Search News


Browse Archives

News

Housework Help as a New Benefit

January 19, 2010

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

When Carol W. Greider of Johns Hopkins University learned that she won the 2009 Nobel Prize in Medicine, she was doing laundry.

That fact is cited in a new analysis of academic scientists and housework -- being published today by Academe, the magazine of the the American Association of University Professors, and calling for colleges to create an option for faculty members and others to have financial assistance for housework as an employee benefit. The study finds that even among dual career scientist couples, the time gap spent on housework is hindering the advancement of women.

The study found that female scientists with male partners perform 54 percent of their family housework (cooking, cleaning and laundry) in their households, while male scientists with female partners perform 28 percent of their family housework. While there are other tasks on which the male scientists contribute a majority of time (yard, house and car care), those tasks take much less time a week than those that women are more likely to perform. It adds up to a 10-hour drain on the time of female scientists, the study finds.

The study was conducted by Londa Schiebinger, the John L. Hinds Professor of History of Science and director of the Clayman Institute for Gender Research at Stanford University, and Shannon Gilmartin, a quantitative analyst and the institute. The data come from a large research project at the institute, "Dual Career Academic Couples: What Universities Need to Know." Schiebinger and Gilmartin used data collected for that report from 1,222 tenured and tenure-track faculty members in the natural sciences at leading universities. Those studied were all partnered with someone of the opposite sex. (Data were also collected from same-sex couples, but the totals were too small to draw conclusions on them.)

Among the other findings:

  • Male scientists with stay-at-home partners do the least household work, relying on their female partners to do 76 percent of such work.
  • While very few women in the survey (13) have stay-at-home male partners, they do more housework than their male counterparts.
  • The men and women in the study reported nearly identical hours a week at work -- mean of 56.4 hours for men and 56.3 hours for women.
  • Men and women who employ others to do housework are more productive than those who don't employ others. (Productivity is measured by number of published articles.)

Based on these findings, the authors suggest that colleges recognize that housework is "an academic issue" and revise benefits packages accordingly. They suggest that institutions offer flexible packages of benefits, in which financial assistance for housework would be one possible benefit. They write that some employees might not want the benefit and would prefer, based on their personal or family situations, other benefits. But the option should be included, they write.

"One appealing aspect of this benefit proposal is its inclusivity -- one need not be partnered or have children to gain access," they write.

Schiebinger and Gilmartin acknowledge that, given the economic downturn, this may not be "the right time" to propose a major expansion of benefits. But they say that over the long run, this is an issue that should be addressed.

"Providing benefits to support housework continues dominant social trends of the past 40 years," they write. "U.S. institutions have stepped into the domestic sphere to support aspects of private life, from health-care benefits to child-care supplements. Institutions now need to step in to support housework."

Cathy A. Trower, research director and co-principal Investigator of the Collaborative On Academic Careers in Higher Education, at Harvard University, said she wasn't surprised by the findings on housework. But she said she feared that this may not be the issue that most needs reform.

"I'm all for more benefits for faculty and household help would be great for everyone -- singles and marrieds and men and women. Bravo," she said.

But the larger question is whether such changes would actually help many women (and men). COACHE's surveys of young faculty members have found significant frustrations with work/family balance in higher education, but the surveys have also found many young scholars who don't just want more help, but want different models, with more time for family or non-academic pursuits.

Too much attention to issues like housework may shift attention away from broader reforms, Trower said. She has written about the need for different models for faculty careers -- long-term renewable contracts, tenure expectations that may not require 60 hours a week in the lab and so forth -- as the best way to create more options. Focusing on benefits -- such as how many times you can stop the tenure clock or whether you should be paid for hiring household help -- doesn't address the question of whether the system is one to bolster or needs real reform.

"What I am against is the lack of flexibility and the seeming inability to confront openly the issues at play," she said.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Housework Help as a New Benefit

  • Posted by non a young faculty person on January 19, 2010 at 8:00am EST
  • I suppose this is a serious article. So the University is to provide child care, and now a housekeeper. And we thought the old model of the University acting in loco parentis was passe. I see now it is not, but has only shifted from the students to the faculty--doing for its young faculty what Grandma and Grandpa used to do. Progress is wonderful, we should all have more of it.

