I appreciate how you point out, by giving very valuable backgrounds and the examples from everyday lives, like the sports example! As well, I find it brilliant how you combine your personal perspectives and stories with what the companies need and seek for, e.g in terms of flexibility, passion PLUS professional performance. You inspire and make my day, dear Ladies!
Great work you are doing ladies! This is such an important message and mission! If you are an Angry Ted, you don't get it. But, as you've shown by companies you've brought on board with your mission and ideas, the future is bright! Keep working hard to change the norm!
There are many misconceptions about job sharing. The cost of job sharing to companies is actually little to no additional cost for a FTE. Through job sharing, the company benefits from continual coverage, knowledge transfer, and peer development and training. There is also a level of quality control and accountability between the job share pair. Administrative roles are commonly thought of for job sharing (that is more of a job split) but the real benefits of are seen in higher level professional individual contributor roles and manager roles all the way up to c-level (top sharing). At these higher salaries, many are willing and highly motivated to split their salaries in order to maintain their level of seniority and have the additional time they need. Job sharing is typically not something you would do for your entire career, but is a flexibility option that can help people maintain their careers and salary (still same for FTE) during certain circumstances in their lives. When and if people are ready to go back full time, they can easily transition back into their roles. If these same individuals were to opt out of the workforce for a couple years, they would have a gap in their resume, and would likely have to take a couple steps back and a pay cut from their previous position. In this way, job sharing keeps women in the workforce and on track to advance their careers and leadership opportunities.
Cost of recruitment for a job role is about 25% of salary due to search, training and induction. That almost doubles for a job share. Certainly if you have 2 staff at half salary you get marginally better productivity and availability, but the overheads of 2 staff still make it less attractive to businesses. I can see how administrative roles could be shared to a point (also loss of productivity in handover) and also why this would appeal to mothers in particular, enabling more parent time. It isn't innovative or novel though. You will never close the gender pay gap by paying women half as much. You will never get good leadership from job shares - it will not increase diversity, just more women working for less.
@UCWDFz0AlSRYtmP_NsJilauA I am not asking, I am telling you, employing two people to do one job is more expensive. Yes, there are minor advantages as I outlined in my post. I employ lots of people, I am not wrong.
@@angrytedtalks Minor advantages? This is about getting more women into senior roles. The female talent pipeline falls off a cliff around aged 35 years - access to flexible working after maternity leave - including job-sharing means they don't need to leave the workforce or enter into low paid part-time roles while they balance work and life. Company profits can be up to 50% higher when women are well represented at the top. And this helps ALL women of all levels - senior women are their biggest champions and allies. Declaring you don't get good leadership from job shares is also is not a statement of fact.
I appreciate how you point out, by giving very valuable backgrounds and the examples from everyday lives, like the sports example!
As well, I find it brilliant how you combine your personal perspectives and stories with what the companies need and seek for, e.g in terms of flexibility, passion PLUS professional performance. You inspire and make my day, dear Ladies!
Great work you are doing ladies! This is such an important message and mission! If you are an Angry Ted, you don't get it. But, as you've shown by companies you've brought on board with your mission and ideas, the future is bright! Keep working hard to change the norm!
Call for online work 917357528876
Great work. Keep it up.
Love the model. You summed up so well in line "match partners, expand talent" Signing up now.
Call for online work 917357528876
There are many misconceptions about job sharing. The cost of job sharing to companies is actually little to no additional cost for a FTE. Through job sharing, the company benefits from continual coverage, knowledge transfer, and peer development and training. There is also a level of quality control and accountability between the job share pair. Administrative roles are commonly thought of for job sharing (that is more of a job split) but the real benefits of are seen in higher level professional individual contributor roles and manager roles all the way up to c-level (top sharing). At these higher salaries, many are willing and highly motivated to split their salaries in order to maintain their level of seniority and have the additional time they need. Job sharing is typically not something you would do for your entire career, but is a flexibility option that can help people maintain their careers and salary (still same for FTE) during certain circumstances in their lives. When and if people are ready to go back full time, they can easily transition back into their roles. If these same individuals were to opt out of the workforce for a couple years, they would have a gap in their resume, and would likely have to take a couple steps back and a pay cut from their previous position. In this way, job sharing keeps women in the workforce and on track to advance their careers and leadership opportunities.
Siraa la te jatiyo
online work Karna Ka liya 7988171072 contact kara;
Cost of recruitment for a job role is about 25% of salary due to search, training and induction. That almost doubles for a job share. Certainly if you have 2 staff at half salary you get marginally better productivity and availability, but the overheads of 2 staff still make it less attractive to businesses. I can see how administrative roles could be shared to a point (also loss of productivity in handover) and also why this would appeal to mothers in particular, enabling more parent time.
It isn't innovative or novel though.
You will never close the gender pay gap by paying women half as much. You will never get good leadership from job shares - it will not increase diversity, just more women working for less.
@UCWDFz0AlSRYtmP_NsJilauA I am not asking, I am telling you, employing two people to do one job is more expensive. Yes, there are minor advantages as I outlined in my post. I employ lots of people, I am not wrong.
@@angrytedtalks Minor advantages? This is about getting more women into senior roles. The female talent pipeline falls off a cliff around aged 35 years - access to flexible working after maternity leave - including job-sharing means they don't need to leave the workforce or enter into low paid part-time roles while they balance work and life. Company profits can be up to 50% higher when women are well represented at the top. And this helps ALL women of all levels - senior women are their biggest champions and allies. Declaring you don't get good leadership from job shares is also is not a statement of fact.