E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Robert Galbraith / Reuters
"My maternity leave will be a few weeks long and I'll work throughout it." new Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer said.
It’s unusual enough to hear that a major corporation anointed a woman as CEO, but a pregnant CEO?
Yahoo announced Monday that Marissa Mayer, a former Google executive, was taking the reins of the technology company, and hours later it was disclosed that she was also expecting her first child in October.
Mayer chose to disclose her pregnancy to the company’s board before she got the final job offer, and the board was supposedly fine and dandy with the news.
"They showed their evolved thinking," Mayer told Fortune.
Yahoo's board may have been reassured by Mayer's unusual description of how she plans to handle the time off she will take to have a baby.
"My maternity leave will be a few weeks long and I'll work throughout it," Mayer said.
It's the kind of news that may get other pregnant women at Yahoo further down the chain worried about the time they put in after childbirth.
Many executives in Corporate America today tout how they lead by example and show their employees that work-life balance is critical. Taking emails while dealing with a newborn might be tougher than first-time-mom-to-be Mayer realizes.
Although it is also worth noting that not all women are as lucky as Mayer to even have a maternity leave benefit. (The United States is one of the only industrialized nations without mandated maternity leave.)
In any case Yahoo's board is to be applauded for looking beyond Mayer's pregnancy to the leadership she can provide the company over the long term.
“Appointing a woman as CEO is pretty rare in and of itself, and having a pregnant one is even more rare,” said Eden King, co-author of "How Women Can Make It Work: The Science of Success." “Many women who reach that level do not have children at all, much less are pregnant at the time.”
What ever does happen for Yahoo's newest CEO, her appointment will up the ante on the working mommy debate. But don't expect it to change the work world.
“It’s a sample size of one, and it’s hard to know if this represents social change. I certainly have hope, but most of the evidence shows that there’s substantial discrimination of pregnant women who are working," said King, who’s an associate professor of psychology at George Mason University with a focus on women and the workplace.
Indeed, the number of pregnancy discrimination claims have been rising in the last decade, and that prompted the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to hold a public hearing earlier this year to address the problem. “A few employers have forgotten, or never learned, that it’s against the law to discriminate against women because of pregnancy,” David Lopez, the EEOC’s general counsel during the February hearing.
It’s unlawful, he stressed, to deprive a pregnant woman "the opportunity to sustain herself or her family based on stereotypical assumptions” that she won’t be as dedicated to her employers as a man or a woman who isn't pregnant.
The number of pregnancy discrimination charges increased about 15 percent in the last 10 years to 5,797 last year. That's down slightly from 2010's total claims of 6,119, according to the EEOC.
The Pregnancy Discrimination Act was signed into law in 1978 in order to stop such bias, but many women's advocacy groups believe it doesn’t go far enough. A bill introduced in May called the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which is similar to the American With Disabilities Act, is supposed to fill the donut hole that the previous act left open when it comes to making accommodations for pregnant women in the workplace.
“Equal opportunity in the workplace is an essential right in this country, and it is deplorable that women are still being fired, forced out of their jobs, and denied employment and promotion opportunities because they become pregnant," said Debra Ness, president of the National Partnership for Women & Families. "The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act is badly needed legislation that would help stem this discrimination and benefit women and their families tremendously.”
How will Yahoo's new CEO impact Google? Colin Gillis of BGC analyst, offers insight.
But in the end, bias against pregnant workers and whether they’ll land a certain job often comes down to perceptions, maintained King. In most cases, she said, the discrimination is based on a belief that a woman won’t be able to handle the job, or chose not to work after they have children.
In the case of Yahoo’s Mayer, she’s made it clear she’ll be more than productive in her new gig even as a mom.
Yahoo spokeswoman Dana Lengkeek said Mayer was not available for interviews Tuesday, but directed NBCNews.com to the Fortune article. Mayer did tweet the pregnancy news late Monday: "Another piece of good news today - @zackbogue and I are expecting a new baby boy!" (Zack Bogue is her husband.)
Mayer has a tough road ahead given the many Yahoo CEOs before her who have tried to turn the beleaguered company around in the last few years. There is no doubt Wall Street will be closely watching her progress. How will a pregnant CEO be perceived by investors?
"Turning Yahoo around is likely going to be a near impossible task; the stress, at least initially, is likely to be similar to that stress of starting Google, and you add to that the stress of having a child and the result could be catastrophic for one or the other," said technology analyst Rob Enderle. "On the other hand, this pregnancy might become a forcing function. Often inexperienced turnaround CEOs learn too late the necessity of building a very strong balanced team; in order to take the pressure off of her during her pregnancy building such a team will have higher priority and, in the end, it will be the team that will do this not the CEO alone."
