Jack Welch to women: Work and family don't mix

[babylonsister]

http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2009/07/14/jack_welch_and_women/index.html

Jack Welch to women: Work and family don't mix


Being a man, I wasn't quite sure how to react to the Wall Street Journal's report of a speech given by former General Electric CEO Jack Welch to the Society for Human Resource Management's annual conference on June 28. I would guess that for the women in the audience, who made up the majority of attendees, it must have been something of a downer.

"There's no such thing as work-life balance," Mr. Welch {said}. "There are work-life choices, and you make them, and they have consequences."

Mr. Welch said those who take time off for family could be passed over for promotions if "you're not there in the clutch."

"The women who have reached the top of Archer Daniels, of DuPont, I know these women. They've had pretty straight careers," he said in an interview with journalist Claire Shipman, before thousands of HR specialists.

"We'd love to have more women moving up faster," Mr. Welch said. "But they've got to make the tough choices and know the consequences of each one."

I'm sure that corporate-minded women can speak for themselves on this topic. Christine Hurt, blogging at the Conglomerate, has a nuanced take. And the Journal's two female reporters, Cari Tuna and Joann S. Lublin, did get a wide variety of reactions to Welch's comments from women.

But being a man, I'll tell you what Welch's comments mean to me. By his definition, every man who has risen to the top of the corporate ladder has sacrificed his family for his career. By being "there in the clutch" they've not been there for the sick kid or the softball game or the dance performance. Of course men have it easier, since if they want kids they can outsource the job of actually bearing them to a sidekick and don't have to worry about figuring out how the breast pump works. But those are just technicalities.

Of course we all make choices with consequences as we go about crafting our careers and balancing them with other priorities in our lives. But to interpret Welch's words as a harsh message for women is to miss his real point. Denying that there is a possibility for a "work-life balance" is a bummer for the entire human race.

― Andrew Leonard

[formercia]

1. "If you want to get ahead, get a teaching degree."

Is what one CEO of a corporation that I worked for told the women at our plant.

But, then, he was a protege of Werner Von Braun, and we know what kind of a workplace he had in the V-2 Factory.

[izquierdista]

2. He's right

And not just for women. Men have been finding out that your boss doesn't care what your problems are at home, just shut up and do your work. When work becomes more important than life, what are you living for?

[Berry Cool]

3. Yeah, but women bear the brunt of it.

Most men never consider the impact of having children on their career trajectory. Women are expected to, and to plan accordingly. There are rare exceptions, but that's the default expectation.

[Progressive_In_NC]

68. I am stuck in my position (a male) because I leave at 5:15 to go to my kids stuff

Granted I come in at 7:00 am but that doesn't count. I also keep up by working 9:30-11:30ish ever night. Countless times I have had a boss say he wished I was more of a team player and would stay until everyone else leaves.

Most of the guys here work 8:30-6:30. The high acheivers come in at 7:30 and leave after 7:30. Most of them see their wives AFTER the kdis go to bed. Two of them only see their young kids on weekends.

And we all wonder why so many of our kids can't have functional relationships. We are all (men and women) too busy with work to care for our families, unless we want to make a sacrifice. I mean how can you expect a kid to maintain a decent relationship of ANY variety if mom and dad aren't there to model it and are all at work.

I love my wife and three kids and have soccer games and swim meets and snuggle time to get to, and I'd rather die of old age with those memories than die with a memory of a met deadline.

[Bill McBlueState]

4. it's different in other work places

Around here (it's an academic setting), men who have to take time off to care for their children are viewed as heroically sacrificing work for the sake of their family. Women who do the same are viewed as just doing what they have to do.

[OwnedByFerrets]

8. He's also a huge douchebag

[izquierdista]

10. That goes without saying

He also makes enough money that he's never had a make a "hard choice"; he just paid some nanny/secretary/aide to do whatever it was.

[NashVegas]

5. I'm Going to Get Torched For This

But male or female, you can't take multiple 6-month->1 year leaves of absence and expect to be put/kept on the fast track. By the same token, you can't ship your kids off to daycare at age 6 weeks and expect them to be emotionally healthy, mature, attachment capable adults at age 18.

In Welch's entertainment industry, a 6 month leave means someone else gets to go on TV for 6 months and possibly become more favored to viewers than whomever they're sitting in for.

[Bill McBlueState]

6. "you can't ship your kids off to daycare..."

