The idea is catching on—bringing a baby to work means employees return to work sooner, reducing employee turnover and improving morale. But there are many downsides, including reduced productivity, liability, and office disruptions.
Parenting in the Workplace Institute
Carla Moquin, founder of Parenting in the Workplace Institute, has several active websites and blogs on the topic, such as www.babiesatwork.org and www.parentingatwork.org. As America’s most outspoken advocate of Baby at Work programs, her Attachment Parenting agenda is off-putting. Moquin’s strongest argument for allowing babies into the workplace, for instance, is that breastfeeding and holding babies in a sling at all times is best for child development.
However, this is not a debate about whether or not being around mom and dad 24/7 is best for baby. On the other side of the argument are businesses with employees, deadlines, and financial needs that will be affected by the presence of a baby.
Productivity and Parents
In Moquin’s e-book “Babies in the Workplace” she first claims that productivity of workplace parents goes up if they bring their babies with them. She quotes Deborah Driskill of CDG, a baby-friendly company, who claims that parents become “very organized and efficient because they schedule their work around the baby’s schedule.”
Only pages later though, and throughout the publication, Moquin concedes that productivity of parents who bring babies generally goes down, even to as low as 70% of non-parent workers, a fact that is repeated in many other sources. This low productivity can lead to resentment amongst co-workers, who are left to pick up the slack.
Burden on Others
Speaking of picking up the slack, Moquin frequently alludes that everyone in the office will “pitch in” when it comes to caring for the baby. If the parent has a meeting or important call, a co-worker is expected to step in and care for the child. From a productivity standpoint alone, this is destructive. Other workers will be forced to put their own workload aside, slowing down employee output across-the-boards.
Unless the company has an onsite nanny who was hired specifically for childcare, this method is presumptuous and intrusive. The “It Takes a Village” concept is nice in theory, but a web designer with an afternoon free of meetings does not necessarily want to spend her day bouncing someone else’s baby on her knee, nor was she hired to do so.
Advocates of Babies at Work Programs will argue that the Web Designer with no desire to babysit is welcome to turn down the chore. But the same designer may not feel that the workplace culture allows her to turn down the task. It makes her look bad or uncooperative. Workers who don’t mind pitching in may resent those who choose not to.
Or, a superior may take advantage of subordinates by expecting them to take care of an infant while they do important tasks. A subordinate will not see himself in a position to refuse, and is taken advantage of. Meanwhile, his workload suffers, and he slowly begins to resent the boss, as well as the company.
Policies Must Be Made First
Theoretical negative situations are so numerous that it almost doesn’t seem worth it to invite so much trouble into the workplace. But many feel the benefits outweigh the risks. If company policies are put into place beforehand, there is a much greater chance of success. Moquin suggests putting guidelines into place regarding workplace disruption (too much and a parent is asked to make other non-work arrangements), and stipulating that the parent must be the primary caregiver. Some companies also chose to offer parents at work a lower percentage of their salary for the time being, to prevent other workers from feeling shafted.
Ultimately, most employers who have embraced the idea feel that it’s better to have a worker in the seat working at lower productivity than having the job stay vacant for months while the worker is home with the baby. And since it retains good employees and can attract many more, the benefits outweigh the risks.
Final verdict: worth a try.
