Babies in the workplace.

Stella Creasey is an elected MP and if she takes maternity leave she cannot have a substitute in her place. Therefore she needs, on occasion, to be present in the House of Commons, without child.
She and her husband should have worked out roles and responsibilities for the time when the child is very young. I believe the husband is in the military and is at times 'away from home'. It was their joint responsibility to organise child care with several back up plans to cover emergencies.
The workplace is not the place for a child, although there will doubtless be stories of how my baby slept in a basket under my desk, in a pack on my back etc and it never did him any harm.

I would have thought a creche could have been organised by the MPs concerned. I had to take my daughter to a creche at the hospital where I worked in the 70s. It was slightly subsidised but the remainder was taken from my salary.

eazybee there will doubtless be stories of how my baby slept in a basket under my desk, in a pack on my back etc and it never did him any harm.

Doubtless there will be so I'll not waste time by telling you how my baby slept in a basket under my desk, in a pack on my back etc and it never did her any harm.

I'm sure there are other threads promoting - yes promoting - the benefits of bringing pets to work, but children? Never.

I worked in strategic government for many years in the political field as a PA/researcher and my boss regularly brought in his children to be cared for by me! Occasionally I would have to resort to taking them into the Chamber when work pressures became too much, but other than that I was feeding them, changing their nappies, entertaining them and generally acting as a child-minder as well as trying to do my own work. I agree with sodapop that a House of Commons creche would be a solution - with appropriate fees, of course. Why should the taxpayer subsidise MP's childcare?!!!

What no one ever explains, because this has cropped up before, how they manage to simultaneously cope with whatever the job involves and break off several times during their working day or possibly more depending on the baby, for lengthy sessions of feeding it, and as we all know from our ante natal classes all our focus need to be on this, locking eyes and all of that. it can't be hurried, we go at the pace of the baby, which can mean they drop off intermittently whilst they are feeding, only to wake up and continue. Then there is the aftermath of the feed, winding, changing, settling. I felt I'd achieved something if I managed to get out of the house by 11 am to do anything! I love the way some people breezily announce that "oh I just carry on with my job whilst my baby sleeps peacefully by my side" yeah right! That's of course if those people around you, you know your colleagues, want a baby in the workplace disrupting what they are trying to get on with.

Well - I did take my baby to work. She slept in a carrycot while I lectured and I also breast fed her whilst doing so - but they were nursery nurses I was lecturing to and it could be regarded as educational. They used to pass her round to burp her after she had fed!

And people wonder why birth rates are declining - such an unfriendly world for mothers

And babies Hithere.

Hithere, when people take time out to breast feed and see to a fretful baby, as happens, someone else carries the load probably in a job they are already under pressure with. If the customer doesn’t get proper service you lose the business. That’s just how it is. It has got nothing to do with not liking children, that silly. A child shouldn’t be in the workplace but a safe place being cared for, not sitting in a sling or in a basket under a table.

For heavens sake. This is the 21st century. People procreate. Why should women have to take the hit of being out of their career? A baby is very portable (toddlers less so). Not always silent, no, but neither are most work places.

Just saying 'If you don't want to look after babies, don't have them.' is draconian. Many, many jobs allow us to work from home now. Those families won't be using nurseries/child minders.

The world of the modern family is not the one we remember. New solutions are needed (or old, bring back creches!).

GagaJo

For heavens sake. This is the 21st century. People procreate. Why should women have to take the hit of being out of their career? A baby is very portable (toddlers less so). Not always silent, no, but neither are most work places.

Just saying 'If you don't want to look after babies, don't have them.' is draconian. Many, many jobs allow us to work from home now. Those families won't be using nurseries/child minders.

The world of the modern family is not the one we remember. New solutions are needed (or old, bring back creches!).

Just so Gagajo. And technology exists to allow MP's to vote from home but it isn't being used. If it could be made watertight then the need to bring a baby to the HOC would disappear.
The HOC needs to modernise its working practices.

The university that DD works at has a creche I believe but it is extortionately expensive. Having the baby with would have been impossible because of the dangerous substances she works with. Hence I took over until he went to school.