Surely, this claim has been clinically tested. I wonder if anyone can post a link to a relevant study.

My experience is that kids in daycare learn to socialize with their peers faster and more effectively than kids who stay with a parent all day. They build up immunity to common illnesses more quickly, too. But that's merely anecdotal.

[NashVegas]

13. One Way of Testing

Would be checking against psychiatric bills, including anti-depressants, ADHD medications, etc for daycare/latch-key kids vs those with an involved, at-home parent, among kids from families with similar income levels. Mind you, that's just one aspect.

The simple fact no such study exists that compares the above, along with life skills, arrest records, and whatever else you want to throw into the mix that suggests someone's on the wrong track, should tell you how much of a hot-potato social scientists fear it would be.

[CoffeeCat]

18. I think there are negative sterotypes...

...or assumptions made about both ends of the spectrum (kids in daycare, kids at home with parents).

I'd just like chime in, as a stay-at-home mom, and say that stay-at-home moms have their own little
communities that provide lots of socialization for kids.

I belonged to a mom's playgroup. We'd meet twice a week at our houses and our kids would play together.

There are also a ton of activities/classes that happen during the day that most people don't know about. I used
to drop my kids off, once a week to a toddler gymnastics class. They'd run around with twenty other kids while
I sat and watched. We were probably with other kids and families 50 percent of our days.

During the day, there's all kinds of music classes, gymnastics, art classes, etc--that mom and toddler can do
together. Gymborree, Kindermusic and Mommy & Me are available in most areas, but these happen when most people
are at work--it's like a whole other world that is unknown to people who work during the day.

When we weren't with other kids---I took them everywhere...parks, the grocery store, the apple orchard, to the
splash park, the zoo or the science center. Sometimes we'd just go feed the ducks. Everyday we got out of
house and did something.

Most of the stay-at-home moms that I know parented like this.

I gave up a lucrative career because this is how I wanted to spend my days--being a good mom and spending a lot
of time parenting my children. We've sacrificed a great deal to make this happen--and I think most women who
stay-at-home feel that they need to make the most of their time at home--because of all of these sacrifices. If
you're going to give up a salary, career advancement, etc--you do it to be a very hands-on, involved parent.

[NashVegas]

36. I Used to Have Stereotypes

Until I knew someone who gave up college -->med school at age 21, became a SAHM for 16 years, 3 kids, and now pulls down 50% more than her engineer hubby, as a mayoral advisor on education topics. The other SAHM I know, I expect to launch a middlebrow foodie business by the time her youngest hits 10. It's all what you make of it.

[JDPriestly]

46. I have seen a study that showed that the difference between

home-nurtured and day-care-nurtured children (that is, children at home or in day-care when very young) is that those cared for at home have a better sense of attachment. In my view, that happens to be an essential factor in a child's socialization -- sense of attachment, ability to be loyal, to have a strong sense of being loved and of belonging.

There is a serious problem here. Just being a stay-at-home mom through your children's childhood until they reach 18 or 20 when you only have a couple of kids is not enough to bring fulfillment for a lot of women. It was enough back when families were larger and many people lived on farms.

I, for one, loved being a mother and stayed home with my young children. Unfortunately, although I had a lot of education and ability, by the time they were old enough for me to go back to school and get a professional degree, it was too late for me to be hired on a good track in my profession. I enjoyed my profession, but my experience illustrates the dilemma for a lot of women.

A lot of potential Sotomayors (well, maybe that is an exaggeration), but let's say females who could be partners in law firms, doctors, community leaders remain "potential" and never get the chance to contribute all they could because they choose to be good parents.

By the way, my children are doing wonderfully well in every respect. And while I never had career recognition, I have the satisfaction of having proved to myself that I was good at what I did once I got around to doing it. Financially -- not so good to stay home with your children. That's the rub.

I hope I will be able to help my children raise their children. That is an answer for many women: get your mother or your mother-in-law to help so that you can balance career and children. Actually, that is the way it is in more traditional societies in which people raise their children in extended families, and the younger women work in the family business whether it be managing a shop or farming or weaving or whatever.

[krabigirl]

49. I agree. And I was on the "fast track" pre-kids. It sucked, for me at least.

I hated the soul-sucking hours, 70+ a week, chained to my cube. I gained so much weight and was so stressed. Hoping to go back as a freelancer, and I really don't care if I never get back on some fast track to nowhere. I would just like a decent (freelance) job.

