Today marks Labor Day, a day observed as a holiday here in the US (although you might ask all those who have to work today how they feel about that). However, for those in the various fields of education, today might better be referred to as Back to Labor Day--the last "free" day before schools begin. Some schools have already begun, but those that haven't will all be up and running this week.
And if schools are starting, can yom tov be far behind? Time to put away those lazy, hazy days of summer and start planning for the weeks ahead. Time not only to have school supplies handy but also all those items you might need for yom tov meals and observance. Time to be thinking about menus and cooking and who will be invited to various meals. The supermarket chains in our area already last week had Rosh Hashanah items advertised and on sale.
The weather in our area is making it easier to sit at a desk and plan--rainy, mega humid and so not bbq weather. However you are going to be spending today, I hope it will be an enjoyable end to summer. And to really get ahead of things, please note that next year Rosh Hashanah will be on Labor Day.
Showing posts with label work. Show all posts
Showing posts with label work. Show all posts
Monday, September 3, 2012
Thursday, August 23, 2012
On SAHMs
A recent posting at Orthonomics once again brought up the subject of SAHMs--stay at home mothers--in reference to a posting at imamother. And once again I'm scratching my head and wondering just where some of the people commenting on the imamother posting have been living for the last decades.
Let's get something on the table right from the beginning--even where and when being a SAHM was considered a societal norm, it never was so. That's right, it never was an across the board item. There have always been working women in society, and working mothers. And yes, there have also been those who closed their eyes to this fact and continued to preach the "a woman's place is in the home" party line.
Go back to biblical times and read the Aishis Chayil word for word. Yes, it talks about all the things a woman does in her home for her husband and children. And yes, it also clearly and with no fuzziness delineates all the areas of commerce that the woman is involved in--that's commerce such as in working.
When mass producing factories came into being there were women working in those factories. Many a small business, such as a grocery store, took both the husband and the wife to keep the business afloat. The servant class was mostly populated by women, and yes, many were married with families they were helping to support with their wages.
Let's move into the more recent past and guess what--we still find lots of women in the workplace. During WWI and WWII women in droves replaced the men in the general workplace who were called up to fight. And when the men came back home, many of those women remained in the workplace. As this country continued to make manufacturing a primary concern, women worked in those factories.
Yes, many of the jobs that women worked at were not considered as "elegant" or "highly desired." This was as much a result of society's restricting women from being educated as it was from society's attitude that a woman's place was in the home.
You want to see the working mothers of Klal? You have only to look at the immigrant generation that arrived after WWII. Go ahead and ask your grandparents how many working women they knew of. If they're being honest they'll tell you "tons of them." My mom worked outside of the home, as did my mother in law, as did my parents and in law's cousins. Some worked together with their husbands in small businesses they eventually were able to begin. Others worked in a variety of factories. Food on the table and money to pay the rent beat out any societal grumbling about a woman's place.
And today? A woman's place is anywhere she needs it to be or wants it to be. The stark reality is that Klal has engendered a "required" lifestyle that makes it impossible for a whole lot of single earner families to comply with. Unless a husband is making uber megabucks, it is going to take two salaries to cover expenses, maybe. And perhaps this is time to mention that for a lot of the frummer families in Klal, where husbands are sitting and learning, it is the woman who is the sole wage earner. And yes, even where both husband and wife are working, there are enough cases where it is the wife that makes more money than the husband. And by the way, this isn't limited to just Klal either.
So please, let us once and for all retire the idea that SAHMism is the societal norm and the best thing for a mother to be doing. Instead, let's get practical for a change. What we need to do is make sure our women--and yes, our men too-- are well prepared and well educated, so that when they do go out to work they will qualify for jobs of a higher caliber that will pay more and have better benefits available.
And just slightly off the topic, but definitely related to it, why is it that when those ubiquitous researchers do studies about the children of SAHMs versus working mothers, they fail to include fathers in the equation? Yup, two parents are working to support the family, but if something disturbs the children it is always blamed on the mother's working. So fathers are nothing but sperm donors? Talk about an out of whack and out of date attitude that needs adjusting.
Let's get something on the table right from the beginning--even where and when being a SAHM was considered a societal norm, it never was so. That's right, it never was an across the board item. There have always been working women in society, and working mothers. And yes, there have also been those who closed their eyes to this fact and continued to preach the "a woman's place is in the home" party line.
Go back to biblical times and read the Aishis Chayil word for word. Yes, it talks about all the things a woman does in her home for her husband and children. And yes, it also clearly and with no fuzziness delineates all the areas of commerce that the woman is involved in--that's commerce such as in working.
When mass producing factories came into being there were women working in those factories. Many a small business, such as a grocery store, took both the husband and the wife to keep the business afloat. The servant class was mostly populated by women, and yes, many were married with families they were helping to support with their wages.
Let's move into the more recent past and guess what--we still find lots of women in the workplace. During WWI and WWII women in droves replaced the men in the general workplace who were called up to fight. And when the men came back home, many of those women remained in the workplace. As this country continued to make manufacturing a primary concern, women worked in those factories.
Yes, many of the jobs that women worked at were not considered as "elegant" or "highly desired." This was as much a result of society's restricting women from being educated as it was from society's attitude that a woman's place was in the home.
You want to see the working mothers of Klal? You have only to look at the immigrant generation that arrived after WWII. Go ahead and ask your grandparents how many working women they knew of. If they're being honest they'll tell you "tons of them." My mom worked outside of the home, as did my mother in law, as did my parents and in law's cousins. Some worked together with their husbands in small businesses they eventually were able to begin. Others worked in a variety of factories. Food on the table and money to pay the rent beat out any societal grumbling about a woman's place.
