History of Work-family - Essay Example

? History of Work-family Balancing between work and family is a quite a modern matter in the society. In the 19th century, when members of same families engaged one another in work on farms or businesses, work and family was more or less one and the same thing. Work was what families did to maintain their families. This made people regard work very highly. Over the years, the relationship between work and family has experienced transformation and peoples’ view of work has changed. Many changes have occurred in the workplace, and this has affected employees and their families. This essay seeks to address how these changes have had an effect on employees and their relationships with their families. The project will also expatiate on the rules that have been put in place to help individuals have the ability to balance their lives in terms of family and work. Unlike in the past, employees are faced with so much pressure of being able to support their families. Coupled with the harsh economic times, it is becoming more difficult for employees to be able to have quality time spent with their families as many individuals opt to have two or more jobs so as to maximize on their income. This paper also discusses the history of work since the 19th century. It also examines the challenges that men and women who were in employment faced as they tried to acquire a balance between family and work (Hammill, 2005). The paper also looks at how social levels have an effect on family structures, and how these structures change with time. Finally, the paper also glimpses at the expectations that the society had of men and women who had employment outside the home thorough 40s to the 60s. At some point between 1960 and 1980, the dynamics of the family changed, and this could be attributed to a number of factors. These issues included divorce, single parenting and same sex partners. Currently, some companies are implementing commitments to employees by creating environments of open communication, appealing jobs, safe working conditions, and good benefits. Researching European work/ family policies we can see where legislation might need to change to become beneficial to all. During the industrial revolution in America in late 19th century, many of the working class in America and Europe moved from the rural areas to find urban jobs. There was also massive migration of people from their countries to the new American and European cities. As a result of these movements from the rural farms and foreigners into America and Europe, there was a total disruption of the social engagement of the people. This was because of the mix-up of the numerous cultures of the people in the newly formed American and European cities (Gornick & Meyers, 2004). It formed a prominent need for these people to be able to interact due to their diverse backgrounds. Fortunately for these huge populations, their numbers called for a vibrant economy which left some workers and employees a frustrated lot as they faced exploitation and unjust working conditions. The reformers of the time identified this problem and created organizations which came to be known as labor unions. Their goal was to fight for the rights of all workers to have fair terms of employment. They also advocated for a balance between work and family. The unions also had the goal of seeking economic protection of workers. These unions provided workers with the sense of belonging to a group with common goals, a factor that also served to motivate them in their workplaces. As these unions continued to gain influence and recognition in America, they also began to make public issues that were once thought to be private. Such included the employment of women and children. The organizations helped draw the line between children helping their parents and families, and engaging them in laborious work for little or no pay. By the year 1910, there were clear laws in place regarding child labor and exploitation, the appropriate working hours, and unsafe practices in factories and industrial plants. Issues of minimum wage for all workers were also set, and compensation and worker protection issues were also addressed. During this period, most of the states in America had a requirement that all employees have leave on all election days, so as to be able to exercise their democratic right. The period between 40s and 60s was especially a difficult time for men and women who were employed. Their involvement in work was to get ahead in their careers. These men and women had a preference for their work to spending time to family. Their lives had no balance between family and work. For them, cash rewards, titles and recognition mattered most. Their families had high expectations of them. They were expected to receive promotions so as to bring fame to their families. This explains why titles and promotions were of exceptional importance to them. In the same way, it was expected that they would sustain their families comfortably. To achieve this, some had to take up well-paying jobs away from their families (Rapoport, 2002). This led to a disconnection in the family ties. Parents did not interact well with their children as they were away working or because they sent their children away to far away schools. The working men and women of this time were also looked upon as the helpers of the community. It is quite clear that work is a progressive important part of our lives. This has made the average working American spends the majority of his or her time on the job. Quite a number of people in the world live and breathe their work while others work hard to pay their mortgages. Whatever reason, the work place has turned to be an influential source of social capital for millions of people around the world. Many people view work place as a membership, mutual support, and center of meaning. Eventually, these people end up finding friends and life partners at their work place. Giving back to the community is also accomplished through work-based activities. Beyond any doubt, it is true that any workplace with strong social capital leads to gain in the status of living for the staff member, as well as the owners’. Balancing