[krabigirl]

48. I don't think socializing with "peers" matters much before age 3, though.

Sorry, I feel no shame being a SAHM, and am a liberal feminist. I spent 12 years in the corporate world and will be back, not that there are any jobs anyway.

[Missy Vixen]

58. Judith Viorst was citing relevant studies on the subject when she

published "Necessary Losses" in 1987.

I am a former nanny and day care employee. I spent most of my twenties in that industry. The average day care employee, in those days, stayed for ninety days according to the studies she cited. In the meantime, very young children are constantly being taught that there is no such thing as permanence. Those kids are now in their twenties. What'a happening in society, by the way?

Children need the security of bonding with people they know love them, and are going to stick around. Day care may be a lot of things, but to paint it as a purely positive experience is disingenuous. I realize that many parents do not have a choice, but if they do, I believe it's better to arrange family schedules so that a parent is actually with the child. The personality is formed by age five; would you want your child spending 8-10 hours a day with someone who wasn't able to spend individual time with them? How about teaching them things you don't approve of?

IMHO, YMMV.

[cali]

7. first of all, I know plenty of kids who are now in their twenties and thirties

who were "shipped off to daycare" and now are waonderful well adjusted adults. secondly how is it that other western countries manage parental leave and do just fine?

[blogslut]

17. Wrong

My child was in daycare almost from birth. She is 22 now. Doesn't do drugs. Doesn't drink. Lives in the dorm. Pays for it by holding down two jobs. Will graduate with a Bachelor's degree at the end of May. Oh, and she was raised by a single mother.

[NashVegas]

19. That's Great

Like your kid, I was raised by a single mother and put myself through school.

I stand by the observations I have made after watching and comparing the children of my circles in all scenarios - two parents working full-time, one parent, working full-time, and two parents with one at home. The more advantages - material, emotional, and intellectual - a kid has, the better.

[blogslut]

20. And I disagree

It depends on the parent(s), the environment, the support system of child and believe it or not, the child his/herself. My child was born with a even-tempered nature. As a parent, all I really did was keep her fed, clothed and enrolled in school. I nudged her in directions I thought were good for her but she was the one that chose to follow those directions. Had she been more like me, I am not so certain she would have turned out as well.

I was raised in a nurturing, married, middle-class home. I had advantages. My mother was a caring a stay-at-home mother. My father neither drank nor screwed around and spent ample time with his family. Nevertheless, I chose to be a rebel. I chose to blow off my studies. I chose to cement bad habits.

Each child is different. Each family is different. Each situation is different. Each deserves the scrutiny of their particular traits and cannot be defined by blanket observations.

[seabeyond]

30. and i agree, lol

as you will see, i agree with the post you are replying to. i also agree to what you are saying.

yup

hey.... how about the storm that just popped out of nowhere. lets see if we are hit

[blogslut]

39. My browser weather thingy

...sez, we're getting rain tomorrow. We'll see. I was nice to see the clouds earlier. :hi:

[seabeyond]

40. it really

looked like we might get it good. and fizzled. that has happened so much here. about a week ago, a huge ass one coming at us. couldnt miss, and still, fizzled out around amarillo. i dunno....

i figured since i watered today we would get some

:hi:

[seabeyond]

29. i agree. n/t

[Iris]

67. having a stay at home mom is not necessarily an advantage

a lot of kids would probably be better off if their moms worked

[Berry Cool]

22. Tell it to Europeans.

You would be amazed at how much family leave they get while being able to return to their jobs later as if nothing had happened...and how much government help they get with day care. And so far I don't see Europe being overrun by emotionally sick, immature people incapable of forming attachments.

[NashVegas]

31. That's Great But We're Not In Europe

:(

[Raineyb]

50. So what are you saying that our system is so great we shouldn't try to change it?

It certainly looks as though Europe is doing something right and we in our arrogance about being number one are not.

[Gwendolyn]

75. Yes, that's true. Europeans get to spend the first year or more with a newborn.

Dads can add to that with paternity leave. Europeans get a lot more vacation time with their families in a year. Europeans also have stay-at-home moms and dads. There's more of an opportunity for parents to spend time with kids.

Europeans can return to work after m/p leave as though nothing happened... in their own cubicle. But all around them, others are being promoted and getting raises, while a temp dog paddles for the person on leave.

Not sure what you're trying to say.

