Rachel Gibson, Doctoral Candidate, University of Exeter Business School,
University of. Exeter, UK. Tel: +44 (0) 1392 724518, Email:
.
Negotiating family and employment: The working lives of lone mothers
Gibson, Rachel S. Doctoral candidate
[email protected] (0) 1392 724518
Jeanes, Emma L. Senior Lecturer in Management
[email protected] (0) 1392 724518
The University of Exeter Business School Discussion Papers in Management Paper number 11/06 ISSN 1472-2939
Streatham Court Rennes Drives EXETER EX4 4PU Telephone +44 (0) 1392 723200 Fax +44 (0) 1392 263242
1
Negotiating family and employment: the working lives of lone mothers Gibson, R. S. & Jeanes, E. L. Abstract: Whilst interest in the working lives of mothers has increased in the last decade, the majority of studies tend to focus on the experiences of those in dual-parent families (Tenbrunsel et al, 1995; Becker & Moen, 1999; Eby, 2001). Little research has being conducted on the working patterns of mothers in lone-parent families. This article will address this gap by providing an in-depth analysis of four employed lone mothers, from different occupations and age groups, whose stories were drawn from a larger study on the experiences of working lone parents. The findings show that the lone mothers’ working lives varied between linear and fragmented patterns, although, irrespective of path type, work and family activities were often intensified in order to adhere to well-defined routines. These routines enabled the lone mothers to survive their daily responsibilities, however, once established they could also lead to feelings of being ‘trapped’ or ‘on hold’ in one’s career as these work-life routines became an ‘iron cage’ out of which they would struggle to break. Keywords: Lone mothers, employment, family, work-life balance Rachel Gibson, Doctoral Candidate, University of Exeter Business School, University of Exeter, UK. Tel: +44 (0) 1392 724518, Email:
[email protected] Emma Jeanes, Senior Lecturer in Management, University of Exeter Business School, University of Exeter, UK. Tel: +44 (0) 1392 724518, Email:
[email protected]
2
1. Introduction Over the last decade there has been an increasing interest in the working lives of women in contrast with the working lives of men. Whilst men’s experiences of work are believed to typically follow a linear career model, women’s experiences of work are generally accepted as more fragmented or ‘frayed’ (Sullivan, 1999; Hall, 1996). This is perceived to be due to the impact of transitional periods such as childbirth, where women are more likely to take primary responsibility for the ensuing care and domestic needs of the family (Hopkins & O’Neil, 2007). By taking on these responsibilities, working mothers are more likely to experience conflict between their work and family commitments which can lead to a renegotiation of their working hours or even a retraction from the workplace altogether (Belkin, 2004; Kirchmeyer, 1998). In comparison to the masculine linear career model, which describes a constant progression up a career ladder over a lifetime, women’s working lives are less hierarchical and far more dynamic. Research into women’s work experiences has focused on three groupings: those at the beginning of their working lives, with studies focusing on ambition and projected career pathways (Carter & Silva, 2010; Fenton & Dermott, 2006); those in the middle of their working lives, with studies focusing on issues of work-life balance and negotiations of work and childcare responsibilities (Crompton & Lyonette, 2011; Burke, 2010; Auster & Ekstein, 2005); and those at the end of their working lives, with studies focusing on career reflections, age discrimination and attitudes towards retirement (Moore, 2007). Therefore, age seems to be a critical factor in exploring women’s work experiences (Perry & Parlamis, 2006). These groupings are also framed around familial responsibilities, for example: studies on women at the beginning of their working lives tend to be on those without children; women studied in the middle of their working lives tend to have younger children, whereas those at the end of their working lives tend to have older or grown-up children (Mainiero & Sullivan, 2005). Therefore, to-date, it appears that research on women’s work experiences tends to revolve around the transitional stage of childbirth (Gangl & Ziefle, 2009). However, the majority of studies that consider the influence of children on women’s employment tend to focus on the experiences of those in dual-parent families (Tenbrunsel et al, 1995; Becker & Moen, 1999; Eby, 2001). There is little research on the working patterns or time-scapes of employed women in lone-parent families. This gap in the research may be due to the continuing stereotype of the teenage lone mother on benefits who remains outside of the workforce or who inhabits poorly paid and lower level jobs, rather than partaking in a career as such. This perception of the low wage, low status lone mother appears to be perpetuated by studies that tend to focus on these aspects in their research (Stewart, 2009). However, in the UK, for example, teenage lone mothers constitute only 2% of all lone parents (Gingerbread, 2010); therefore, there is a need for research that explores the experiences of 3
lone parents (of all ages). Continuing research in this field is also critical as lone mothers are constructed as both primary carers and providers so it is important to consider how this dual aspect affects their decisions regarding work and family. By considering this, one can also add to a greater understanding of women’s working lives. To address this omission, this study will provide an in-depth exploration of the work experiences of lone mothers from different age groups and occupations. By targeting those at different phases of their working lives, this study provides an intersectional analysis of the impact that age and gender can have on the various working rhythms lone mothers may experience as well as the choices they make regarding their employment and family. 2. Women’s gendered working lives In their recent review of literature on women’s working lives, O’Neil, Hopkins & Bilimoria (2008) identified four main research patterns in management and psychology journals since 1990. These patterns showed: that women’s careers are “embedded in women’s larger-life contexts”; that both paid work and families are “central to women’s lives”; that women’s career paths “reflect a wide range and variety of patterns”; and that “human and social capital are critical factors for women’s careers” (2008: 727). They also identified a detachment between the academic research on women’s work experiences and organizational practices. Overall, they concluded that “male-defined constructions of work and career success continue to dominate organizational research and practice” (2008: 734). Within this ‘male-defined construction of career success’ is the ‘corpocratic’ career model. This model is founded on the belief that employment progression is linear and hierarchical (Hopkins & O’Neil, 2007), and to facilitate this progression one must continue to work long hours and prioritise work over other commitments, such as childcare (White, 1995). This accumulative pattern of career success suggests that those who take time out of the workforce for any period of time or utilise part-time working hours will be penalised and unable to progress (Duncan & Loretto, 2004). The assumptions of this model also problematise many family related policies which offer flexible work hours and leave opportunities. These policies are often directed at women so: There is a danger that they can reproduce ideological stereotypes of motherhood as being incompatible with career commitment and advancement, reinforcing the traditional sex-specific public-private divide (Benschop, 2006: 279). For working mothers, this represents a paradox as they often take responsibility for both childcare and domestic tasks and so face conflicts in reconciling the expectations regarding both work and family commitments (Acker, 2006). However, there are those who argue that the traditional linear employment model is now obsolete (Sullivan, 1999) and that the “career as a series of upward moves with steadily increasing power, income, status and security has died” (Hall, 1996: 1). Mills, Blossfield & Bernardi (2006) build on this by 4
