The price of motherhood

For the first time last year, the hourly gap in pay between full-time working men and women fell to 10 percent. While that’s not good enough and is still higher than in much of the rest of Europe, it is a sign of enormous progress in reducing work place inequality. In 1997, the hourly full-time pay gap was double. Unfortunately, this is less true for mothers. While employment among women without children is similar to that of their male counterparts, employment among mothers falls far behind. So while we should celebrate our progress on gender equality, the price of motherhood remains too high.

Part of the high price of motherhood comes from the fact that many women with children want to work part-time but in order to do so, they have to take a big cut in position and pay. Cathy’s experience is typical of what happens. Before having children, she worked full-time as a radiographer running a fleet of breast cancer screening vans. In order to work part-time once her son Ethan was born, she had to take several steps downward the career ladder. Now fifteen years after starting work, she is only one rung above her initial entry grade and is likely to be overlooked for promotion because she only works part-time. And this is in the NHS, an organisation that many assume to be family friendly. 

The pay penalty is compounded by the fact that many mothers struggle to secure the kind of flexibility from their employers that would make the juggling act between work and home a little easier. It took Diana nine months to negotiate a day working from home so that she could do the school run one extra day a week. Pauline works at night and has still not managed to get her employer to agree to a split shift that would allow her to drop her seven year old at school. 

The choice facing many working mothers in Britain is unenviable: they can either work full-time to keep their careers afloat or they can reduce their hours to spend more time with their children but take the career and pay penalty for doing so. For many on low to middle incomes, even this poor choice is not on offer.  With full-time childcare being akin to a second mortgage, many families cannot afford to have two people in full-time work and lone parents are particularly badly off. Sarah, for example, works 15 hours a week in three different jobs at evenings and weekends to avoid paying for childcare. She would consider working more hours if it did not involve childcare costs because that would leave her no better off. 

A large part of the solution to the high price of motherhood lies with employers. There is little more workplace flexibility that can be achieved through legislation. The problem is now achieving the culture change that will allow employees to benefit from the existing legislation. Too many employers still assume that seniority and responsibility can only be done full-time. No one can manage a team and not be around five days a week. How can a part-time worker manage a client relationship? But think about the amount of time that most managers are actually in the office and available to their staff – at best, they are part-time. Bearing that in mind, some creativity could make part-time work or a job share a real option. While a clutch of leading employers have got the message and are reaping the benefits of hiring highly skilled women, most only offer part-time to retain staff who might otherwise leave. 

As for government, it’s done more harm than good of late, with cuts to tax credits that support  childcare. Next week’s Budget looks unlikely to offer much hope either. At best, we can expect some deregulation such as a relaxation of staff to child ratios for nurseries with better qualified staff. At worst, there will be silence on how to bring down the costs of childcare. But with the 10th anniversary of the childcare strategy now only two years away, the time is right for government to take a strategic look at whether its current investments are delivering enough value for families and children. As women become better qualified, it would pay to lower the price of motherhood through greater investment in childcare.