And today? A woman's place is anywhere she needs it to be or wants it to be. The stark reality is that Klal has engendered a "required" lifestyle that makes it impossible for a whole lot of single earner families to comply with. Unless a husband is making uber megabucks, it is going to take two salaries to cover expenses, maybe. And perhaps this is time to mention that for a lot of the frummer families in Klal, where husbands are sitting and learning, it is the woman who is the sole wage earner. And yes, even where both husband and wife are working, there are enough cases where it is the wife that makes more money than the husband. And by the way, this isn't limited to just Klal either.
So please, let us once and for all retire the idea that SAHMism is the societal norm and the best thing for a mother to be doing. Instead, let's get practical for a change. What we need to do is make sure our women--and yes, our men too-- are well prepared and well educated, so that when they do go out to work they will qualify for jobs of a higher caliber that will pay more and have better benefits available.
And just slightly off the topic, but definitely related to it, why is it that when those ubiquitous researchers do studies about the children of SAHMs versus working mothers, they fail to include fathers in the equation? Yup, two parents are working to support the family, but if something disturbs the children it is always blamed on the mother's working. So fathers are nothing but sperm donors? Talk about an out of whack and out of date attitude that needs adjusting.
Friday, June 8, 2012
No, You Can't
At least in theory we can all recognize when two items are mutually exclusive. Either you are sleeping or you are awake, but you can't be both at the same time. However, the asifa that took place re the Internet brought up a situation where this basic rule need not apply.
Let me backtrack a moment. There is always much discussion about SAHMs--stay at home moms. For many, perhaps most, in klal this is the "only" correct place for the mother of children. I'm not arguing about the correctness of this but would point out that it is the "ideal," and is not possible for many, many mothers due to other requirements that klal has. You want parents to have large families? You want all the children in yeshivot? You want them in summer camp? You want families living in certain communities and places as opposed to others? Okay, but just how is all this going to be paid for when you also want young men sitting and learning as opposed to working? Even when--begrudgingly--you say that a man can go out to work, just how much money on average is this quite possibly under-educated and under-experienced young man going to be making?
Ah yes, silly me, I forgot about that other requirement--the one where a woman's parents are supposed to be kicking in megabucks in support. Hmmm, let me see, those parents have a SAHM in the house and they have 5 kids who between them have 31 children, all in yeshiva. And the father's name doesn't happen to be Warren Buffet. Support for their children may be a tiny drop in the bucket for what is actually needed to live the lifestyle some groups in klal insist on.
Now to get back on topic. The Internet represents a way that the mothers in situations as described above can, indeed, be in two places at once. They can be at home and they can be at work. I'm not saying it's easy to do this, but it is possible, and yes, I know women who are doing this. But that also brings up a different issue that would need to be addressed. Many of our young women are being channeled into the therapy fields or into teaching. Here's the thing--you can't do physical therapy over the Internet and you can't teach a school class that way either. (Obviously there are online classes available, but those are given by teachers employed by schools, not by SAHMs.)
So, some in klal would need to change their views about the Internet if they want SAHMs to be the rule, not the exception. Those same people would also need to change their minds about what is "suitable" employment for the SAHMs. And if they want their future SAHMs prepared to be able to work from home, they are going to have to give good instruction in computer use while these future SAHMs are in high school, or even college. And they are going to need to do some thorough and objective research about what types of jobs can be conducted over the Internet.
Those in klal who are so opposed to the Internet--and no, it's not only because of possible access to pornography--need to heed the old saying "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." The circumstances under which they would be "joining them" could be theirs to decide, but only if they first take off their blinders and look at just what century we are living in and under what circumstances.
Let me backtrack a moment. There is always much discussion about SAHMs--stay at home moms. For many, perhaps most, in klal this is the "only" correct place for the mother of children. I'm not arguing about the correctness of this but would point out that it is the "ideal," and is not possible for many, many mothers due to other requirements that klal has. You want parents to have large families? You want all the children in yeshivot? You want them in summer camp? You want families living in certain communities and places as opposed to others? Okay, but just how is all this going to be paid for when you also want young men sitting and learning as opposed to working? Even when--begrudgingly--you say that a man can go out to work, just how much money on average is this quite possibly under-educated and under-experienced young man going to be making?
Ah yes, silly me, I forgot about that other requirement--the one where a woman's parents are supposed to be kicking in megabucks in support. Hmmm, let me see, those parents have a SAHM in the house and they have 5 kids who between them have 31 children, all in yeshiva. And the father's name doesn't happen to be Warren Buffet. Support for their children may be a tiny drop in the bucket for what is actually needed to live the lifestyle some groups in klal insist on.
Now to get back on topic. The Internet represents a way that the mothers in situations as described above can, indeed, be in two places at once. They can be at home and they can be at work. I'm not saying it's easy to do this, but it is possible, and yes, I know women who are doing this. But that also brings up a different issue that would need to be addressed. Many of our young women are being channeled into the therapy fields or into teaching. Here's the thing--you can't do physical therapy over the Internet and you can't teach a school class that way either. (Obviously there are online classes available, but those are given by teachers employed by schools, not by SAHMs.)
So, some in klal would need to change their views about the Internet if they want SAHMs to be the rule, not the exception. Those same people would also need to change their minds about what is "suitable" employment for the SAHMs. And if they want their future SAHMs prepared to be able to work from home, they are going to have to give good instruction in computer use while these future SAHMs are in high school, or even college. And they are going to need to do some thorough and objective research about what types of jobs can be conducted over the Internet.
Those in klal who are so opposed to the Internet--and no, it's not only because of possible access to pornography--need to heed the old saying "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." The circumstances under which they would be "joining them" could be theirs to decide, but only if they first take off their blinders and look at just what century we are living in and under what circumstances.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Arrrrrrgggggghh!
I like to believe that I assimilated all those lessons on politeness that my mom gave me over the years. I like to believe that I have a goodly measure of self control when faced with awkward or temperature-raising situations. And then I get into a situation that has me seeing red and it's a real struggle to maintain my equanamity.
