I’m a little surprised that Jack Welch’s comment about work/life balance is still making the rounds on the internets. It bristled many SHRM Annual Conference attendees in June. I figured it would blow over. It hasn’t …
Basically Jack said, “There’s no such thing as work-life balance. There are work-life choices, and you make them, and they have consequences.”
I’ve been critical of things Jack Welch has said in the past…but I’m not sure I disagree with him here. We all make life choices that impact our work. That doesn’t mean the choices are bad. Every day, we make decisions about children, other family members, going to school, etc. It only seems logical that we make those choices because it’s what we feel is best for us or that person close to us.
Of course, Jack’s comment was made in the context of taking time off to have children and raise a family. I didn’t take his words as bashing working mothers as much as pointing out that the system is flawed. Corporate America has a double standard where families and choices are concerned.
Individuals who take time off for family stuff shouldn’t be asked to choose between family and work opportunities. The mantra of business has been if you have the skills and do the work, you’ll get the same opportunities as everyone else. But in reality, I’m not sure we really practice that.
On the other hand, childless people shouldn’t be asked choose between work and whatever else they have going on. As a person who doesn’t have children, I’ve been told to come in early, stay late, and take work home because I don’t have children. And I’m guessing I’m not alone when I say I’ve really never felt there was a way to address it without running the risk of being labeled “anti-children”.
Corporate America needs to fix the system. Everyone should be able to make life choices and companies should “support” an employee’s right to do so. (Please note: I didn’t say support the choice…because sometimes that might not be possible.) But, an employee’s family situation should not be the driver. Rather, it’s ability to do the work.
It doesn’t matter who you are, at some point in your career, you’ll have to make choices. The important part is to know our workplaces understand our need to make choices and not hold those choices against us.
Think we can do that . . . ?
0
John Jorgensen says
I agree. I never thought he was being “sexist”, more realistic than anything.
Not that that is right, but just the way things are.
Puf says
Myself and Mrs. Puf are confirmed non-breeders, and we used to be asked to pick up extra work in order to allow the breeders time with their families. What we realized, was exactly what you point out, we have choices to make. I think for us, the fact that we didn’t rush into our choices and worked a long term plan, it’s paid off. We both are strong earners, and have a great work/life balance. We focus on results, and working where that matters.
Just my 2 cents. We’ll it’s 2nd Friday, so let’s call it 1.5 cents.
ndslotnick says
I agreed with Jack Welch’s basic premise. I didn’t think that they were sexist, but still thought it was sad that his follow up comments centered on women making these choices. Men also make work-life choices. Sometimes they choose to be the one to take the couple of years off to raise kids and sometimes they make the decision to allow their wives to do the child rearing while they put the job ahead of family. Some have implied that Jack Welch chose the latter and that that is why he is on his 3rd marriage. I don’t think it is my place to judge, but I would venture that that is a distinct possibility. Hopefully, most men and women are learning to achieve a win-win mix of work and family responsibilities that works for both them and their families.
I was a little older when I married, and definitely remember expectations that I be the one to fill in because of someone’s else’s family responsibilities – and I was in the Army where the tongue-in-cheek comment about family responsbilities used to be that “if the Army had wanted you to have a wife/husband/child, they would have issued you one.”
I took a few years away from full-time employment, when my son was born. It was a decision I always knew I would make. I definitely lost career “momentum” as a result and my military career was never the same when I went back. I believe that the impact on my potential for advancement was permanent. However, being home with him for those first few years was something that I placed a high value on. I believe that it will have a lasting, positive impact on the man my son becomes, so for me, it was the right decision and one I will never regret.
By the way, when I went back into the Army, my husband was leaving salaried employment to start a business – the one we now run together. In our situation, he was working from home, and took over primary child-care responsbilities, which he balanced fairly well with the demands of owning a business while I was suddenly working 12-14 hour days, 6 days a week. My son got to experience both of us being the primary caregiver at different times in his childhood. I think that that will also positively affect the man he becomes.
Susanne says
I don’t have a problem with Welch’s message on this topic. (Although I’m generally not a fan) We all make choices and there are always sacrifices and consequences for all of our choices. What is acceptable for one won’t be for another, and that should be OK.
Employers have the right to determine their expectations for performance and availability for all jobs, and employees have the right to seek employment that meets their needs. I have always worked full time, while raising one child (I stopped at one intentionally, because I knew I would always work full time — so there’s a choice I made). My husband and I have balanced jobs and family well, with only minor impact on either of our careers and I don’t think any real impact on our family. But still, there were choices. I intentionally chose jobs that had limited travel; he intentionally changed industries to work a “normal” schedule. We’re OK with those choices.
What annoys me is parents who request reduced work schedules, and are granted same, yet still expect to be given the same consideration for promotions as their non-reduced schedule counterparts. Making the decision to take family-friendly schedules is a choice. Those of us who don’t ask for that perk are making the choice to forgo more time with our families. So I might expect to move up a little faster because I’ve put in the time. It just is what it is. Own your choices!
China Gorman says
Thanks for revisiting this, Sharlyn. I, too, did not take offense from his comments. I thought them extremely realistic and more of a “state the obvious” comment than a message purely for women. Because the interviewer had just written an excellent book, Womenomics, I think the conversation turned specifically to women in the workplace and that’s when the controversy started. I love it that the conversation persists because it points out a significant need in the workplace: policies and practices that allow families to thrive. Great post!
Wally Bock says
Welch was right that it’s about choices. Talking about “balance” implies that there’s some kind of right way to live your life. Not only isn’t there “one best way,” the best way of the moment changes at different stages in your life. I would rather see the conversation structured around choices and the life mix, instead of balance.
Deirdre says
I don’t disagree with Jack’s comments at all. I think it is a misconception that there is worklife balance and that people are entitled to it.
My husband served in the Navy for 22 years. The Navy never asked me how I felt about moving, losing career momentum, handling six -10 month deployments alone, having no contact with my spouse for long periods of time, etc. We spent 7 years, me on the West Coast and he on the East Coast so I could have some sort of career. Those were OUR CHOICES so I could get ahead too.
I shouldn’t have to pick up extra work because of choices other people make. And I would have no expectation that all playing surfaces are flat and equal for everyone. They aren’t.
I think we need more matter-of-factness in some situations and less appeasement. We all make choices and we should all own them.
SH says
Formerly (female) Human Resources Manager at GE. I believe the culture has changed since Welch left for the better. During the Welch regime, GE always came first before family. After Welch, Immelt made an attempt to listen to his workforce through his town hall meetings with the goal of bringing GE out of the dark ages in terms of work/life balance. Very, very high divorce rate at GE amongst the managerial group (mostly men). To get ahead and stay in the “top ten” group, you were expected to be extremely flexible and willing to relocate every two years in a new job despite the impact on marriage and family. I don’t think Welch gets it yet.