DATE: Tuesday, October 7, 1997              TAG: 9710070028

SECTION: DAILY BREAK             PAGE: E1   EDITION: FINAL 

TYPE: Column 

SOURCE: Elizabeth Simpson 

                                            LENGTH:   68 lines

COMPANIES THAT HELP MOTHERS FACE COMPLICATED TASK

NO SOONER DID the list of 100 best companies for working mothers hit the newsstands than e-mails started filling my computer.

``I almost fell out of my chair laughing,'' said one woman, who found her company among the chosen few.

``I couldn't believe this place got on there,'' another wrote before launching into a tale of woe about her latest work-family collision.

The messages were posted on an electronic bulletin board set up for working moms across the country, and the subject was an annual list of companies that Working Mother magazine has published the past 12 years.

The chat group of moms is a radar screen of sorts, where messages are exchanged about the latest virus kids have picked up, the intricate science of splitting up household tasks with what's referred to as DHs - dear husbands - and the unending task of making sure our work personas don't collide with ``real life'' ones.

These mothers are also a touchstone to reality.

Especially in this instance, which occurred soon after I had been salivating over the top 100 list and the family-friendly benefits featured there:

Fourteen-week paid maternity leave at J.P. Morgan. Flex time, compressed work weeks and telecommuting at Hewlett Packard. Schedules set up by co-workers at Xerox to fit everyone's work and home schedule. High chairs in the lunchroom at Arnold & Porter law firm in Washington, D.C., so children at the on-site child-care center can eat lunch with their parents.

What's not to like?

But the backlash over the listing made me realize that the act of balancing work and family is not only a daunting task for parents but also a tricky endeavor for companies that set out to help them.

To wit:

One woman's company set up a child-care program where employees' children could be cared for when they were sick. Terrific, right? Not for one woman who felt her supervisor expected her to use the care even when she felt she needed to stay home with her sick child.

Another woman's company had a long list of flexible work options, including job sharing, which allows two people to ``share'' a job by working fewer hours and splitting benefits. Two of the woman's co-workers tried the benefit but soon went back to full-time schedules during a downsizing scare. They felt the family-friendly options left their positions less secure. ``There's a common perception that part- time/flextime/telecommuting (EQ) not serious about your career,'' the woman wrote.

Another mother talked about how benefits designed to allow more flexibility sometimes blur the line she liked to draw between work and home. While voice mail, fax machines and home computers helped her do more from home, those same ``benefits'' made her feel like she was doing both jobs, simultaneously, all the time.

The whole idea of linking work and family - usually touted as a positive - can sometimes carry a down side: If you open the work door to let in the ``real life'' side, work inevitably slides into home.

I remember thinking my home computer would be the answer to all my work-family crises. I'd write my column at home at night after the kids went to sleep. I'd check messages from home if one of my kids got sick. I'd send stories via modem that I couldn't finish during the day.

Then I found myself - even on vacation - tapping into this umbilical cord to work, obsessively tracking what was going on at the office, even as my kids stood at my side begging for attention.

While I still laud the companies that land a place on the top 100 list, benefits and flexible work options are not the end-all and be-all.

It also takes companies with the right intentions at heart, and employees who know where to draw the line between work and home.

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu