St.Louis Business Journal
BRING BACK THE “MOMMY TRACK”—BUT MAKE IT AN OPTION FOR EVERYONE

By Anna Navarro

November 2006  

Author's note: Client stories in this column are based on actual situations fictionalized to protect privacy and told with permission.

History has a way of repeating itself - especially in the work world. For those of us old enough to remember, the seventies brought a profound change in workplace rules. Women in professional and management jobs could opt out of the career fast track and jump onto the "mommy track." Sure it came with trade-offs - less authority and decision-making powers, fewer opportunities for promotions and a smaller paycheck. But for many, the freedom to leave at 5 o-clock every day and have your weekends reserved for family only, was worth the price.

And now, 30 years and a generation later, employees are again seeking to find an alternative to the fast track. Dual career couples with kids, older employees who want to work shorter hours and students who have to balance school and work demands and others are looking for a way to manage their demanding lives.

Erin had been an associate in a large law firm for seven years. She was an excellent tax attorney. She had two kids under five and a husband whose job required constant travel.

She and her husband agreed prior to having kids that she would be the one to oversee the management of the household and the kids' lives. It was often a stretch for her to balance work and family. She had been able to manage it only because of a very understanding boss who valued her contribution and was willing to accommodate her needs.

But her boss was retiring in a year. His successor was a man inclined to operate by the rulebook. He had already expressed concern that Erin consistently billed fewer hours than the firm's norm for associates.

Erin was worried about her future under this new boss. She sought my help because she was afraid his expectations would make it impossible for her to balance her home and work life. To complicate matters, she was about to enter the timeframe when she would be evaluated for partner.

My advice was to be proactive in getting the firm to officially sanction a career path that would fit her lifestyle. She was going to need that as a tool in managing her boss-to-be's expectations. I urged her to get this effort underway while her existing boss was still on board, and before partnership issues came to the forefront.

First she researched the alternative career paths that existed in firms across the country. She discovered many had created a non-equity partner role that allowed for working fewer hours and didn’t carry with it expectations of business development or firm management. It usually paid less, didn’t include an ownership stake in the firm and didn’t allow a voice in firm management. These were tradeoffs Erin was willing to live with.

Her next step was to approach her current boss for help in getting a non-equity partner track established. He was supportive and agreed to take the issue to his successor.

The successor was, predictably, not as receptive to Erin’s proposal as her current boss. He didn’t welcome change. But after several rounds of discussion he finally gave his consent to bringing the issue to the firm’s management committee.

It took several management committee meetings, and a lot of lobbying but the proposal finally passed by a razor thin margin. It gave Erin exactly what she needed to be able to stay at the firm in a way that made a contribution without jeopardizing her family life.

Erin’s area of the law was, fortunately, one that lent itself to this kind of arrangement. She could control her hours by the number of tax matters she took on.

In general, this approach works best for those who work on a project basis where the demands of the project can be predicted and controlled, for example, consultants, writers and IT specialists. It doesn't work as well for jobs that involve continuous functions like managing people, receptionist, finance or maintenance.

What was disrespectfully called the “Mommy track” in the past is a wonderful option for anyone—male or female—whose job lends itself to short term or project work, who is capable of making a significant contribution and who wants to set limits on how much of themselves they invest in work.

Anna Navarro is the founder of Work Transitions, a nationwide career consulting firm that trains independent career strategists and consults with individual clients.

This column was originally published by the St. Louis Business Journal. The actual title of the column and date in which it appeared in the Business Journal may be slightly different from what appears on WorkTransitions.com.