In addition to teaching I also do freelance editing/writing work. I had a meeting with a possible client about giving a short series of workshops on the basics of business communication. I knew ahead of time that the person I was meeting with was frum and that the firm's employees are also frum. I spent some long minutes staring into the contents of my closet in deciding what to wear to this business meeting. Obviously "business" dress was going to be required but whose notion of business dress? The weather wasn't making things any easier for me--it was hot, mega humid and with storms expected. In no way, shape or form was I going to get into a black suit and a full sheitle, although I suspected that was what the female employees would be wearing, or some variation thereof.
In the end I settled on hose, and a very nice two-piece long-skirted outfit in the colors of teal blue, raspberry and white. Yeah, I know guys, your eyeballs are turning up in your head. Bear with me. Instead of a sheitle I opted for a hat, which is way less heat inducing than a full sheitle. Yes, the hat was not just a baseball type of cap but a "real" hat. Yes mom, I remembered the lipstick if nothing else.
During my meeting with the client I could see him look very puzzled. Finally he told me that I was something of a puzzle to him. And then he said the words I reallllly hate to hear: "What are you?" I bit my tongue on the words "I'm female" because I so knew that was not what he was asking. He had been told by the person who recommended my that I'm frum and it was obvious that he was having some troubles putting that "frum" together with the way I was attired. What he wanted to know was what kind of frum am I.
I had already figured out this this person was 1)not going to hire me based on the money being charged for the seminars, 2)was not going to hire me based on how many more hours were going to be needed to "give them some English" as the interviewer mentioned about the employees, and 3)it had now become obvious that I wasn't going to get hired because I visually represented the "wrong" branch of observance.
I packed up my materials preparing to leave, but I did warn the interviewer that he had wandered into illegal territory with his question, that asking about religion was an EEOC violation. When his eyebrows formed a questionmark, I realized he had no idea what the EEOC was. No, I'm not filing an EEOC complaint. It was my choice not to take this job and I'm not looking to punish anyone. But somewhere down the road this company, and others like it, are looking at real problems unless they get their heads out of the ground they are buried in and become familiar with workplace practices and regulations that the government approves and disapproves of. Strangely enough, or perhaps not so strangely, those seminars I might have given to this company would have covered the basics of what an interviewer can and cannot ask at a job interview.
Their loss, in more ways than one.
In addition to teaching I also do freelance editing/writing work. I had a meeting with a possible client about giving a short series of workshops on the basics of business communication. I knew ahead of time that the person I was meeting with was frum and that the firm's employees are also frum. I spent some long minutes staring into the contents of my closet in deciding what to wear to this business meeting. Obviously "business" dress was going to be required but whose notion of business dress? The weather wasn't making things any easier for me--it was hot, mega humid and with storms expected. In no way, shape or form was I going to get into a black suit and a full sheitle, although I suspected that was what the female employees would be wearing, or some variation thereof.
In the end I settled on hose, and a very nice two-piece long-skirted outfit in the colors of teal blue, raspberry and white. Yeah, I know guys, your eyeballs are turning up in your head. Bear with me. Instead of a sheitle I opted for a hat, which is way less heat inducing than a full sheitle. Yes, the hat was not just a baseball type of cap but a "real" hat. Yes mom, I remembered the lipstick if nothing else.
During my meeting with the client I could see him look very puzzled. Finally he told me that I was something of a puzzle to him. And then he said the words I reallllly hate to hear: "What are you?" I bit my tongue on the words "I'm female" because I so knew that was not what he was asking. He had been told by the person who recommended my that I'm frum and it was obvious that he was having some troubles putting that "frum" together with the way I was attired. What he wanted to know was what kind of frum am I.
I had already figured out this this person was 1)not going to hire me based on the money being charged for the seminars, 2)was not going to hire me based on how many more hours were going to be needed to "give them some English" as the interviewer mentioned about the employees, and 3)it had now become obvious that I wasn't going to get hired because I visually represented the "wrong" branch of observance.
I packed up my materials preparing to leave, but I did warn the interviewer that he had wandered into illegal territory with his question, that asking about religion was an EEOC violation. When his eyebrows formed a questionmark, I realized he had no idea what the EEOC was. No, I'm not filing an EEOC complaint. It was my choice not to take this job and I'm not looking to punish anyone. But somewhere down the road this company, and others like it, are looking at real problems unless they get their heads out of the ground they are buried in and become familiar with workplace practices and regulations that the government approves and disapproves of. Strangely enough, or perhaps not so strangely, those seminars I might have given to this company would have covered the basics of what an interviewer can and cannot ask at a job interview.
Their loss, in more ways than one.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Work? Work!
I've mentioned before that my first language was not English. Yiddish was among those first languages. My mother and my aunt, both with beautiful voices, used to sing to us kids a whole slew of Yiddish songs from "in der heim." Decades later, when I'm busy around the house I still sing those songs, nostalgia making the work go easier.
There's been a lot of arguing about whether or not work is a concept that frum Jews need to deal with. Well, here's what they thought about it in that long ago Europe so many are so fond of romanticizing. The song? Rozhinkes mit Mandlen--raisins and almonds. The song was an old Yiddish lullaby, arranged in the form many of you might now recognize by Abraham Goldfaden (1840-1908). And yes, work, and the view of work, figures into the song.
