3 ms·
The point that people are trying to make is that if you are busy taking care of a baby at home you are not working, or at least not working at the same level of
by hug 2y ago
The point that people are trying to make is that if you are busy taking care of a baby at home you are not working, or at least not working at the same level of capacity or in the same fashion as as you would if you were not looking after a baby... And if you're not working when you're at home, you're not working from home. You're just home. Most countries in the world would call that parental leave.
Is it possible that we can change workplace expectations to remove synchronous communication & work in such a way that these things aren't roadblocks? Probably, and I would argue that we should.
Is that the current way of the world at the vast majority of employers? Not even nearly.
- tptacek 2y agoI am responding to a comment pointing out the untenability of going to a workplace while also taking care of a kid, which is specifically not what the article is about.
- hug 2y agoOf course, but the subtext of that comment is that working anywhere while taking care of a baby is untenable, and the fact that you're working from a home office does not change the fundamental calculus of current work expectations.
- remoteworkprep 2y agoThank you for calling this out. Most of the commenters seem to have never read the article. I intentionally left the type of childcare out of the article as everyone's situation is different. But plenty of people WFH with kids around.