The pregnancy, he continued, "may actually help focus Marissa on doing something that often is neglected and could actually better assure the result. In the end her job is to turn Yahoo around; how she gets there isn’t as important. Being pregnant could become a best practice which would screw a lot of male CEOs out there."
Is juggling work, after-school activities, dinner, and more leaving you feeling overwhelmed? Carol Evans, president of Working Mother Media, and Shivonne Probeck, a working single mom of two, share their secrets to enjoying your job and family.
How women handle their pregnancies and how they disclose them, will likely impact their careers, King noted.
“Marissa Mayer made the decision to tell the company before the offer, which was ethical for her to do but not legally required,” she said. “I know women who waited to disclose pregnancy until after they got a job or promotion to protect the jobs they deserved.”
On a personal note, King admitted that she was pregnant when she was up for a promotion but waited to tell her co workers and managers until after she secured the position. "I have supportive supervisors and colleagues but I didn't want to chance it," she said. "I know the research."
Did you ever face a similar situation while job hunting? How did you handle it? Let us know.
More money and business news:
- Lifelong layover: Old jets being recycled as homes
- Grocery prices headed higher as drought lingers
- Buy it now! America's biggest advertisers
- Video: Signs of recovering in the housing market
- Sign up for our Business newsletter
Follow NBCNews.com business on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
Wow, a CEO who is honest and transparent! I bet she will go far just on her values and the pregnancy is just media wanting an angle to write about. Good luck Ms. Mayer!
What this does is raise the bar for every female CEO. Maternity leave was a hard-fought battle for women in the workplace. Now every other woman in high positions may be held to the same standard. Bad move for women, in my opinion.
I could not agree more. And they don't have to be in an executive position either. This affects all working women who become pregnant. My sister once got fire many years ago because her boss found out she was pregnant, and trust me she didn't even show until she was about 6 months gone. Then I got fired years after that for being pregnant. Both actions were totally legal. One generation later and with women still fighting for their human right to reasonable maternity leave, this one is setting things back, and for what purpose? To further her own career? What about the careers of other professional women who have children and then are told, hey the CEO of Yahoo didn't need 2 or 3 months of maternity leave so why do you? In most European countries both parents can get something like 16 weeks of paid maternity leave, and more unpaid if they want it. It's expected and normal. Here we act like it's an act of self-indulgence for mothers, and especially fathers, to want to stay home with their newborn for several weeks and get to know and learn how to care for their child. It's just such BS and then we can't figure out why our kids are so messed up later in life. Maybe it's because mommy and daddy had to go back to work when they were 4 weeks old and they got raised by a series of babysitters and daycare workers who sees it as a job and not a calling to care for someone else's children.
I agree that this is not good for women. We all know that the standards for CEO types are not the same standards for average capable women. At this point I have to say that Yahoo! has an up hill battle and I am not sure that anyone can help them.
The greatest human rights champion in the world spreading democracy all over with trilion dollars treat their women and new born the most shameful way....God Bless America..... outsourcing jobs, high taxes on middle class, student loans,... This all so that war mangols have the money to spend on WARS...
==================================
Although it is also worth noting that not all women are as lucky as Mayer to even have a maternity leave benefit. (The United States is one of the only industrialized nations without mandated maternity leave.)
As a man who has four daughters, my worry is the thing behind this is the effect of being separated from a new born almost at birth is very detrimental to the emotional welfare of this new child. In primitive, so called, societies the new born is almost never separated from the mother so soon after birth. In America time is money, so a new born is not worth much, but the high cost of the incarceration of an emotionally dead criminal is way more than the cost of a few weeks of maternity leave. In Europe they have this maternity leave built into their work force, but then their socialized. I guess I'm glad were not like that. Who wants to live in a society that cares about it's members. Money first, people second. USA. USA, USA!!
She's going to be making enough cash to pay for the help she will most likely need. She'll need a short period to recover physically and then she can just hand the kid off. I don't think that changes much of anything for most other moms-to-be at Yahoo or anywhere else. She's not a typical case at all.
I agree that this is a terrible thing. Granted the leave is unpaid, but after years of struggle a three month maternity leave became standard and accepted....now we are unwinding the woven threads of women having an equal chance in the office. I haven't had a child yet, but I hope for my few months to recover/bond with my child before I am expected back at my desk. If not granted this, I would seriously consider stepping down to take it for myself.
I think this is great news! I worked through my pregnancy and
soon after my son's birth:) I love what I do...so incorporating baby felt like
a natural extension. I think choosing to work& have a baby actually made me
more motivated to work because I became more sensitive to the fact that America needs as many positive leaders as possible (to insure these children grow up within a country that's worth living in).
"What this does is raise the bar for every female CEO" Not only that, but it creates a lofty and unrealistic expectation for every FEMALE, not just female CEOs.