The links below will give you the "message" as well as showcase the beautiful voices of two long ago operatic/chazonish stars--Jan Peerce and Richard Tucker.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w633M08hsaU Jan Peerce
[Note: I had this posting scheduled for today and then discovered that it happens also to be the yahrzeit of Jan Peerce. Eerie coincidence.]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M86MhMxpybg Richard Tucker
For those who don't speak/understand Yiddish, head over for the lyrics, transliteration and translation to
http://yiddishlyrics.wordpress.com/
There's been a lot of arguing about whether or not work is a concept that frum Jews need to deal with. Well, here's what they thought about it in that long ago Europe so many are so fond of romanticizing. The song? Rozhinkes mit Mandlen--raisins and almonds. The song was an old Yiddish lullaby, arranged in the form many of you might now recognize by Abraham Goldfaden (1840-1908). And yes, work, and the view of work, figures into the song.
The links below will give you the "message" as well as showcase the beautiful voices of two long ago operatic/chazonish stars--Jan Peerce and Richard Tucker.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w633M08hsaU Jan Peerce
[Note: I had this posting scheduled for today and then discovered that it happens also to be the yahrzeit of Jan Peerce. Eerie coincidence.]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M86MhMxpybg Richard Tucker
For those who don't speak/understand Yiddish, head over for the lyrics, transliteration and translation to
http://yiddishlyrics.wordpress.com/
Monday, November 9, 2009
A Female Advantage
I occasionally like to play word games online. One of the sites I prefer put up a team boggle game, which has had some pretty deep "philosophy" discussions in the chat. Inevitably the most valuable player, the one finding the most words during one of the three rounds of play, is a female. A male winning is so rare that everyone comments on it, and wonders if the player is using a bot (an anagram program). And no, it's not that there are only a few males playing, judging by the names and avatars used.
So why are females winning? The two main reasons being given on the site have application outside of the site. The first reason is that more females than males can touch type using a keyboard. For those who don't know, touch typing is typing where you do not have to look at the keyboard as you are typing the letters but look instead at the material to be typed. Touch typists are the fastest typists. Most men use the hunt and peck method. Yes, some of them get really fast at the hunting and the pecking, but they still waste time having to look up at the screen and down at the keyboard. And many mouse instead of typing, the slowest method of all.
Back when I was in high school every girl had to take a typing class for at least one term. Okay, the reasoning for it back then had to do with the fact that a whole lot of women were going to become secretaries after graduation. It was considered preparation for "women's work." However, there were always a few boys in the classes as well. When my daughters were in high school they also were required to take two semesters of keyboarding. That high school still requires the keyboarding but it's taught on computers today instead of typewriters. What is the practical result of girls being taught keyboarding? They can use computers in a faster, more accurate way than the boys can. They are more familiar with and knowledgeable about the features of a word processing program and the other basic programs taught, such as spread sheets.
For college purposes this ability of the girls to keyboard puts them at an advantage. I require that all the work done at home for my classes be typed. For many, many of the boys this is sheer agony. The lucky ones have mothers/sisters/wives who will type up their papers for them. For my in-class exams I send them to the computer labs and have them type the assignment. But first, the lab tech and I have to answer a whole slew of questions about how to do certain basic things in word processing, and it takes them well more than one period to produce a one page letter. In today's world the ability to keyboard is becoming a basic tool of virtually all businesses. And if you don't want to stay for hours after regular quitting time, you need to be able to produce your work in a timely fashion. Unfortunately, the more to the right you go, the less likely that computers have been taught to the boys in high school, the less likely they are to have developed any keyboarding skills.
The second reason given for why the females win at this word game? Better vocabularies, and more exposure to the written word. More females than males select as readers. Females are also more likely to read across a broader variety of reading literature, thus being exposed to a broader spectrum of vocabulary. Because of their broader reading they have been exposed to more word/letter combinations and will try certain combinations when playing, because they have seen the odd combinations elsewhere, than the males will.
Again, the more to the right you go, the less reading secular works is encouraged. Even girls' yeshivas offer a highly censored reading list, but at least there is a list. And parents in the home are more likely to "allow" or even encourage the girls to read widely than they are to encourage this with the boys.
So yes, boggle as a window for viewing male/female differences. Keyboarding and vocabulary knowlege are two skills highly sought after in the work world, and women have a huge advantage in these two areas. Yeshivas are doing no one a favor when they shortchange their male students in these two areas. Yes, eventually everyone is going to have to go to work, and the males are missing some key skills.
As I explained to one of my students who was grousing about having to learn to use a word processing program, "When your boss tells you he wants a memo on his desk in one hour you can't tell him that you can't make the deadline because your mother/wife is out shopping and won't get back for another two hours to type up the memo."
So why are females winning? The two main reasons being given on the site have application outside of the site. The first reason is that more females than males can touch type using a keyboard. For those who don't know, touch typing is typing where you do not have to look at the keyboard as you are typing the letters but look instead at the material to be typed. Touch typists are the fastest typists. Most men use the hunt and peck method. Yes, some of them get really fast at the hunting and the pecking, but they still waste time having to look up at the screen and down at the keyboard. And many mouse instead of typing, the slowest method of all.
Back when I was in high school every girl had to take a typing class for at least one term. Okay, the reasoning for it back then had to do with the fact that a whole lot of women were going to become secretaries after graduation. It was considered preparation for "women's work." However, there were always a few boys in the classes as well. When my daughters were in high school they also were required to take two semesters of keyboarding. That high school still requires the keyboarding but it's taught on computers today instead of typewriters. What is the practical result of girls being taught keyboarding? They can use computers in a faster, more accurate way than the boys can. They are more familiar with and knowledgeable about the features of a word processing program and the other basic programs taught, such as spread sheets.
For college purposes this ability of the girls to keyboard puts them at an advantage. I require that all the work done at home for my classes be typed. For many, many of the boys this is sheer agony. The lucky ones have mothers/sisters/wives who will type up their papers for them. For my in-class exams I send them to the computer labs and have them type the assignment. But first, the lab tech and I have to answer a whole slew of questions about how to do certain basic things in word processing, and it takes them well more than one period to produce a one page letter. In today's world the ability to keyboard is becoming a basic tool of virtually all businesses. And if you don't want to stay for hours after regular quitting time, you need to be able to produce your work in a timely fashion. Unfortunately, the more to the right you go, the less likely that computers have been taught to the boys in high school, the less likely they are to have developed any keyboarding skills.
