logo
Departures are often due to return-to-office policies and caregiving responsibilities

Departures are often due to return-to-office policies and caregiving responsibilities

NZ Herald2 days ago
'It's become harder for women, particularly those with caregiving responsibilities, to thrive in this job market,' she said, likening the moment to the Barbie movie when Ken takes over the feminist land of Barbie with masculine ideals.
'It's clear that we're backsliding in the Ken-ergy economy, that the return-to-office chest-pounding is having a real ripple effect.'
In some cases, mothers say they are giving up jobs happily, in line with Maga culture and the rise of the 'traditional wife' (#tradwife on social media), which celebrates women choosing conventional gender roles by focusing on children instead of careers.
The Trump Administration has doubled down on its message that Americans should be having more babies, with Vice-President JD Vance promoting the benefits of having a parent at home, saying 'young children are clearly happier and healthier' in such arrangements.
Emily Santoni plays with her children at their home in Houston earlier this month. Photo / Lexi Parra, The Washington Post
This year's pullback among mothers is part of a broader shift: some 212,000 women over 20 have stopped working or applying for jobs since January, with particularly pronounced drops for black women and those ages 25 to 34, Labour Department data shows.
And while the unemployment rate, at 4.2%, remains low, the share of women in the workforce has fallen since January.
In interviews with more than a dozen women who've recently left the workforce, many cited a confluence of factors – from layoffs to waning work-from-home flexibility while caring for children or ageing parents.
Many also noted a discernible shift in workplace attitudes, including return-to-office mandates and discarded diversity policies, that made it feel like they were less valued at work.
Several said they struggled to find new work after losing their jobs and decided to go back to school instead, or stay home with their children.
Almost all of the women said the decision to stop working felt uncharacteristic for them, and wasn't something they would've considered a year ago.
'Work was a big, big part of my identity, but all of these little things added up,' said Isabelle Beulaygue, 37, a sociologist in Santa Fe, New Mexico, who left her job as a university professor earlier this year to stay at home with her infant.
'I was always super career-focused, but it started feeling like women were expendable at work, like they weren't really respected anymore.'
There wasn't any one thing that led her to quit, she said, but rather a culmination of small changes – including a move for her husband's job, growing pressure to be in the office for long hours and worsening morale because of federal budget cuts.
When she had to leave work early a few times to care for her sick baby, it was difficult to co-ordinate. 'Flexibility feels like a thing of the past,' she said.
The pullback comes at a time when the broader labour market is cooling after years of hefty post-pandemic growth.
US employers added 106,000 jobs between April and July – less than one-third of jobs added in the same period last year, according to the latest Labour Department data.
'The US is the only advanced economy that's had declining female labour force participation in the last 20 years, and a lot of that is because of lack of social safety net and caregiving supports,' said Kate Bahn, chief economist at the Institute for Women's Policy Research. 'It's a long-term trend that appears to be getting worse.'
Although black women are more likely to be in the workforce than white or Hispanic women, Bahn said they have been disproportionately hit by recent overhauls, including federal government cuts and the dismantling of diversity, equity and inclusion programmes.
The labour market has slowed down considerably for all workers, but the unemployment rate for black women over 20 has risen by nearly an entire percentage point so far this year, to 6.3% in July, its highest level in almost four years.
After six months of job-searching, Jovanna, who was laid off from her healthcare copywriting job in early February, is changing course entirely. The mother-of-two, who is black and lives in the Midwest, recently enrolled in a 15-week project management certification programme in the hope of switching careers.
'I sent out at least 500 applications, worked with three different career coaches, and networked as much as I could,' said Jovanna, who asked to be identified by her middle name only, because she worries about jeopardising future employment.
'I am depleting my savings and ended up having to borrow against my 401(k), so it got to the point where I had to make a bigger change.'
Economists say they worry that the latest labour force departures could indicate a longer-term setback for women, especially if they decide to return to work.
Historically, breaks in work history have coincided with lower pay and fewer opportunities for advancement, said Heggeness.
'There are huge implications for the women themselves,' she said.
'Their lifetime earnings will be lower, they will most likely come back to a job that does not pay the salary they were making when they left. It'll be harder for them to get back in, harder to move up the ladder to senior management positions because they've had this gap in employment.'
Emily Santoni left her position as a chief marketing officer at an energy consulting firm in Houston to stay home with her children, ages 1 and 3, this year.
It wasn't a decision she made lightly – she and her husband spent months lining up their finances and preparing for the transition.
Last year, the couple spent more than US$140,000 on a fulltime nanny and other childcare. It was financially doable, Santoni said, but she couldn't shake the feeling that she was missing out.
'I worked hard, I had a great career, we were both making great money,' the 39-year-old said.
'But I was working so much, there were weeks when I saw my kids for maybe 30 minutes a day. Finally it was like, 'Let's slow this down so I can be a present mother.''
Santoni said she felt like she was missing out on spending time with her children before she left her job this year. Photo / Lexi Parra, The Washington Post
Plus, her workplace was doing away with a policy that allowed parents to work from home two days a week. That wasn't a 'major deciding factor', Santoni said, 'but it was one more thing that was like, 'Blargh, this sucks.''
Major corporations around the country, including JP Morgan, AT&T and Amazon, as well as large swathes of the federal Government, have begun mandating that employees clock in to the office five days a week.
Although enforcement has been uneven, labour economists say those requirements have added extra strain for many workers, particularly those with young children. (Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post.)
Santoni says leaving the workforce has been a refreshing change. She's spending a lot more time with her children, and is also going to more workout classes and happy hours with friends.
Although it took a few months to find her rhythm, she's now encouraging other women in her circle to consider stepping back from the labour force.
'My decision to leave my corporate role had nothing to do with politics or a movement telling women to stay home. It had everything to do with what success looks like for me right now,' Santoni said.
'I've worked relentlessly since I was young, and now I choose to give my best energy to my kids while they're little.
'For mums choosing to leave the workforce for this same reason, it's not weakness or submission – it's power.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump can cut billions in foreign aid funds approved by Congress, appeals court rules
Trump can cut billions in foreign aid funds approved by Congress, appeals court rules

