Q&A with Paula Dubeck

Workplace/Women’s Place

, the third edition of an anthology Paula Dubeck edited with a colleague, was published this year. In the following interview she discusses the book’s success and the contents of her own chapter in the work.

Q: The anthology has obviously been a success if it’s in a third edition. There must be other texts that deal with this topic. Why has this one worked so well?

A: Probably because the book covers a wide range of issues, beginning with how we socialize girls for work and careers. The articles address the dynamics of the workplace, including pay, opportunity, barriers to advancement, and workplace policy on employees and family. We have a section dealing with the challenges and dilemmas of combining work and family, including an article on women “opting out” of work when they have young children. In addition, we include articles on the experiences of women of different race/ethnic backgrounds and in different kinds of occupations. So we were able to illustrate how work experiences differ--or are similar--across social groups and by positions in organizations. Finally, we provide data and information on employment, earnings, and education to highlight the trends relating to women’s employment over the past 40+ years.

Q: What about these statistics? How does the percentage of women in the workforce today compare with those from the 1950s and ‘60s?

A: In the ‘50s and into 1960, women comprised approximately 33% of the workforce. Today they’re approximately 47%. But those percentages hide dramatic changes in labor force participation by women, especially married women with children. In 1955, fewer than 20% of mothers with children under the age of 6 worked. In 2004, that statistic rose to over 60%. Also, for women with children from 6-17 years, the percentage changed from slightly less than 40% in 1960 to 78% in 2003. Women also have gained access to higher status positions through education. Today they earn 57% of BA degrees and 58% of MA degrees. In 2001, they earned 43% of medical degrees, 47% of law degrees, and 46% of all doctorates. Consequently, the careers they pursue represent a broad spectrum, and many are high status, professional positions.

Q: How do the competing demands of work and family affect women’s career choices and their performance and longevity in jobs?

A: Research demonstrates that women’s career orientation and commitment are as high as men’s. At the same time, they are more directly faced with work and family decisions because they tend to carry more family-based responsibilities, especially when children are involved. Policies that allow flexibility enable them to work full time and maintain their careers. Organizations benefit from the commitment of such employees. But not all organizations offer flexible options, so some women “opt out” of the job market or change employers. Their career paths often don’t follow the linear models of males. Another dilemma they face is that employers view mothers as either less capable or less committed to careers; so they are offered less challenging assignments that stifle future career opportunities.

Q: You believe the media’s and academics’ interest in work and family issues has had an impact on some work environments. Explain.

A: They’ve had their fingers on the “pulse” of women’s expanding roles in the labor force. They’ve also documented the challenges females, especially mothers, face and the reasons they leave jobs. The turnover is costly, especially when employers lose highly trained employees. The attention to this repeated loss has made some employers develop strategies like flexible work hours, assistance with child and elder care, and job sharing.

Q: Considering the “big picture,” which American employers been most aggressive in adopting family friendly policies?

A: Beyond legal requirements of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, embracing “family friendly” policies varies by organizational size and sector of the economy. Financial services, pharmaceutical concerns, and technology and information service employers were most frequently represented in

Working Mother

magazine’s “Top10” of the “Top 100 Best Places for Mothers to Work.” These organizations grew rapidly in the 1980s and ‘90s, and they’re more flexibly structured compared to traditional manufacturing or bureaucratic organizations. Larger organizations are also more likely to incorporate family friendly policies, as are employers with higher proportions of women at all levels. But when there’s an economic downturn, these policies are often defined as “costly” and become more vulnerable to being reduced or eliminated.

Q: Do family friendly benefits usually benefit everyone in the organizational hierarchy?

A: In theory, this is the case, but research shows they don’t apply equally. Often higher status, managerial, and professional employees have access to benefits that don’t extend to everyday employees. When

Working Mother

publishes its annual list of the “Top 100,”it looks for evidence that family friendly policies extend through all levels of the hierarchy. Most corporations fall short.

Q: What kinds of returns do employers derive from responsiveness to family needs?

A:

Catalyst

, which focuses on women in professions and management, has demonstrated that policies like child care programs reduce employee absences and turnover. Other research documents the high level of commitment of employees in organizations with family supportive policies like those that allow new mothers to work part-time for a period after the birth of a child, so it's clear that family friendly policies ultimately benefit employers as well as employees.

Related Stories

3

UC alum named Fulbright Scholar, will teach in Taiwan

August 6, 2025

Recent University of Cincinnati graduate Perry Li is a 2025 Fulbright U.S. Student Program recipient. He is in Taitung, Taiwan, where he’ll focus on teaching English and cultural exchange through music during this school year.

Debug Query for this