baby

Stay-at-home mums would earn a six figure salary if it were a full time job. And PREACH.

It’s a truth universally known that stay-at-home mums work hard. Really hard.

They scrub bathrooms, do the accounting, make three meals a day (plus snacks) and make sure the emotional needs of every child are being met. They are (like all parents) super heroes.

But work stay-at-home mums do is often perceived as a labour of love and adoration, rarely being perceived as actual labour. However according to Salary.com, if their work was converted into a salary it would be… a lot.

The website researched a range of jobs and various tasks that stay-at-home parents complete throughout the day, such as Laundry Manager and CEO, and came to the calculation that the job is worth AUD $225,000 per annum. Wow.

And to top it off, with the average 9 to 5 job equating to 40 hours working a week, being a full-time parent equates to more than two full-time jobs.

Stay-at-home mums are on call 24 hours, and carry, among other things, the emotional and administrative weight of a home. So their work week would equate to 96 hours.

They’re essentially running a small company. But with children. Any job with a description like that is well worthy of a six figure salary in our eyes.

Want more parenting stories? Visit our newsletter page and sign up to “Mamamia Parents”  to get Nama Winston’s take on Parenting for real every week into your inbox (see one of her newsletters here)

Related Stories

Recommended

Top Comments

Guest 5 years ago

These kinds of salary "comparisons" are insulting to both sides. Being a mother does not equate to being a professional in any number of other jobs - it's insulting to suggest motherhood provides a shortcut, making the role the analogous to that of a CEO, teacher or nurse, for instance. Conversely, being a parent is hard, often thankless work - totally different to being any of the listed professions.

disqus_ehFT9Qs1lT 5 years ago

I think you've missed the point...

Guest 5 years ago

No, I haven't missed the point at all. In an attempt to highlight the importance, value and demands of motherhood, the article conflates it as being analogous to dozens of completely different roles for which most mothers are completely unqualified to carry out. This dumbing down of the issue for mothers does nothing to acknowledge their ability to understand the situation without being ridiculously compared to others, and also insults those in the professions that have been equated to something entirely different. It's a lose-lose approach.