The second reason given for why the females win at this word game? Better vocabularies, and more exposure to the written word. More females than males select as readers. Females are also more likely to read across a broader variety of reading literature, thus being exposed to a broader spectrum of vocabulary. Because of their broader reading they have been exposed to more word/letter combinations and will try certain combinations when playing, because they have seen the odd combinations elsewhere, than the males will.
Again, the more to the right you go, the less reading secular works is encouraged. Even girls' yeshivas offer a highly censored reading list, but at least there is a list. And parents in the home are more likely to "allow" or even encourage the girls to read widely than they are to encourage this with the boys.
So yes, boggle as a window for viewing male/female differences. Keyboarding and vocabulary knowlege are two skills highly sought after in the work world, and women have a huge advantage in these two areas. Yeshivas are doing no one a favor when they shortchange their male students in these two areas. Yes, eventually everyone is going to have to go to work, and the males are missing some key skills.
As I explained to one of my students who was grousing about having to learn to use a word processing program, "When your boss tells you he wants a memo on his desk in one hour you can't tell him that you can't make the deadline because your mother/wife is out shopping and won't get back for another two hours to type up the memo."
Monday, August 17, 2009
Don't Put Off...
Note to Readers: There's a bit of irony here, which you may note as you read this posting. The posting should have gone up yesterday--it didn't. C'est la vie.
Somewhere along the line I imagine we've all heard that old saying: "Don't put off until tomorrow what you can do today." I've followed this maxim many a time. And then today I rebelled. Why not do X tomorrow? It's not that the maxim says what you SHOULD do today, just what you CAN do today. If it's not a must activity then putting it off may bring no harm and could do you some good. You've been up and at 'em for hours, checking off items on your to do list. It's hot and muggy. It's the weekend, and somewhere you are supposed to find some time to relax, to enjoy yourself, to lay back. But there's that closet hiding in a corner that really needs to get looked at--who knows what is hiding in there? Unless what is hiding in there is cash money you've forgotten you've hidden there, just what about that closet is so compelling that you have to tackle it today?
Yes, I know that I am probably not going to get to that closet tomorrow, and maybe not the tomorrow after that either. So? Will the world come to an end if I don't sort out what is waiting in that closet's depths today? Will I be healthier/wealthier/wiser from cleaning out that closet today? Yes, someday that closet will need to be looked at, but just because I can do so today doesn't mean that I have to.
I know a few people who get very edgy if they are not fully occupied all the time. They need to be in constant motion. These people pack as much activity as they can into every single day. No putting off anything for them. I also know a few people I put in the doom and gloom category. They are always expecting a catastrophe to hit tomorrow, so they feel compelled to do everything they can today. Are these people really any happier than I am?
Today I've done enough. Let tomorrow bring what tomorrow will bring. The rest of today is mine. Okay, I still have a load of laundry for the dryer and a few loads to fold. Yes, dinner needs to be prepared. Okay, I need to get back to the person I'm getting a car from. Yup, I need to touch base with my mom and sister. But that closet? "Unto every thing there is a season" and today I could clean out that closet...and I'm not going to. Its "season" is just going to have to wait.
I'm not procrastinating, really! I'm making a clear cut, rational decision about time management and allotment. And yes, I'm putting myself first for a change, before all the must-do items. Who knows, I could get used to this.
Somewhere along the line I imagine we've all heard that old saying: "Don't put off until tomorrow what you can do today." I've followed this maxim many a time. And then today I rebelled. Why not do X tomorrow? It's not that the maxim says what you SHOULD do today, just what you CAN do today. If it's not a must activity then putting it off may bring no harm and could do you some good. You've been up and at 'em for hours, checking off items on your to do list. It's hot and muggy. It's the weekend, and somewhere you are supposed to find some time to relax, to enjoy yourself, to lay back. But there's that closet hiding in a corner that really needs to get looked at--who knows what is hiding in there? Unless what is hiding in there is cash money you've forgotten you've hidden there, just what about that closet is so compelling that you have to tackle it today?
Yes, I know that I am probably not going to get to that closet tomorrow, and maybe not the tomorrow after that either. So? Will the world come to an end if I don't sort out what is waiting in that closet's depths today? Will I be healthier/wealthier/wiser from cleaning out that closet today? Yes, someday that closet will need to be looked at, but just because I can do so today doesn't mean that I have to.
I know a few people who get very edgy if they are not fully occupied all the time. They need to be in constant motion. These people pack as much activity as they can into every single day. No putting off anything for them. I also know a few people I put in the doom and gloom category. They are always expecting a catastrophe to hit tomorrow, so they feel compelled to do everything they can today. Are these people really any happier than I am?
Today I've done enough. Let tomorrow bring what tomorrow will bring. The rest of today is mine. Okay, I still have a load of laundry for the dryer and a few loads to fold. Yes, dinner needs to be prepared. Okay, I need to get back to the person I'm getting a car from. Yup, I need to touch base with my mom and sister. But that closet? "Unto every thing there is a season" and today I could clean out that closet...and I'm not going to. Its "season" is just going to have to wait.
I'm not procrastinating, really! I'm making a clear cut, rational decision about time management and allotment. And yes, I'm putting myself first for a change, before all the must-do items. Who knows, I could get used to this.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Free Jewish Community Services Expo
Please check out the following information and pass it along to any and all you believe might benefit from the program.
A free Jewish Community Services Expo, presented by the OU Job Board and over 30 Co-sponsors, will be held on Sunday, April 26, 2009, from 12:00 to 4:00 PM.
