Examining Family Leave PoliciesJacqueline Jones |
||
|
|
The Committee on the Status of Women in the Profession announces a new OAH web site devoted to sample practices related to the family-leave policies of colleges, universities, and other employers of historians. The purpose of the web site is to provide information to OAH members and others who work for institutions that are considering new policies, or seeking to revise current ones, in order to meet the needs of their employees. At the 2004 Annual Meeting in Boston, members of the Women’s Committee discussed a recent study of women in the academy that suggests that women who have babies early in their careers are less likely to receive tenure twelve to fourteen years out from the PhD than their male counterparts who also have babies early in their careers. Committee members then asked for and received authorization from the OAH Executive Board to conduct a survey that would explore some of these issues as they pertain to members of the OAH. The online survey “went live” in mid-December 2004. Its purpose was to collect information related to the implementation of family and parental policies in institutions (universities and colleges, K-12 schools, museums, etc.) that employ historians. We were interested in learning about such policies and their impact on our members. Sixty-eight people responded to the survey (fifty-seven of them women). Although that is not a large enough number to allow us to draw definitive conclusions, the data are suggestive of the problems inherent in certain family leave policies (and nonpolicies). The federal government mandates that all (or at least most) employers must allow twelve weeks unpaid leave for any employee who qualifies for family leave benefits. Yet it is evident from survey responses that not all institutions comply even with this basic requirement. Some institutions cobble together policies that force an employee to draw upon sick leave or vacation days. In general, the persons most likely to seek to take advantage of leave policies are younger faculty who have not accrued much in the way of either sick-leave or vacation benefits. An employee who adopts a child is not allowed to use sick-leave because s/he is not “sick” (though neither of course is a woman who gives birth). Some employers (and union officials) go so far as to suggest that prospective parents time the birth or adoption of a child to coincide with summer vacation, so that leave from teaching and other responsibilities does not become an issue. More generally, survey responses reveal that many specific arrangements—the amount of pay and time off for parental leave, stopping the tenure clock, administrative duties during or after the leave—are all open to negotiation with department chairs, deans, and human resources officers, among other administrators. In many cases, “nothing is written down” and no one seems to know what the policy is, forcing faculty—most often, younger untenured women—to rely on administrators who might or might not be supportive. In sum, within many departments, individual faculty receive widely varying leave benefits based on their ability to negotiate with chairs and/or supervisors. The fact that it is younger women who most often seek parental leave has other implications as well. Many younger employees cannot afford to take a whole semester off without pay, forcing them back into the classroom (or the office) soon after the birth of a child. Adjunct professors (who are disproportionately female) often do not qualify for benefits from their employer. In some cases, even in institutions with generous leave policies, colleagues and department chairs pressure younger women not to take advantage of those policies—pressure that junior faculty members find hard to resist. In sum, in too many cases the most vulnerable members of a department are forced to negotiate for leave benefits that should be universal, generous, and standard for all employees. The results of the survey prompted a lively discussion among attendees at our annual luncheon in San José. Several people pointed out that the issue of partner/spousal hires is also part of a broader problem related to family-friendly policies in the academy. In response to the idea that all employers should issue formal, written leave policies in order to clarify matters and eliminate the need for case-by-case negotiation, some suggested that in fact it would be preferable for prospective leave-takers to negotiate with some degree of flexibility rather than be locked into ungenerous standardized policies committed. Rather than endorse a specific set of policies, members of the committee decided to sponsor a clearinghouse of sample practices that would serve as an information base for interested employees. The American Historical Association has expressed an interest in establishing a link with the new OAH web site. If you believe your own
institution has instituted
policies that might be of
interest to other historians,
please send it to us at: |
|