discussing the influence that globalization has had on men’s working patterns. Like Sullivan (1999) and Hall (1996), they believe that working lives are now far more fragmented and ‘patchwork’ where globalization has contributed to widespread “employment flexibility, which, in turn has already produced unstable, fragmented and contingent employment careers” (2006: 4). However, recent studies on women’s work experiences suggest that the expectations inherent in the ‘corpocratic’ career model are still apparent (O’Neil, Hopkins & Bilimoria, 2008). There have been a number of alternative employment models formulated to help explore the experiences of working women. Many of these models were designed to portray the multi-faceted nature of women’s working lives such as Mainiero & Sullivan’s (2005) ‘Kaleidoscope model’ where women shift the ‘pattern’ of their paid work “by rotating different aspects in their lives to arrange their roles and relationships in new ways” (2005: 106). In this model, the ‘ABC’ approach is utilised which highlights the ‘key’ issues of ‘authenticity’, ‘balance’ and ‘challenge’ which are experienced by working women. It is argued that women hold different priorities to these three aspects depending on which career stage they are going through (2005: 115). However, this model assumes that these three issues of authenticity, balance and challenge are commonly experienced by all women to varying degrees. The term ‘balance’ is also problematic as it assumes that there is a level of ‘harmony’ that can be achieved between work and non-work responsibilities which then ignores the complex relations and negotiations that can exist between the two areas (Crompton, 2006: 78). Other models have tried to present an even more flexible picture of women’s working experiences by utilising terms that indicate fluidity, for example, O’Neil and Bilimoria (2005) and Bilimoria, Godwin & Zelechowski (2007) both discussed the ebb and flow of women’s working lives, compared to the traditional male model, whilst O’Leary (1997) explored the notion of a ‘lifestream’ career model for women. Powell & Mainiero’s (1992: 215) also utilised the metaphor of fluidity in discussing women’s work experiences in relation to ‘the river of time’. They discussed how this river of time was edged by two ‘banks’ where, looking down on the river of time, the ‘upper bank’ represented ‘success’ in relation to career and the ‘lower bank’ represented ‘success’ in relation to family and relationships (1992: 221).Women would then experience a pull (or current) towards either bank, dependent upon context, over their working lives (1992: 222). This conceptualisation of women’s employment experiences aimed to demonstrate the complex interrelationships between personal, organizational and societal factors. However, the issue with this model is that ‘career’ and ‘family/relationships’ are juxtaposed as dualistic and oppositional. There is little conceptual room to consider how these areas may co-exist and overlap and, as Morehead argues, these types of dualistic understandings of work and family fail to appreciate the “synchronised experience of time that mothers report” (2001:355).
5
Whilst these alternative career models can aid understandings of the experiences of working women, especially working mothers, studies still tend to explore the working lives of women in dual-parent families over women in lone-parent families. Lone-parent families now constitute a quarter of families with dependent children in the UK and 56.7% of these parents are in employment (Labour Force Survey, 2009). Their experiences of work are still very much underrepresented in the research and, as Gill & Davidson point out, “this lack of attention paid to lone parents in relation to work is increasingly at odds with the demographic” (2001: 383). Ninety per cent of lone parents are also women (General Household Survey, 2007), which may explain why gender (and its associated roles) is the most likely factor to be focused on in explorations of lone parents and employment (Albelda et al, 2004; Coyne, 2002). Duncan & Edwards (1997) provide perhaps one of the most influential conceptual explorations of lone mothers and paid work. They argue that the traditional ‘rational economic man’ model, which posits that people make “cost-benefit type” decisions regarding work, is incompatible with understanding the employment choices and decisions of lone mothers (1997: 32). For Duncan & Edwards, decisions regarding motherhood and paid work are more likely to be determined by social relations and perceptions, or ‘gendered moral rationalities’ (1997: 56), rather than economic influences. This study led to the development of a ‘gendered orientation model’ which has since been utilised by many subsequent sociological studies in exploring the combination of family and work roles (Spencer-Dawe, 2005). However, Spencer-Dawe argues that this ‘gendered orientation model’ is based upon the understanding of work and home as separate, conflicting spheres (2005: 253). She believes that this has led to the “stereotyping of women as either ‘work-orientated’ or ‘home-orientated’” (2005: 253), which obscures how inter-linked and multi-faceted these two areas can be. Considering this, a broader understanding of the types of ‘identity work’ lone mothers engage in may shed greater light on their decisions regarding employment, without simplifying their constructions of self into either ‘mother’ or ‘employee’ categories. However, these categories may still play a part in their constructions of self, therefore, an in-depth analysis that considers the lived experiences of lone mothers is critical. 3. Methodology It would appear that there is a need for greater research on women’s careers generally and lone mother’s careers more specifically. To address this need, this paper aims to explore the subtleties and intricacies of lone mother’s working lives by providing an in-depth analysis of four participants. The datasets for this paper are part of a larger body of research on the experiences of nine working lone mothers. Data was collected via in-depth semi-structured interviews and diaries which participants completed daily for a week long period. The experiences of only four of these participants will be explored in order to present an analysis that balances the importance of understanding the peculiarities of the ‘whole’ of people’s lives, and the emergence of interesting themes that could have significance for a 6
wider population. As Coyne (2002) points out, lone parents may act as a “lightening rod for the range of issues affecting the care givers’ balancing act with their careers” (2002: 449), therefore, this research may hold significance for parents within various family forms. As discussed in the review of the career literature, a person’s age is an important factor when exploring career stages or working experiences (Duncan & Loretto, 2004; Moore, 2007; Snape & Redman, 2003). Consequently in this study we have selected a participant from each ‘age category’ as demonstrated in the following table (chosen participants shown in bold):
Age range (years) 20-29 30-39 40-49 50+
Participant pseudonym (age) Katy (23), Summer (24) Hazel (32), Samantha (31), Sue (30) Lucy (41), Lydia (47) Laura (50), Margaret (56)
