Hellobee Boards

Very few women have such high profile positions when they are still of childbearing age. Marissa is already an incredible example of a young woman who has managed to be wildly successful in a male dominated field. I don't think it's also her job to be an example of representing what OTHER women may want for their maternity leave. She's just one person, she shouldn't be expected to represent every working mother in the country.

@LuLu Mom: My guess is both are checking emails. With email on your phone, who doesn't check email all the time?

As a CEO I wouldn't be surprised if she's fielding phone calls and emails from her hospital room. But she should be worried about the tone she is setting and I think the backlash is bc the statement is a passive aggressive stab at maternity leave. I worked for a woman who took 2 weeks maternity leave and it was miserable. She made much more direct statements about how her lack of safety concerns during pregnancy and short maternity leave should be emulated. It was a big reason I quit while pregnant. I knew there was going to be no room to figure out how to be a mom and an employee bc the job was too important and it wasn't fair to others to put things off just bc I want to be around baby.

Also. We are all so worried that other upper management teams and policy makers will use her as an example to encourage all women to take shortened maternity leave. It seems to me it's pretty damn sexist to blame her for that rather than blaming the policy makers for not recognizing that different working mothers need/want different things.

@Truth Bombs: I guess I disagree? I think as a member of a minority group, if you a high profile public figure, you have a responsibility to be supportive of other members of your minority group. If Marissa really does support working women taking longer maternity leaves, she should state that and make that clear so there's no question. Instead, we've just gotten her stance about what she's doing (and being very nonchalant about it too).

@Adira: maybe she doesn't support working mothers taking longer leaves. And it's not her responsibility to do so just because other people want her to. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

In case people were curious, here's what Marissa said back in September:

"Since my pregnancy has been healthy and uncomplicated and since this is a unique time in Yahoo’s transformation, I plan to approach the pregnancy and delivery as I did with my son three years ago, taking limited time away and working throughout."

I think this wording sends the message: if you have a healthy, uncomplicated pregnancy and it's a busy time at work, you should take as short a maternity leave as possible.

I don't follow her or even know who she is. Has she had her twins yet? How does she even know she will be physically able to return to work in two weeks? I just couldn't imagine going back to work at 2 weeks. Physically I wasn't healed yet and all the swelling had just disappeared. I think it's easier to make your plans before you actually experience having kids.

It seems hypocritical to say that we support a woman's right to choose whether to work outside of the home or stay at home and then a second later judge this woman for making a choice that apparently works for her, her career, and her family. Empowering women is about letting each woman make the choice that works best for her and her situation.

I agree that more favorable leave policies would be beneficial for all families, but Marissa Mayer doesn't owe it to anyone to be an example to all moms.

@Adira: still seems crazy to me! I was still a bleeding hormonal mess at 2 weeks. I just can't imagine going to work then.

It seems like the giant point thats being overlooked here is that she's NOT 'going back to work' in the traditional sense. As in leaving babies at home or in someones care, being away from them for hours at a time, etc, etc, etc. Someone mentioned she'll have a nursery and staff beside her office? Bahahahaha. Thats NOT 'going back to work'. So, she pops in the office for a couple hours a day while a wet nurse fawns over her newborns next door. Sounds super stressful and exactly like what most mothers go through when they 'return to work'. Its comparing apples to oranges I'm afraid.

I haven't read a lot of the previous comments, but i think she's getting shit for nothing. She is a CEO and yes, executives will be held to a different standard whether they are male or female. I don't expect her to be an example or lead the way for leaves. I also doubt that Zuckerberg is competely disconnecting while on leave so what example does he set for men who go on leave then - that they can take a leave as long as they are still accessible to their employer?

Honestly, the problem with leave policies in the US is that there are no government mandated leave policies. Heaven forbid THAT happen, right? That's the only way it's going to happen. It's just like how people take less vacation in companies with unlimited vacation policies. Canada has mat/pat leave BUT women are typically the ones who take most of the leave. A lot of men STILL don't take parental leave. Before DH got tenure, he didn't take official time off for both of our kids because it would look poorly on him. His department was already stretched thin because of sabbaticals and if he took official leave, then someone would have to cover him for his classes and students. Instead, he just went to the office a few times a week but was mainly at home with me for 1-2 months.

@Freckles: I think your husbands situation is part of the problem. It's hard to keep women in high powered positions when the expectation is that they won't take family leave. It's great he could have a more relaxed schedule for a couple months and had that sort of flexibility. But what if he was the one giving birth, that pressure to come back would still be there.

To add to the comments about her eliminating the option to telecommute - how can she possibly think it is fair to have a nursery with nannies at her office and not allow parents to telecommute to get a somewhat similar benefit while working. That is totally hypocritical. I mean, they are not exactly the same thing of course, but that really rubs me the wrong way.

@Dagny: She had eliminated telecommuting because they had discovered that employees who worked from home were much less productive. It's not to say that someone could never work from home but those who never showed up to the office often times abused the telecommuting benefit.

The nursery next to her office seems like more of a short term thing so she could return to work so soon. I doubt it will be longterm.

@lepamplemousse: that is true, it is short-term, but she is still benefitting from having a more flexible work environment for her family while others at Yahoo no longer have that option in general.

No one has ever mentioned what kind of leave her husband is taking.

I see both sides- I can see how it does set a precedent that women don't need to take that much time to bond. She could make more of the fact that she has a host of people making it work for her. She is in a really unique position as such a public figure.

But she didn't ask to be a spokesperson for all working women. She happens to be a woman who is in a very public role, but it's mostly so public because she is such a high powered woman. Who says she has to be a spokesperson for all working moms? No bats an eye if a male CEO is taking calls in the delivery room (except maybe his wife).

Personally the idea of trying to do anything 2 weeks after birth is laughable, but I don't have the help she does! And I'm making assumptions here, but I'm guessing breastfeeding isn't at the top of her priorities, which is true for tons of women. Whatever.

Eta: when I say laughable, I mean for me. Not for everyone!