Term “part-time” outdated, inappropriate

Being nominated by an Aussie bloke as Bullshit Artist of the Week on 6PR in Perth earlier this month for our call to remove the term 'part-time work' from the workforce vocabulary because of the destructive effect it has on people's careers, highlights the big gender gap on this issue. 

Men who called the radio stations on which I did interviews could not understand why it was even an issue, whereas female callers not only understood but provided case studies of how working 'part-time' impacted negatively on their careers. This is nicely summed up in a comment we received from a member of the Women on Boards.

"I am currently working four days per week – as are two of my female colleagues. We constantly suffer snide comments from our male colleagues – masked behind humour! The constant refrain of "enjoy your day off" wears thin when my "day off" comprises – on a rotational basis – of being a Director on two Boards, fundraising for a conservation fund, doing school canteen and escorting my kids to regional or interstate sport competitions."

Another Women on Boards member, who works as the CEO of a Football Club, attends the office three days a week and spends two days at home with her child. She has refused to call it a part-time role as she does email/phone/other work on the at home days and is available all hours of day and night, so effectively there is no diminution of expectation on what she will deliver.  The same applies for women working three days in the office, one day at home, nominally having one day off but in fact their goals are no different from their “fulltime” counterparts, plus they are usually expected to be flexible in their ability to attend on their “off days”.

She said “It is unfair and inappropriate to characterise these roles as being performed part-time as they are delivering 100 per cent, just not in the paradigm to which we have become accustomed.  The workplace itself has evolved from the strict 38 hour, 9-5 mentality to almost an “as-is, where-is” philosophy, so it is archaic and inappropriate to measure flexible working arrangements against an outdated concept of work.”

For this reason our suggestion that we rename part-time work as "working flexibly at X per cent" may be another label that allows employers/peers/society to view this as a partial contribution and regard these employees as less serious about their work and career. Perhaps we need to move to a situation where there is no label at all for work, and certainly not one that suggests any diminution of expectations.

This would support the person who wrote in with the following:

What is “full-time”? In Government, anyone who worked more than 32 hours was considered “full-time”.  So what does that make associates at a top law or consulting firm who are in the office 10-12 hours a day or more? How about medical registrars? Double full-time? Does the paradigm of “full-time” vs “part-time” have any basis in reality? Has it ever? Full-time vs part-time/flexible is a false dichotomy. Women often seek “flexibility” through entrepreneurship, which is flexible but “double full-time”!

It’s an interesting issue and clearly one that affects women more than men as they constitute 70.4 per cent of all part-time employees in the Australian workforce.

Claire Braund is the Executive Director and co-founder of Women on Boards. She has expertise in start-ups and small business, including in the IT sector. Her early career was in journalism and public relations. Claire was a director of the Foundation for Australian Agricultural Women for eight years and is a graduate of the Sydney Leadership Program.

Women on Boards is a social enterprise to improve the gender balance on Australian company boards. Women on Boards brokers women into board roles, offers professional development and mentoring programs, hosts events and ensures a high level of dynamic interaction across its large and influential network of 11,000 women.

2 Comments

1. 

   Michelle Ray

   August 19, 2011 at 5:11 am

   Claire, I agree with your

   Claire, I agree with your comments. My background is in Policing. I easily spent one third of my employment talking directly with employees and employers about this issue. There is certainly a stigma attached to the part time classification regardless of the total actual hours worked. This issue impacts on females greatly because they are usually still providing the traditional caring roles. Whilst I can recall a male Police Officer crying to me over the phone about the bullying and victimisation he was suffering in the workplace after reducing his working hours (from 38hrs to 30hrs per week) to care for his children after a marriage breakdown, in contrast I can recall many more female Police Officers subjected to the same.
   The focus should be on the benefits of reduced hours of which there are many – increased productivity being one to big picture benefits like reduced traffic congestion. I could go on.
   • 

     Marie Bermingham

     August 25, 2011 at 2:09 am

     Working in a male dominated

     Working in a male dominated industry for the last twenty something years, this has been a constant refrain. In fact one very senior manager colleague told me that his female staff were causing a morale problem by coming in at 9am and leaving at 4pm in what is traditionally a 7am to 7pm job. When I pointed out that their male colleagues were having hair cuts, long lunches, coffees and going to the gym during their working day justified by the fact that they were working long days, and asked the simple question. So what are the women not gettting done? He was absolutely stumped when he said if anything they are getting more done…and proceeded to change the culture (created in part by him). Its about working smarter, not harder or longer!!

     Remember everything Fred Astaire did, Ginger did backwards and in high heels.