Recently my son did a post about living on a single income while one parent stays home with the kids.  I found the subsequent comments quite interesting and diverse.  Further to this topic, I would like to write about my experiences.

Of course, my children are now grown but even back in the “olden days” the question of staying at home with your kids was quite open to debate.

Staying At Home With Your Kids

We purchased our first house shortly before our oldest child was born in 1976.  Maternity leave was only three months at that time and I didn’t want to return to work after so short a period so I quit my job.

I happily stayed home taking care of my babies and getting to know the neighbours in our new housing development with distant thoughts of getting a part-time job when the kids started school.  Unfortunately two events occurred that changed all my plans:

• My husband had a serious accident at work that resulted in his being unemployed off and on through most of the ensuing years.
• Double digit inflation almost doubled our mortgage payment amount when it came up for renewal (along with other increased expenses).

I had no choice but to return to the work force.  I started working for a bank as a secretary.  I found an excellent day care but the cost was almost an entire two-week paycheque.

Related: The High Cost Of Child Care

I always thought that this would be a temporary situation.  At that time an employer sponsored pension plan for women was optional and I didn’t take advantage of if because, 1) I couldn’t afford the deduction and, 2) I didn’t think it was necessary because this was temporary. (A big lost opportunity there.)  This temporary job lasted for almost twenty-five years!

Even during the years of Women’s Lib when women entered the workforce in droves and denigrated those ladies that stayed home to be “just boring housewives,” I was never really career minded and I would have quit in a minute if the right circumstances occurred.

I still feel guilty to this day that I left my children in the care of others and was not around while they were growing up.

Luckily, finances and investing were interesting to me and I learned a lot as I slowly worked my way up the ladder, took all the courses and started to build my own portfolio.  I don’t know if I would be in the same financial position if I had gone to work in another industry.

My main point here is that often life doesn’t quite work out the way you expect.  You might have to have a plan B or C or even Z.  I think I have done quite all right for myself financially even with all the drawbacks I have experienced.  My mortgage is paid off and I have a respectable investment portfolio.

I have learned that if I want to be financially secure I can only rely on myself.  There’s no white knight on a charger holding a winning lottery ticket to bail me out.

I have found out that I can be resourceful and (after the odd couple of days of feeling sorry for myself) persistent and still find the time and money in my semi-retirement to enjoy life and do the things I want.

I read an interesting article in Canadian Business Magazine a few weeks ago.  The article was called, “The end of clock-punching?”, and was written about a new concept in employee performance management called results-only work environments.

The concept behind ROWE is that employees will no longer be responsible for showing up to work at a certain time, or to attend particular meetings, or even show up to the office at all.  As long as they are meeting goals and achieving results in their job, they’re considered to be working.

Results Only Work Environment

I have to say that I’m all for this type of work flexibility.  When it comes down to it, getting the job done is all that matters.

How many times have you heard a colleague complain (or brag) about the number of hours they logged into their job or HR and payroll software? Yet you see them socializing during work hours, and they don’t produce quality results.

You shouldn’t have to feel guilty about leaving the office on time, or even early, if you are a high achiever in your workplace.

I’m a big believer in quality over quantity.  If I can produce the same results in a 25-30 hour work week as someone who claims to be putting in a 70 hour work week, aren’t I the more efficient employee and the greater asset to the organization?  Efficient, as a definition, means to achieve maximum productivity with minimum wasted effort or expense.

The article goes on to explain that the idea of less oversight leading to greater productivity is not an easy sell to managers accustomed to working in a more regimented way.

I can also see an issue of fairness amongst all employees if not every single employee was able to work in the flexible results-only work environment.  For example, your customer service personnel would obviously need to be working during your normal business hours and not sleeping until noon and working past closing time.

Overall, I think the ROWE concept is a good one for an organization looking to create a culture or boost morale.  As long as non-performers (slackers) were held accountable for their results, and the goals and objectives were truly achievable and measurable, this sounds like a great working environment.

Should I let my boss know that I’m sleeping in until noon tomorrow?  🙂