarter and maybe younger.  So don’t panic when offered another choccy.

Categories
4 years and beyond

No Backup No Job

The girls waiting for the action to happen
The girls

I read with interest Clementine Ford’s article “When paying for child care is women’s work”.  In Ms Ford’s article it shows that women don’t work due to not earning any money and child care fees taking a big chunk of the women’s wage, but why is it solely the responsibility of the women’s wage to pay for care? As the article so clearly states having a child is a joint decision and so should be the costs of care, they should be equally shared.

I am sure that if it was up to the man and his wage was getting eaten up by fees and costs due to child care he might have something to say about it.

I am in the same boat as some of the examples in this article. I am not working due to the fact that we cannot afford care and by the time I work and pay for the kids to be looked after we are minus money. I would like to have a job to have some more independence, sense of self, of course bring more money into the household and allow us to do more and have more choices, contribute to my superannuation as women live longer I will need the money, do something other than being seen as a mother and housekeeper, feel worthwhile and valued for your opinion/skill/education and work history.

It is a pity that women no matter what their qualification or background is that they will still earn less than the men due to having kids. I know there are exceptions to this rule and good on them, wish I was one. However it is hard to race off to the high powered job when you have two four year olds to care for and no help. Child care is both parents responsibility and should not be all on the woman or the primary care giver. It is not fair and it does not allow the child or children to experience time with the other parent.

In our case hubby would desperately love to stay home more and be with the girls; however his job is in the office and in multiple locations so it is not flexible to this demand. Maybe in the future it might be, or we as a couple have to put our heads together and create a business for us that allows us the freedom to be with the kids, the ability to work more locally, to have a better lifestyle and allow for care demands.  In Ms Ford’s article it also discusses the fact that women are seen to be the ones that are lumped with all child rearing activities and care options, I for one don’t want to be just seen as a mother and a care taker. I do love that I am looking after my kids and adore them to bits but I do have other things to offer the world other than caring for babies or kids. Do you feel like this too?

I recently went for a job and it was a work from home role, all to be done in your own time as long as you meet the deadlines given. I could do nearly all communication via email and the odd phone call to a client in business hours which I could do, so no issue. I did not get the role due to not having a backup babysitter on call. I was upset to learn that the flexible work from home role was not that flexible. The reason I was applying for a work from home job was due to the kids in the first place, and if it was not for them needing me I would have applied for a job that was full time and in an office like I had before kids. It made me quite depressed that I had an excellent application however when kids were home from pre-school there lies the problem, no family or instant babysitter to help me.

Why is it that employers are not willing to give an excellent candidate a chance? In the advertisement it did not state that you needed to be available at all times during business hours but sometimes is understandable. My point here is, I am willing to work, I have skills and things I can offer an employer however I am in a situation where I need something to fit in with the current lifestyle, ie. Looking after the twins at home, hence a work from home role. One of my friends said don’t worry it will all get better when the twins go to school, that will allow more days per week while the kids are at school, but still faced with the same issue of the school holidays as before.

In regards to this missed job opportunity I feel like the article about women being responsible for child care costs and care hit the nail on the head. I feel that there has to be an easier way to allow women in my situation to work and to stay at home with kids or at least make it easier to access care. Organisations are not tapping into the virtual world and the wonderful technology that will allow so many to telecommute to make a difference for themselves and their families. What great employees are out there wanting to work and cannot due to kids at home?

Also why is it that the woman is penalised for earning less and then paying for care as well? Not fair if you ask me.   Do you work and have kids? How do you fit it all in? Do you find that by the time you pay for child care working is pointless?

I am currently about to start summer school for my last subject and next year to graduate from my Master’s in Project Management. 2013 is going to be me time, allow me to develop more skills in sewing and see if I can do anything with it, I also would like to create more short films like I have been aching to do for a while – maybe I can enter a film festival, now that would be great.

I am not worried about not getting the job, just disappointed that the employer could not see what an asset I would be and that the kids or the fact that I look after them should not be an issue. I do hope when the time comes for the next big thing that they will see beyond the fact that I am a mother to the twins. You never know by this stage the kids most likely will be in school and I will have more time. You never know what is on the horizon.

I am not sitting still and will keep active and busy. I just find it sad that as a person that would like to achieve I am worried that I will not get that opportunity due to being seen as a primary care taker of kids. I am thinking the only way that this will work, if I make the opportunity for me. No wonder so many women go into business for themselves, it all makes sense now!

Let us know your thoughts. Why not continue the discussion on our Facebook and Twitter pages.

 

Categories
4 years and beyond

More Kids?

I for one have been guilty of it. Have you? What I am referring to is asking the dreaded question, “Are you going to try for baby number 2 or anymore kids?” It really is up to the family and the individual if they want 1, 2, 3 or more kids. Some people have issues when it comes to having children so asking this question might cause stress and angst and it is best avoided.