Place: Lander College For Women, 227 West 60th Street (at West End Avenue), NY, NY.
Program: Learn about free services for you and your family--Meet one-on-one with people who can help--Government agencies with free benefits--30+ social service and chesed organizations.
Special Events: Expert Resume Check--by reservation only--Workshops dealing with empowerment, motivation and employment develpment6 to be presented throughout the day--walk in to attend these: no reservations needed for this workshop.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:go to www.oujobs.org or send email to [email protected].
A free Jewish Community Services Expo, presented by the OU Job Board and over 30 Co-sponsors, will be held on Sunday, April 26, 2009, from 12:00 to 4:00 PM.
Place: Lander College For Women, 227 West 60th Street (at West End Avenue), NY, NY.
Program: Learn about free services for you and your family--Meet one-on-one with people who can help--Government agencies with free benefits--30+ social service and chesed organizations.
Special Events: Expert Resume Check--by reservation only--Workshops dealing with empowerment, motivation and employment develpment6 to be presented throughout the day--walk in to attend these: no reservations needed for this workshop.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:go to www.oujobs.org or send email to [email protected].
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Where the Money's At
I ran across an interesting article on the following link which gives a listing of 25 jobs that pay $25 per hour or more, calculated on a 40-hour week over 52 weeks. As a plus, these job areas are forecast to have growth over the next years. http://msn.careerbuilder.com/Article/MSN-1801-Salaries-and-Promotions-25-Jobs-that-Pay-25-an-Hour/?sc_extcmp=JS_1801_hotmail1&SiteId=cbmsnhm41801&ArticleID=1801>1=23000&cbRecursionCnt=1&cbsid=4dcf62f335b64a28b231108d9159fbfa-287854141-wg-6 A few of them that I really hadn't thought of as being all that well paying that apparently are.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
To Work or Not to Work--Is That a Question?
Editor's Note: I had this posting scheduled months ago. In the meanwhile, two other blogs posted related articles referencing an article by Yonason Rosenblum, ( http://wolfishmusings.blogspot.com/The Answer is Nine To Five and http://orthonomics.blogspot.com/Variety Post: Links and Comments on a Whole Bunch of Stuff ) so I decided not to publish what follows. However, two things happened which changed my mind. One, the conversation with my reader that I posted about a few days ago, and two, I overheard a comment yesterday about a new choson and kallah where it was remarked "No, the kallah's parents aren't anybody special. The father works and so does the mother." That sent me scurrying to find the draft of this. The focus of Mr. Rosenblum's article was work and the Israeli Hareidi world. The problem of work is not limited to this sector, thus the posting that follows is not sector specific.
Okay, the battle has been fought, a protracted one at that, the combatants have given it their all, and it is time for the gong to ring signalling the end. All that remains is for the judges to declare a winner. "What battle is that?" you ask? The one about frum Jews and work.
"Wrong!" someone yells loudly. There are two other ways to get money: you can steal it and you can "shnorr" for it. Let's eliminate the first choice, even though we all know or know of people who play fast and loose with government programs. And yes, who play fast and loose with other people's money as well. As to the second choice, yes I suppose it is more than possible to use charity collecting as a way of providing the money you need and don't have. It's already being done. It is, however, a very risky way of providing for a family.
WORK! Just hearing that word or seeing it written out gives some people wild frissons of fear and distaste. "Work" is what the other person does, so please stop waving the word in our face. How did we get to this point? In every other argument heard in frum communities you will find someone offering psukim from Chumash, from the Gemorah or Mishnah, from the writings of the greats of our past. But the side that is so anti-work is almost strangely silent here when it comes to bringing a precedent from our Jewish writings--the only canonical basis for their argument they bring is the Yissochar/Zevulun agreement. And that argument has some flaws in it. It raises some questions for me. Not every member of Yissochar sat down and learned; some worked. And not every member of Zevulun worked; some learned. Did no other shevet have learning people in it? Yes, they did. How were they supported? Or did they support themselves? The agreement was made between two specific shvatim--who are the direct descendants of those two shvatim today? With the exception of the leviim and cohanim of today, where a genetic link has been found going back centuries, who today can prove what shevet they are descended from? And then there is that pesky little posuk that says that a father is required to teach his son a trade. Why? Just for giggles? Or because work is expected?
One way or the other, work, and those who work, is not something to be ashamed of nor something to feel "less worthy" about. In every culture on earth working is a sign of an independent adult. Are we really truly saying that adult Jews don't need to work?
And then there is this. Does a rosh yeshiva get a salary from the yeshiva? Benefits? Does he perform tasks for the yeshiva? Does he have specific duties? Then he is a working man. Does a rebbi get a salary? Benefits perhaps? Does he have specific duties he must perform? Then he is a working man. Does a shul rav get a salary? Benefits? Are there tasks that are expected he will perform? Then he is a working man. Why is it then that so many roshei hayeshiva, so many rabbaim denigrate working people? Isn't this really a case of the pot calling the kettle black? If they are going to make the argument that working is a no-no, they are going to have to give up their salaries and benefits before saying so. Otherwise it's do as I say, not as I do. Just think: if all the holier-than-thou principals and rebbis gave up their salaries, so that labeling them as "working" people would no longer be possible, schools might have more money available to actually educate students.
Okay, the battle has been fought, a protracted one at that, the combatants have given it their all, and it is time for the gong to ring signalling the end. All that remains is for the judges to declare a winner. "What battle is that?" you ask? The one about frum Jews and work.