[Raineyb]

24. You should get torched as it's a rather ignorant thing to say.

Other countries seem to get along just fine giving parents even longer than a 6 month to 1 year leave of absence and they manage just fine. What you mean is you can't take multiple leaves of absence to deal with the birth of a new child in a society and corporate culture that doesn't value families and expect every person to behave as a bloody slave.

[NashVegas]

32. And Yet, You Repeat It

Go figure.

[Raineyb]

45. I restated it as it should be stated. I by no means agreed with it. That was all you. n/t

[Karenina]

33. We have it SO MUCH BETTER here.

A fast-track finance wizard student of mine was at home caring for his kid for the 1st quarter of this year which allowed his fast-track wife to return to her much-loved job. It's so civilized and fair..

[taught_me_patience]

63. "you can't ship your kids off to daycare..."

Bullshit and offensive statement to the many DUers who grew up in daycare.

[NashVegas]

73. I'm Okay With That

As I'm equally offended by the elephant in the room.

[taught_me_patience]

74. Could you please explain?

[NashVegas]

77. How Much Are You Willing to Pay?

For me to spend the time and research to write the essay that lays it all out in the most tactful terms possible?

[The2ndWheel]

9. Obviously not just women, but there is only so much time in a day

In a life. Any life. Female or male. We live such specialized lives, with so many obligations and responsibilities, collectively and individually, there is only so much a person can do.

[hatrack]

11. Immelt - "A German shepherd could have run GE."

EDIT

Earlier this year, Jeffrey Immelt, the beleaguered successor to Jack Welch as CEO of General Electric, rather defensively told a gathering sponsored by the Financial Times that in the 1990s, “anyone could have run GE and done well.” Warming to his theme, he added, “Not only could anyone have run GE in the 1990s, dog could have run GE. A German shepherd could have run GE.”

EDIT

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200906/steve-jobs/3

[MrsMatt]

27. but, German Shepherds are

smart

[get the red out]

12. All that "work"

And all that work just continues the mess of capitalism that we have now.

Brilliant!

Wouldn't it be nice if equally hard work to improve the world rather than destroy or control it were valued?

[JamesA1102]

14. Jack always reminds me of Jacob Marley nt

[HughBeaumont]

15. Neutron Joke can't leave this planet fast enough for me.

I don't really care if that sounds unfeeling, this guy's one of the most enormous assholes still drawing breath.

As a stalwart opponent of Laissez-fail corporatism, outsourcing and "layoff first, manage later" strategy, I'm opposed to everything this guy is about. His influence on the business community, the economy and politics has been nothing short of disastrous for this nation's middle/working/poor classes, his management actions and influence have directly/indirectly ruined the lives of millions of workers and his place in NBC's boardroom (Google the story on his demands for the network to call the election for Bewsh) could possibly have taken part in swinging the 2000 election in favor of the Failure Fuhrer.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=2534065#2556001

A misogynist (and possibly a racist, based on his past statements) of the highest order, this guy's long outlived whatever perceived usefulness the GOP thought he had. Time to put yourself and your corroded and damaging mindset into a slow die-off with the rest of the bitter "Everything for OURSELVES" curmudgeons.

[CoffeeCat]

16. I'm a stay-at-home mom...

My kids are 8 and 9 now, and in school full time. From 0-5, I was at home
with them all of the time, except for the few hours they were in preschool. From K-2, I
volunteered in their classrooms and did all sorts of activities with the school.

Now, it's time for me to return to the workforce.

Most women do take the lead as caregivers. There are a couple of stay-at-home
dads in our neighborhood. Each family has to make these decisions--and figure
out how to balance parenting/career.

I sure as hell know that I'll never be a CEO--or even a VP. I'm at peace
with that. Each person has to find their own level of comfort. The reality is...
you want to move up in the corporate world--you have to sacrifice almost everything.

It's just the reality.

I'm not willing to make those sacrifices.

But many are, and that's cool.

Today, women do have the power to make all of these choices--but these choices DO have
consequences (good and bad).

[Berry Cool]

25. Exactly my point. Most women do take the lead as caregivers--without anyone questioning

whether that is what they really want to do, or whether it's simply what they feel they are expected to do. Even by themselves.

And when they withdraw from the workforce, they often give no regard to not just the income they lose by doing so, but the time they spend out of the "work loop" unless they make a concerted effort to keep up with changes in the business world. They also give no regard to the effect on their lifetime payments into Social Security and how those are affected.