We focus on these four participants particularly because of the diversity of occupations they represent. However, we do not make the assumption that a participant’s age necessarily makes their experiences similar to others within those age categories. As Chambaz (2001) argues, there is a need to highlight the “diversity of lone-parent families, which are too often portrayed as a single whole” (2001: 671). Broad themes will be discussed across all age ranges, however, individual lives will be kept ‘distinct’ in order to avoid reproducing the conceptualisation of a ‘generic’ lone parent. 4. Findings The following charts are designed to provide an overview of the career pathways to-date of the four chosen participants. The visual presentations show how their career paths changed (or did not change) at key points or significant life events. The scale of each contour is dependent upon the physical and temporal impact that certain events had on their working lives, for example, a long absence from work or change from full-time – to part-time – to full-time work again would be indicated by a large contour. [Insert charts about here] Katy and Sue both appear to follow a more linear career pathway compared to Lucy’s and Laura’s more undulating work histories. The charts also show how life events had different affects on career pathways, for example after the birth of her first child Katy returned to full-time employment, whilst Laura took on part-time freelance work in order to accommodate childcare needs. Whilst Katy and Sue provide interesting examples of lone 7
mothers who appeared to choose a more linear career pathway (which, as we will see, raised its own challenges), the majority of the nine participants in this study experienced more fragmented career pathways. For many, the fragmented career pathway was a product of being unable, or unwilling, to work within an organisation that demanded ‘time’ as an indicator of commitment. The use of part-time working hours amongst the participants was common and, as they could not offer additional time commitment to their workplaces, they felt that career development was ultimately limited. 4.1 Significance of career In all four cases paid work played a more significant role in the lives of the lone parents beyond that of financial stability. There was also evidence of considerable investment in training and development to enhance their career. The idea of having a career was important to them, although its significance emerged at different stages of their working lives. For Sue, having a career was important at the start. Sue described herself as “very ambitious and...quite driven” going on to add I took a year off when she was born and by the end of that year I could not wait to get back to work ..(..).. I needed to get out of that sort of being at home world and get back to having busy stuff going on and feeling that I had a bit more to do. Initially Sue found herself worrying a lot about her daughter whilst she was in work and consequently her motivation for work was affected, but this returned “quite quickly”. Katy and Lucy found their working lives developing into careers as they took on more responsibility and grew to identify with their work. Whereas Laura viewed her work life as a ‘job’ until the birth of her children when she decided she needed to “build something up”. Becoming a lone parent “concentrated (her) mind”: I think before I had the children I was just doing jobs just to earn a bit of money and fill in the time because as I say I was more preoccupied with other things and probably because work wasn’t that interesting ..(..)..work is a much more important part of my life now. In all cases, however, work was important to them for a number of reasons. Work was a significant part of their sense of identity which in turn was important to them to act as a role model to their children. I’ve never thought about not working but I think…...if I was without a job then that I would be desperate to get a job and that wouldn’t just be for money reasons, it would also be for all the other things like identity and status and you know career such as it is (Lucy).
8
I would actually say that work gives me a chance to have an identity. When you’re at work you’re not a mother and you’re not anything else but you doing that job. So you have the chance to be you. So I would say for me it’s actually more of a forum to be myself (Katy). Have I made sacrifices for her? Yes but I think for me it’s been really important that I’m a role model for her so whatever her future might bring, I think having a dedicated mother who is also dedicated to their own career, their development and getting up every day and going to work, rather than sitting around the house or not having a strong purpose for each day (Sue). Being a working parent was described as a means of “self-respect”, a way of demonstrating that they were capable of looking after themselves and their children and were not a “victim”. It was a time when they could be themselves. There was also a need to secure the financial future of the family. For example, Sue stressed how she felt she had let her daughter down when she failed to achieve promotion: [T]he only reason that I want to progress and earn more money is to provide an easier life for me and my daughter so at the heart of everything is that I want to be able to have more choices in life and make decisions that suit me and that I don’t necessarily have to think so much about money etc, I want to do the best for her so I almost felt like I’d let her down, you know that after all that hard work and effort and picking up from the childminder at the eleventh hour. A lack of work was also seen as a sacrifice of the family (rather than work resulting in the sacrifice of the family) I think I’ve made sacrifices either way, in both ways. I think I’ve sacrificed my family in the sense that I could not work, or I could work less and claim benefits and I feel like I’ve sacrificed work in the past by not taking opportunities because I don’t want to jeopardise my family. So I think I’ve kind of got a healthy balance and sacrificed it on both levels, um, just dependant on the time and what’s going on really (Katy). These quotes stress the need reflected in all the accounts of the economic value in developing a career. These financial motivations stand alongside, rather than supersede, the multifaceted importance of working for the lone parents. However, there was also an implied acceptance that ‘career’ for a lone parent meant something different than it did to the unencumbered worker. Lucy captures the complexity of the meaning of the term ‘career’ for the lone parent. In her account, it is clear that she identified with her work, as we saw earlier, but later she went on to say: I’ve kind of come to the conclusion that you can’t have a career, a really successful career and spend quality time with your family, I don’t think it’s possible..[..]..I felt 9