She might be bright, but that's dumb.
My wife dutifully informed her employer(a small and ritzy law firm) when she realized she was pregnant with our second child. They congratulated her and subsequently asked her to write a manual for the computer-related duties of her position.
As soon as she completed the considerable and time-consuming task of preparing the document and training an assistant, ...
They fired her, leaving us with no notice, compensation, and no hope of obtaining affordable health insurance.
Maybe this CEO can get some nanny help, so she can "hit the marks" during her leave. I also hope her actions don't provide a precedent that will become the norm for those on "maternity leave".
There are many reasons one becomes a democrat. This is one of ours.
Obama/Biden 2012.
"Mayer chose to disclose her pregnancy to the company’s board before she got the final job offer"
Knowing that she could file a discrimination suit if they didn't offer her the job
This CEO sounds like she wants a lot of attention and not to produce a lot of good.
I didn't know Yahoo was trying to hire a celebrity instead of an actual worker with common sense.
Oh, and on maternity. My wife manages a retail store. She told the company owner that she would be taken her maternity leave allowed to her by law. And when he heard the word law, he was smart enough to shut up and say, 'Yes.'
She's working there now, and with no problems. Exactly the way it should be. Too bad not all employers are smart enough to let workers have the rights entitled to them by law.
I agree, BlueNote!
Please. CEOs are a different breed than the average worker. Not only do they have the discipline, drive, and expertise to get where they got, but they have the money to pay for the finer things in life. LIKE NANNIES and DAYCARE. I think it's going to be difficult, but I also think that while coddling and loving and nuturing are incredibly important (and they can still be done by working mothers) I think that having a strong and powerful female role model can be powerful for a child.
If she can pull this off, she'll be a great story for young girls who want to give it a shot at having it all. Fathers have had it all all this time. Work and family. It's about time women get it too. Maybe it just means that the men have to start committing to the family more.
How is having a nanny having it all? Paying someone else to parent your child makes you a CEO, not mother!
It's easy for her to have that plan NOW.... all I have to say is she better pray her butt off that it is an easy, healthy, and full term pregnancy and that she doesn't wind up having complications for possible stress or have to have a c-section. Yeah I'd like to see her bounce right back to the work place in a couple of weeks after THAT!! She's being incredibly unrealistic about this whole thing. It must be nice to live in la la land and just assume that well I'm pregnant now this is going to be a cake walk and I'll breeze right through it no problem and then have the baby and be back to my self in no time. LOL!!!!
I can see the headlines now. "Maternity leave in coporate is now band." This chick would get some much hate mail... My lord!
She's a CEO. CEO's hold business meetings on golf courses, hold training or meetings in Jamaica at $5000 a day per person resorts all on company expenses which are written off on their taxes while the costs are paid for by customers. Most corporations wouldn't even miss a CEO if they were gone for a few months, but you can't say that about the janitor or cleaning people who only make $28,000 a year so these CEO's can make $50,000 an hour. Who knows, she's probably pulling this stunt so other women will not take any kind of maternity leave and they'll probably flop down a big 100 million dollar bonus to her for doing this.
Seeing as she's taking over a struggling company, I'd say she feels she needs to be available in case decisions are needed. Its unfortunate that she won't be able to take the usual maternity leave, but being a ceo isn't like being anyone else in the company. Plus how difficult can it be...she can work from her home get plenty of bonding with the baby and still get her job done. Besides with the way that Yahoo cycles through their CEO's she may be done before she even has the baby.
@Go_Obama!
And to get what you want you would deny this woman the right to choose something else?
Sad to hear so many people saying this woman's personal choice is wrong because it may not be what's best for someone else. I wonder how many of you make choices in your personal lives based on what other people think you should do. My guess would be not many.
I was reading at CNBC that many financial analysts think she's got a really short time-frame in which to make a BIG difference at Yahoo, or else she will be judged a failure and a terrible choice for the job. If I were in her shoes...and thank god I'm not, everything considered...I'd want to be able to dedicate myself to turning that place around 24/7/365 with no other distractions at all. 110% focus on the job is what it's going to take, and clearly she won't be able to do that. If she pulls it off, she's super-woman as far as I'm concerned, and will deserve all the credit in the world for it, but that would STILL mean it has no real effect on the average woman at Yahoo who DOESN'T have the luxury (or pressure) of being CEO. CEO's are often not even in the building and practically no one knows or cares...in fact, many who do know the CEO is out for the day are probably RELIEVED, not critical of it. That's just a wee bit different from being a female mid-level manager who is constantly under direct scrutiny from above. Who's going to meaningfully criticize the CEO, the BoD? They aren't in the building either. All they care about is results. She better well "deliver"...