Who are the combatants in this battle? Everyone it would seem. Younger folk who are determined to sit and learn forever. Younger folk who are determined to sit and learn to at least 25 or 26. Parents who want their boys learning. Parents who can't support their learning boys. Parents who won't support their learning boys. Parents who want their boys to learn and earn. Parents who expect the community to take care of training their children to make a living. Parents who believe it is their job to prepare their children for work. Parents who are in favor of college. Parents who are against college. Girls who want to marry a learning boy. Girls who want to marry an earning boy. Girls who want to marry a learning/earning boy. Parents of girls who want a learning boy. Parents of girls who want an earning boy.
Parents of teenagers who want their children to begin making money on their own. Parents who think that teenagers should not be working. Parents who believe that being 14 or 15 entitles you to entry level wages on the same level as adults get. Parents who want someone else to solve the problem of low wages and few jobs. Parents who have good ideas about how to provide jobs for teenagers but who have no one who will listen. Parents who refuse to even get in the middle of the discussion because it just might be bad for shidduchim some day.
Community leaders of every stripe--shul rabbis and roshei hayeshiva and school principals and seminary heads and teachers and tzedaka organization heads and doctors, lawyers and all the Indian chiefs.
Where do they all agree or disagree? On whether or not "Work" is something that the members of frum Klal should be doing. They disagree on how to define what work is. They disagree on what kind of work members of Klal should be doing. They disagree on when members of Klal should be working.
Mention one thing, though, and all the combatants agree: You can't live without money. One way or the other you need money to purchase the real necessities of life. This is where the "Work" battle bogs down--where are people going to get the money they must have?
"Wrong!" someone yells loudly. There are two other ways to get money: you can steal it and you can "shnorr" for it. Let's eliminate the first choice, even though we all know or know of people who play fast and loose with government programs. And yes, who play fast and loose with other people's money as well. As to the second choice, yes I suppose it is more than possible to use charity collecting as a way of providing the money you need and don't have. It's already being done. It is, however, a very risky way of providing for a family.
WORK! Just hearing that word or seeing it written out gives some people wild frissons of fear and distaste. "Work" is what the other person does, so please stop waving the word in our face. How did we get to this point? In every other argument heard in frum communities you will find someone offering psukim from Chumash, from the Gemorah or Mishnah, from the writings of the greats of our past. But the side that is so anti-work is almost strangely silent here when it comes to bringing a precedent from our Jewish writings--the only canonical basis for their argument they bring is the Yissochar/Zevulun agreement. And that argument has some flaws in it. It raises some questions for me. Not every member of Yissochar sat down and learned; some worked. And not every member of Zevulun worked; some learned. Did no other shevet have learning people in it? Yes, they did. How were they supported? Or did they support themselves? The agreement was made between two specific shvatim--who are the direct descendants of those two shvatim today? With the exception of the leviim and cohanim of today, where a genetic link has been found going back centuries, who today can prove what shevet they are descended from? And then there is that pesky little posuk that says that a father is required to teach his son a trade. Why? Just for giggles? Or because work is expected?
One way or the other, work, and those who work, is not something to be ashamed of nor something to feel "less worthy" about. In every culture on earth working is a sign of an independent adult. Are we really truly saying that adult Jews don't need to work?
And then there is this. Does a rosh yeshiva get a salary from the yeshiva? Benefits? Does he perform tasks for the yeshiva? Does he have specific duties? Then he is a working man. Does a rebbi get a salary? Benefits perhaps? Does he have specific duties he must perform? Then he is a working man. Does a shul rav get a salary? Benefits? Are there tasks that are expected he will perform? Then he is a working man. Why is it then that so many roshei hayeshiva, so many rabbaim denigrate working people? Isn't this really a case of the pot calling the kettle black? If they are going to make the argument that working is a no-no, they are going to have to give up their salaries and benefits before saying so. Otherwise it's do as I say, not as I do. Just think: if all the holier-than-thou principals and rebbis gave up their salaries, so that labeling them as "working" people would no longer be possible, schools might have more money available to actually educate students.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
I Found My Major: What am I Going to Earn?
The following information is taken from a Forbes Magazine article written by Kurt Badenhausen on June 8, 2008. The title is "Most Lucrative College Majors."
See the complete article here http://www.forbes.com/2008/06/18/college-majors-lucrative-lead-cx_kb_0618majors.html?feed=rss_popstories
The following information from the article is important in gauging the importance of the information presented. "To gauge the most lucrative majors, we turned to PayScale.com, which collects real-time salary information from 10 million users. They looked at 20 popular majors where most of the graduates go into the private sector; thus, some popular majors, like education and social work, were excluded.
We looked at median salaries to wipe out outliers at the top and bottom ends of the scale. (Emphasis mine) Salaries included bonuses and commissions, but excluded any stock compensation. All jobs were included in the data, not just those specific to the major. Anyone who acquired an advanced degree was excluded from the study."
Keep in mind that the jobs below are talking about salary ranges for jobs that mostly require a BA/BS college degree. Advanced degrees can up the ante considerably in the fields that require a college degree. The range is from entry level to twenty years.
Computer engineering ($60,500-$104,000)
Economics ($48,000-$96,200)
Electrical engineering ($59,900-$96,100)
Computer science ($54,200-$94,000)
Mechanical engineering ($56,900-$88,100)
Finance ($46,900-$84,400)
Mathematics ($43,500-$82,200)
Civil engineering ($52,600-$81,700)
Political Science ($39,400-$74,400)
Marketing ($39,400-$72,300)
Accounting ($44,600-$71,500)
History ($37,600-$68,000)
Business Management ($40,900-$64,900)
Communications ($36,400--$64,300)
English ($36,700-$62,300)
Biology (37,900-$60,000)
Sociology ($35,700-$55,900)
Graphic Design ($34,700-$54,700)
Psychology ($34,700-$54,000)
Criminal Justice ($34,200-$53,400)
This list might help in answering the question of what a college degree is worth.