that there was this pressure that yes you should put work before anything else and if you needed to get something done for a certain time then you would just do it and if that meant you were sitting in front of your computer until two o’clock in the morning then so be it and I think I only don’t feel it now because I’ve stepped back and I don’t have the expectations on me that I’m going to be… I’m not careerist now. This viewpoint was supported by a previous boss who had made it clear that “being a senior manager and being part-time” wasn’t compatible. Feeling insecure, Lucy eventually left that job, but she also began to wonder whether that point of view was correct. In her consideration of a future career, Lucy was debating whether or not to undertake a PhD. Her concern was primarily with the effect the additional responsibility and workload would have on her ability to spend time with her children. What is interesting is her association of ‘career’ with the preparedness to put work ahead of her other commitments. Here we get a sense of the implicit ‘career ceiling’. These ‘limits’, despite a desire to develop a career, were a consistent theme within participant discourses. Sue referred to her previous employer as being one where “If you weren’t there until ten o’clock at night then you weren’t a good manager” – a viewpoint also reflected by Katy. Laura cited the example of a colleague publicly rewarded for having “left her baby when he was only three weeks old” to work and being held up as an “exemplar” 1. Laura went on to say of her own role in that organisation “I knew it would count against me but you know you just have to do it...you just have to look after your kids”. 4.2 Support arrangements The nature and extent of support networks were crucial to the lone mothers studied in negotiations of work and family. All four relied upon this network even though its form varied in the extent to which it included the father and extended family. In any case, it was this informal support that enabled the lone mothers to structure their working lives in a particular fashion, allowing them to fulfil both caring and providing responsibilities. The extent to which the parent viewed themselves as “lone” was also affected by the involvement of others: I think I’m more embarrassed when I talk about it, my set up because I only have (him) half the week whereas a lot of single mothers have them five days and the dad has them at the weekends, almost as if I’m not doing enough (Katy). Laura, who had no family living locally, had to rely on friends, particularly when the children were young and she had to commute to work. The father had the children for most of the weekend, and in that sense Laura described herself as not entirely a lone parent. But the 1
See also Joanne Martin’s (1990) article in which she described the case of a woman who had a caesarean section over the weekend to ensure she avoided missing work.
10
father had – for example – never taken time off work when the children were sick. The neighbours and friends were “the big difference” and enabled her to cope. Family and friends were typically crucial, even where child care arrangements were shared such as in Katy’s case: “I think I only left (work) once or twice because I have a great family network”. Sue’s mother formed a key part of her support network, although the father also saw their daughter regularly. Informal support networks could also offer other forms of support apart from childcare. Lucy drew on her extended network, including the father, for advice and support. Lucy and her partner had relocated to live nearer her family when they had started their own family. Since the separation, her family as well as supportive friends had played an increasing role in their family life. The family / friend networks were the most significant support networks outside of the workplace and underpinned the routines by which the lone parents organised their time, particularly during the summer vacation. Working in an organisation that was sympathetic to the lone parent’s responsibilities was also crucial, as were empathetic managers, flexible working arrangements and negotiated working hours. Having a minimal commute to work – and being close to the children’s school – was another factor that had to be taken into consideration. These factors also served to limit the opportunities for the lone parents. Some of these issues will be addressed in more detail below. 4.3 Structuring work and family One of the key distinctions between the lone parents was the ‘choice’ to work full-time or part-time, and the flexibility of the work undertaken. In all cases ‘structure’ and ‘routine’ were important ways in which the days were organised and also served to facilitate worklife boundaries. Participants differed in their structuring of work in regard to age of children. Katy and Sue both had children under the age of six yet chose to utilise full-time working hours, whereas Laura only returned to full-time employment, with longer working hours, when the children were further on in their schooling, a flexibility that she enjoyed. However, the age of one’s children did seem to be significant in regard to free time as Laura represented the lone mother with the most free-time to do things for herself – carving out the time to take on other personal commitments and projects. The role of the father also played a part in experiences of free time as Lucy’s ex partner occasionally had the children on a weekend, leaving her with a ‘day off’. Lucy also felt that the type of work she was involved in (namely conducting research) offered her a greater level of flexibility, describing how she was “lucky that it’s the type of job where I can fix it around me, most of the time”. Katy’s work in the care industry was more structured, consisting of twelve hour shifts. She had organised it as such with her ex-partner (who she shared parenting with equally) so that when she was not working she was caring for her son. Her limited free time was used to complete a qualification which was hoped would help her move into a different career once her son had 11
reached school age. Katy’s case is more unusual as she had always maintained the breadwinner role, “always been a worker”, even when within the dual-parent household. In this way, Katy felt her routine had not changed that much since becoming a lone parent. Whilst free time for oneself was often discussed as a necessary sacrifice in maintaining one’s family and work routine, there were also other sacrifices that were experienced. Sue described how she was the primary carer but had a childminder who picked up the child from school. This meant she was often excluded from what she referred to as the “informal networking” of mums, where mothers who worked part-time or did not work at all could socialise with other parents and teachers after the school day had ended. Not only did Sue feel that working full-time mean that she was excluded from these informal networks, she also commented on how in some ways her mothering role has been sacrificed from lack of time, “I’m always chasing, rushing, wondering how on earth I’m going to be able to achieve everything within the time”: I think the work life balance thing works really well for working couples far more than it does for a single parent. I think because between the two of you can balance out finances much better, you can balance who is picking up on what day and who can work late and all that kind of stuff is much easier. I don’t see how that…. Essentially I’m a full-time working mother but it’s really that I’m a full-time working woman and a part-time mother during the week. For all cases, the way to try and maintain a sense of balance was by limiting the amount of time that work interfered in the evenings and weekends. However, this could at times be difficult for example when working from home, Sue discussed how she would feel “paranoid” and would therefore try to be as visible as possible by sending lots of emails. Lucy also discussed the difficulty of sometimes maintaining evenings as ‘work free’ when needing to bring work home. She referred to the “constant juggling of the guilt around...do I play with the kids, do I go to work, what do I do?” This feeling of guilt was often discussed by the other lone mothers, however, most managed to keep their weekends work-free. Whilst work played an important part in the lives of the lone mothers, it was continually structured around the needs of the family. Even in Laura’s example where older children meant she had more free time and flexibility, her routine was still structured around the family unit, such as spending meal times together and making sure that there was some period over the weekend where they did things together. The importance of providing ‘quality time’ for the family was also critical, however, the time claims of things like housework meant that this quality time was often compromised in trying to achieve certain standards. For all participants, time was precious and this perception of time had often led to the development of well defined routines in order to manage work and home. Katy in particular discussed feeling a lot of guilt when time was ‘wasted’, particularly with so much 12
