無(wú)法靈活調(diào)整的長(zhǎng)時(shí)間加班，往往是重視增長(zhǎng)的高薪高壓工作和薪資嚴(yán)重不平等的企業(yè)或行業(yè)的常態(tài)。這類工作是美國(guó)性別薪資差異的一大原因。??

無(wú)法靈活調(diào)整的長(zhǎng)時(shí)間加班，往往是重視增長(zhǎng)的高薪高壓工作和薪資嚴(yán)重不平等的企業(yè)或行業(yè)的常態(tài)。這類工作是美國(guó)性別薪資差異的一大原因。

Long, inflexible work hours are?often the?norm in high-pressure, high-paying jobs where promotions are important, or in firms or sectors where earnings are considerably unequal. These kinds of jobs are a big part of why there’s a gender pay gap in the United States.

曾獲諾貝爾獎(jiǎng)的哈佛經(jīng)濟(jì)史學(xué)家、勞動(dòng)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家克勞迪婭·戈?duì)柖。–laudia Goldin）在即將出版的著作《事業(yè)與家庭：一個(gè)世紀(jì)的婦女平權(quán)之路》（Career and Family: Women's Century-Long Journey Toward Equity）中解釋了原因。她說(shuō)，答案在于“貪婪工作”，這個(gè)概念涵蓋廣泛，從收入不平等到男性和女性為自己劃定的適合職業(yè)。

In her forthcoming book,?Career and Family: Women’s Century-Long Journey Toward Equity,?award-winning Harvard economic historian and labor economist?Claudia Goldin?explains why. The answer, she says, involves “greedy work,” a concept that touches on everything from income inequality to which jobs men and women sort themselves into.

過(guò)去的18個(gè)月，新冠疫情迫使幾百萬(wàn)人同時(shí)應(yīng)付工作和照顧家人，許多員工更加遷就家庭需求。我想請(qǐng)戈?duì)柖×牧倪@類工作是否變得靈活，靈活性是否會(huì)對(duì)性別不平等或薪資不平等的現(xiàn)狀造成影響，以及有沒(méi)有什么辦法讓工作不那么“貪婪”。

Over the past 18 months, the Covid-19 pandemic has forced millions of people to juggle work and caregiving — and led many employers to be more accommodating of domestic demands. I wanted to ask Goldin for her take on how flexible (or not) these jobs are becoming, whether this flexibility might influence gender inequality or the pay gap, and if she sees any ways to make work less greedy.

戈?duì)柖⊙芯啃詣e薪資差距及相關(guān)職業(yè)發(fā)展動(dòng)態(tài)數(shù)十年之久，是美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)會(huì)會(huì)長(zhǎng)、國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)研究局美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展項(xiàng)目負(fù)責(zé)人、美國(guó)國(guó)家科學(xué)院成員。她還建立了鼓勵(lì)女性在大學(xué)讀經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)的Undergraduate Women in Economics Challenge項(xiàng)目。本采訪通過(guò)電子郵件進(jìn)行，經(jīng)過(guò)編輯潤(rùn)色。

Goldin has been studying gender pay gaps and related career dynamics for decades. She served as president of the American Economic Association, is the program director of the Development of the American Economy program at the National Bureau of Economic Research, and is a member of the National Academy of Sciences. She also created the Undergraduate Women in Economics Challenge. This interview, which was conducted over email, has been edited.

你對(duì)美國(guó)伴侶的研究表明，讓所有人都靈活工作是很復(fù)雜的，在性別方面尤其復(fù)雜。能不能解釋一下“工作靈活性”是指什么，為什么一般被當(dāng)作一種福利？為什么不是所有工作都能靈活安排？

Your research on U.S. couples demonstrates that the idea of flexibility for all is complicated, particularly when it comes to gender. Can you explain what “job flexibility” refers to and why it is generally considered to be an amenity or a perk? Why aren’t all jobs flexible?

