Yeah, IIRC Boston actually tried this, and the uproar from parents whose schedules were thrown into disarray was so intense it had to immediately be walked back. It sucks, but there are broader considerations at play.
Ive read some speculation that the women's right to work movement was just a ploy to double the workforce. Not only that, thet get double the workers for less money since nearly all women are paid less than their male counterparts.
I want women to be able to work because I want the women in my life to not be caught under the thumb of an abuser. If it harms families somehow, that is a separate problem, with separate solutions that do not have anything to do with restricting the independence of women.
>Especially since women are paid nearly half as much as men across nearly every industry.
This is not true when comparing the price of the same labor offered by a man or woman.
>This is not true when comparing the price of the same labor offered by a man or woman.
Okay, maybe not HALF, but you can't argue with the gender wage gap. Men make ~20% more than women.
This is so disingenuous it really shouldn't be repeated. The pay gap within the same job is miniscule. Men and women make different career choices. There's just no accounting for the lack of women applying for high-paying positions as roughnecks.
Why are you blaming the parents? Most people in the world don't have the benefit of flexible tech jobs that allow them to work 10-6 or to come and go as needed during the work day.
Because when Boston tried this, uproar from parents was sufficient to cause meaningful change, but that uproar was directed at their schools and not their workplaces. They used their collective power to defend their work schedules at the expense of their children.
Why not insist on more flexibility in their work schedules, or for additional transportation solutions to assist in getting teens to/from schools? Is this really an insurmountable problem?
School officials are locally democratically accountable. Employers generally are not, and are often able to play workers in different localities (and even states and countries, in many cases) against each other to create a race-to-the-bottom effect.
Parents directed their force against the movable object, not the immovable one.
But it was the wrong one, while making victims in the process.
For most parents, the ability to maintain the work schedule demanded by their employer is rather central to, not a separate unrelated interest from, the health and well-being of their children.
When we have both the economic structure to support and a government run by a political ideology that will allow a robust UBI that makes this optional (and thereby forces employers to accommodate it if they want to have employees at all), we can discuss the issues as if they were separate. But in the concrete would we live in, they are not.