to do around the house, or when her son was “neglected” whilst she cleaned the house or went shopping. However, she notes how “I have managed to set up my routine” between work and home which enabled her to spend ‘quality time’ with her son. Lucy also noted how her perception of time had changed which meant that she had become “more disciplined” and that her time was “already set out, I’m not choosing it”. Both Lucy and Sue sometimes relied on alarms to ensure they did not miss important times like leaving to pick up the children from school or meeting appointments when busy at work. Their settled routines allowed them to survive their day-to-day commitments, however, this often meant that they felt unable to move beyond their current positions as these routines may be difficult to replicate elsewhere. 4.4 Are lone parents different to dual parents? Many of the issues facing lone parents would be familiar to a fellow primary carer. However, some of the issues may have been felt more keenly. All the participants stressed the importance of good work relations, and the difficulties when having previously worked with ‘unsympathetic’ bosses. Finding the ‘right’ place and developing these relations was both a support and also a ‘tie’ to the organisation. Having turned down an opportunity to work elsewhere because she could not offer them the desired flexibility, Katy notes: [U]ntil (he) goes to school, now I have such a routine going because I’ve been very lucky with my workplace that I’ve been given the rota to create the scenario that I’ve got, it would be very difficult for me to move workplace right now, um, so that would create a problem for me. This support was important for the short notice given when taking time off for emergencies. However the real “struggle” was running out of annual leave and having to take unpaid leave to cover their caring responsibilities. Katy referred to only taking time off sick if “really unwell”. The lone mothers were also very sensitive to calling in sick – feeling “guilt” or checking emails to maintain a “presence” and were keen to stress that they made up any hours so that they weren’t seen “as the one who is not committed” or the one “off more than other people”. These sometimes resulted in challenging decisions being made: I’ve had lots of occasions where and I’ve thought god I can’t take another day off … you felt like you were really pushing it if you took time off because the children were ill and I have…. Even here I don’t… if they’re only a bit ill then I just leave them. (Laura). Like many mothers, the lone mothers all cited the challenge or impossibility of being able to meet colleagues socially, particularly when arrangements were spontaneously arranged “I felt like I was constantly: ‘the one who couldn’t do stuff’”. Similarly there was a tendency to be missed off some lists when returning to work which was sometimes perceived as a result of people wanting to give them “an easier time”. However there was a strong desire to 13
‘debunk’ the stereotype of the lone parent. Some felt this more keenly than others with responses ranging from “furious” and “angry” to a position where one “ignores it”. I think it’s like right deep down in your core you feel that little judgements are being made or that you have to work very hard to dispel the myths about being a single parent. Yeah I think it’s probably quite deep in you and I think it’s not the first thing I think of and I don’t consciously consider having to work hard at getting rid of that but I think I am always doing that (Sue). Sue made sure she always referred to herself as a “working mum” to make it clear she was not “a little bit needy”. This was also implicated in the working arrangements that she had negotiated: [A]lso what I really can’t stand is if I pick up on a vibe which people do do, in a jokey way, you know, so part of the negotiations of me coming back to work is that I have weaned them away from working weekends, I don’t do that because if I worked on a weekend rota pattern like I used to, it’s bad enough that I only see (her) for an hour each night, if I didn’t see her on the weekends then I may as well not have a child, you know, so I’ve got that agreement but every now and again there are jokey little ‘oh that’s something at the weekend so we won’t tell (Sue), ha ha ha ha’..(.)”(Sue). In contrast, Katy noted that she was “stigmatised” by the fact she worked full-time: “when I lived in the family unit, I had no choice, I had to earn the money and I’m sure there were people, quite a few people who were like oh you need to be at home, you’re a woman”. The lone parents generally denied that they received any special treatment, or argued that it was “marginal” or “untested”. In practice there was evidence to suggest that they were given more flexibility, had their rota adapted to meet their weekly routine, were given the option to leave early, or make up time to attend a sports day and were one of the last people to be asked to “pitch in” “unless it was an emergency”: [Y]ou feel quite guilty sometimes when it’s like… um, like sometimes on a weekend I might be allowed to leave work early and certain people will allow me to leave early first before anyone else gets the opportunity to leave early because they will be like go and see your son because I go and see (him) everyday, even when he is at his dad’s I’ll see him after work and I feel a bit guilty on that because it’s like why am I different? I’m not any different and shouldn’t be perceived that way but then I always hand back those opportunities to people anyway (Katy). Lone parents had the additional pressure of being (more) alone. As Laura put it, “it would be a lot easier if there were two people...some back up” and “you just have to get on with it...sometimes you just have to sit it out”. Lucy observed that since becoming a single parent she’d “realised that there is still a lot that is geared around two parent families and that’s the point where I feel… I guess I kind of just feel sad for my children because I expect 14
they’re noticing it too”. This featured in many ways – in terms of the day-to-day routine, balancing responsibilities, getting ‘breaks’, flexibility and so on. Even those with good support networks felt this pressure, particularly when working long hours and finding they “can’t fit the kids in”. I guess when I’m with them I’m just with them and there’s no escape so if I do suddenly feel down or get really angry and lose my temper or whatever there’s not a lot of space to say I need some time out and go and lie on the bed or whatever, I can’t do that because they’ll just come and follow me there whereas when you are with someone else you can do that (Lucy). It was also reflected in the desire of the lone parents to prove they could cope (often wanting to not feel “beholden” to the father), and that the children weren’t “missing out”. [M]y ex partner is around ....if I say can you go and pick them up then he will do if he can so you know it’s not like it’s the end of the world but I prefer not to ask him for help if I don’t have to and I will struggle to a fairly large degree before I will ask him to do anything...I suppose I am actually determined to do most of it myself so I probably am trying to prove something ... I can manage basically (Laura). Where the mother had taken part-time or