Hypothetical situation! If you could get a new job that gave you better work/life balance after your baby is born, would you take it, EVEN if you had to sacrifice a longer maternity leave? The alternative would be to stay at a job without much work/life balance, but you get a nice long maternity leave. Vote in the poll, and explain below!
You might also enjoy...
-
Assuming you don't have the option to be a SAHM lol, I would choose the job with the better work/life balance. Sure, I'd get less maternity leave, but it would be better in the long run.
-
Better work/life balance. It's more long term whereas maternity leave however long it is is only temporary.
-
Definitelt the better work/life balance. As much as I loved my long maternity leave long term happiness is more important than short term.
BUT I would be sure to double check the policy at the new job because with most companies you aren't eligible for ANY paid maternity leave until you've worked there for a year.
-
I would choose the job with the good work/life balance because that's better in the long run. And if possible I'd take another few weeks unpaid (if they allowed it) to add more time to my maternity leave.
-
If you had meant a year's paid leave, I would have taken the dreadful job with no work/life balance. But as it's only getting me an extra 6 weeks, I'm taking the less stressful job! It's better to be happy long term, I think.
-
Initially I was going to say a longer maternity leave, but then I saw that it would still only be 12 weeks, which doesn't seem that long to me (I guess I'm spoiled as a teacher), so I chose the work/life balance one. I think time at home with a baby is really important, but the difference between 6 and 12 weeks doesn't seem that significant to me. I got almost 5 months with Liam (12 weeks mat leave plus summer break) and next time I want at least 6 months!
-
@MamaMoose: Definitely - it wouldn't be this cut and dry. Hypothetical question.
-
@daniellemybelle: I would choose work/life balance. Especially because an extra 6 weeks doesn't seem like enough to make up for the lack of work/life balance. Also--totally unrelated but I have a craving for McDonald's every time I see your avatar!
-
@lawbee11: Haha! I've been calling our little fetus a "nugget" so that's why its my avatar!
-
Work-life balance! Parenting is not just those first 12 weeks. I must be a parent to my children even when they're 17 years old. So, I want a job that allows to occasionally leave early, or answer my kid's call, or take a day off to tend to a sick child....and maybe go in/get out in time to do pick-up/drop-off at school (either me or my husband).
So, I'd go back at 6w if I could know that my job is flexible enough that if worst came to worst (daycare closes for a day, child falls ill), I could be there for my child. -
I choose work life balance because an extra 6 weeks doesn't make up for things I will miss in my kids life later on like when they do sports or have classroom parties/field trips, etc.
-
Regardless if the maternity leave is 12 weeks, 6 months, or a year... I would still choose work/life balance.
-
Work/life balance hands down.
-
Well, I think both 6 weeks and 12 weeks sucks, so I'm going with the work-life balance.
-
I think the answer to the whether or not we can support shorter maternity leaves lies in affordable childcare options. Whether you are home for 1 week or 52 weeks, you can't go back to work without proper childcare options.
-
Long term life balance over maternity leave.
-
Thinking long term I would want/need a career that understood the balance of being a mother. I would miss my longer maternity leave for sure, but it would totally be worth it.
Reply
Subscribe to our newsletter
- Google Plus
- Stumbleupon
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Pinterest
- Favorite0
17 comments