TheJakartaPost

Please Update your browser

Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.

Jakarta Post

By the way ... Are fewer working hours really what women want?

There is still time for one of the country’s top figures in gender affairs to step in and prevent the reduction of working hours for women — an idea likely to constitute a setback for gender fairness in the country

The Jakarta Post
Sun, December 14, 2014

Share This Article

Change Size

By the way ...  Are fewer working hours really what women want?

T

here is still time for one of the country'€™s top figures in gender affairs to step in and prevent the reduction of working hours for women '€” an idea likely to constitute a setback for gender fairness in the country.

Fortunately, Women'€™s Empowerment and Child Protection Minister Yohana Yembise'€™s reaction to the idea '€” first put forward by Vice President Jusuf Kalla '€” is a breath of fresh air.

Earlier this month, Kalla floated the idea, saying that fewer working hours would allow women more time to educate their children.

In response, Yohana was quoted on the Kompas website as saying the planned policy was '€œdiscriminatory'€, as both men and women should be responsible for their children.

Her comments were echoed by women'€™s rights activists including Andi Yentriyani from the National Commission on Violence Against Women (Komnas Perempuan).

It remains to be seen, however, whether these comments will be enough to deter the Home Ministry from realizing Kalla'€™s suggestion.

Kalla has every right to be concerned about the state of the country'€™s children and their future, a very important matter indeed in this troubled world filled with threats from climate change, heinous crimes and sheer ignorance.

But before the country embraces the idea and applies this exclusive cut of working hours for women, we should acknowledge that some women are not happy with the idea '€” and it is certainly not because they are bad mothers or bad women.

In fact, these women might have good intentions behind their opposition. For one, they want to play fair in the workplace.

Some women, just like men, are very passionate about their jobs and realize that permanently reduced working hours for women makes the game unfair.

Limiting work hours might also affect pay and limit working women'€™s potential.

There are other ways to ensure that the nation'€™s children are well looked-after without permanently reducing women'€™s working hours. For one, providing childcare and nursing facilities in or near offices, longer maternity leave and paternity leave for fathers, who also need to bond with their children.

In big cities, better infrastructure could contribute to more family time, since many parents currently spend hours stuck in traffic congestion, when they could be spending time with their children.

Secondly, women want to play fair at home. Mothers will understandably jump with joy at the chance of more family time, but they might want to share that joy with the father of their children too, so why not allow parents to enjoy an equal share of family time?

While there are rosy pictures of the father spending a little quality time here and there with his children because his main priority is to earn money, that picture may not always be the ideal for every family.

Children need their mother'€™s touch. Very true, especially for certain activities such as nursing. But they need their father'€™s touch too.

In some cases, men can even be better at parenting (yes, really), and why nip that talent in the bud by giving more hours to spend with children exclusively to mothers?

Some of my friends are fathers who love their children very much and it is unfair that they should be given less parenting time than women just because they are men.

And the opinion that children should come before career should apply to both parents '€” not just the mother.

Kalla'€™s citing of Japan as a country already applying a fewer working-hours policy for women is mind-boggling.

Why base our country'€™s policy on a country that, despite all of its positive traits, is often criticized as having '€œbamboo ceilings'€ that hinder women'€™s advancement in the workplace, and where men are seen as not participating enough in housework?

Also puzzling is the statement from Administrative and Bureaucratic Reform Minister Yuddy Chrisnandi, quoted on the Tribunnews website: '€œHow about newlyweds? What happens if the woman often leaves her husband'€™s side?'€

Surely, that applies the other way around too, or is it considered less of a concern if it is the husband who often leaves the wife'€™s side?

Before implementing the working-hours reduction, there needs to be consultation with various representatives of women'€™s rights groups in the country. After all, if minister Yohana herself has some issues with the idea, surely that is a sign that it might not be such a great one after all.

'€” Dina Indrasafitri

Your Opinion Matters

Share your experiences, suggestions, and any issues you've encountered on The Jakarta Post. We're here to listen.

Enter at least 30 characters
0 / 30

Thank You

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We appreciate your feedback.