7 ms·

(Admission - I've only read the abstract) I wonder if there is any/what the correlation is between the attrition rate of these females and pregnancy - is becom

by elthran 11y ago

(Admission - I've only read the abstract) I wonder if there is any/what the correlation is between the attrition rate of these females and pregnancy - is becoming pregnant a significant blocker to their survivorship rate?

Zikes 11y ago
From the conclusion: It is most implausible to suggest that giving birth and caring for young children is the predominant reason why female executive managers, who average 50 years old in our sample, quit. Other unobserved factors leading managers to attrit could include more un-pleasantness, indignities, and tougher unrewarding assignments at work, examples of factors that reduce the attraction of work without necessarily affecting productivity or human capital acquisition. Perhaps women are subject to this form of gender discrimination. Another hypothesis is that women acquire more nonmarket human capital than men throughout their lives, and hence find retirement a relatively attractive option.
- facepalm 11y ago
  Why shouldn't women quit at age 50 because of children? If they sacrificed family time for their career before, they might realize that suddenly there is not a lot of time left with their children before they will leave the house. Maybe at 50 they have secured enough money as well to be comfortable working less. Older men seem to be taking time off for family, too. It's a shame that they have to discredit their paper by ending it with pure speculation ("could include...").
  - Zikes 11y ago
    At 50 years old, most people's children would be having children of their own, let alone be out of the house. Retiring to spend more time with your adult children wouldn't make much sense when those children are likely just ramping up their own careers.
    - efaref 11y ago
      My mother semi-retired in her fifties to care for her grandchildren (providing free childcare so that my sister could continue her career). Perhaps this is a factor.
      - Zikes 11y ago
        Definitely a possibility, especially since two incomes are becoming so necessary.
        oldmanjay 11y ago
        Not necessary, just desirable because people like buying things. Considering it 'necessary' is actually part of what makes this a problem. If people knew how to want instead of need, they might next learn how to delay gratifying those wants. Instead, desire becomes confused with necessity and suddenly you can't live without an HDTV right now.
        Zikes 11y ago
        The median income per household member in the US was $23,535 in 2004[1]. Unfortunately I can't find a more recent census value for that. In the case of a household with two partners and at least one child, such as we're discussing here, I would think that more than ~$24,000 would be necessary. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income_per_household_member https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income_per_household_me...
    - a3n 11y ago
      I'm 58 and my kid graduates high school this spring. And looking around at my workmates, I'm far from the exception, although I may be somewhat toward one end of the scale. Looking around, 50 seems entirely plausible, even if it's only a significant minority. Data and people should probably not be divided into the majority and nothing else.
    - tedks 11y ago
      Maybe in barbaric parts of the world where people reproduce absurdly young in their 20s, but in most of the West reproduction is moving later in life in their 30s or 40s. If you start having children at 30 and have three kids at say 30, 34, and 38, at 50 your youngest would be in middle and high school and your oldest would be halfway through college (hopefully).
  - norswap 11y ago
    The speculation is clearly indicated, and is no discredit to the paper. In fact, it is to their credit that they admit ignorance of the causes of the effects that they observe.

by elthran 11y ago

Zikes 11y ago

From the conclusion: It is most implausible to suggest that giving birth and caring for young children is the predominant reason why female executive managers, who average 50 years old in our sample, quit. Other unobserved factors leading managers to attrit could include more un-pleasantness, indignities, and tougher unrewarding assignments at work, examples of factors that reduce the attraction of work without necessarily affecting productivity or human capital acquisition. Perhaps women are subject to this form of gender discrimination. Another hypothesis is that women acquire more nonmarket human capital than men throughout their lives, and hence find retirement a relatively attractive option.

facepalm 11y ago
Why shouldn't women quit at age 50 because of children? If they sacrificed family time for their career before, they might realize that suddenly there is not a lot of time left with their children before they will leave the house. Maybe at 50 they have secured enough money as well to be comfortable working less. Older men seem to be taking time off for family, too. It's a shame that they have to discredit their paper by ending it with pure speculation ("could include...").
- Zikes 11y ago
  At 50 years old, most people's children would be having children of their own, let alone be out of the house. Retiring to spend more time with your adult children wouldn't make much sense when those children are likely just ramping up their own careers.
  - efaref 11y ago
    My mother semi-retired in her fifties to care for her grandchildren (providing free childcare so that my sister could continue her career). Perhaps this is a factor.
    - Zikes 11y ago
      Definitely a possibility, especially since two incomes are becoming so necessary.
      - oldmanjay 11y ago
        Not necessary, just desirable because people like buying things. Considering it 'necessary' is actually part of what makes this a problem. If people knew how to want instead of need, they might next learn how to delay gratifying those wants. Instead, desire becomes confused with necessity and suddenly you can't live without an HDTV right now.
        Zikes 11y ago
        The median income per household member in the US was $23,535 in 2004[1]. Unfortunately I can't find a more recent census value for that. In the case of a household with two partners and at least one child, such as we're discussing here, I would think that more than ~$24,000 would be necessary. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income_per_household_member https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income_per_household_me...
  - a3n 11y ago
    I'm 58 and my kid graduates high school this spring. And looking around at my workmates, I'm far from the exception, although I may be somewhat toward one end of the scale. Looking around, 50 seems entirely plausible, even if it's only a significant minority. Data and people should probably not be divided into the majority and nothing else.
  - tedks 11y ago
    Maybe in barbaric parts of the world where people reproduce absurdly young in their 20s, but in most of the West reproduction is moving later in life in their 30s or 40s. If you start having children at 30 and have three kids at say 30, 34, and 38, at 50 your youngest would be in middle and high school and your oldest would be halfway through college (hopefully).
- norswap 11y ago
  The speculation is clearly indicated, and is no discredit to the paper. In fact, it is to their credit that they admit ignorance of the causes of the effects that they observe.