In The Sydney Morning Herald today there is an article about The baby number 2 question, and it got me thinking. I have been asked this very question by a variety of people, sales assistants, waitresses, other mums, men and other family members. As I have an instant two children I am fine that we have enough at the moment. However there is a part of me that would like another one, however we are not at the point that we can accommodate a new baby.

Our place is small with no storage; the twins sleep in a small room and will eventually need to move to the room where we have the study and spare bed. Our study would need to move to the small room that the girls are currently in and then no room for guests or anything really. Currently we are in dilemma about what to do with some furniture to have this move happen, both hubby and I are unsure what to do with these pieces so the move has not occurred.

I must say that it would be nice to have another baby but if it does never happen I am thankful and very grateful that I got twins first go. It was and is a blessing and has been so wonderful having the girls. When they are nice and behaving which is most of the time they are a delight, however there are those times where I think why would I want another baby my girls are so all over the place and an extra would just add to the chaos. Although I do think that one extra would not cause that much extra work as I did do two at once so if I had one it would be easier than dealing with two babies at the same time. I know it is just a thought and currently it will remain until we can figure things out to make it viable and if we decide we want to do it at all.

Maybe by the time we come round to the idea we might be over it and too old to worry or do anything about it. So then decision made. As I said, we are very happy with our wonderful girls.  So in regards to the more kid’s question, we are thinking about it but at the moment we are happy with our lot in life. I will do as Kasey Edwards suggested in the The baby number 2 question article and not ask anyone unless they bring it up. It is a personal issue and who knows what someone’s circumstances are, I don’t want to cause upset or pain.

Has someone asked if you are going to have any more kids? Has this upset you? Why is it their business?

Send in comments and why not continue the discussion on our twitter or facebook pages.

Categories
News

All Kids Need to Swim

Swimming with the girls
Swimming with the girls, when they were younger.

More young people are drowning due to not being taught to swim, according to an article on news.com.au. I for one believe it is the high cost of swimming lessons that are causing this. Parents cannot afford to pay for school, other activities and of course swimming lessons.

Quotes from the news.com.au article:

“Royal Life Saving believes that the rapid increase in drowning in young adults … is undeniably linked to a fall in the swimming and water safety skills of children in Australia over the past 10 years,” the organisation said.

“The RLSS believes many families simply can’t afford swimming lessons and having them as part of the curriculum would be one way to ensure all children receive training.”

“It acknowledged that some schools do offer swimming training but said it was often only a few lessons every year.”

We have been fortunate to have the girls have some swimming lessons but cannot afford to do so this year. This is due to the girls going to pre-school and the costs of everything else in between.  In my post “The extreme cost of activities for kids” I mention that it will cost for both kids to do a 10 week term for swimming lessons it will cost us, $280.00. There are four terms per year, so you will need to times $280.00 by four to find out the real cost per year to put kids in swimming lessons. The amount comes to: $1,120.00, so as you can imagine it is a lot of money to find that is extra on top of what you are already paying.

I also touched on the idea to have the schools have swimming lessons as part of the curriculum in my post, ‘Swimming for all, not just for the lucky 10,000’ as I believe this would be beneficial. It would give every child the chance to learn how to swim.   Swimming is a life skill that will save lives.  Money should not be an issue, everyone has the right to know how to swim and it should be part of the school system.

Kids who are around water, or who come into contact with water need to know how to be safe. If they fall in they know how to get out of trouble. What happens if they go to a mates place, they have a pool and this kid cannot swim? Will other kids pick on this child? Will they throw him/her in the pool as a joke due to not believing the child? If this happens and the kid cannot swim, then this is dangerous and of course a possible drowning. However it is preventable and learning how to swim is vital to being safe and of course having fun and participation in water sports.

Being around water and swimming is fun for health and relaxation. Living in Australia we are surrounded by water so one day your child will come into contact with a pool, the sea at the beach or a creek at a farm. It is not only safety with water outside the house; it helps kids know how to get out of trouble even in the bath. My girls have fallen over while playing in the bath and managed to get up unassisted. I do believe that this is due to the training at the pool and the fact that we as parents take them swimming and try and teach them.

Also on The Sydney Morning Heralds article about the rise in drownings, “Mr Bradley (From the RLSS) says about one in five Australian teenagers are entering high school unable to swim 50 metres or even float for two minutes.”  I for one find this shocking, not being able to swim that distance and also not able to float for 2 minutes, my kids are four and they can swim, well dog paddle mostly the length of a pool and also to float for more than 2 minutes.

I agree with the RLSS and would like to see the school system take on board swimming lessons for all children. What are your thoughts? Do you find it tough to pay for swimming lessons? Do your kids swim? If all kids could swim, it would making a safer world for kids.  Send in your comments

Why not continue the discussion on our twitter (when on twitter use #kidsafety) or facebook pages.

Disclaimer:  ‘I am participating in the National Kidsafe Day Blogger Competition to support and promote child safety, along with the added bonus of chances to win prizes. All opinions are my own and not those of Kidsafe. To find out more or to enter the competition, please visit www.kidsafe.com.au