For more stories like this one, please follow me on Medium. Many thanks! —Elisa
In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. economy is hemorrhaging millions of jobs with more than 60 percent of the laid off women. The staggering job losses, which are expected to reach Depression-era numbers of over 25 percent due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, do not include the already unemployed and underemployed, which number tens of millions of Americans, again, largely women. The job search website Monster.com found that 90 percent of the most underemployed majors were dominated by women.
As a long-time community organizer in women’s rights, I have an idea: Why not share existing jobs — starting with those at the top?
While the concept of job sharing is nothing new — just google “job sharing” — it comes laden with biases. It would require an overwhelmingly number of men, who occupy almost all of corporate leadership, corporate boards, and the most lucrative paid positions in the country, to share power with women. It would require them to think like women, feeling and showing empathy, working collaboratively, and communicating effectively to make a job-sharing partnership work. It would require them to give up some of their golfing money to share their earnings.
In the past years when I advocated for such an arrangement and a social safety net, I frequently heard from men hostile to these policies. At the heart of their opposition was this “zero-sum-game” mentality that a boost to working women came to their detriment.
They are not wrong to believe that jobs, especially well-compensated leadership positions, are precious resources. Trust me, as an underemployed single woman looking for full-time work, I know! But their reasons for poo-pooing solutions that would mutually aid them and the unemployed and underemployed were disingenuous at best.
If I had to rip apart a few of their assertions, it would be the following: No, you are not the only person in the world who can do your job. Yes, you can live on less money — and quite comfortably. And yes, collaborative teamwork is productive work. Let me break those down for you.
Myth #1 The Top Earners Are Deserving of Their Compensation. Anyone who believes that he is the only person capable of doing his job is delusional. The reality is that Ivy league universities alone are bursting at the seams with MBAs who are quite capable of competently running an enterprise. Research shows that company leaders would be even more effective, and increase returns to shareholders and workers if they worked together and shared a salary.
While my google search turned up many studies showing this to be the case — “that two heads are better than one” — I was intrigued by this research published by the American Psychological Association comparing individual and group thinking, including multiple doctors looking at the same x-ray.
The study found that not only did “Full groups outperformed Partial groups,” but that full groups’ advantages “increased with each additional group member.” They were able to share redundant information as well as bring different perspectives to the problem, which ultimately brought the correct diagnosis and best solutions.
“Interestingly, participants who ultimately made decisions in groups (Partial or Full) performed better on their individual judgments than participants who only completed the task in isolation,” the social scientists wrote. “Thus, social motivation may lead to improvements in individual performance for those who know they will later be working with others. Together, these studies confirm the intuition that two heads are better than one, and, reassuringly, this effect is driven by sound argumentation, statistical averaging, and social motivation, not the influence of strong personalities in a group.”
Still, even strong personalities know this to be the case and never go at their ventures alone. It is why Steve Jobs brought along Steve Wozniak, why Bill Gates had Paul Allen, and Elon Musk co-founded Tesla with four other partners, Martin Eberhard, Marc Tarpenning, J.B. Straubel, and Ian Wright. It is why the President of the United States selects a Vice President to be his running mate. Two heads — or more — are better than one, and way too many jobs out there are too big for any one person.
Myth #2 The Top Earners Can’t Live On Less. As I have learned, having substantially cut back after unemployment and divorce, this simply is not true. Just eating at home rather than takeout or at a restaurant saves money. Then again, you need more time to cook, and you would have more time if you were job sharing and not working 12 hours a day solo.
Having time has allowed for me to engage in free, fulfilling activities like calmly eating dinner as a family, playing board games with my teenagers, and face-timing with extended family and friends. It has allowed me to be present for loved ones without the constant worry of checking my text messages and working round-the-clock just to acquire more stuff.
I say all of this to ensure nervous CEOs or high earners that they would probably be more than okay and even happier if they cut down on acquiring stuff and spending money. Based on all the happiness surveys out there, job sharing would help them enjoy what they already have, including time with loved ones.
Myth #3 Job Sharing Inhibits Innovation and Productivity. Countries such as Australia and New Zealand, faced with a shortage of skilled workers, have long relied on job sharing to ease the crunch. Not only are there more jobs to go around, but there is a 30 percent increase in productivity among job-sharing partners, according to an article in the pro-business Forbes.
In addition, job sharing makes for robust and resilient workplaces. If a worker were to quit or become incapacitated, there is already a back-up worker in place. That worker is also uniquely positioned to train others to complete tasks, thus saving the company from costly searches for workers.
Workers also report less conflict in work and life responsibilities, an impetus for staying put in their job-sharing arrangements. These arrangements are so popular in the Land Down Under that there are job-sharing platforms like Gemini3 to help match job-sharing partners.
Of course, like dating and marriage, there needs to be trust and buy-in from all who use this platform to not just land work, but work together. Sharing a job, like sharing one’s heart, requires partners to do their part to not hog up the whole pie, in this case, a paycheck. It requires the hard work of delegating tasks fairly, compromise, and constantly offering and receiving feedback, no matter how painful.
It requires completely changing our work culture from cut-throat competition and scarcity to one of empathy, collaboration, and strong communication. In essence, the latter three attributes are the ones that will ensure productive and mutually fulfilling relationships for everyone.