NZ Herald

time18 hours ago

  • NZ Herald

Trump can cut billions in foreign aid funds approved by Congress, appeals court rules

If the panel's decision stands, it wasn't immediately clear how much it would affect other lawsuits contesting a range of Trump Administration funding freezes and cuts besides foreign aid. Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson wrote in the majority opinion that the challengers lacked valid legal grounds to sue over the Trump Administration's decision to withhold the funds, also known as impoundment. The US Comptroller General - who leads an accountability arm of Congress - could sue under a specific law related to impoundment decisions, Henderson wrote, but the challengers couldn't bring a 'freestanding' constitutional claim or claim violations of a different law related to agency actions. Henderson, appointed by former President George H.W. Bush, was joined by Judge Greg Katsas, a Trump appointee. The court didn't reach the core question of whether the Administration's unilateral decision to refuse to spend money appropriated by Congress is constitutional. Judge Florence Pan, nominated by former President Joe Biden, dissented, writing that her colleagues had turned 'a blind eye to the 'serious implications' of this case for the rule of law and the very structure of our government'. White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement that the appeals court 'has affirmed what we already knew – President Trump has the executive authority to execute his own foreign policy, which includes ensuring that all foreign assistance aligns with the America First agenda'. A lead lawyer for the grant recipients did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The two consolidated cases before the appeals court only deal with money that Congress approved for the 2024 fiscal year, which ends on Sept. 30. Grantees are poised to lose access to funds if they haven't yet been approved to be spent by federal officials - a precursor to actual payouts - or unless a court order is in place. The Administration lost one of its few battles before the US Supreme Court earlier this year in the foreign aid fight. In March, a majority of justices refused to immediately stop US District Judge Amir Ali's injunction taking effect while the legal fight went forward. Since then, however, the challengers have filed complaints with Ali that the Administration is failing to obligate or pay out the funds. They've rebuffed the government's position that the delay is part of a legitimate effort to 'evaluate the appropriate next steps' and accused officials of angling to use a novel tactic to go around Congress in order to cut appropriated money. Trump's Administration has dramatically scaled back the US government's humanitarian work overseas, slashing spending and personnel and merging the USAid into the State Department. The challengers say the foreign aid freeze has created a global crisis, and that the money is critical for malaria prevention, to address child malnutrition and provide postnatal care for newborns. They argued that the President and agency leaders couldn't defy Congress' spending mandates and didn't have discretion to decide that only some, let alone none, of the money appropriated by lawmakers should be paid. The President can ask Congress to withdraw appropriations but can't do it on his own, the challengers argued. The Justice Department argued Ali's order was an 'improper judicial intrusion into matters left to the political branches' and that the judge wrongly interfered in the 'particularly sensitive area of foreign relations.' The government also said that the Impoundment Control Act, which restricts the president from overruling Congress' spending decisions, wasn't a law that the non-profits and business could sue to enforce. The challengers countered that Ali's order blocking the funding freeze was rooted in their constitutional separation-of-powers claim, not the impoundment law.

