One thing really annoying that I’ve noticed working in the white collar industry is that some people get a free pass all the time on important things, just because they have kids. For example, in a different team who often has to step away during business hours and becomes unreachable, simply because they have kids. There’s always some sort of excuse with them. Have to go pick him up from the bus stop, have to go pick him up from school because they got in trouble, dance recital during the middle of the day, always something. But when it comes to ordinary normal people who don’t have kids, it feels like there’s a lot more scrutiny. Why do you need a doctor’s appointment in the middle of the day? Why do you need to go pick up a prescription at lunch time, like why can’t you work through lunch?

But also, when it comes to employment, it feels like there’s a lot of preferential treatment for people with children. Oh that person has kids / children! They need the job a lot more. They have a little girl! Clearly they need it more than the the person who has a disabled spouse, because kids are way more important than an adult dependent! We can’t fire this person, they have kids! Let’s choose someone who doesn’t have a family. Like, stuff like this. Why is there so much preferential treatment to people who have children? Is this some sort of utilitarian thing? The least number of people affected?

  • Tiefling IRL@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    Yes and no. Everyone deserves the same benefits here. The issue isn’t why someone with kids gets a free pass, but why you don’t get the same offering. Why should someone have to work harder because they’re infertile, gay, or otherwise unable to reproduce?

    • JeffKerman1999@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      But that’s on the capitalist, not on the worker. They should hire some more people to cover for whoever has emergencies.

      I have a kid now and I understand the frustration of who didn’t have kids. The problem is that the frustration is to the wrong person.

  • zbyte64@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    12 days ago

    I mean we should all be able to leave our desk to go pick up a prescription for ourselves or a family member. That’s the problem, not that parents are the only ones with the privilege.

    The discrimination in regards to parents is real. In an interview I was asked if I would be able to keep up with a demanding schedule because I have kids. In my experience, women with children get the opposite end of that consideration than with men being considered bread winners. This is messed up any way you slice it.

  • echo@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    in a different team

    Maybe this all comes down to the boss of the other team not being a dick? Life and work are not separate things. A good manager knows this. If your manager is making you work through lunch , not take breaks, not go to the doctor, etc. then you have a manager problem and this has absolutely nothing to do with who does/doesn’t have children.

    • TheKracken@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      Also depending on where they live making them work through lunch / breaks is illegal without extra pay. Look up your local labor laws.

  • Linktank@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    Fuck no, if anything you should be punished for bringing children into this world. (The kids shouldn’t be, but damned if they aren’t going to be already anyway)

  • pumpkinseedoil@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    As someone without children:

    They should, yes. Children are extremely important for our future so especially people who earn well and can provide their children with a good life (likely leading to a successful carrier later on) should be encouraged to have them.

    Additionally this kind of culture is needed if we want women to have same chances as men (since childcare still is majorly done by women, and likely always will be (progressive families split it evenly, conservative families don’t or at least don’t split it evenly, for every families where the father does more there’s at least one where the mother does more))

    • Bgugi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      As someone with kids: they should not. This kind of basic flexibility should be the bar for all employees, regardless of family status.

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      We are approaching 10 billion people on this Earth.

      At some point people should realize that the important thing for our future is having less children, not more.

      • pumpkinseedoil@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        12 days ago

        Population is shrinking in developed countries, looks like that issue will erase itself as more and more countries are developed.

        • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          12 days ago

          Population is rising in developed countries.

          You may want to say that new borns by native population are shrinking.

          But the growth in inmigration greatly overcomes that fact.

          Check population charts of the US, the UK, France, Germany, Sweden… Not one points down, all point up.

          Problem is not solving by itself.

          • pumpkinseedoil@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 days ago

            I meant it’s shrinking without immigration, yes. As more and more countries are developed, less and less countries have population growth, so there’s also no population growth through immigration anymore (when one time the people from the few countries that still have population growth are distributed among so many countries without population growth).

            It is solving itself if we keep working on helping countries to become developed.

            • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              11 days ago

              Idk, there’s a point of view over this that seams very reasonable, and it’s being proven (imho).

              People who emigrate tend to be the “best”, aka: the educate youth, the working class, people running from other people causing trouble. This means that the country of origin gets a way harder time developing, sometimes even become worse the most people go away.

              I think there’s an example of this on a great part of Latin America. 10 years ago it used to be a better place to be. But as more and more people run away from those troubles to USA and Spain the people causing troubles are the ones left back there. And in most Latin American countries it can be said that the developing process has not only halted, but in some places have even start regressing.

              I’m a little pessimistic on this regard. I don’t believe that the whole world will develop on this country. Quite the contrary, I think we’ll began seeing more and more countries becoming worse over time. Other instance of this is the Arab World, many countries that started developing on the last century have fallen nowadays in islamic fundamentalism and basically a middle ages revival.

              You concatenate this issues with climate change and I think humanity are in for a very bad time over the next centuries. Many people (more than ten billions in the next century) living in poorer and poorer conditions.

  • traches@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    I think in general people should be understanding of each others’ situations and make things easier on them where possible.

    Speaking as a parent, I can pretty much guarantee that you are living a less stressful life than your coworkers with kids. Not sure it means much but hey

    • BertramDitore@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      First part: 100% agree. The problem is that the empathy and compassion isn’t directed at everybody, not that parents get something extra. Everyone should get that extra empathy, and as long as you get your work done, who cares what responsibilities you have at home?

      Second part: Hard disagree. There’s simply no way you can know what’s really going on in your coworkers’ lives. People also experience stress very differently, it’s quite relative. I think it’s universal statements like this that are part of the issue. Everybody deserves empathy, compassion, and the flexibility to live a full life while having a job. Parents don’t deserve that more than non-parents.