  • Household Benefits Don't Make Sense
  • Posted by Gary on January 19, 2010 at 8:15am EST
  • It doesn't make sense to suggest that an employer (university or otherwise) should provide household assistance as an employee benefit because such assistance is not tax deductible. The only advantage of having an employer provide a benefit rather than having the employees pay for it themselves is when the cost of the benefit is not taxable income to the employee. A university that provided household assistance to its employees/faculty would have to include the cost of that benefit in the employee's W-2 taxable income. So it would in effect simply be an increase in taxable compensation that would only go to employees that wanted household help. It would make more sense and be fairer just to give everyone a big raise (assuming the resources were available) and let each employee decide whether to spend the after-tax dollars from that raise on household help or something else.

  • Posted by K.T. on January 19, 2010 at 9:15am EST
  • If faculty -- men or women -- can't keep up with a job and housework, then they have much larger problems in life. If there is a problem of uneven distribution of household chores, that's a marital issue, not an employer issue.

    The inherent sense of entitlement in this proposal is absolutely stunning.

  • You must be kidding
  • Posted by Working woman on January 19, 2010 at 9:15am EST
  • Housework as an academic issue? Puh-leeze! All working women face the struggle of balancing demands at home with demands at work, and researchers have found a gender gap in the sharing of household duties in all walks of life. To suggest that the academy is somehow special and faculty should get housekeeping as a benefit is the height of arrogance! Cathy Trower is right to point out that what's needed are new workplace models that provide flexibility for all employees.

  • How bout a Chauffeur and Cook too
  • Posted by Mike on January 19, 2010 at 9:45am EST
  • With budget cuts everywhere, this author suggests maid service for the busy professor. Who says academics are out of touch?

  • Posted by Untenured on January 19, 2010 at 10:00am EST
  • Heck, yes! But it shouldn't just be for women -- it should be for any untenured faculty member. Anyone who's been here knows that there's a lot of work that goes on outside of the hours one is on campus, and it's pretty much ignored. With all that's required in my position, I realized at one point that I could have a good relationship, or I could have a clean home. It was not technically possible with the demands of my work and my partner's work to have both and to have some quality time as well. Oh yeah, did I mention that we like to eat vegetables, and that good ones don't come in a microwaveable box?

    If faculty had a 35 or 40 hour week and were not forced to work outside of those hours, maybe they would have time to dust, mop the floors, and clean the bathroom. (Laundry, on the other hand, can be done while you're doing other things.)

  • OMG
  • Posted by Annoyd Ph.D. on January 19, 2010 at 10:00am EST
  • Good comments so far from the above posters...it's probably good for scientists to be pulled out of their labs and experience some balance in their lives, slumming it with the rest of us laundry-doers and toilet scrubbers.

    Who knows? Maybe doing things like the laundry or cooking gives people a chance to mull over things and gets the creative juices flowing due to the change of environment.

    Anyway, I need to go...my au pair is calling with yet ANOTHER question about how to wash the carpets in our sixth bedroom (sigh)

  • Faculty Entitlement
  • Posted by ADD on January 19, 2010 at 10:15am EST
  • I've only been a professor for a dozen years, but I'm starting to feel old because I don't understand the attitudes of my younger colleagues. They expect the university to do everything. Well, they did until the recession hit. They've asked the university to provide childcare. They complain about twice a month faculty meetings that run to 5:30 because of childcare issues. Never mind that we have otherwise very flexible schedules. They requested that the university help them with housing expenses. Now, this article suggests that schools should provide housekeepers. Please, just give me a decent salary and let me decide how to spend it. I don't want my university deciding which choices should be considered benefits.

  • Housework
  • Posted by Neosha Mackey , Dean of Library Services at Missouri State University on January 19, 2010 at 10:45am EST
  • So what is the problem of "When Carol W. Greider of Johns Hopkins University learned that she won the 2009 Nobel Prize in Medicine, she was doing laundry." If she wants to hire out the laundry or have a housekeeper, she can surely afford it. If not, she can do it herself. Even Nobel prize winners have dirty clothes, dust and other housekeeping things that need to be done.