freelance work for an extended period of time during the children’s early years there was an inevitable impact on career development. This was most apparent with Lucy: I think my career is different to what it would have been if I hadn’t have had children, I don’t feel that I’ve kind of been a martyr and made big sacrifices but I know that I would have probably been earning a lot more money if I had not had children and that was a big issue for me in splitting up with my partner that we did the stereotypical thing when we had children and he wanted to carry on working full-time and I wanted to go part-time and we were doing exactly the same career, we’d met when we were doing our youth and community training and we’d been climbing up the local authority levels at the same rate so we were kind of on the same grading system and on the same grade when we had children and then over the last ten years he has carried on.... working his way up so he’s now earning quite a bit of money whereas obviously I went part-time and left my job and did lots of freelance work and stuff like that so I certainly feel like quite often men carry on up the career ladder and become quite senior and have a decent pension because they’ve had continuous service whereas women don’t basically and my career has been totally interrupted. Unlike in a dual family arrangement, the lone parent bore the (economic) brunt of this career interruption. However it had broader implications as noted above. And, as Lucy 15
observed, there were important things to consider for the future when the children have left home and taken with them a key sense of one’s purpose and identity as a lone parent. In all cases something tended to ‘give’ – typically either time for oneself or the housework, paperwork or calling friends. The routine that enabled lone parents to meet their responsibilities was more about day-to-day survival than a sense of ‘progress’: [T]he worst thing I think about being a single parent, a lone parent whatever, is that inability to get anywhere other than just the day, you know that inability to sort the loft out, just all that crap that just build up because all you feel like you can do is just keep plodding (Laura). 5. Discussion Typically career-based models assume a linear development of a career from the start of one’s working life. Not only do working mothers not experience the same linear progression, but the evidence here suggests that lone mothers may not – by dint of their circumstances – be motivated to embark on a career until after childrearing (for example, Laura). Indeed their career is not seen merely as ‘in balance’ with their home lives but fundamental to it, and to their children’s development. However, in contrast to the findings of Duncan and Edwards (1997), decisions were also economically motivated and, whilst prevailing attitudes did play a role, these were not the most significant determining factor in work/family choices. In fact the issues pertaining to choices made were a more complex mixture of identity work, career ambition, economic motivation or necessity and, proving oneself capable (not only to the organisation, but to the children, father, and others around them). The responses demonstrate a keen awareness on the part of lone parents of the need to ‘be seen’ to be committed, yet at the same time they appeared to accept their career as limited or going slowly – ‘on hold’ until the children have grown up. Organizational cultures appeared to play a part in these understandings of ‘commitment’ as the idea that success and loyalty were directly linked to time dedicated to work were often espoused. Within these discourses, experiences of ‘presenteeism’ were also discussed where participants felt that they were expected to demonstrate commitment to an organisation through long work hours (Watts, 2009). Invariably, becoming a parent within these types of work environments would either lead to a withdrawal from that workplace or a re-negotiation of ambition levels, such as reducing responsibilities or looking for more structured work, in light of the competing time demands of work and family. This then lead to feelings that one could not have a ‘proper’ career (as in a career that maintained a linear career pathway), whilst maintaining primary care responsibilities for their children. Drew & Murtagh argued that flexible working within the context of a long work-hours culture is “incompatible with holding a senior management post” (2005: 262), and the experiences of the lone mothers in 16
this study would appear to support this. The impact of being part-time on career progression was also an issue and mirrors the findings of Epstein et al who argued that parttime employees are often stigmatised as ‘time deviants’, because of the perception that they offer “less commitment to their organisations” (1999: 11). Whilst not all participants experienced cultures that expected longer working hours as a measure of commitment, there was a common belief that workplaces were still organised around the traditional ideologies surrounding work and parenthood. For example, many highlighted how a ‘good’ employee is still conceptualised as someone who will prioritise the “work sphere ahead of the family sphere” (Fletcher & Bailyn, 1996: 258). However, the lone mothers in this study maintained a consistent ‘family first’ dialogue in relation to work, which often resulted in a greater distinction between (rather than integration of) work and family time. For many, this meant that one’s career (which remained important) was necessarily ‘on hold’ as contributing greater time to work was synonymous with taking time from the family and the home. The notion of the ‘second shift’ is therefore especially pertinent for the lone mothers in this study, however, their experiences of this ‘shift’ were slightly different from that of the mothers (from dual-parent families) in Hochschild & Machung’s (1989) study. The configuration of this ‘second shift’ was far more intensive and pervasive, with lone mothers feeling a greater sense of guilt or even ‘failure’ if it was not achieved. Both ‘work’ and ‘home’ shifts were likely to be of greater intensity where a larger number of activities would be compacted into a smaller amount of time. This often led to segments of time being set aside for each shift and also a greater patrolling of the barriers between them (through setting alarms etc). It would appear then that Coyne’s assertion that care-giving has become the “glass ceiling of the new millennium” (2002: 447) is warranted as many of the participants in this study appeared to be constrained as well as aided by their work and home routines. The intensification of work and family also appeared to be a product of a need to ‘prove’ oneself, that even as a lone mother they could ‘do it all’. However, because of this intensification of activities, things would inevitably ‘slip’ and the lone mothers often experienced being excluded from informal networks both within and outside of work. Being excluded from informal networks within work could then impact on their ability to gain information and establish relationships with colleagues which could be crucial in developing one’s career (Simpson, 1998). Whilst routines helped the lone parents survive their daily responsibilities between work and home, it also meant that they were trapped in certain types of work (with often limited responsibility and work hours), in certain locations. Once they were in a workplace that ‘fitted’ it was incredibly hard for them to contemplate leaving as the informal arrangements they had arranged with their employer, in regard to negotiating schools and networks, may not be available elsewhere. The well-worked rationalities of their work-life routine had thus also become the ‘iron cage’ out of which they would struggle to break.