It may be true that "if you want to move up in the corporate world--you have to sacrifice almost everything." But that's true only of women. Men can easily have it all...all they have to do is allow their wives to take care of the home and family angle, and nothing holds them back.

And while women "have the power to make all of these choices," men don't really have much of a choice. If a woman wants to stay home and raise her children, her husband will be looked upon as a pig if he doesn't support her in that. If a man wants to stay home and raise his children, his wife won't be looked on as an unsupportive pig if she doesn't. And they both know it.

So the way things are now really shortchanges both sexes. And it results in parents most frequently making the decision that the mother of the children will make the career sacrifices, while the father will go out and earn the money whether he wants to be the sole breadwinner or not. Most of the time the justification used is "His job pays more." So, unequal pay justifies an inequitable distribution of family responsibilities.

Little girls grow up being told they can choose to work, or they can choose to stay home and raise their children--their choice will be fine either way. Little boys grow up being told they can't really choose. They have to work, and they have to take into account that the salary they earn needs to be enough to support not just themselves but two or more people, if needs be. Rare is the one who makes the choice (but never without his wife, because he has to get her buy-in or all is lost) to stay home with his kids--and, if he does, he's looked upon as a god, rather than as a father just doing what fathers do.

[JDPriestly]

54. You will have a chance as long as you don't go into certain

professions or fields -- like law. Law firms want relatively young associates and decide early on whether they will go partner track or pretty much oblivion track. Last time I checked, there were far fewer female partners in law than there are men, yet my law school class some years ago was at least 40% women. Go figure. Associates in law firms are required to put in very long, long hours, bill by the tenth of an hour and make money for their firms based on the number of tenths of an hour they bill and on top of that need time to socialize and kiss up to partners. At least five years ago, the big firm culture was pretty much male dominated. Women, especially a much older woman like me, just looked like secretaries or maybe paralegals to the older men at the top of the partner pyramid who remembered their own many years of bondage prior to becoming partner and believed that it was necessary to go through that process for those years to qualify for partner.

What women are not credited when they re-enter the workplace after some years raising children is the fact that they have probably learned more raising children -- more about time management, anger management, sticking to a task until it is done, patience, dealing with people, asserting authority, etc. than they would have learned at the work they would have done as a law firm associate. The law stuff is easy to learn, the character, courage and handling people stuff is why it takes young people who move straight from law school to law firm so long to learn to be partner.

Once you have spent a few years changing diapers, tending to crying children, keeping two-year-olds out of mischief, wiping tears, reading bed-time stories, etc., and doing all this with people for whom you would gladly die if necessary, you are pretty much ready to handle any crisis. It's much easier to persuade or at least assuage a judge than to try to reason with a screaming two-year-old.

Of course, law is a good-old-boys' club, ossified and full of itself -- and I was much, much older than other associates by the time I finished law school, so ----. Still, I watched many other highly qualified women associates take time off to have children while their male counterparts were made partner. The three female partners I knew were miserable. One worked only because she felt she and their one child could not live in the style to which she was accustomed on her husband's meager paralegal salary. Another never married. The third was divorced with a disabled child and had obviously delayed children until after her career was well established.

The Clintons managed to raise a wonderful child although she worked. I don't know how they did it, but they seem to have done a great job. Maybe a mother or mother-in-law was helping out, or maybe Bill Clinton was home a lot with Chelsea. Does anyone know?

[Lorien]

59. Some don't have that power. My mom raised us alone

she worked 16 hour days and we raised ourselves. No choice there. We needed food and a roof over our heads, she got paid less than her male counterparts for the same job and there WAS a glass ceiling, so she had to work harder, longer hours. She may have wanted to have been a stay at home mom-but my father had other ideas.

[TexasObserver]

21. Recommend

[Cerridwen]

23. So let me guess...he's suggesting we change the work place

and how it's run to be more family-friendly, right?

Right?

[Berry Cool]

26. Bwahahahahaha.

That was a good one. :rofl:

[Cerridwen]

28. Thank you. Thank you.

Don't forget to tip your server.

:D

[lumberjack_jeff]

34. I'm a stay at home dad, and he's right.

I made a choice. When/if I return to the workforce, I start at the bottom.

[defendandprotect]

35. Women outperform men every day in every way . . . even with children . . .

family -- which really pisses off men like Welch --

Welch has lived a hidden life of crime and corporate corruption.