Swing voters want more focus on the economy, less on identity issues
Swing voters want more focus on the economy, less on identity issues

NZ Herald

time19 hours ago

  • NZ Herald

Swing voters want more focus on the economy, less on identity issues

Five years ago, Raymond Teachey voted, as usual, for the Democratic presidential nominee. But by last fall, Teachey, an aircraft mechanic from Bucks County, Pennsylvania, was rethinking his political allegiances. To him, the Democratic Party seemed increasingly focused on issues of identity at the expense of more tangible day-to-day concerns, such as public safety or the economy. 'Some of them turned their back on their base,' Teachey, 54, said. Raymond Teachey, an aircraft mechanic who said that he skipped the 2024 presidential election after supporting Joe Biden in 2020, at a park in Bristol, Pennsylvania. Photo / Hannah Yoon, The New York Times Working-class voters like Teachey, who supported Biden in 2020 but either backed Trump last year or, as Teachey did, skipped the 2024 presidential election, help explain why Democrats lost pivotal swing counties like Bucks and vividly illustrate how the traditional Democratic coalition has eroded in the Trump era. Now, Democrats hope to bring these voters back into the fold for the midterm elections in 2026, betting on a backlash to Trump and his party's far-reaching moves to slash the social safety net. But in interviews with nearly 30 predominantly working-class voters who supported Biden in 2020 before defecting or struggling deeply with their choices last year, many had a stinging message for the Democratic Party. Just because we have misgivings about Trump, they say, it doesn't mean we like you. 'I think I'm done with the Democrats,' said Desmond Smith, 24, a deli worker from Smithdale, Mississippi, and a black man who said he backed Biden in 2020 at the height of the racial justice protests. Last year, disillusioned by what he saw as the party's over-emphasis on identity politics and concerned about illegal immigration, he voted for Trump. Asked how Democrats could win him back, he said: 'Fight for Americans instead of fighting for everybody else'. An in-depth post-election study from the Pew Research Centre suggests that about 5% of Biden's voters in 2020 switched to Trump in 2024, while roughly 15% of those voters stayed home last year. Trump retained more of his 2020 voters than Democrats did, a crucial factor in winning the election. Polling on the current attitudes of those Biden defectors is limited, but it is clear the Democratic brand, broadly, continues to struggle. A Wall Street Journal poll released in late July found that the party's image was at its lowest point in more than three decades, with just 33% of voters saying they held a favourable view of Democrats. 'They're doing nothing to move their own numbers because they don't have an economic message,' said John Anzalone, a veteran Democratic pollster who worked on that survey. 'They think that this is about Trump's numbers getting worse,' he added. 'They need to worry about their numbers.' Certainly, anger with Trump, an energised Democratic base and the headwinds a president's party typically confronts in Midterm elections could help propel Democrats to victory next year. Democrats have had some recruitment success (and luck), and they see growing openings to argue that Trump's domestic agenda helps the wealthy at the expense of the working class, a message they are already beginning to push in advertising. There is no top-of-the-ticket national Democrat to defend or avoid, while Republicans have virtually no room to distance themselves from Trump's least popular ideas. But interviews with the voters whom Democrats are most desperate to reclaim also suggest that the party's challenges could extend well beyond next year's races. Here are five takeaways from those conversations. Biden's disastrous re-election bid fuelled a trust issue. It hasn't gone away. Bielski, 35, an executive chef at a private club, said he had typically voted for Democrats until last year's presidential election, when he backed Trump. Democratic leaders had insisted that the plainly frail Biden was vigorous enough to run, and they had encouraged sceptical voters to fall in line. Instantly after he dropped out, they urged Democrats to unite behind the candidacy of Kamala Harris, who was then the vice-president. That did not sit right with Bielski, who said he was already distrustful of Democrats who had pushed pandemic-era lockdowns. Harris, he said, 'wasn't someone that I got to vote for in a primary'. 'It almost seemed wrong,' continued Bielski, who lives in Phoenix. 'It was kind of like, okay, the same people that were just running the country are now telling us that this is the person that we should vote for.' After Harris became the Democratic nominee, some voters interpreted her meandering answers in televised interviews as an unwillingness to be straight with them. By contrast, while Trump gave outlandish and rambling public remarks riddled with conspiracy theories and lies, some said they had got the general sense that he wanted to tackle the cost of living and curb illegal immigration. 