I'm a full supporter of a woman's right to choose, about EVERY aspect of her life and career. I'm sure Mayer will use today's technology to give her the utmost schedule flexibility, but, she can't make any iron clad guarantees about her ability to perform, especially late into her pregnancy, as this is her first(although all pregnancies are unique) pregnancy. I'm just sayin'....Good luck to Ms Mayer, her partner and to Yahoo. I hope she shatters every remaining myth on the subject and that she and her baby are healthy and happy !
edit...late into her pregnancy and through her leave...
I knew Marissa Mayer when we were both Stanford students in the late '90's. She was a b*tch who happened to be excellent at self-promotion back then and not much has changed since. Friends I know who worked with her at Google tell me that she is a horrible manager. She's where she is today not because she's competent but because she is very shrewd at manipulating people to promote her own interests.
@ Crimson...Sound like she's the perfect hire, all bark, no bite, for a company that since the 90's, has generally produced a quality product, but has never been able to craft a viable business model. Nobody wants to pay for news and information on the internet, when there's someone younger and hungrier ready to deliver virtually the same thing for free. Advertisers find out quickly, even the most watched sites, deliver poor ROI for the ad dollar( see Facebook) Like most news based dot coms, long term viability has never been the goal ...making out like bandits with the IPO, or, buy out (see Huffington Post)then leave others to grasp at straws trying to actually make a profit. At least the board of Yahoos, can tell progressive shareholders, they're trying everything to turn the firm around.
Seems like an abortion would be in order.
Turn the company around, then have a baby.
Get a third trimester abortion, some states still do that.
This is a chance of a life time.
I think she's in for a rude awakening. She plans on going back to work after 2 weeks, but working through those 2 weeks? Did I read that wrong? I don't think she understands, with or without a nanny.......she's going to be 'EFFing' exhausted! Heaven forbid she gets postpartum depression, or any other unforeseen circumstance arises. Personally, I do not admire or envy her. It's going to be difficult for her to bond with her child.....but, she's probably paying someone else to do it. I guess that's what nannies are for. & if I'm wrong and her family isn't completely dysfunctional (just because she's at home....if her nose is constantly in a device because she's working....she's really not "there") Good for her. That corporate WORK/life/WORK/family/WORK balance is nothing I personally will ever aspire to.
First time CEO of a struggling albeit billion dollar corporation. First time mother in a couple of months. And she's planning to work throughout her leave? It's possible, I guess, but she's going to be in for a big, big shock if she thinks she can pull off work and life duties like those at the same time!
That's what i thought. She'll have to ship her child off to day care all day or have a nanny. I know people at a high executive level who work a ton of hours. They have nannies for the weekday, nannies for the evening and nannies for the weekend. Why bother having children at all? They are just another possession to these people like a new car. I don't see how you can possibly bond with your child properly if you are the CEO of Yahoo. The while idea that women can have children and properly take care of them at the same time as being a high level CEO is a fairy tale. Something's gotta give.
This is a terrible decisioon, since women fought for years to get maternity leave. It's just not doable to be a good CEO, a good mother and whataever else the world throws at you particularly if you are a first-time mother!!!I feel sorry for the child if this woman really does intend to work thru her maternity leave, all just to please her bosses. The tteapublicans must be ecstatic. LShe'll be the next Republican VP nominee, mark my words. LWonderwoman, white, and very very malleable willing to jump through in numberalbe hoops to please your board of directors. What a stupid idea. She has no idea what she is doing to the cause of other women who use their maternity leave to bond with their child, and probably be a lot better mother because of it.
I am dismayed at the number of posts that seem to be saying that you can't be a good mother and successful in your work. Women fought hard to get out of the June Cleaver mentality, and it looks like the people who should be leading the charge for equality are the ones tearing it apart.
Plenty of men work while raising young children and no one applauds their bravery or berates their priorities. Women deserve the right to be productive on their own merits rather than to be forced to subvert once again to men simply because of biology.
(This, by the way, is coming from a confirmed leftie, so the Republican / Tea Party comment above is simply confusing. Here I always thought it was the conservatives who were supposedly trying to push women back into the kitchen! Just goes to prove my old belief that politics have nothing to do with ideals -- Both sides have their rational thinkers AND their troglodytes.)
Give it a rest. I was back at "work" after my second child was born within 3 days. It amounted to nothing more than sitting at the computer 10' from the bedroom and answering e-mails, etc. while the baby was sleeping - which they do quite a bit of those first few months. The only difference was that I wasn't trying to prove anything like this lady, but rather was self employed and part of our income depended on it. I'm far from superwoman and far from being the only one out there to do this.