    Yes, division of labor in the home is a marital/partnership issue, not something that the employer solves.

  • Posted by Laura on January 19, 2010 at 11:30am EST
  • I do not feel sympathy for women based on reports that they do more of the housework than their husbands. All spouses have their good attributes and their bad attributes. It is not the responsibility of the employer to compensate for your spouse's weaknesses.

    If having a spouse do more housework than you is important to you then you should select a spouse with that quality.

  • You've Come a Long Way Baby
  • Posted by mb on January 19, 2010 at 12:15pm EST
  • "All working women face the struggle of balancing demands at home with demands at work, and researchers have found a gender gap in the sharing of household duties in all walks of life."

    This is exactly the kind of attitude that I though feminism was against. /cynicism

    The fact is that all people, women and men alike, struggle with balancing work/home demands, it's just that men tend to not whine about it and just get on with life. The University of Michigan Institute for Social Research published a study a few years back that showed that while women did indeed do more housework, the amount was minimal. What the politically correct, feminist-leaning researchers failed to include in their Executive Summary, but which was buried deep in the full report, was that men tended to do more job-related work, and when the two were balanced it turned-out that that men actually did several hours more work for the benefit of the household than women did, even in two-career couples. Therefore, because feminists have a long and well-documented track record of not telling the whole truth on much of anything relating to gender, I don't trust this report from the Clayman Institute for Gender Research at Stanford University any more than any other advocacy work.

    Regardless, I agree with others that state such things should not be the business of employers but instead is rightfully seen as a marital/family issues. Besides, I thought that women wanted to be treated fairly via the same rules and standards as men in the workplace? So why do we see over and over again that when women are brought into a male-dominated workplace, ostensibly to be treated "equally," they work to change the rules of the game to favor themselves. That's hardly what I would call "fair" but alas, is par for the course in feminist-inspired venues like modern Western academia.

  • Posted by Untenured 2 on January 19, 2010 at 12:15pm EST
  • Keep in mind that the study and recommendations were focused around findings for scientists in academia. Academic science has a particularly acute shortage of women. It is often suggested by science faculty (especially female faculty) that the burdens of being an academic scientist (as opposed to an industry professional, or a professor in some other discipline) are particularly incompatible with family life, and that this is a key reason (though of course not the only reason) why academic science has a worse shortage of women than other academic fields and other career paths. If that is true, then perhaps this makes sense in the interests of diversity. OTOH, if academic science is not uniquely difficult (and my friends on the other side of campus certainly don't seem to have it easy) then perhaps work and family are not the key variables here, and this sort of benefits package does not make sense.

    Personally, I am sketpical that this is the key variable. Medical doctors work long hours, academics in other disciplines work long hours (and often for less pay than science faculty) yet they do not have the same gender disparities as science. Still, everyone assures me that this is the key variable, and it is often best not to argue with what everyone says...

  • Assertiveness Training Instead?
  • Posted by Mark on January 19, 2010 at 1:30pm EST
  • Perhaps the Universities in question should be encouraging women to just not do their household chores until their husband's shape up and do their share? I think it's an absolute disgrace that men in America think that they can still get away with 'manly' chores such as mowing the lawn and cleaning the car once a week!

    It feels like the article is describing a scenario out of the TV show Mad Men.

  • get a hose keeper
  • Posted by Jeff Frelinger , Professor/Immunology at UNC on January 19, 2010 at 1:45pm EST
  • This reflects my advice to all the young female faculty I hired during my time as chair. It was always - pay someone else to clean your toilets. Spend your family time with your family, not cleaning the bathroom. For the record all the women I hired (5/5 primary and 3/3 joint) all got tenure.