How much did it pain him to not have time for his family?

Projecting in the usual r-w way . . . that must mean that females want to do the same!

[RB TexLa]

37. Then how are women supposed to provide financially for their children. What their spouse does in no

way relieves them of the responsibility to provide financially for their children.

[fortyfeetunder]

38. Jack don't know jack...on family values!!!!!

He left his wife Jane, after having an affair with Suzy Wetlaufer (about 20 years his junior), then editor of the Harvard Business Review -- divorced Jane, and married Suzy.

But don't cry for Jane: (from Wikipedia)
"His second wife, Jane Beasley, was a former mergers-and-acquisitions lawyer. She married Jack in April 1989, and they divorced in 2003. While Welch had crafted a prenuptial agreement, Beasley insisted on a ten-year time limit to its applicability, and thus she was able to leave the marriage with an amount believed to be in the range of $180 million."

Jack's still fuming that he got his butt rightfully taken to the cleaners by a woman!!!!!

[Odin2005]

41. Sexist POS!

[Rex]

42. I'm sure he would love women to stay at home so the men could

work and make all the big decisions. He sounds scared.

[alarimer]

43. This attitude is exactly what is wrong with this country.

This "all work, all the time" is why we do not have universal health care (I got mine so screw you), universal day care, a real welfare state, etc, etc.

People are so busy trying to get ahead that they will screw over each other rather than supporting a social safety net. All because they will lose their jobs if they do not work like maniacs.

Just another reason why I will NEVER work in the private sectors. At least government employers generally treat you like a human being.

[Silent3]

44. Seems to me a lot of the "fast track" "go-getter" culture is self-perpetuating BS.

Do people actually accomplish that much more productive work by working 60+ hour weeks for years at a time, missing big events in their kids' lives, becoming strangers to their spouses, etc., or is a lot of this about looking like you're dedicated, about symbolic sacrifice, posturing, and posing?

[NashVegas]

78. I Agree Somewhat

I think the greatest swindle of the industrialists was to convince laborers that if they worked hard, they, too, could have that big house on the hill. The real trick, as more people now realize, is to get others to work for you, far more cheaply than you yourself would demand for your own labor.

[Silent3]

80. I'm not sure I'd call that a "swindle".

It's the general American culture, not only (or even largely) specific employers, that promotes the idea of the potential for economic and social mobility via hard work. That mobility does exist, it's just not as simple as "work hard and you'll get ahead". The likelihood of upward mobility is exaggerated because many of us -- not just evil, exploitative industrialists -- love our cultural myths like "the American Dream", and because we play up stories of success and largely ignore stories of failure.

If someone starts in the mail room and eventually becomes CEO of the company some day, you definitely hear that story loud and clear. The achievement is celebrated. Meanwhile, of course, hundreds and hundreds of other mail room workers and other lower-level employees obviously don't become CEO. You don't hear their stories very often, if at all.

As for the "real trick", as you put it, I'd hardly call that a "trick", at least if you mean "trick" in the sense of a deception, rather than in the sense of a useful technique. If I started my own company, then of course I'm going to want to be the one who eventually makes the most money from that venture. For a time I might actually make less than some of my employees because I keep most of what I might pay myself invested in the company, taking the risk that the investment will pay off big someday. Even if I'm a particularly generous employer, I can't afford to pay my employees salaries that are too far out of whack with the market values of their skills and education, or I wouldn't be likely to be able to compete effectively with my company's competitors.

I can, of course, provide stock options to employees so they can more genuinely feel that the company's success is also their success, but I can't give out more than 100% of the stock. There is only so much of the success pie to be sliced up and doled out. I can't even give out more than 50% unless I want to risk losing control of my own company. I'd want employees to feel that hard work will pay off, and to the extent that I could afford to I would reward good employees with raises and promotions, but (and the employees themselves should be smart enough to realize this) I certainly don't want to be replaced myself, and the number of other higher positions available in the company will be dictated by the need for those positions to exist, not by the number of people I want to reward with higher positions.

If an employee of mine wants that "big house on the hill" that my eventual success might get me, his or her best bet might be to save as much as they can while working for me for a few years, then strike out on their own. The odds of their success aren't high, but then again, my odds for success wouldn't have been very high when I started this hypothetical company either.

[madmom]

47. Many years ago, I was called in and reprimanded for staying home with my 3 year old son when he had

scarlet fever. They told me my job should take precedent over everything.