With that being said, however, I think this is a terrible idea and a terrible precedent to set. Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it SHOULD - especially when working in her position she does have full access to maternity leave. Given the choice, I wouldn't have been logging in but rather sleeping myself! The US really is one of, if not the only industrialized country that doesn't have any form of maternity leave for women in the workforce. Instead of showing how great she is by doing it all at once, this would have been a wonderful opportunity to demonstrate the importance of work/life balance or highlight the issues that women face every day in the workforce.
I'm sure she'll have a nannie a cook & a maid, so as long as there are no complications with the pregnancy & delivery....she'll be able to do it!
Let me guess, you are blond and unmarried without kids! But I think you're great...You remind me of when I was young and stupid.....Florida girl, get a clue. You cant have it both ways! You really think daycare and nannies are the answer? Ok...ask yourself...would you rather be in a loving home with mom or dad raising you (you know, your parents) or in the walls of a daycare 12 hours a day??? Just saying...
"blond and unmarried"--?? where are earth did you pull that from?! You didn't even read Florida Girl's post correctly. If she uses a maid/nanny then the child will not be in a daycare; s/he will be home.
If you're going to be snarky, Shannon, at least take the time to read the person's comments.
Oh c'mon people. She's not superwoman. She'll be checking her voicemail and answering emails from home. Newborns sleep most of the day anyway. It's not like she's going to be on an assembly line. And she's rich so chances are that she'll have a nanny anyway to help her. She's not going to have the typical up all night with a screaming baby new mom experience that the rest of us have. Most working moms at the executive level work a great deal "from home" while the rest of us use up sick or vacation time when we need to be home with a sick kid. I can't tell you how many times I've seen an email from a manager saying that they would be working from home because their kids are ill blah blah blah and all it really means is that they log onto their computers 3-4 times and reply to a couple of emails.
Enough of the snarky comments that kids shouldn'tbe in a daycare blah blah blah...
How is it any different if she hires a nanny to help in the home from her having her sister or mom come stay with her for a few weeks like most new moms do?
And haven't you ever heard that it takes a village to raise a child etc etc etc...
Daycare is inherently natural to our species. Look at any primitive peoples and you will see that babies are left with some women to look after them while others see to other jobs. Native Americans did it, Australian Aboriginies did it, African tribes did it... Hell even Apes do it. It's a freaking part of our nature. As long as the caregivers are vetted properly and the mother spends the remaining time bonding with her children there is no problem.
I swear the same people who complain about women working are the ones that get caught on YouTube whipping their children for sneaking a cookie.
No worries, as a CEO she makes enough money to hire several full-time staff members $50,000 a year to take care of her kid when it's born.
I hope the authors and people making comments realize that this is not an average employee with an average paycheck. This individual is in the top 0.01 % and can easily afford au pairs, nannies and even a wet nurse if needed.
Comparing a CEO pregnancy to that of a hourly/salaried worker and making generalizations based on that.....that is pretty ridiculous.
It's also pretty ridiculous to claim that just because someone is a h igh powered CEO and can AFFORD to pay countless others to take care of her infant that all is well in cloud cukoo land. Money is not the answer to everything, Einstein or Sartre (you insult the name of the real sartre who was much wiser than you, incidentally.)
There are such things as biological issues, and nature doesn't give a @!$%# how rich the new mother is. The baby would be much better off having its mother around for at least the first year or so. Or would you rather it be a soulless little Mittens Romney handed off to nannies, and other hired hands so that it can see all personal care as "boought and paid for." Hope ytou never had any children because if you did, I pity them. My guess is you are m ale and never give the value of m othering a second thoght. Even if you did have a good mother, which I doubt.
Totally agree w sartre. I had to methodically plan my maternity leave around vacation and sick and FMLA and other time available and I still had to go without pay for about a month. I consider myself luckly to have what I had even though it wasn't enough. She can afford all kinds of help that others don't have the benefit of. This is her life choice to be uber successful and take minimal time out for her firstborn. By no means should this woman's story be setting the example for the 99.9 percent of working class moms and moms to be who choose to enjoy the first couple of months of tender moments with their newborn babies and who sometimes are also the main income provider for their household and very much need that job!
...and I don't know why Lil debbie sounds so angry and why they ragging on you. I don't think you were condoning hiring out nannies and such.
Lil' Debbie,
You need to calm down. I was simply pointing out that using this individual as an example for all women is ridiculous. Most women or couples do not have the financial wherewithal that this person has to even consider the alternatives I mentioned. Whether or not it is correct is a different conversation.
What the heck are you talking about with Mitt Romney? Mrs. Romney took care of the children herself when they were growing up and all their son's wives are home taking care of their children themselves. They don't hand them off to nannies.
Sad that this is headline news; it shouldn't be a surprise that a pregnant woman can choose to work through maternity leave; it's completely doable. I worked through mine after giving birth to twins (and I was a single mom with NO help). I was fortunate to have healthy, easy babies though; I recognize that not all women have the same experience. Best wishes to her.
well, justathought, to each his own. However I th ink women should have the option of maternity leave because everyone and their infant is not just like you.