See the complete article here http://www.forbes.com/2008/06/18/college-majors-lucrative-lead-cx_kb_0618majors.html?feed=rss_popstories
The following information from the article is important in gauging the importance of the information presented. "To gauge the most lucrative majors, we turned to PayScale.com, which collects real-time salary information from 10 million users. They looked at 20 popular majors where most of the graduates go into the private sector; thus, some popular majors, like education and social work, were excluded.
We looked at median salaries to wipe out outliers at the top and bottom ends of the scale. (Emphasis mine) Salaries included bonuses and commissions, but excluded any stock compensation. All jobs were included in the data, not just those specific to the major. Anyone who acquired an advanced degree was excluded from the study."
Keep in mind that the jobs below are talking about salary ranges for jobs that mostly require a BA/BS college degree. Advanced degrees can up the ante considerably in the fields that require a college degree. The range is from entry level to twenty years.
Computer engineering ($60,500-$104,000)
Economics ($48,000-$96,200)
Electrical engineering ($59,900-$96,100)
Computer science ($54,200-$94,000)
Mechanical engineering ($56,900-$88,100)
Finance ($46,900-$84,400)
Mathematics ($43,500-$82,200)
Civil engineering ($52,600-$81,700)
Political Science ($39,400-$74,400)
Marketing ($39,400-$72,300)
Accounting ($44,600-$71,500)
History ($37,600-$68,000)
Business Management ($40,900-$64,900)
Communications ($36,400--$64,300)
English ($36,700-$62,300)
Biology (37,900-$60,000)
Sociology ($35,700-$55,900)
Graphic Design ($34,700-$54,700)
Psychology ($34,700-$54,000)
Criminal Justice ($34,200-$53,400)
This list might help in answering the question of what a college degree is worth.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
On Holidays, Holy Days and Days Off
The US is not alone in having federally mandated legal holidays; many other countries have these holidays as well. Many companies will close on these holidays; employees have no choice as to whether they wish to work on them or not. Other companies, whose services perhaps are required 24/7, will have at least skeleton crews around on a legal holiday; those who work on the holiday are given a compensatory day off of their choosing or are paid at time and a half. Some companies offer their employees "bonus" days in connection to a legal holiday, giving off the Friday after Thanksgiving, for example. In addition to the legal holidays companies also offer sick days--the number allotted varies-- and vacation days. Schools, which are a type of business, also offer days off during the "work" year. So what, you say?
There is a lot of grumpiness out there whenever an occasion for a day off from work occurs. One reason for this grumpiness is that different businesses offer wholly different days off from what other businesses are offering. In a practical sense you can have Dad with a day off while Mom doesn't have one, or vice versa. Now add in two or three different schools with different days off, or 1/2 days off, and you can have a family scheduling nightmare. For religious people you have the added headache of when holy days fall during the week.
My husband's company has a solution that has worked well for years, and I don't know why other companies do not follow suit. His company started out as a privately owned concern, with mostly frum employees. The company offers some services that are of a 24/7 nature and some that are not. Even now that the company is a subsidiary of a mega multi-national firm, its days off policy has remained the same. Someone was smart enough to understand that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." The policy? Each employee, depending on rank and on number of years worked, gets X number of days off from work a year. How an employee takes those days is strictly up to the employee. You want to take off on chol hamoed? No problem. You want to work on Thanksgiving? No problem. Non-Jewish employees take off the days that are important to them; Jewish employees take off the days that are important to them as well. It's not all hefker either. Employees still have to indicate when they will be taking off so that the bosses know what coverage will be available in the firm. But it's a lot easier for these employees to coordinate with their children's school schedules and with their spouses' schedules than if they were on a set calendar of days off.
This policy would work well for an awful lot of businesses that are out there, but not, unfortunately, for all. Schools in particular cannot offer their teachers this kind of a schedule. You can't just plug in substitutes and expect the type of continuity necessary for excellent learning to take place. But there is no reason that other businesses cannot think about adopting this policy. It would allow the type of flexibility that would be helpful to families. It's certainly something that you might want to bring up with your supervisors when you are planning how to take your days off. Again, it might not work for every business concern, but for the ones where it could work it produces a very happy staff.
There is a lot of grumpiness out there whenever an occasion for a day off from work occurs. One reason for this grumpiness is that different businesses offer wholly different days off from what other businesses are offering. In a practical sense you can have Dad with a day off while Mom doesn't have one, or vice versa. Now add in two or three different schools with different days off, or 1/2 days off, and you can have a family scheduling nightmare. For religious people you have the added headache of when holy days fall during the week.
My husband's company has a solution that has worked well for years, and I don't know why other companies do not follow suit. His company started out as a privately owned concern, with mostly frum employees. The company offers some services that are of a 24/7 nature and some that are not. Even now that the company is a subsidiary of a mega multi-national firm, its days off policy has remained the same. Someone was smart enough to understand that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." The policy? Each employee, depending on rank and on number of years worked, gets X number of days off from work a year. How an employee takes those days is strictly up to the employee. You want to take off on chol hamoed? No problem. You want to work on Thanksgiving? No problem. Non-Jewish employees take off the days that are important to them; Jewish employees take off the days that are important to them as well. It's not all hefker either. Employees still have to indicate when they will be taking off so that the bosses know what coverage will be available in the firm. But it's a lot easier for these employees to coordinate with their children's school schedules and with their spouses' schedules than if they were on a set calendar of days off.
This policy would work well for an awful lot of businesses that are out there, but not, unfortunately, for all. Schools in particular cannot offer their teachers this kind of a schedule. You can't just plug in substitutes and expect the type of continuity necessary for excellent learning to take place. But there is no reason that other businesses cannot think about adopting this policy. It would allow the type of flexibility that would be helpful to families. It's certainly something that you might want to bring up with your supervisors when you are planning how to take your days off. Again, it might not work for every business concern, but for the ones where it could work it produces a very happy staff.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)