Family roles reduced my earning power

Re Men still make more than women. Here’s why, Scoffield, Jan. 15

Heather Soffield’s column describing wage gaps experienced by women in the workforce mirrored my experience and that of many of my friends so closely that I felt I had to respond.

For the first 10 years of working life, there were no children and no gap. I was able to apply for and obtain positions of leadership, which were commensurate despite gender.

However, after having children, I was unwilling to have them contend with their own “work” days, including daycare that extended long past school hours.

Financially it was feasible, albeit with a salary cut of 40 per cent, including the loss of management roles.

After retirement, a new role emerged. Non-paying, of course, it was that of support for an aging parent. This morphed over time into providing or arranging full-time care.

Fortunately, our family had the financial and human resources to do this, but I often wondered how those without those resources coped with the demands.

We feel lucky as a family that we were able to give our mom the best possible care in her own home. However, my time out of the workforce in both of these situations has unquestionably had a significant effect both on earnings during my working years, and on my pension/retirement savings.

Perhaps extending caregiver tax allowances would somewhat alleviate the financial cost of workplace absence. I am mindful, of course, that my actions were chosen, not forced, but certainly made for the benefit of loved ones. T. Merrick, Thornhill

Send email to lettertoed@thestar.ca; via

Web at thestar.ca/letters. Include full name, address, phone numbers of sender; only name and city will be published. Letter writers should disclose any personal interest they have in the subject matter. We reserve the right to edit letters, which run 50-150 words.