You were fortunate as you say, but I think you are not the norm.
So, the fact that the Yahoo board was "fine" with her pregnancy showed "evolved thinking". I think it showed that they understood the law. If that's considered to be "evolved thinking", I shudder to think how the rank-and-file at Yahoo are being treated. My guess is that if you get down to lower levels, you'll see considerably less "evolved thinking". It never ceases to amaze me how many hiring mangers and even HR people have either a profound ignorance of the laws - or simply choose to ignore the laws regarding discrimination in employment.
They not only hired a women but they hired a pregnant women. That is where the evolved thinking comes in. They did not have to hire her, they chose to. She didn't already have the position they gave it to her.
Maybe I didn't make my point clearly. It would have been illegal for Yahoo's board to deny her the job because she was pregnant. Whether or not someone is pregnant, not pregnant, can become pregnant, or can't become pregnant is not supposed to be a consideration in hiring. Just knowing and obeying the law is not "evolved thinking".
She sounds like the kind of ceo who will PUSH! PUSH! PUSH! Yahoo Inc for higher profits.
This is what is part of what is wrong with the US. The idea that you have to be present 24/7/365. That she is going to take NO TIME off is disheartening to me - mainly for her child. It is a sign of things to come.
I only wish I hadn't jumped back in so soon with my first and I won't make that mistake with my second. I understand there are those who cant afford that. But as google employee#20, we all know that isn't the case.
@2227298 -
The 24/7/365 argument is rejected by a lot of successful parents. My wife and I chose to trim our lifestyle for about 12 years. She dropped out of the paid labor market, put her career on hold, and I turned down several opportunities that were not in the best interests of our family even though they would have been great from a career perspective. We lived on one income and postponed buying that dream house and drove older cars, etc.
We homeschooled our kids to high school, they were both valedictorians of their graduating classes, got full ride scholarships to private universities, achieving magna cum laude and summa cum laude degrees. Our oldest is a senior manager now at a Fortune 25 company, our other child is the youngest manager where she works. My wife and I both enjoy great careers, we have our 'dream home', and are incredibly close to our kids and grandkids.
We don't think we gave up anything. We made calculated investments based on principle and it has paid off handsomely. We have many friends who have made the same choices, and don't know anyone who wishes they could do it over. Sure we don't have as much money as some of our friends, but we're a heck of a lot "richer" than most.
Jerry, I completely agree.
It has been hard financially to step out of the workforce to raise kids, but my husband and I have never regretted it. We know our kids in a way our friends who worked through parenthood don't. It will be interesting to see how Ms. Mayer and her family are coping in 18 years.
Anti-discrimination laws for working/pregnant moms are nice, but I think what is needed even more is laws that prevent discrimination against woman re-entering the workforce a decade or more after leaving work to raise kids. Sometimes I feel like Corporate America is never going to forgive me for stepping out of the workforce. But I am still the same intelligent person I was before I had kids.
She's a bundler for Obama. Which means she raises and consolidates donations from other large donors. Which means she might be a really nice lady, but she's a leftist. Which means she's either had years of therapy (i.e. grad school) or is mentally ill, or both. Which means Yahoo is probably hosed. Unless she can get some cash for Yahoo from her idol, president Obama, the great entrepreneur and executive
First order of business for her should be sacking Yahoo news politics team that's lobbing creampuff softball questions and being lickspittles for their messiah, Obama. You can't call it news. Everyone else sees it for what it is. Propaganda. Pathetic! But her being cut from the same cloth as they, that won't happen. If it did they could all get jobs at MSNBC.
Finally, we had to get to post number 8 to get to the real story. Thanks GregB. Now all you lefties out there, she has just set women's rights back 40 years. And you lefties think Obama is the President who supports women's rights - LMFAO.
Having a baby should be the most special day of a parent's life. Giving birth tramatizes the body whether by natural child birth or C-section. New mothers need to take the time to heal, but to also bond with their newborn child, and not just pass the newborn off to a nanny. I wonder if she plans to breast feed, which we all know is best for the baby's health.
Mentally ill - no - just brainwashed and delusional she is.
Im sure if I were a CEO of a company, I could work through mat leave. I would be able to hire folks to help me. A nanny perhaps? However, for those on the line, that is just not possible. Im sure she is a salaried employee, who under current rules only needs to work 5 hours a day to get paid for the full day. The Secretary or accounting clerk who is hourly, could do no such thing without taking a signifcant cut in pay. Nice, but thats not how the real world works.
