October 23, 2018

New KPMG Associate Wants to Know What the “Deal” Is with Working Mothers

Yesterday we discussed the plethora of accounting firms that are pro-mom, according to Working Mothers. It seemed like a pretty simple idea – treat moms good = win; treat moms bad = Christ, what kind of hellhole firm are you running? Despite this elementary idea, there still is some questions out there:

GC,

On the subject of working mothers…what’s the deal with that? I’m a first year at KPMG and there is another first year who is already pregnant and taking maternity leave soon.

My question is, does she really get promoted on the same schedule as the rest of us? I get the importance of allowing some flexibility for working moms but does it make any sense to treat someone the same as the rest of us when it comes to raises and promotions when they’ve missed out on all the work? I’d love to hear what other readers have experience with this.

Thanks,

KPMG First Year

Well, the “deal” with working mothers is that not having policies that allow them to pursue a career and having a family is what I like to call “doing shitty business.” As to your specific question, the details aren’t clear. It’s not as if she will be on maternity leave for 6 months. KPMG offers up to 9 weeks of paid maternity leave, according to the firm’s profile on WM. That means that there are 43 other weeks (that assumes no PTO, obv) that she will be working. That doesn’t really qualify as “miss[ing] out on all the work” as you put it.

Those who are evaluating her performance should have a pretty good idea whether or not she’s capable of being promoted. Besides, it’s a jump from A1 to A2, not exactly a huge change in responsibilities or expectations. Furthermore, your raise from A1 to A2 isn’t going to be anything to write home about so getting worked up about whether or not she’s getting the same 11% bump as you isn’t worth it.

Yesterday we discussed the plethora of accounting firms that are pro-mom, according to Working Mothers. It seemed like a pretty simple idea – treat moms good = win; treat moms bad = Christ, what kind of hellhole firm are you running? Despite this elementary idea, there still is some questions out there:

GC,

On the subject of working mothers…what’s the deal with that? I’m a first year at KPMG and there is another first year who is already pregnant and taking maternity leave soon.

My question is, does she really get promoted on the same schedule as the rest of us? I get the importance of allowing some flexibility for working moms but does it make any sense to treat someone the same as the rest of us when it comes to raises and promotions when they’ve missed out on all the work? I’d love to hear what other readers have experience with this.

Thanks,

KPMG First Year

Well, the “deal” with working mothers is that not having policies that allow them to pursue a career and having a family is what I like to call “doing shitty business.” As to your specific question, the details aren’t clear. It’s not as if she will be on maternity leave for 6 months. KPMG offers up to 9 weeks of paid maternity leave, according to the firm’s profile on WM. That means that there are 43 other weeks (that assumes no PTO, obv) that she will be working. That doesn’t really qualify as “miss[ing] out on all the work” as you put it.

Those who are evaluating her performance should have a pretty good idea whether or not she’s capable of being promoted. Besides, it’s a jump from A1 to A2, not exactly a huge change in responsibilities or expectations. Furthermore, your raise from A1 to A2 isn’t going to be anything to write home about so getting worked up about whether or not she’s getting the same 11% bump as you isn’t worth it.

Related articles

Grant Thornton and the Antichrist

al pacino_devil.jpgIt’s rather mysterious that the New York office of Grant Thornton is located at 666 Third Ave. As I’m sure our more pious readers know, the significance of the 666 is commonly known as “The Number of the Beast“. We won’t get into any more specifics than that other than to mention that it is a pretty creepy-ass looking number.
Is G to the T run by a secret group of Al Pacino-esque figures that are working against the forces of good?
Maybe not but the otherwise boring-assness of that particular lobby is def working too hard to not be noticed…