5 ms·
Having a family is a lot of work. A job that takes all that time away from your other responsibilities isn’t feasible for most people with kids.
by almost_usual 5y ago
Having a family is a lot of work. A job that takes all that time away from your other responsibilities isn’t feasible for most people with kids.
- shepherdjerred 5y agoKids were raised just fine for the thousands of years before remote work existed.
- makapuf 5y agoFor those thousands of years, women didnt work without their kids nearby.
- dukeyukey 5y agoWork-from-home was pretty much the standard up until 1900 or so, at least for the vast majority of people. It's only since trains and motor vehicles we've been able to commute.
- ngrilly 5y agoFor what kind of work?
- dukeyukey 5y agoMostly agricultural, plus artisan crafts that made up most manufacturing up until the Industrial Revolution.
- ngrilly 5y agoThen what do you mean by work from home? For agricultural, I guess you mean work at the farm, which can also be the home? And for craft, the workshop and the home are together?
- kazen44 5y agothis is highly dependant on location. a factory worker in a european city in 1900 would not be working from home. (his home would probably be close to the factory yes, but not at home). Also, raising children and making them spend time in education is only a relatively recent invention. Prior to ww1, child labour was common, especially as a farmer.
- nradov 5y agoThe standard varied widely from place to place. In coastal areas it was common for men to go away to sea for months at a time. In fact that still happens today in some countries.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- nitrogen 5y agoThat doesn't mean such jobs shouldn't exist. Also, some of these jobs pay enough to hire a nanny, at least for those two weeks.
- ehnto 5y agoOf course, so the best you can do is try and find a job or negotiate some terms that work best for you. But what I see is this false dichotomy that just don't represent the real world and kind of stifle useful conversation. It's not a matter of "Good for family" or "Bad for family", it's a diverse world out there. Some people work away from home for a full 14 days and then have a full week at home of no work, for some people that's a great compromise. Some people have nothing else, so they like the interaction they get from work, for another example.
- jnwatson 5y agoThe pure mendacity of this statement strikes me as appalling and frankly entitled and classist. Thousands of workers don't have the enormous privilege of seeing their family every night. All those travel workers, remote health workers, and oil field workers manage to make it work.