This makes me sad. She will be pre-occupied with hitting the ground running in her new job, when she should be sleeping, healing and watching for that first angelic smile. Probably the nanny will see it. How many other firsts, how many quiet moments of bonding will she miss? I am not one of those all or nothing people who thinks you can't work and be a good mother at the same time. But heavens, if you can't get a few weeks of rest after childbirth, what kind of balance will you achieve?
So agree. I used to be a "career woman" and thought that was the be all end all and then i had my first baby and all that career stuff just went out the window. It all seems so trivial when you have this beautiful bundle who depends on you for literally life itself and who giggles sweetly and who you get to hold while they sleep. Nothing compares to it. Nothing else in life matters as much to me as my children.
Absolutely correct. This is an example of what's wrong with America today. She'sbusier trying to satisfy her superiors, whoever they may be than caring for the child she is about to bear. She should n ot have become pregnant as far as I am concerned, if she intends to be their super hard hitting CEO at Yahoo. After all, "evolved thinking" does incllude knowledge of birth control, does it not? Or maybe she just wanted to prove she is a "true wooman" to satisfy the Tea Bag faction that is undoubtedly among her superiors.
Lil Debbie, I have read all your posts and you are a troll. The new CEO of Yahoo is not a Tea Party member, but rather an Obama bundler. Do you know what a bundler is? I think not. You need to expand your world and read news from sources than other than the MSM. Ms. Mayer, a liberal, has just set women's rights back at least 40 years. And for your information, Anne Romney actually stayed home and raised her children versus working.
I have a feeling Mrs. Mayer's medicine cabinet is going to be full of anti-anxiety & anti-depression medications within the year.
Nice, a CEO that takes l.o.a.d
I'm sure 20 years from now when Marissa and her daughter reflect on mom's choices, that both will be glad that at that critical juncture mom chose career over her new daughter. Isn't that what the evidence shows? Most people look back and regret they didn't spend more time forwarding their careers, because the kids will always be there, tomorrow, next week, next year. Cat's in the Cradle is probably her favorite old pop song.
I have no doubts that she'll be able to continue working in her new capacity as CEO. But the real question...the question nobody has asked yet.....is what kind of mother will she be? I agree with the comment about 7 notes up. She'll have plenty of nannies, etc. I feel sorry for the baby.
At first blush she seems completely naive and with no clue just how hard it is going to be to be a new mom and a new CEO...
But on second blush, she's a CEO. She'll have more than enough money for a nanny.
No real story here.
I can't believe the number of posters who think since she's going to have a good paycheck andn can afford an army of "nanies" or whatever that her child care problems are solved. Typical male thinking, or those who don't believe there is something important in bondingn between the mother and a newborn child. If somebody is going to "regret" not having a career and instead being a mother, that's sad. But that's why we have birth control and that's why we have a brain. You can't have it all and somebody needs to understand a choice is a choice, and by making one you eliminate other options....even if you happen to be rich.
I disagree. There are THOUSANDS of people, men and women, who have not made the choice between having a baby or using their brains in a fulfilling career and who are not only happy but have happy and well loved children. Honestly, from the constant protesting and harping, it sounds like you're very bitter that you didn't have a career you wanted and are defensive about choosing motherhood instead. You shouldn't be, choosing to be a full time mom is not only admirable but one of the hardest jobs out there. However, that also doesn't mean it's the only valid option available.
@lil Debbie, some of the people you are responding to, are being SARCASTIC. Ever heard of sarcasm? Sheessh don't get your panties all wound up, and you assume those are all MEN too my goodness.
This change of command at Yahoo would only be something on the business and tech pages if the subject were a fat guy from India. Now it's all over the web and at the top of many news sites. The same bias is operating here that makes the media concentrate on missing or murdered white girls when covering crime stories.
If I walked into a job interview in July, and told the hiring manager that I would need to take a 6-week leave of absence in October-November to attend to personal issues, I would not be hired, because that is a ludicrous request. But if I was pregnant, I would be entirely justified, and could sue for not being hired.
Pregnancy is not a disability. It is not a racial, ethnic, or religious group which deserves equal protection under the law. It is a choice. Why should any company be legally compelled to bear the expense of health care and the inconvenience of losing an employee for several weeks, based on a choice that employee made?
Maternity leave is absurd. Use regular sick time, or use vacation time. Pregnant women, get over yourselves.
So what's your position? Women with jobs shouldn't get pregnant or woman who get pregnant shouldn't work?
You are talking about half the work force, you know.
Oh, brother - Way to respect the people responsible for continuing the human race. And facilitating your coming into existence.
Pregnancy isn't just a "choice" - It's necessary for the continuation of the species, for pete's sake. Working for a pregnant woman isn't usually a "choice", either - It's necessary for the continuation of their own and their child's survival. So yeah, I think it is somewhat like a "disability", in that the rights of the pregnant woman should be protected.