17
References Acker, J. (2006) Inequality regimes. Gender & Society, 20,4, 441-464. Albelda, R., Himmelweit, S. & Humphries, J. (2004) The dilemmas of lone motherhood: key issues for feminist economics. Feminist Economics, 10,2, 1-7. Auster, E. R. & Ekstein, K. L. (2005) Professional women's mid-career satisfaction: An empirical exploration of female engineers. Women in Management Review, 20,1, 423. Becker, P. E. & Moen, P. (1999) Scaling back: Dual-earner couples' work-family strategies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 995-1007. Belkin, L. (2004) The opt-out revolution. New York Times Magazine. 26 October, p153. Benschop, Y. (2006) Of Small Steps and the Longing for Giant Leaps. Research on the intersection of sex and gender within workplaces and organizations. In Konrad, A., Prasad, P. & Pringle, J. (Eds.) Handbook of Workplace Diversity. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage. Bilimoria, D., Godwin, L. & Zelechowski, D. D. (2007) Influence and inclusion: a framework for researching women’s advancement in organizations. In Bilimoria, D. & Piderit, K. (Eds.) Handbook on women in business and management. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Burke, R. J. (2010) Managers, balance, and fulfilling lives. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 25,2, 86-90. Carter, N. M. & Silva, C. (2010) Women in management: Delusions of progress. Harvard Business Review, (March)19-21. Chambaz, C. (2001) Lone parent Families in Europe: A Variety of Economic and Social Circumstances. Social Policy & Administration, 35,6, 658-671. Coyne, B. (2002) Has care giving become the new glass ceiling? A cross-cultural comparison of UK/US responses by lone parents with sole care-giving responsibilities. Human Resource Development International, 5,4, 447-466. Crompton, R. (2006) Employment and the family: the reconfiguration of work and family life in contemporary societies, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Crompton, R. & Lyonette, C. (2011) Women’s career success and work–life “balance” in the accountancy and medical professions in Britain. Gender, Work & Organisation, 17,2, 231-254. 18
Drew, E. & Murtagh, E. M. (2005) Work/life balance: senior management champions or laggards? Women in Management Review, 20,4, 262-278. Duncan, C. & Loretto, W. (2004) Never the Right Age? Gender and Age Based Discrimination in Employment. Gender, Work & Organization, 11,1, 95-115. Duncan, S. & Edwards, R. (1997) Lone Mothers and Paid Work-Rational Economic Man or Gendered Moral Rationalities? Feminist Economics, 3,2, 29-61. Eby, L. T. (2001) The boundaryless career experiences of mobile spouses in dual-earner marriages. Group & Organization Management, 26,3, 343-368. Epstein, C. F., Seron, C., Oglensky, B. & Saute, R. (1999) The part-time paradox: Time norms, professional lives, family, and gender, London, Routledge. Fenton, S. & Dermott, E. (2006) Fragmented careers? Work, Employment & Society, 20,2, 205-221. Fletcher, J. K. & Bailyn, L. (1996) Challenging the last boundary: Reconnecting work and family. In Arthur, M. & Rousseau, D. (Eds.) The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organizational era. Oxford University Press. Gangl, M. & Ziefle, A. (2009) Motherhood, labor force behavior, and women’s careers: An empirical assessment of the wage penalty for motherhood in Britain, Germany, and the united states. Demography, 46,2, 341-369. General Household Survey (2007) Overview & Appendix A: Definitions and terms [online]. , Office for National Statistics. Available from: [Accessed: 02 February 2009]. Gill, S. & Davidson, M. J. (2001) Problems and pressures facing lone mothers in management and professional occupations–a pilot study. Women in Management Review, 16,8, 383-399. Gingerbread (2010) Let's Lose the Labels campaign briefing. Gingerbread [online], February 2010. Available from: http://www.gingerbread.org.uk/portal/pls/portal/!PORTAL.wwpob_page.show?_doc name=574172.PDF [Accessed: 27th May 2010]. Hall, D. T. (1996) The career is dead--long live the career: A relational approach to careers, Jossey-Bass. Hochschild, A. R. & Machung, A. (1989) The second shift: Working parents and the revolution at home, London, Piatkus. 19
Hopkins, M. M. & O’Neil, D. A. (2007) Women and success: dilemmas and opportunities. In Bilimoria, D. & Piderit, K. (Eds.) Handbook on women in business and management. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Kirchmeyer, C. (1998) Determinants of managerial career success: Evidence and explanation of male/female differences. Journal of management, 24,6, 673-692. Labour Force Survey (2009). Table from Labour Force Survey - 2009 [online]. , Office for National Statistics. Available from: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=409 [Accessed: 20 July 2009]. Mainiero, L. A. & Sullivan, S. E. (2005) Kaleidoscope careers: An alternate explanation for the" opt-out" revolution. The Academy of Management Executive (1993), 19,1, 106123. Martin, J. (1990) Deconstructing organizational taboos: The suppression of gender conflict in organizations. Organization Science, 1,4, 339-359. Mills, M., Blossfeld, H. P. & Bernardi, F. (2006) Globalization, uncertainty and men's employment careers: a theoretical framework. In Mills, M., Blossfeld, H. P. & Bernardi, F. (Eds.) Globalization, uncertainty, and men's careers: an international comparison. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Moore, S. (2007) Age as a factor defining older women's experience of labour market participation in the UK. Industrial Law Journal, 36,3, 383-387. Morehead, A. (2001) Synchronizing time for work and family: preliminary insights from qualitative research with mothers. Journal of Sociology, 37,4, 355-369. O’Leary, J. (1997) Developing a new mindset: the “career ambitious” individual. Women in Management Review, 12,3, 91-99. O’Neil, D. A., Hopkins, M. M. & Bilimoria, D. (2008) Women’s careers at the start of the 21st century: Patterns and paradoxes. Journal of Business Ethics, 80,4, 727-743. O'Neil, D. A. & Bilimoria, D. (2005) Women's career development phases: Idealism, endurance, and reinvention. Career Development International, 10,3, 168-189. Perry, E. L. & Parlamis, J. D. (2006) Age and Ageism in Organizations. In Konrad, A., Prasad, P. & Pringle, J. (Eds.) Handbook of Workplace Diversity. London, Sage. Powell, G. N. & Mainiero, L. A. (1992) Cross-currents in the river of time: Conceptualizing the complexities of women's careers. Journal of management, 18,2, 215-237.
