 |
|
|
|||||
Its a tale as old as the modern workplace: In the 1960s, women entered the workforce en masse, ready to compete with their male counterparts for promotions, pay, and opportunityonly to find the system wasnt built for them. Today, women comprise almost half of the U.S. labor force. The playing field looks different now, but the fight for equal access hasnt gone away. It just moved into subtler territory. Companies make quiet calculations about whos worth investing in, says Corinne Low, gender economist and associate business professor at the University of Pennsylvanias Wharton School of Business. Women often face career penalties in anticipation of motherhood as employers presume theyre more likely to take leave or step back. Once in their 40s, past childbearing, this bias fades. But not before its done damage. The cost of inaction is huge: 4 out of 10 mothers in the first five years after childbirth resign. In 2025, around 400,000 mothers with young children resigned from the U.S. workforcethe sharpest decline in more than 40 years. Mothers face a training penalty that hinders their career advancement On average, data shows women working full-time only earn 83% of a mans median annual salary. Mothers face even worse oddstheir pay is often reduced by 3% for every child they have. A new study from the University of Connecticut finds that, one to three years after childbirth, women are 17% to 22% less likely to receive on-the-job training opportunities, such as seminars, workshops, and development programs, compared with a 3% to 8% decline for men who became fathers. The result is a hidden skills and promotion gap that may explain nearly a third of the motherhood wage penalty. When women have children, theyre viewed as less committed or competent, research showsa bias that leads employers to assume mothers are too busy, distracted, or disinterested to participate in training opportunities. This is called benevolent prescriptive stereotyping, and it doesnt do mothers any favors, says Joan C. Williams, distinguished professor of law emerita and founding director of the Equality Action Center at UC Law San Francisco. As Williams points out: If you don’t get work, you eventually either get laid off because you’re not progressing, or you leave because you’re disgusted that you don’t get good work. Or you just stall out. If a mother turns down an opportunity for training or advancement, its important to circle backnot to assume its a permanent no, says Williams. She also recommends employers keep track of who receives opportunities in their workplaceand who doesnt. Supporting mothers isnt a charity case Another opportunity mothers are often left out of is informal networking, like happy hours, dinners, or travel, says Kate Westlund Tovsen, founder of Society of Working Moms, a supportive community for and by working mothers. Even if a mother cant attend, Its nice to be invited, Tovsen adds, who suggests teams try daytime coffee hours as a caregiver-friendly option. Mothers are forced to be proactive, as many companies lack frameworks to support leave or reintegration, Williams cautions. She advises scheduling meetings with superiors before and after taking family leave to make a plan. And though being a new mother is a relatively short blip on a womans career, companies often make permanent decisions in terms of who they’re investing in based on this kind of temporary period when women are most squeezed, says Low. Supporting mothers is not a charity case, she argues, but a competitive edge that lets them retain talent long term. Caregiver strategies and investments, including benefits and return-to-work programs, deliver measurable business returns, states Jess Ringgenberg, professional certified coach and CEO of Elxir, an advisory firm focusing on caregivers in the workplace. Companies see three to six times ROI through higher retention, productivity, and lower absenteeism with such programs, Ringgenberg says. Replacing a mid-level caregiver comes with backfill, training, and ramp-up expenses that can reach $200,000, says Ringgenberg, or totaling twice the employees annual salary. But some companies are already working hard to help mothers succeedand its paying off. Small and large companies finding solutions Frontier Co-op, an Iowa-based wholesaler of natural and organic products with around 580 employees, created the Breaking Down Barriers to Employment initiative, which includes an on-site childcare center, subsidized to $120 per week per child. Their childcare program enables parents to participate in training programs and developmental opportunities that might otherwise be missed, explains Megan Schulte, vice president of human resources. She says 100% of new parents returned to work after their parental leave. While Frontier Co-op eases the logistical strains of childcare, Brigade Events, a woman-owned and operated event strategy and management company in Dallas with 10 full-time employees, tackles rebuilding confidence and access for women who stepped out. The company views its mentorship and project-based work model as a form of retraining, recognizing womens existing expertise, rather than resetting them to zero. Senior employees work on a hybrid schedulethree days from home, two in-officeto preserve collaboration while creating space for caregiving. Brigade doesnt bat an eye at blocked calendars for a childs doctor appointment or school event. Our whole culture is giving grace to each other, says April Zorsky, partner and chief creative officer. One of their policies is that mothers returning from their 16-week maternityleave take a transition month working at 50% capacity. This can mean working from home, setting their own schedules, and easing back in without penalty. As moms, we feel its crucial to have flexibility, says Zorksy. Larger companies can learn to be more flexible and collaborative, too, says Marissa Andrade, a veteran HR executive and former chief people officer at Chipotle. She recalls when one of her field managers chose to take a six-month maternity leave during a period of company-wide turnaround. Before she left, she requested an interim hire from the Mom Project, a digital platform that helps companies to hire skilled mothers, to support her leave. It went so smoothly that the field manager was able to reenter without missing a beat. Andrada recommends establishing employeebusiness resource groups. At Chipotle, one employee-created group, The Hustle (Humans United to Support the Ladies Experience), formed a maternity program to keep employees in the loop while on leave, and reoriented them on compliance and training updates on their return. Dont overlook the power of your employees as your consumer, says Andrada. When companies invite access for mothersto training, to support, to opportunities that just dont reacclimate them to their roles, but get them to thrive in themeveryone wins. Mothers arent just reentering the workforce with confidence. Employers are retaining their talent, too.