      • Drusas@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        12 days ago

        I don’t have kids, but I have more than one serious health condition which requires tons of medications, treatment time, and doctor’s appointments. My life is usually more stressful than those of my friends and family with kids. Also, their stress is at least moderately predictable and brings them joy in addition to the stress.

    • socsa@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      12 days ago

      I can pretty much guarantee that you have no fucking clue what any other person is dealing with.

    • nimble@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      12 days ago

      Second paragraph is an easy one on my bingo card. Parents are so predictable always thinking they are more tired or more stressed than any non-parent. It doesn’t work like that.

      Parents do have a lot of reasons to be tired or stressed but it is self elected. Non-parents (and Parents!) Can also have self elected things that are stressful or tiring. Worse even is when someone has a non- elected thing that is stressful or tiring-- parent or not.

      Being a parent is just a low level way to group people, but it doesn’t mean anything other than they just decided to procreate. I certainly have empathy when my coworkers are telling me about how they are tired because of a kid. But empathy should go both ways. Listening to conversations thinking that you have the trump card on stress is a shitty way to approach conversations.

      • traches@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        12 days ago

        Obviously I’m aware that people face all kinds of challenges and stressors, it’s the entire fucking point of my first paragraph. I wasn’t trying to start a “who’s more stressed” contest here, it was a throwaway half-joke attempt to make OP feel better.

        Seriously, internet, can you chill? Do I have to speak with absolute precision and clarity at all times?

  • Boozilla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    I’ve worked at a lot of different places and in my experience it varies a lot.

    Some bosses cut everybody slack. Some bosses are jerks and cut nobody any slack. I would say most of them play favorites with their employees (some are blatant about it, some are more subtle). Some bosses cut the workers with kids more slack. Some bosses cut the workers with kids less slack.

    Anecdotal evidence is like that. It’s emotionally compelling, but doesn’t really tell us what’s going on in the bigger picture.

  • NotSteve_@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    I don’t think so but tbh it sounds like you’re just in a bit of a shitty team. My coworkers with kids do the same thing but so do I with no kids. I can just disappear for a bit as long as I’m getting my work done

    • BertramDitore@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      Exactly. I disappear quite often, just like my colleagues with kids do. We all trust each other to get our work done, so nobody cares what we actually do all day. More widespread work from home has helped normalize this a bit (it’s an amazing privilege that I enjoy, that not everyone can, to be fair), but just don’t be late for meetings, meet your deadlines, and otherwise enjoy your life however you choose, kids or not.

    • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      Yeah, I was a little late the other day for my daughter’s appointment, but my coworker needed to duck out early another day because they had a maintenance guy going to their place.

  • WhiteOakBayou@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    I think your complaint is similar to that of non smokers when smoke breaks were normal. What you see as preferential treatment is just how everyone should be treated.
    Also, In my 20 or so years in the legitimate workforce, I have seen parents cut slack and parents get run off because the boss doesn’t like people having other priorities. In my direct experience it’s been a lot more boss dependent than anything else.

  • magnetosphere@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    It can be frustrating to see, but remember, parents almost never get any actual time off. Go home at the end of the day? Kids to deal with, and perhaps shuttle around. Weekend? Kids. Holidays? Kids. Parents have enormous, constant responsibility, so cutting them some slack is just basic compassion.

    Besides, any decent parent would choose their kids over their job anyway, so being accommodating only makes good business sense.

    • Drusas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      OP specifically compared having a child dependent versus an adult dependent. An adult dependent also means not having time off. Or, if you have significant health issues of your own, you might not really ever have time off, either.

  • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    Feels like there is more than just 1 answer…

    There’s always some sort of excuse with them. Have to go pick him up from the bus stop, have to go pick him up from school

    First part of my answer: when they have to, then they have to. Raising kids isn’t just always fun, it is hard work too. No need to make it even harder. If nobody has kids, humans dy out.

    Why do you need to go pick up a prescription at lunch time, like why can’t you work through lunch?

    The other part of the answer is just an asshole boss (can’t say it with nice words, sorry, not sorry). As soon as you find a better one, give this one a greeting from me with your shoe print on his backside.

  • SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    Lots of great points in the comments. But I think so far no one has really addressed your core complaint head on, which is why society tolerates a double standard here.

    Parents get a pass because they are supporting more than just themselves… It may appear that the parent who is getting a free pass is pulling less weight, if you look at this exclusively through the lens of comparing contribution to the company’s productivity. But if you expand that lens a bit, you see that raising a child is also work to be valued (which you benefitted from yourself, btw). Frankly, a company with a work culture that considers its social responsibility to the community beyond merely spitting out products is a really good thing.

    If you are ok with the double standard of handicapped parking, you should be ok with this too.

    • netvor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      raising a child is also work to be valued (which you benefitted from yourself, btw).

      This.

      And it’s not a binary thing, it’s a scale. Kids who are supported by emotionally stable parents who are able to spend their time together are more likely to succeed in life than kids who are left to their own devices and end up picking up all sorts of insecurities due to the parent being sort of a nerve wreck, and them eventually feeling like a burden all the time.

      I will happily support my colleague spending more of his time with his daughters, because then when I’m old, I have higher chance that those daughters being confident, nice and educated adult people who can produce economical value. Only then, part of that value can come back to me in various forms of support, whether it’s pension, better social services or just more options. (Unless they move to another country – but then again, that depends on the relative quality of life in this country, which in turn boils down to the same principle.)

      Now, maybe I’m a nice guy here, but none of the above logic requires me to be nice. I could be a totally selfish asshole and still the position works out the same.

  • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    The better question is why management is giving you flack? That’s the issue. Not your coworkers with kids.