[cap]

51. here's the link to the study (4 decades long) showing the net positive effects of daycare

http://www.highscope.org/Content.asp?ContentId=282

[JDPriestly]

55. This study is not about the day-care, latch-key kids.

This study is about quality day-care. Quality day-care and being a stay-at-home mom are not mutually exclusive. I stayed at home, but because we lived in Europe at the time, my children had three years of excellent, and I mean the very best in the world, public pre-school education between the ages of three and six.

Once we catch up with Europe on health care for all, I hope we will catch up with them on free (or virtually free) pre-school for all. And I hope we will follow their example with the kinds of stress-free, age-appropriate pre-school curriculum that you find in European schools. No reading until the child proves to be ready for school. That's the way it was in the country in which my children grew up in early childhood in Europe. It was great!!! If we had that available for every American child, we would be a much wealthier country than we are, and we would have far less crime.

This is where we definitely agree about raising children and having career. It would be possible for women to continue to work part-time at least if we had decent pre-school education for all children. The combination of a reliable parent at home who is not working 60 hour weeks and who is not too exhausted to care about the child's needs with the opportunity to learn social and learning skills in a good pre-school would be ideal for mothers and children.

[cap]

52. Taliban Jack: women in burqas

aka If you want to make it to the top, you better have your woman under control serving your needs.

Either that,or, I wonder if Taliban Jack has considered castration for men on the fast track. If men are castrated, they wont have a sex drive and won't need to get married and have kids. Think of a new career track: the castrati. If corporations provide a dormitory and cafeteria for these castrati, they could devote themselves easily for about 14 hours/day, 365 days/year to the corporation.

For women with kids, I think they should all show up at Taliban Jack's office and drop the kids off.They should tell Taliban Jack that they want to be on the fastrack, too and that their companies need them to be available in a clutch. Since this idea of 24/7 availability is his idea, then Taliban Jack can step up to the plate and deal with the kids. I guess he'll find himself in a bit of a "clutch". But he can handle an army of screaming kids, right?

Or, is Taliban Jack really advocating power over women as part of the benefits of being on the fastrack? In addition to the money and the corner office, that you'll come home to domination over the family.

[JDPriestly]

56. "Taliban Jack." That's a keeper.

[old mark]

53. Thanks, Jack, for another lecture by a man on how women should live their lives.

I am a near 62 year old white man, and this really offends me. I am disgusted by the RW's "ideas" about manhood, sex as determining work or life choices, and "what the bible says" about sexual roles.

This shit has been fucking up peoples lives for thousands of years and it's time we got over it and got rid of it and just become HUMANS.
Thanks -
I'm better now.

MarkO8)

[Forkboy]

57. I don't think work mixes with anything.

:)

[Lorien]

61. Not in America it doesn't. Doing anything EXCEPT working is discouraged

in this country. Other first world nations take one month vacations and two hour lunch breaks. We feel guilty when we don't put in our 60 hours each and every week.

[Romulox]

60. Sorry, but Jack was right.

Corporate America has no interest in providing a decent "work/life" balance to anyone, and it's beyond ludicrous to whine that men "get to" spend the vast bulk of their waking hours at work.

[taught_me_patience]

62. Jack is correct

In order to reach the highest levels of a corporation, you need 100% committment. If you are taking time off for family, whether male or female, you're not likely to reach the top. There is nothing wrong with not making it to the top. Most people decide the stress and commitment is not worth it.

[JVS]

64. Neutron Jack hasn't ever heard of the worker he doesn't want to separate from a job.

[Maru Kitteh]

65. Women to Jack Welsh - Shove it in your ass, sideways -and then get out of my way, I have work to do.

[mnhtnbb]

66. I have to agree with Jack. Given the way our society is organized

it's extremely difficult for any person--man or woman--who wants to make it to the very top to have a balanced life.

I left hospital management when I was mid-30's because I wanted a balanced life. The job I did required me
to be at work 60-70 hours/week. Having a home and family meant more to me than the work I was doing. So I quit.


It was a huge sacrifice. I was lonely and yearned for adult company for many years when my boys were small.
It did allow me to pursue my first love, acting in a community theater setting for several years.

If I had it to do over again? There are days when I think I wouldn't have had kids and there are days
when I have no regrets.

Now that the kids are grown (the youngest will be second year in college in the fall) I have to figure
out what I want to do with the rest of my life.

