Valuing work

The results of the Bureau of Labor Statistics' new survey of how American spend their time (http://www.bls.gov/tus/home.htm#news), which were announced this week, offered little new news. Working women get less sleep and spend more time cleaning the house and taking care of the kids vs. their male counterparts. Any one of us working mothers could have told you that.

I found the survey more interesting when I considered the message it sent about the value this society puts on paid work. The BLS separates "work" -- the kind of work you get paid for it -- and "caring for family members" and "housework" -- the kind of work you do for free. Of course, this is something feminsts have been complaining about for years, something that has spawned the politically correct question sprung whenever we meet a mother: "Do you work or do you work at home?

Perhaps if we looked at this work done at home, mostly by women, in a different way -- perhaps if those who do it were paid for it or at least made eligible for social security as Ann Crittenden suggests in The Price of Motherhood (www.anncrittenden.com) -- we would value it differently.

To some, I know this smacks of socialism, or at least of the ever expanding reach of big government. But if ALL work was given a measurable value, both the corporate decision-maker jobs that men have typically filled and the home management responsibilities that women have handled, our perceptions of their importance would be levelled. The importance of the cleaning and cooking and child rearing would be elevated, put on a relative par with those office jobs, increasing their attractiveness. This couldn't help but open more doors for women in the organized leadership positions of U.S. society while giving men a greater appreciation for the issues women have always cared about. It seems like we would be bound to come out with a fairer and more humane society as a result.