  • What are they smoking???
  • Posted by Paul on January 19, 2010 at 2:00pm EST
  • I can't believe these people are serious!! Adding "housework benefits" as part of your hiring package? Are they nuts?! Housework is something that's entirely separate from your job! It's a common fact of life, and it must be done. You're not supposed to get paid for doing that unless you're a maid by occupation.

    But if, by some strange chance, that the majority of universities do make "housework" part of a paid benefits package, I expect a butler to be delivered right to my front door immediately. JEEVES!

  • Why pick on the academics?
  • Posted by Kaija on January 19, 2010 at 2:30pm EST
  • If the Research I universities believe that their science faculty would be more productive, more effective, and stick around longer if they subsidized <insert personal life issue here>, then they might give it a try. Law firms, financial institutions, investment banks, all kinds of businesses provide some pretty nice to pretty basic "subsidies" or perks to keep their employees on the job longer and harder...car service and food delivery for those who stay late, transit passes, laundry/dry cleaning service...but no one is ranting about how "anyone can walk around the corner to the deli/Starbucks and grab a snack". For some reason, people love to think about academics as living in some out of touch bubble where they don't really work hard and don't live in the real world. I bet there's a ton of investement bankers and CEOs who are "out of touch" and wondering how they will manage to live on less than half a mil and a smaller household staff.

  • What It Says
  • Posted by cts on January 19, 2010 at 2:45pm EST
  • I think this is an odd idea, but many of the comments seem to miss what is being proposed:

    "They suggest that institutions offer flexible packages of benefits, in which financial assistance for housework would be one possible benefit. They write that some employees might not want the benefit and would prefer, based on their personal or family situations, other benefits. But the option should be included, they write."

    In other words, in a flexible benefits program, add housekeeping costs as an option. Not just for women and not for those who prefer to use their benefit $$ otherwise. So, faculty/staff who have no childcare needs/costs could enjoy the benefit of housekeeping help.

    Kooky, but hardly an imposition on anyone.

  • Posted by mb on January 19, 2010 at 3:15pm EST
  • To Untenured 2: Remember, the men in the STEM fields have exactly the same problems vis-a-vis housework (we have to wash our clothes, cook our meals, etc.) so this isn't simply a women's issue. And I'm here to tell you, from many years experience as a bachelor, housework is trivial compared to tasks traditionally considered to be "men's work" both at home and at work. Bottom line: women do not have it any harder than men do, they just complain more.

    Mark said: "I think it's an absolute disgrace that men in America think that they can still get away with 'manly' chores such as mowing the lawn and cleaning the car once a week!"

    And I think it's an absolute disgrace that women in America think that they can still get away with using children as an excuse to stay home and do trivial 'womanly' chores like housekeeping and child-rearing while the men slave away in the workplace to earn the money to allow women that luxury.

    Women complain about doing housework, they complain about working outside the home. Will they ever stop complaining, suck it up and get on with work and life? Just like a man?

  • Housekeepers
  • Posted by Senior faculty on January 19, 2010 at 5:00pm EST
  • Perhaps a little sympathy not for housekeeping payments, but for the demands on young faculty's personal lives. I didn't like the juggling I had to do when I had a spouse who's job took her away for weeks at a time so the sensible thing is to provide reasonable accomodations to help them succeed. Why not? It makes for far a more collegial atmosphere. I also don't like faculty meetings that drag on past 5:30 either; but as a tenured senior member of the department, I leave. Others do as well and encourages the chair and others to get on with the buiness of the department--not that all of it is so critical in these days of no hires and reduction in travel and research monies. In 30 years I don't think I missed anything of great consequence.

  • What's Next?
  • Posted on January 19, 2010 at 5:45pm EST
  • God, we are a spoiled country.

  • Central Issue?
  • Posted by Dr. F. Gump on January 19, 2010 at 5:45pm EST
  • Have we all found the central issue yet? MUST every couple be a dual career couple? By whose choice? Who ultimately decides how clean the house and clothing must be? Often, dual career families must dine out and drop off some of the laundry to be professionally done. Choices, choices, choices.

  • Thanks, cts, for that.
  • Posted by DFS on January 19, 2010 at 8:00pm EST
  • You are right, and we should not be totally surprised by our 'bumps' in the envelope of new ideas.