work together with family life has not been a piece of cake for many working Americans. As mentioned earlier, most Americans live and breathe their work. Work has become a central point of peoples’ lives. For some people, their involvement in work has an effect on their lives such that they have no social life outside work. One problem that most people have encountered is the inability of being able to establish priorities when it comes to family and work (Grzywacz & Carlson, 2007). Most individuals are caught up in working very hard to provide for their families that they forget to spend time with their family because they are busy working. It is common to find people whose family commitments and work responsibilities always clash. This puts them in a hard place as they have to make a choice on what they have to attend to. Another problem involves the inability to manage time for work and family. This is because most individuals have the assumption that they have to keep working as the family needs the money so much that they cannot afford to be away from work. Lack of self evaluation on the part of the employee is a big challenge when it comes to their performance at the workplace. When an individual realizes when they are most effective, it goes a long way in planning how to manage their day. Unfavorable working hours have contributed in making many individuals spend a little time with their families. For some people, they work during the night and can only get to sleep during the day when other family members are out at school or work. Another challenge that men and women face is that one may have more than one job. Managing two or more jobs is physically draining for an individual. Such an individual may have little or no time for family due to the nature of their work. To ensure the effectiveness of employees at the workplace, it is necessary that managers and employers in organizations employ mechanisms that will make work and family life compatible. For instance, many employers in America are warming up to the idea of allowing employees to choose their flexible working hours. This ensures that people are able to choose to work hours that enable them to have personal as well as family time. Legislations that make it easy for people to have time for family and work has also been passed. The Family and Medical Leave Act, for example, is a law that was passed in 1993. The law requires that high organizations allow their workers to take a maximum of three months leave without pay (Gornick & Meyers, 2005). This is to allow them to recover from illnesses or accidents, or to care for a new child. There are also proposals at the federal and state levels that employers should give permission to their staff to take time off to attend to their children’s appointments either at school or hospital. Although this time off is unpaid, it is good as it allows individuals time to interact with family hence creating a balance between family and work. Implementation of rules by the federal lawmakers radically changed how poor people lived. These rules began to take effect in 1996, where twenty five percent of mothers in each state were expected to have found work before the end of 1997 and fifty percent by 2002. After the end of 2 years, all mothers without disabilities were expected to be working regardless of their educational preparation or skills (Saltzstein et al 2001). It is hard to tell on the full impact that these reforms had in relation to low-skill single mothers and their children. The low skilled mothers end up getting low paying jobs. As a result, they cannot afford to register their children in good schools where their aspirations are raised leading to high educational and occupational achievements. Many single mothers find themselves in situations where they are forced to attempt a speedy transition from welfare to work because they want to raise money to give their children a brighter future. These mothers also do this to improve their livelihoods and those of their children. These reforms implemented in 1996 ought to deny mothers who cannot sustain their families with their salaries a chance to receive help form the government. After a period of some years, the government safety nets that these women could rely on in events of inadequacy will by no means be there. However, some mothers have found their way back to the welfare. These mothers are considered to be vulnerable and with the least working experience, and the lowest educational qualification. A few mothers on the welfare manage to get work immediately, but the majority of the welfare recipients express a strong desire to leave welfare for work. In conclusion, it is evident that work can strain family relations. This could arise from the pressure to provide for the family or fuelled by the desire of self-fulfillment. Other factors could be the inability of individuals planning for their time effectively so as to have adequate time for family and work. As mentioned earlier in this discussion, individuals also have the responsibility of evaluating themselves and determining the time that they are most effective. This is to enable them attend work during these hours and have time for family and social activities with friends. References: Gornick, J., & Meyers, M. (2004). More Alike Than Different: Revisiting The Long-Term Prospects For Developing "European-Style" Work/Family Policies In The United States. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 6(3), 251-273. Grzywacz, J. G., & Carlson, D. S. (2007). Conceptualizing Work Family Balance: Implications For Practice And Research. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 9(4), 455-471. Hammill, G. (2005). Mixing and Managing Four Generations of Employees. Farleigh Dickinson University (FDU). Retrieved June 10, 2013, Rapoport, R. (2002). Beyond work-family balance: advancing gender equity and workplace performance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Saltzstein, A. L., Ting, Y., & Saltzstein, G. H. (2001). Work-Family Balance and Job Satisfaction: The Impact of Family-Friendly Policies on Attitudes of Federal Government Employees. Public Administration Review, 61(4), 452-467. Read More