'It was difficult to understand what her point of view was,' said Bruce Gamble, 67, a retired substation maintainer for the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority. Gamble said he voted for Biden in 2020 and Trump last year. Trump 'was able to communicate better to me', he added, while Harris 'felt like she was talking over my head, so I didn't quite trust her'. Worried about paying the bills, they saw Democrats as too focused on cultural issues. Many in this multiracial group of voters said they thought Democrats had gone too far in promoting transgender rights or in emphasising matters of racial identity. But often, they were more bothered by their perception that those discussions had come at the expense of addressing economic anxieties. 'It seemed like they were more concerned with DEI and LGBTQ issues and really just things that didn't pertain to me or concern me at all,' said Kendall Wood, 32, a truck driver from Henrico County, Virginia. He said he voted for Trump last year after backing Biden in 2020. 'They weren't concerned with, really, kitchen-table issues.' A poll from the New York Times and Ipsos conducted this year found that many Americans did not believe that the Democratic Party was focused on the economic issues that mattered most to them. 'Maybe talk about real-world problems,' said Maya Garcia, 23, a restaurant server from the San Fernando Valley in California. She said she voted for Biden in 2020 and did not vote for president last year. Democrats talk 'a lot about us emotionally, but what are we going to do financially?' She added, 'I understand that you want, you know, equal rights and things like that. But I feel like we need to talk more about the economics.' But in a warning sign for Republicans, a recent CNN poll found that a growing share of Americans — 63% — felt as if Trump had not paid enough attention to the country's most important problems. Sarah Smarty, a home health aide and an author who voted for Joe Biden in 2020 but flipped to President Donald Trump last year, drives through Mifflin County, near McClure, Pennsylvania. Photo / Hannah Yoon, The New York Times 'America First' gained new resonance amid wars abroad. As wars raged in the Middle East and Ukraine, some working-class voters thought the Biden Administration cared more about events abroad than about the problems in their communities. 'They were funding in other countries, while we do not have the money to fund ourselves,' said Smarty, 33, a home health aide and an author. She said she voted for Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2024, adding that she viewed Trump as a man of action. 'I would really like to see more jobs,' she said. 'I would like to see them take good care of people who are homeless in our area.' Bielski said that against the backdrop of overseas turmoil, Trump's 'America First' message resonated. But these days, he does not think Trump is living up to that mantra. 'We're getting into more stuff abroad and not really focusing on economics here,' he said. 'It doesn't seem like he's holding true to anything that he's promised.' Flores, 22, a technician at a car dealership, said the foreign policy emphasis — and a sense that life was tough regardless of the party in power — helped explain why he skipped last year's election as well as the 2020 presidential race. 'No matter how many times have we gone red, or even blue, the blue-collar workers' have seen little progress, Flores said. Marlon Flores, a technician at a car dealership who said that regardless of the party in power, blue-collar workers have seen little progress, at his apartment complex in Houston. Photo / Desiree Rios, The New York Times They worry about illegal immigration. But some think Trump's crackdowns are going too far. These voters often said they agreed with Trump on the need to stem the flow of illegal immigration and strengthen border security. But some worried about the Administration's crackdown, which has resulted in sweeping raids, children being separated from their parents, the deportation of American citizens and a growing sense of fear in immigrant communities. Several people interviewed said they knew people who had been personally affected. Smarty, for instance, said her friend's husband, who had lived in the US for 25 years, had suddenly been deported to Mexico. Her friend is 'going through some health problems, and they have kids, and that's really hard on their family', Smarty said. 'I don't really feel that's exactly right.' They're not done with every Democrat. But they're tired of the old guard. Many of the voters interviewed said they remained open to supporting Democrats — or at least the younger ones. 'Stop being friggin' old,' said Cinnamon Boffa, 57, from Langhorne, Pennsylvania. As she recalled, she supported Biden in 2020 but voted only down-ballot last year, lamenting that 'our choices suck'. Teachey thought there was still room for seasoned politicians, but in many cases, it was time to get 'the boomers out of there'. He is increasingly inclined to support Democrats next year to check unfettered Republican power. 'They're totally far-right,' he said of the GOP. 'Honestly, I don't identify with any party.' This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Written by: Katie Glueck Photographs by: Adriana Zehbrauskas, Hannah Yoon, Desiree Rios ©2025 THE NEW YORK TIMES

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store