We live in the wealthiest nation on the planet in a technologically advanced civilization.
Everyone needs to understand things are only still this absurd because we allow a small percentage of people to live better than any kings from the past ever lived off the backs of the rest of us. Hording the vast majority of our wealth.
We absolutely have the means to prevent people from having to take their kids to fucking work with them but we choose to let billionaires do things like dismantle our government and destroy our international relations instead.
Everyone needs to understand things are only still this absurd because we allow a small percentage of people to live better than any kings from the past ever lived off the backs of the rest of us. Hording the vast majority of our wealth.
We absolutely have the means to prevent people from having to take their kids to fucking work with them but we choose to let billionaires do things like dismantle our government and destroy our international relations instead.
I like that "it takes a village" means bringing your child to work, and not having the support to either have someone/some facility watch your child if you chose to work, or having actual paternity leave. Nor does it mean being paid enough that if you had to just not work, you and yours wouldn't be in the street.
but for many (and we know who) your misery cancels out THEIR misery.
as long has YOU are suffering more than they.....They win. which is why "Owning the Libs" is to them desirable. and a sufficient reason for self harming behavior.
it is an insane point of view....but there you go.
This gives me the same vibe as all those "feelgood" stories about communities coming together to pay for some valued member's back surgery or cancer treatment or something.
It's nice people do that, but what about people that are less liked, and how is it that we have so much wealth going around, and yet extremely basic things like healthcare are still factors people need to concern themselves with being able to afford?
The manager was generous enough to let her carry her child while working, but not generous enough to pay her enough to get childcare, or provide it themselves?
It reminds me a bit of the story of a mother going in for a job interview, and shortly after, being arrested for child negligence/endangerment, because she'd left her child unattended (in the same area) while attending said interview. This situation feels like it's setting up for that kind of thing.
I mean, it's McDonald's. The manager doesn't have the ability to pay her a living wage. The manager is a wage slave as well, or even worse on salary while having to cover so many shifts they're barely averaging minimum wage themselves.
No, the person you're mad at is the franchise owner.
And, depending on the store, the franchise owner could be barely breaking even despite paying employees so poorly.
Restaurants, and especially Fast food, is a very low margin industry unless the stores are churning through a significant number of orders consistently throughout the day.
Source: managed a fast food store for a couple years that, after all costs, barely broke even most months of the year.
The thing is, this is a situation where there was no village. She’s her own village, working and taking care of her kid simultaneously. “It takes a village” would mean someone else watched her kid without question because she needed someone. So this is dumb on a lot of levels.
Yeah that's what I was thinking too. A village would involve someone helping this woman in some way, not just making her do everything and then taking a picture of it for (presumably) social media clout.
The village would be birth control, abortions and sterilizations being available to anyone who needs them so that 17 year old children aren’t having children in the first place
that apparently falls completely to the mother. Fuck that.
I understand why you might say that, but as a single dad who has done 90% of the work while working crazy hectic jobs (and has maybe lost a chunk of sanity to it all), fuck that view. It's part of the reason I've been on an island (metaphorically, I WISH literally) for more than a decade. Everyone telling me I'm doing the right thing, but still treating me as a pariah. Where are the scholarships for single fathers or the programs targeted at us? Do we not count? It's seen as almost "creepy and weird," it seems. Fuck. That.
"Oh, let's do a playdate! Oh, your husband is jealous, too? Okay. Well, fuck me, I guess."
Amidst all the outrage, I'd like to say I'm really in favour of having workplaces child friendly where possible. More time of letting the children spend time with mum or dad, rather than going to corporate childcare.
If any of you are planning an office layout today, make a playroom!
Yeah. For single parents and such maybe.
But mostly I want to get back to where you can just live off of one FT income so this whole problem doesn't exist.
Being able to live off one income would be good, though you have to fix the problem where people de-value childcare over paid employment, so the partner staying home doesn't feel 'lesser' from it and dominated by the other. Especially in early months it's better the mum stays with the baby (direct breast feeding is still healthier than expressing milk to feed later), and I think many women still feel that staying home to look after infants is demeaning compared to working a job. We still have some way to go on that!