20
Simpson, R. (1998) Presenteeism, power and organizational change: long hours as a career barrier and the impact on the working lives of women managers. British Journal of Management, 9, 937-50. Snape, E. & Redman, T. (2003) Too old or too young? The impact of perceived age discrimination. Human Resource Management Journal, 13,1, 78-89. Spencer-Dawe, E. (2005) Lone Mothers in Employment: seeking rational solutions to role strain. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 27,3, 251-264. Stewart, K. (2009) Employment and Wage Trajectories for Mothers Entering Low skilled Work: Evidence from the British Lone Parent Cohort. Social Policy & Administration, 43,5, 483-507. Sullivan, S. E. (1999) The changing nature of careers: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 25,3, 457-484. Tenbrunsel, A. E., Brett, J. M., Maoz, E., Stroh, L. K. & Reilly, A. H. (1995) Dynamic and static work-family relationships. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63,3, 233-246. Watts, J. H. (2009) ‘Allowed into a Man's World’ Meanings of Work–Life Balance: Perspectives of Women Civil Engineers as ‘Minority’ Workers in Construction. Gender, Work & Organization, 16,1, 37-57. White, B. (1995) The career development of successful women. Women in Management Review, 10,3, 4-15.
21
Katy (age 23) 1.
2.
3.
4. 5. 6.
7.
Phase 1: - Entry into employment market (aged 17) Full time employment Phase 2: - Child at age 19 - Dual-parent family - Primary earner - Basic maternity leave, returned to full time employment, no change in career Phase 3: - Continuation of same working hours/employer - Career plateau Phase 4: - Lone parent at age 22 - No initial change in full time career Phase 5: - Rearranged work shifts to negotiate childcare Phase 6: - Child reached school age - Career transition period Phase 7: - Change in career at age 23 - Part-time work hours - Current role: Mental health care support worker/Care assessor
Sue (age 30) 1.
2.
3. 4.
5. 6. 7. 8.
Phase 1: - Entry into employment market (aged 18) Initial part time work followed by full time employment Phase 2: - Continued development within the company – hierarchical progression - Move to different organisation – still same hierarchical progression Phase 3: - Child at age 25 - Dual parent family - Maternity leave of 1 year - keen to return to work - First 6 months of work – part time Phase 4: - After 6 months – return of motivation/ambition – return to full time work hours - Slight change in working schedule – did not work weekends Phase 5: - Lone parent at age 27 - No change in full time career - Use of child minder/family support to facilitate full time working hours Phase 6: - Child reached school age - No change in career/work schedule Phase 7: - Keen to continue career development within organisation - Worked longer hours/beyond work role to facilitate this - Mother unwell, unable to help with childcare – increase in use of childminder to compensate - Recession – organisation unable to offer progression Phase 8: - Changed jobs in order to continue career progression (public sector to private sector) - Same working hours (full time) but flexible working, better location (closer to home/schools) - Current role: People development manager
22
Lucy (age 41)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
7.
6. 8.
Phase 1: - Undergraduate degree in English - Left university (aged 21), volunteered for two years to be eligible for training course - Continued education – Youth & community work training Phase 2: - Full time employment - Continued development – manager to regional manager – hierarchical progression Phase 3: - First child age 32 - Dual parent family - Relocation to Devon to be near family - Took on a part time regional manager post Phase 4: - Second child age 35 - Initially returned to regional manager post Phase 5: - Ability to be a ‘good’ part time manager questioned – lead to change in employment – move away from management roles - Freelance, part time employment for 2 years to fit around caring for children - MSc Educational research for 1 year Phase 6: - Part time employment (4 days/week) - Flexible work hours Phase 7: - Lone parent at age 40 - No change in career/work hours - Slight change in working schedule Phase 8: - Future aspirations – uncertain – aspiration to complete a PhD – competing points of focus (children’s needs versus personal needs). - Current role: Assistant research fellow
Laura (age 50)
1. 2. 3.
4. 5. 6. 7.
8. 9.
Phase 1: - Undergraduate degree in English - Left university aged 21 Phase 2: - Temporary admin employment Lead to full time office work Phase 3: - Time abroad Phase 4: - First child aged 32 - Dual parent family - Part time, freelance work to accommodate childcare Phase 5: - Second child aged 36 - Continuation of part time, freelance work whilst studying for diploma in computing Phase 6: - Second child reached school age - Part time admin job to fit in with school hours Phase 7: - Lone parent at age 41 - Need to progress career wise in order to earn more - Part time job as a computer skills tutor – employment funded her to complete a PGCE Phase 8: - Full time employment – teaching in Further Education college - Unsupportive work environment lead to change in job Phase 9: - Full time employment - Current role: Academic skills advisor at a university
23