Category:
E-Commerce
In todays job market, many employees are feeling the pressure. Layoffs continue to make headlines, hiring pipelines have slowed, budgets have tightened, and job seekers are facing fierce competition. For those already employed, this environment raises a tricky question: Whats reasonable to ask for at work right nowand what isnt? Theres always the standard wish list: promotions, raises, more flexibility, and better benefits. But in a strained economy, some of these asks may be harder to landand for many employees, even harder to ask for. Zety, a career platform designed to make job searching easier with expert-backed tools and advice, found in its latest Pay on Pause Report three in five workers are willing to forgo or accept smaller raises this year due to fears of layoffs and job instability, and 66% avoided asking for a raise altogether, citing economic pressures and uncertainty. In a job market this unpredictable, where many employees are job hugging out of fearone question remains: should employees hold off on asking, or should conversations still be happening? Theres fear in asking According to career expert Jasmine Escalera, many employees are hesitant to ask for anything right now. The thought process is: I should just be grateful to have a job, or, I dont want to ask for more and rock the boat, especially if AI is coming in, she explains. Maybe even, I don’t want to disrupt what I already have, because I don’t want to then be out in that job market and not even know when’s the next time I’m potentially going to get a position, Escalera says. In todays job market, employees are often hesitant to speak up, hoping staying quiet will help them maintain their positionsespecially since certain requests, like pay raises, are harder to secure. Pay increases and promotions may be harder to secure It is true. Certain requests are more difficult in todays job market, Escalera explains, and pay raises are one of them. If layoffs and budget cuts are happening, one of the first things that are going to go is pay increases, she says. This also includes bonuses, or any other type of financial component. Anything that goes into the budget could potentially go wrong, which is not good for individuals who are in positions where they need to be upskilling. Or they need to be learning more to complement AI, or even potentially just for specific career growth opportunities, she says. Promotions also face limitations. As Escalera explains, Promotions typically come with raises and professional development [or] upskilling opportunitiesthose are going to be things that potentially go away. Still, it doesn’t mean employees should shy away from asking, or from putting their requests on their managers radar. Open the conversation A company may not be able to provide pay raises or promotions during a downturn, but that doesnt mean the conversation cant happen. Even if your company comes out and says, we don’t have the financial capacity to give pay raises right now, or we don’t have the financial capacity to give bonuses right nowthat does not mean you do not have the conversation, Escalera says. The key is approaching the discussion thoughtfully, focusing on your contributions and the value you bring. You might say, I understand that the organization is in financial hardship, or may not be giving bonuses or pay raises at this moment, but I really want to open up the conversation around my work Escalera suggests. Carolyn Troyan, CEO of Leadership360, an HR consulting and leadership coaching firm, agrees its important to be thoughtful with your approach. It’s doing it in an emotionally intelligent way, she says. After half your team has been laid off, demanding a raise is probably not such a good idea. But after the dust has settled and the company is back on steady footing, its reasonable to bring it upor even during your next performance review, if the timing feels right. When having that conversation, acknowledge the environment and what the team has been throughbut dont let that stop you from discussing your growth with your manager. Just because a company is struggling doesn’t mean you don’t have a career plan, Troyan says. To your manager, you might say, Here’s what I want to do over the next two to three years, I’d love to kind of talk about that with you. What opportunities do you see available, even in this environment, for me to learn some of these new skills? Commonly, youre going to hear one of two responses, Troyan explains: We really love you, but we can’t do it right now, which comes up a lot. Or, you may receive feedback highlighting what you need to work on to reach a promotion or raise in the future. Either way, youre still having the conversation. Support and flexibility Even if a company cant provide a promotion or raise due to financial hardship, there are other things to ask for. One of the biggest asks right now is supportsupport that isnt monetary, Escalera says, pointing to the same report: Mental health support tops the list. What that really shows is that individuals are incredibly burnt out and stressed out, she said. As a result, were seeing more requests for mental health days and other forms of support. If a company isnt meeting requests for pay, flexibility, or other forms of support, it may be a signal for employees to reassess their options. Even in uncertain times, understanding your value, approaching conversations thoughtfully, and asking for the support you need are all things you dont have to shy away from.