[Iris]

69. This does not sound like a balanced life -

"I was lonely and yearned for adult company for many years when my boys were small."

nor does this -
"The job I did required me
to be at work 60-70 hours/week."

How are either of these choices balanced? Most people are not at the very top in their fields. Most men are not at the very top. Most women are not at very top. Why can't there be balance with both parents working somewhere in the middle in jobs that can be done in 35-45 hours a week with decent salaries that allow them to access quality childcare when needed?

[mnhtnbb]

70. That's the point. Our society is not organized that way. People make choices.

I did not want to choose to have other people raising my kids. My compromise was to have
college girls as regular sitters when they were very young (0-4) for 4 hours two days a week
so I could do something besides take care of kids and a house, even if it was only reading a book uninterrupted. I was fortunate to have resources that allowed that.

I said all along, and to this day, I don't know how women who have kids work full-time at any job, whether it's top of their field or not. I happened to be at the top of my field. The majority of my peers
were men.


I would have loved to have a challenging part time job, but they didn't exist in my field. I have quite a few friends who went back to school to get Ph.D's so they could teach at a university level--but I'm not a teacher. Going to school and studying was their "out" while they had young kids.

Should things be so out of balance in this country? No, but until this country gets over its love affair with capitalism things aren't going to change.

[Iris]

71. Women who use full-time childcare are still raising their kids.

At any rate, I think it is as much how we as individuals look at things and how we make our own lives work.

[mnhtnbb]

72. I wanted to spend more time with my children when they were young.

I wanted to take them to the library, read to them, take them to the park and the zoo, play games with them,
play outside with them. I couldn't do that in one hour/night before bedtime and a couple of hours on the weekend while running a house and having some time to myself. I wanted to be their primary caregiver,
not delegate that to someone else.

We may be arguing semantics, but women who work full time can't be with young children full-time. There's not enough full-time to go around for both functions and I view the person who is with the kids full-time
as the person raising the children.

[MrScorpio]

76. I don't know about you, but I find his comments extremely insulting and condescending

This is coming from a rich white man who will never wonder where he'll find the money to pay for a meal for the rest of his life.

This is coming from a man who was hands on in creating the philosophy which dictates that people should live to work, instead of work to live. Foregoing, paid vacations, family leave, shorter work hours, better and equal pay for all, universal health care and a social safety net equal to what one sees in western European societies.

This is coming from a man who has benefited greatly from company that is part of the military/industrial complex. This empire has created riches for the few, like him, and forces every one else in this country to be wage slaves.

What would he had told men that worked for him at GE who asked him for more time to raise their families, instead of sacrificing that time working long and hard days to better his company's bottom line? "Your family is more important than your career?" "I'll give you that promotion because you're spending quality time with your family that you would otherwise spend serving General Electric?" Why are mothers so different from fathers? What about single parents? They don't have to slave for long hours to take care of their families?

Is he being absurd and hypocritical? Of course, he is.

The truth is that he doesn't know how absurd and hypocritical he actually is... This makes him a complete fool.

[newportdadde]

79. Wasn't Jack Welch the guy who dictated cutting your bottom 10% of employees each year?

I always wondered who ended up doing the work in a few years..

Back on topic though, what Jack is saying is how corporations feel towards everyone and its bullshit. I have 4 young sons and as they were born I made the choice that I wanted to be a father first. Over the past 5 years I've many times asked myself - Do I focus on them or do I work XXX hours extra take on additional work to try for promotion etc? To tell you the truth its hurt my career because I'm not 'playing the game' but it made me a better father.

I figured when I'm on my deathbed that my sons will hopefully be there with me, maybe holding my hands... I doubt my boss will be there or an HR representative from my company.

I also just want to comment about SAHMs... my wife worked daycare for a couple of years and also was a teacher after college. Given her personal experiences in daycare she opted to stay at home with our sons. Of course with twins and ending up with 4 total staying at home ended up making more sense then putting them in daycare with her very low teaching salary.

I just want to say that being a stay at home mother or father is about the toughest freaking job I've ever seen. We have zero grandparent help its all on my wife and I. I watched my wife nurse twins and take care of our oldest who just turned 2 running on months with little to no sleep, I've seen her go 5 years now on maybe 4 to 5 hours of sleep a night. She has gotten up with our sons every night(even with the twins) so that I could sleep all night and be able to come into work and perform. She is my rock and I wouldn't be successful at home or at work without her.