<p>It sounds like they may have had a problem with employees taking advantage of the flexibility that working from home offers. Where I work we can work from home but we have to sign an agreement that, among other things, we wouldn’t be trying to take care of kids while we were supposed to be working. I personally don’t work from home, there are too many distractions, but other people I work with do and I don’t question for a minute if they are working or not, they are the type of people that I know that they are.</p>
<p>That said, I don’t think Marissa Mayer should have built herself a nursery connected to her office. I think it’s bad for morale because it sets herself above everybody else too much. I know she is the CEO and so she is entitled to perks like a bigger office and a better parking space but kids shouldn’t be at work and that should apply to everyone.</p>
<p>"When a talented woman breaks through the glass ceiling and makes it to the CEO’s office, there seems to be an impulse to prove very quickly that she’s just as much, if not more, of a ****buster as the men who came before her.</p>
<p>And how’s that any different from men? I worked for a department that went through 8 VPs in 10 years, 3 of them women. The men were just as eager to prove the presence of their, ah, balls as their predecessors, whether that predecessor was male or female.</p>
<p>Your observation reminds me of that adage - when a man is aggressive, he’s being a leader; when a woman is agressive, she’s being a b***…</p>
<p>Katliamom: I’m a woman and a feminist (and a b****, ask my ex). And I’m old. Like I said, that’s my personal observation from my decades as a corporate cog - that women who break the glass feeling seem not to feel secure unless they can out-man the men. Sometimes it’s a change - more rigid, less flexible - from who they seemed to be at the VP level and below (again, personal observation, as I don’t know Marissa Mayer from a hole in the wall).</p>
<p>I feel like we will finally be equal when that is not necessary.</p>
<p>Lindz126 - I’m not a feminist, or an anything-ist…at least I try not to be. I am for equality, not the advancement of one gender or any other group over another.</p>
<p>I don’t like the term feminist in today’s society. It had its place and time - it was much needed and valuable. I don’t like it for use today. Just my opinion.</p>
<p>No, I haven’t seen anyone behave that way in the workplace. I have seen people who call themselves feminists behave that way in politics and in the media. I find it shrill and distasteful. That is WHY it’s a stereotype…because there are high profile women who behave that way.</p>
<p>Yahoo Finance is quite good. I use it for fundamental analysis. It’s quite a bit better than Google Finance which seems geared more towards technical analysis and short-term trading. Yahoo’s stock screeners are also quite good.</p>
<p>A lot of other Yahoo properties, though, don’t compare well with Google’s properties.</p>
<p>cromette----just wondering when was the last time you saw a feminist behave that way in the media or politics, maybe late 80’s? Feminism IS about equality…and was never about the advancement of one gender over another…</p>
<p>I met Gloria Steinem at the Presidential debate in October 2012, and she was intelligent, gentle, warm, soft spoken, and lovely…just saying</p>
<p>Not really looking for an argument. You seem to associate/identify with the term feminist, and you are sincere about its meaning to you. Good enough for me. Not meaning to offend.</p>
<p>I have known some offensive and shrill man-haters and yes, have seen them in the media, fairly recently, don’t know when exactly, but I know what offends me when I see it.</p>
<p>I get that it’s not everyone. </p>
<p>I disagree vehemently with a lot that Gloria Steinmen says (her philosophy on things), but I’m sure she’s a wonderful and personable lady.</p>
<p>thanks for the acknowledgment, and I too don’t want to argue. I can respect you having a different view of feminism, just wanted to clarify that implying that feminism is about one gender over another or that feminists are just shrill angry women is inaccurate. </p>
<p>my 21 yr old soft spoken, kind daughter sees herself as a feminist due to her belief in equality. it’s not just our generation…and it shouldn’t be a dirty word.</p>
<p>OP finally back here. First off, thanks Thumper for having my back </p>
<p>I have not been avoiding you all. I have a WFH job running a company with my DH and this past year took on an onsite job. That was manageable but last week I added a second onsite job and life got a little crazy. That’s three jobs…thank you recession and empty nest. </p>
<p>I knew when I posted that a lot of emotion would follow. A little background on my own life might help some people understand my views on this one whether you agree or not.
