Even for a day or two, a child in the workplace can be disruptive and cause resentment.
I’ve worked in a few offices where co-workers felt compelled to bring their children to work. Luckily, it was only on occasion, and luckily, the kids were old enough to be out of diapers.
However, in all instances, I, as the office administrator, was expected to watch the kids for a portion or all of the day while the parent worked.
Clearly this was abuse of company human resources—I was hired to make copies and answer the phone, not play 7,468 games of patty-cake. Additionally, as someone with absolutely no child-care experience, I felt exceptionally underqualified to act as a sitter for the day. Last but not least, I resented the employees (often bosses) who brought their kid to work, assuming I had nothing better to do than keep an eye on little Dennis the Menace. (Or assuming that I even wanted to or was capable of doing it.)
Because of this, the popular new concept of babies in the workplace alarms me a bit. In theory I am 100% pro-family, and support anything that creates a better work-life balance. However, as someone who was child-free by choice for most of my working life, I resent anything that favors parents over child-free workers. This concept is no exception. If the person at the next cubicle is given leeway to bring a baby to work, spending most of their day cooing, feeding, burping, and entertaining the child while receiving the same paycheck as me—and if that parent expects me to take over part of the time so they can get their actual work done—I am strongly against the concept. It simply isn’t fair.
More on that in Babies in the Workplace.