So, this is something I have - I think - an unpopular opinion on. I think children should be a part of life, and saying, "I don't want to be around children" is a bit like saying you don't want to be around old people, or immigrants, or men, or the homeless. With some balance I can accept it, but I think on the whole society should expect to be around all these people (with the exception that we should help the homeless people to not be homeless!).
But kids can have their own area to play, especially if there's a few of them. Making workplaces child-friendly shouldn't mean you can't have some child-free space, or need little Timmy running between your legs and screaming while you solve that intricate Lisp bug.
I'm of the opposite opinion. Maxing out spending time with mom and dad means less healthy social interactions and growth for your child. I want them to have a separation where they have a teacher, a class and friends, and not feel they can run to me or are distracted by me.
The children I've seen who were raised at home are miles behind our child in terms if development.
Bringing a child to work seems worse - they can't play with toys or engage in what they want at all anymore. They'd be subjected fk whatever the mom and dad have to do. They also have no friends or structured learning.
The daycares we've used have been fantastic and care a lot about teaching our child in many ways they wouldn't otherwise have.
Hm. I think you need a balance. And not about getting less mum and dad time, but that you do get play time with other children. Already we have schools struggling because children aren't developed enough at home. Deeper than that is whether children grow up with a strong bond to their parents, or, in a deep and often inexpressible way, feel abandoned. I'd rather a child be less classroom-developed in early years than feel unloved.
Bringing a child to work seems worse - they can't play with toys or engage in what they want at all anymore.
Luckily, toys are portable. A good child-friendly workplace would have space for toy-playing I think!
Thanks for sharing your perspective, though. I appreciate seeing different experiences of parents.
My old workplace (rip, got a acquired and the new company ran it to shit) was down the street from a daycare. It had discount plans for the daycare. During lunch/breaks, some of my co-workers would spend time with their kids.
I thought it was a good best of both worlds. Still have the separation, but still get to spend time with your kids.
Exactly this. Teachers can basically spot the kids who didn't go to pre-school or day care before kindergarten and spend most of their days with one of their parents. A good daycare will basically help give your kids a head start in their development.
Human beings experience a steep drop-off in productivity after ~6hrs, and the worst effect found of switching to a four day work week has been no change but employees are happier, though more often it’s a large increase in productivity and quality.
While yes, that would be something to consider after fixing everything else, your idea is just this post, please do better.
One time, one of my coworkers showed up to work with his kid, because the babysitter called in sick. My manager, without skipping a beat, told him to go home and be the best dad he possibly could, then, not only did she not use his sick time for this day, she made it a department policy to allow unlimited* "parent days". One of the best managers I've ever had.
' * Fine print was basically, don't abuse it, but use it when you need it.
Lol!! Parents day actually extended to pets, too, and later (about a year or so before I left) also extended to (what is now known as) mental health day.
If you don’t have young kids, you don’t get sick nearly as often. It’s not like having a sick kid at home is a vacation. I don’t begrudge my coworkers their time off for illness or supporting family members with illness.
Hahaha, no, dumbfucks all over think this is a feel good story because the job didn't fire her ass right away like they would have 15 years ago in the "you're lucky to have a job" era. Now they're so short on workers who actually want to work such bullshit-ass jobs that they're willing to "make exceptions."
My mom lost her business when I was really little, and once we settled down somewhere new, she started working as a receptionist for an environmental company. She used to have to bring me to work with her sometimes. Everyone in the office was super chill about it, but if Ed, the owner/complete asshole was there, I had to hide under her desk until he left.
We need a lot of changes, but honestly, a UBI with an extra stipend for parents is one of the big ones. people can't afford to have kids, can't afford to lose their jobs because of their kids. Who the fuck is gonna take care of assholes like Ed when they're old if no one is having kids?
As somone who had kids and loves kids, it absolutely is a mistake. It doesn't mean she can't / won't love the kid, but we need better sex ed and contraceptive accessibility for everyone.
People like her still need our support, but we also need to make sure these kind of accidents happen as little as possible. Now her life will be multiple times harder than it should be and the child's life will also be multiple times harder than it should be.
Its a mystery - why would a hypercapitalist society increasingly dependent on manual labour destroy education, destroy workers rights, remove the ability to abort unwanted pregnancies and make prisoners legal slaves?