I was a SAHM for a few years when my children were very young. During that time I did WFH particularly when my firstborn arrived and my company wasn’t ready to let me go.<br>
I’ve worked lots of onsite jobs, including working during a time when it was acceptable for the boss to make sexist remarks and pinch your butt in full view of other co-workers. Also worked early on in some places where I was much younger than my co-managers and had to prove myself to earn their respect. Ageism anyone? The glass ceiling had been above my head firmly in place for years when my DH started his company which is in a 99 percent male based industry. I left a full time on site job to go work with him. Put up with a lot of nonsense and nasty men but gained their respect along the way. </p>
<p>So…I do consider myself a feminist and I have a lot of years under my belt in jobs of all types, both WFH and onsite. </p>
<p>That said, I stand by what I originally said about Ms. Mayer. While some find it sexist to say that a female CEO shouldn’t take such a minimal maternity leave and it would be okay for a man I do not. I consider it biology. We are talking about a two week old baby here. Even puppies get six weeks with their mothers. I support both Dads and Moms taking at least four weeks and hopefully six to bond with a new infant. There is a physical bonding process that takes place. In my mind anyway this is completely different from those who posted that their mothers worked and they were in day care. I’m talking about six weeks here. </p>
<p>What some people who WFH for Yahoo may be achieving by working for home is a work/life balance. A flexibility that allows dedicated workers to get their work done. For instance, yesterday I went to the gym at 8:30am but then worked till 9:00pm. Of course, if I had needed to be in an office or on a call I wouldn’t have done that and I don’t do it daily. </p>
<p>All of us strive for that, obviously included Ms. Mayer. What she has done in building the nursery in her office is create a blend of work/life. For her employees that is not possible. I understand that worker bees don’t get the same perks as CEOs in terms of cars, money, etc. as was pointed out earlier but shouldn’t your best and brightest workers get the same perks in terms of being able to achieve work/life balance?<br>
Ms. Mayer has the right to do whatever she wants with Yahoo. After all, she is the boss. But I saw this reaction as a bit of an over reaction which may cause Yahoo to lose, along with their dead weight, some of their best and brightest. </p>
<p>And btw, I wouldn’t start a thread just to be a ■■■■■. I don’t have time.</p>
<p>“What she has done in building the nursery in her office is create a blend of work/life. For her employees that is not possible.” </p>
<p>Very true. Highly paid executives can buy a lot of time with their kids that the rest of us can’t. A woman I read about, a high powered lawyer, admitted that while she never missed her kids’ sporting events (even the after-school ones) she also didn’t ever make breakfast for her boys. The nanny/housekeeper did. Another high executive I know would have the nanny bring the baby to work so that mom & baby could spend an hour together over lunch at least a couple of times a week. </p>
<p>As the huge income gap between executive salaries and worker-bee salaries grows to un-heard-of proportions, those on top lose sight of just how hard it is to balance life/work for the mere worker.</p>
<p>Here is a thought: will similar companies nearby to Yahoo emulate this policy and demand that all WAHs come daily to the office, or will they attempt to poach the impacted WAH workers?</p>
<p>Although some people at Yahoo may be abusing the WAH policy, I suspect there are others who are quite competent but need this sort of policy because of decisions they have made in their lives.</p>
<p>For example, an employee might have moved to a community a 2-hour drive from the Yahoo office so that his/her spouse could take a job in that community. This employee may have counted on Yahoo’s WAH policy to make this arrangement practical. Driving 4 hours a day 5 days a week is not acceptable to most people; doing it once or twice a week may be. I think that an employee like this would be ripe for the picking.</p>
<p>Office space and resources aren’t free and I’ve seen many companies essentially kicking people out of offices and forcing them to work from home (or quit). The Yahoo move may start a lot of conversations at higher levels but I don’t think that they will change things that much in software development.</p>
<p>Perhaps the term Yahoo’d will mean companies that aren’t doing well so they make everyone come into the office. How would that reflect on management?</p>
</p>