    And F. Gump, we will always be a two-income family society as long as the withholding tax -- temporary for WWII -- remains, while our collective spending binge of 'other people's money' continues.

  • Posted by Chris on January 19, 2010 at 11:00pm EST
  • Here are some solutions:

    A) Don't get married.

    B) Don't get a big house.

    C) Have a life (which includes cleaning, funerals, bad moods, taxes and other downsides.)

  • Benefits for everybody, please!!!
  • Posted by Bob on January 20, 2010 at 10:15am EST
  • OMG, these are all problems that can be solved by simply having your failing students come to the house to beat your dirty undershorts on a rock for extra credit.

    There is a larger question we are all ignoring...it's the data stupid!

    My wife will clean the whole house from top to bottom even though she just did it yesterday???? Everyone's obsessive-compulsive neurosis is not the same.

    Hence the problem with the numbers...exactly how much of the hours put in doing these chores were actually necessary? And could they be performed more efficiently?

    Subjective you say...but of course!

    I think we need to solve for x, before we leap to a conclusion.

  • Scew it for your own needs....
  • Posted by Rebecca M Carroll , Owner at Rural Educational Services,LLC on January 20, 2010 at 11:45am EST
  • I think it is kind of nice that she was doing laundry as I have had to endure the "stinky" professor (male & female) that chews up most of the class complaining about how hard their life is. Welcome to the world. I do not know of a man or a woman in any profession that does not have to deal with balancing their life. IQ does not always go hand in hand with efficiency. Should we include this as a benefit? Do we blame this on men? How about rejoicing the fact that you have a washer at home, a career with a steady paycheck and a husband? What a concept? Should we jump to the conclusion that her husband doesn't do work because she happened to be doing laundry? Maybe he was vacuuming or grocery shopping with the kids? Shut your mouth....research something worthy and manage your time better. And thank your lucky stars that a college received acknowledgement for her work!!! I know plenty who never get so much as a pat on the back!

  • A joke?
  • Posted by Amazed and amused , Adjunct/Business Department at Community College of Indiana on January 22, 2010 at 5:15am EST
  • MB's comments are outstanding among the 26 thus far. I DO assume they are parodies--they are lovely send-ups of the kind of good old-fashioned misogynistic bombast I haven't seen in years.

    But you missed a few old saws--"whining" is good, but what happened to "shrill" and "hysterical"?

    But the images of the stay-at-home wives and mothers wallowing in "luxury" compensate: ah, yes, I can just see them now, reclining on couches eating chocolates and watching soap operas, while occasionally tossing a piece of bologna into the floor for the kids.

    Is "rant" the masculine equivalent of "whine"?

    Thanks for a good laugh.

  • Posted by mb on January 23, 2010 at 6:45pm EST
  • "MB's comments are outstanding among the 26 thus far. I DO assume they are parodies--they are lovely send-ups of the kind of good old-fashioned misogynistic bombast I haven't seen in years."

    Apparently we have a new definition for a familiar and threadbare term:

    Misogynist
    noun
    Saying something that a woman or feminist doesn't like or agree with.

    "But you missed a few old saws--"whining" is good, but what happened to "shrill" and "hysterical"?

    But the images of the stay-at-home wives and mothers wallowing in "luxury" compensate: ah, yes, I can just see them now, reclining on couches eating chocolates and watching soap operas, while occasionally tossing a piece of bologna into the floor for the kids"

    Strawman. Or should it be Straw-woman?

    So, you seem to be suggesting that going to work with boss looking over your shoulder, a time clock holding you to a 20 minute lunch and two 10 minute coffee breaks, etc., is preferable and more easy than staying at home and doing "housework" on your own time, own schedule, no boss or time clock, handy access to the phone, refrigerator, etc.? Really?

    Ok, let's see a show of hands from all the rational, reasonable people in the audience who would prefer the former to the latter.

    Uh huh, I thought so.

    Is "rant" the masculine equivalent of "whine"?

    I don't know, are you a man?