Category:
E-Commerce
Companies are increasingly using AI to conduct job interviews, and, according to experts in the field, the technology is leading to some impressive results. However, giving candidates the choice between an AI interviewer or a human can create bias that makes landing a job tougher for some people, according to a new report. AI is now a common part of the job application process. According to the World Economic Forum, around 88% of employers use some form of AI for initial candidate screening such as filtering or ranking job applications. But AI is also being used to conduct interviews. Currently, around 21% of U.S. companies use the technology for initial interviews. AI interviewers can give companies an edge when during the hiring process. One study found that candidates who were interviewed by an AI were more likely to land a job than candidates who were sourced by humans screening résumés: 54% of candidates interviewed by AI got the job, compared to about 29% of candidates sourced by a traditional résumé screening. Still, there is a lot to learn about how utilizing AI interviews impacts both people and firms. Brian Jabarian, a researcher at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business with doctorates in economics and philosophy, recently examined what happens to candidates when they are offered a choice between an AI interviewer and a human interviewer, which he detailed in his paper, Choice as Signal: Designing AI Adoption in Labor Market Screening. The research, which has not been peer reviewed, finds giving candidates a choice between a human and AI interview could also create a new hurdle for low-ability candidatesapplicants whose skills are below the firms hiring threshold. Jabarian tells Fast Company that different applicants will automatically be drawn to either AI interviewers or human interviewers based on their strengths. For example, “applicants with strong language skills prefer human interviewers to highlight their English proficiency,” he says. “In contrast, applicants with strong analytical skills choose the AI interviewer to showcase their quantitative strengths.” But the choice isn’t neutral, like a candidate may expect it to be. An applicants decision to be interviewed by a human or an AI agent can reveal private information about their strengths, weaknesses, or expectations for relative performance, Jabarian writes in his paper, also pointing out that employees with high abilities benefit because companies can identify them more easily “using both the signal and the selection decision, increasing their probability of being hired. However, it also means firms are able to more easily identify low-ability workers. Jabarian writes: “Consequently, low-skilled workers succeed less often in obtaining a job and therefore experience a welfare loss.” Essentially, by interpreting both the choice itself as well as the information from the interview, an employers precision increases, which doesn’t serve lower-ability candidates. Jabarian says if firms had no insight into the candidate’s choice, then all workers would have the advantage of choosing which interviewer best shows their skill set, but companies would lose out on the advantages of using AI interviewers. While on the surface giving job candidates choices about how they are interviewed seems like a solid idea, Jabarian says that in practice, it’s not quite so simple. “Before this new paper, I was really rooting for giving this choice to people because I was confused about why everyone was assuming it was just okay to impose a new technology on people in a high-stakes environment when they maybe didnt want it,” he explains. However, now he believes it’s clear that the choice alone hurts the weakest candidates, and therefore it shouldn’t be one that is routinely offered but rather “on a case-by-case basis.” Jabarian says he expects AI interviewing to increase, particularly because its good for firms. Still, that doesn’t mean humans as interviewers are a thing of the past or irrelevant. AI interviewers and humans have different strengths: Human recruiters can improvise and are able to vary their interviews, while AI creates a consistent experience and is excellent at garnering information from candidates. That means adopting hybrid techniqueswhere humans and AI run interviews with opposing purposesmight really be the smartest and fairest way to hire.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||