It's not so much the tiny babies which are the problem. Baby cries, latches on, shuts up. It's the older baby, the one who's teething and grizzly, the ten month old who wants to be played with. How can a mother give a serious speech on prison reform or taxation or coastal defence or some such with a squirming offspring on her hip and, even if she can concentrate, the distraction will be considerable to other members of the house - especially if said offspring suddenly goes red and still and holds its breath.

Several MPs worked from home during the pandemic. Much better.

You cannot work properly with a baby there; you don't have babies in schoolrooms, hospitals, offices, laboratories, factories etc. There is a creche at the HoP, and many many child minding services available; this is not a hostile action towards women but a practical one with care for the baby being of primary concern.

I can take my teenagers to work if I need too. One is autistic and not safe at home alone. Babies have also been in the workplace.

It's fantastic, do not see a problem with it. Bout time women were given more credit as working mothers. It costs us nothing.

taking in ironing to work? what because she has a vagina that is what she would do?
seriously>>>?

But Stella Creasy worked perfectly well when she had her baby with her. A baby that small is best being with its mother.
I don't think anyone is going to start bringing toddlers in.

eazybee

You cannot work properly with a baby there; you don't have babies in schoolrooms, hospitals, offices, laboratories, factories etc. There is a creche at the HoP, and many many child minding services available; this is not a hostile action towards women but a practical one with care for the baby being of primary concern.

Actually, eazybee, when my daughter was in hospital and my DGS was 6 weeks old, I took him to school with me. Year 7 were enchanted with him and I have gorgeous photos of them clustered around him. Management weren't overjoyed, but there was no supply available and I made do.

It wouldn't have been a long-term solution, but in the short term, it worked out.

Some jobs could be done with a baby there on an occasional basis; but on the whole it's probably not possible for many parents - as GagaJo says, a new baby would usually be fine, but older ones would be a distraction and would get in the way after a short period of time. It's not fair to a baby to expect them to be quiet and out of the way, either.

I agree with those who say that both parents have a responsibility to find childcare, and also that workplaces should provide creches. Somewhere the size of the HoC should definitely have one, and smaller employers could team up with others in the area so that the aim should be for all parents to have creche facilities within a mile or so of their workplace. That wouldn't work in rural areas, but thought should be given to that, too.

As has been said, in a lot of jobs there are many times when there is no need to be on the premises (and voting in the HoC is one of them). I think that people should all be able to work from home if their job allows it, and there should be no detriment to the employee so long as they fulfil the demands of the role. Benchmarks against which to measure this can easily be drawn up before the change to the contract, so that both parties are happy with it. There are many MPs who hardly ever turn up to the HoC (mine is one of them), so picking up on the attendance of parents seems a bit 'deliberate'.

A combination of working at home, creches and legislation to help fathers to take a part in the organisation childcare would go a long way to help women to stay in the workplace. I don't think anyone is suggesting that parents (of either sex) have babies with them during all office hours.

I don't see the link between taking in babies and taking in ironing or potatoes. I very much doubt that one would lead to the other. .

One baby wouldn’t be a problem in most workplaces but I’ve worked in some offices where 90% of the workforce were parents of babies and toddlers at any given time…imagine all of them bringing an infant in at the same time!

Doesn’t really work does it? Or would there be a hierarchy where cleaners couldn’t but managers would be favoured?

'. . . would there be a hierarchy where cleaners couldn’t but managers would be favoured?
Almost certainly. That's what usually happens, and it's very unfair.

It's totally unworkable for plenty of job roles, so I don't see it as a huge step forward for womrn.
Only some women.

Yeah, but a step forward for the ones who could do it would be a step in the right direction, surely?

Are you saying that unless something benefits everyone it shouldn't happen? There are a lot of 'perks' or working practices that don't apply to everyone, but nobody suggests that they shouldn't apply to those who can benefit.

Yes it's generally for very rare generally middle class professions. Does nothing to tackle the fundamental issues around childcare, the role of women in relation to childcare etc.