Neither. Only that pregnant women should not expect to be treated differently than any other employee.
When you become a pregnant woman let me know if you think you should be treated just like everyt other employee. There is such a thing as biology and a pregnant woman should not be working a job either right before but mostly right after giving birth. It's not coddling it's being responsible about the future life of another human being who is not asking to come into this world. Giving birth keeps the human race going, which sometimes I think is a bad idea in itself, particularly considering how you must feel about your own mother, who made the rest of us lucky to experience your stupid remarks. Without your mother, you wouldn't be here.....a mixed blesing I suppose.
"There is such a thing as biology and a pregnant woman should not be working a job either right before but mostly right after giving birth"
It sounds like you are saying that a pregnant woman, by virtue of being pregnant, is not capable of doing the job that she is expected to do. I don't necessarily agree with that, but if that is what you are saying, why should an employer hire someone who they know will not be able to do the job?
Wow, that's as great as my friends boss who told her pregnancy was a "self inflicted illness" that shouldn't be covered by leave or insurance!
BEC- the employer should hire the person that is best for the job. That might mean making accommodations, but if the person is worth it, the employer comes out ahead.
Not hiring someone because of maternity leave is very short sighted.
Wow BEC, it is people like you that make life so hard! We live in a world where most families need two incomes to survive, so you're saying that means that no one should have children? I do disagree with anyone "working through" their leave because that is time for your child. Do you really think almost EVERY industrial country does it wrong? We are one of the few with out paid leave because other places have learned the importance of that time.... if we all followed your advice we would be all out of a job because we would be out of people! I hope you never choose to ahve kids
BEC, You are ignorant. And you must be a man. A person who pushes out an 8 lb bowling ball shouldn't be treated any differently than... what?? A dumbass with a hangover after too many shots at Hooters the night before?? I disagree.
corporations love to hire women..theywork for less money than men..and they treat everyone like children..especially if you dont fit in(men)
She's telling the employees of her company that a maternity leave is unnecessary. It's important to take time to bond with your child, no matter how many nannies you can afford.
I fail to see how this is good news for women.
Gee whiz! She can screw and count at the same time!
I wonder if there has ever been a male CEO who has run a company at the same time he has had a pregnant wife? In the Guinness book somewhere?
What dexterity! When multitasking becomes multicramping.
Love how the tightie righties make this political. Yeah I'm pretty sure she has a hammer and a sickle tattooed on her coochie. You Republitards really need to give it a rest and go to a movie or a comedy club or get an enema or something.
Soos..... you're an @$$ and your comments show just how much you are like the rest.
I do hope she can pull it off but like it was said here, with her salary it will be easier. Money often makes things easier in life! I just think it's sad that we're the only industrialized nation without mandated maternity leave. Once again, USA is #1 in something and it's nothing to be proud of. SIGH...
She'll work from home with a day time nanny and a night time nanny because she can afford it on that kind of salary. I doubt she'll even have to get up in the middle of the night. Sounds pretty do-able to me. I started a part time job working from home within a week of having my first baby by c-section, and I had no child care. When a good opportunity arises, you have to take it. They don't come around often.
Not a good move for a company that is already fighting to keep its head above water.
Yep--it's a gimmick. Yahoo died a long time ago.
Wow, it sounds like she's basically saying "Don't worry, Yahoo comes first - even before my first child". Sad for her child, and sad for women (and men!!) out there who are trying to create a change in society where family always comes first. Having a work ethic is great, but if it supersedes your family ethic, that seems like a huge problem to me. Yes, people should work, but it's sad when that's your whole life, especially if you have a family.
I agree totally that she is not setting a good path for any other women working currently at Yahoo or in any other high level position. She is to be commended for her success but I am sure that once she gives birth to her baby, she may have a different opinion of chosing to work through her maternity leave rather than bond with her new baby. I do not have children but my experience in life has teached me well-enough to know that eventhough my career is important, the time you spend with family is priceless. That you cannot get back.
While I believe in the write to choose the length and intensity of maternity leave for each woman, I think this sets a bad example. It tells women that to be successful they have to have to deny the basic needs of the feminine - postpartum time with your child is important for mother-child bonding and the child's basic development. It is also important for the mother to avoid postpartum depression......As a woman working in corporate America, this depresses me....
Nice to see she has her priorities straight. In further news she promised to work straight through her parents funerals as well.
Hahaha! Exactly, unless she truly lacks any emotions whatsoever she will not be working through her maternity leave. She might be able to run a company, but being a first time mom is a whole other ball game. And if she does lack the emotions, and just hires someone to take care of the kid she probably shouldn't be having it in the first place. Somebody will lose and I hope it's Yahoo and not the baby.