靈活性是一個(gè)多維度的概念，涉及工作時(shí)長(zhǎng)、工作強(qiáng)度以及工作時(shí)限——一些工作本身就需要隨時(shí)待命、迅速完成。不過(guò)很重要的一點(diǎn)是，這個(gè)概念還涉及公司作為福利提供工作靈活性所必須支付的價(jià)格，以及員工愿意接受的價(jià)格。要理解女性收入為何低于男性、特別是承擔(dān)照料家人責(zé)任的女性薪資更低，這種計(jì)算非常重要。

Flexibility is a multidimensional concept concerning the number of hours of work, the intensity of the work, and when the work must be done — think of the rush, on-call, anytime nature of some jobs. But importantly, it also concerns the price that firms must pay to provide flexible work as an amenity and the price that workers are willing to accept. This calculation is of great importance in understanding why women, especially those who undertake caregiving roles, earn less than men.

“公司提供工作靈活性必須支付的價(jià)格”是指什么？

What do you mean by “the price that firms must pay to provide flexible work”?

我舉一個(gè)跟靈活工作無(wú)關(guān)的福利的例子。比如在工作場(chǎng)所提供凈化的空氣，公司可以選擇為全體員工提供凈化空氣（比如使用大型的高效空氣過(guò)濾器），這樣會(huì)產(chǎn)生成本。如果空氣過(guò)濾技術(shù)昂貴，公司可能只在員工接受為此減薪或工作效率會(huì)因此獲得提升的前提下提供凈化空氣。但如果需要的花費(fèi)很低，公司幾乎不需要員工承擔(dān)成本就可以提供凈化空氣。

Let me provide an example of an amenity that has nothing to do with flexible work. Consider the provision of clean air at a job location. Firms can choose to provide clean air (for example, using large HEPA air purifiers) to all their workers, but only at some cost to the company. If the clean air technology were expensive, the firm would provide clean air only if workers would take a steep cut in their wages to get it or if it increased productivity. But if the technology were really cheap to provide, the firm could make clean air accessible at almost no cost to the workers.

那么，假如女性比男性更需要凈化空氣呢？女性可能會(huì)選擇在提供凈化空氣的公司工作，乃至為這個(gè)福利接受降薪。如果凈化空氣的成本讓薪資減少太多，一些女性可能根本不工作了。男性和女性會(huì)根據(jù)公司提供凈化空氣的成本區(qū)分適合自己的公司。但如果提供凈化空氣的成本全面降低，工作場(chǎng)所的性別之分就會(huì)更少。

Now, what if women had a greater preference for clean air than men? They might choose to work at firms that provide clean air, and may even take a pay cut for the amenity. Some women might not work at all if the cost of clean air lowered their wages too much. Men and women might segregate themselves by firm according to the firm’s cost of cleaning the air. But if the cost of clean air fell across the board, workplaces would become less segregated by gender.

靈活工作時(shí)間的問(wèn)題與此相似。如果一項(xiàng)工作可以由一位員工傳遞給另一位員工，信息幾乎沒(méi)有損失，那么公司提供靈活性的成本就比較低，因?yàn)槿绻幻麊T工不得不留在家中照顧生病的孩子，可以由另一名員工無(wú)縫代替其工作。即使是要接觸客戶的職位，如果兩位員工的工作內(nèi)容非常接近，那么若有需要，稅務(wù)文書(shū)、訴訟摘要、離婚協(xié)議、房地產(chǎn)交易和銀行對(duì)賬單等等各種任務(wù)都可以交接。

The issues with time flexibility are somewhat similar. If a job could be handed off from one worker to another with little loss in information, then it would be less costly for the firm to provide the amenity of job flexibility, because if one worker had to stay home to care for a sick child, another could seamlessly take her place. Even for positions that are client-facing, if two workers were very close substitutes, then tax documents, legal briefs, divorce papers, real estate transactions, and bank statements could be handed off from one to the other, should a need arise.

但如果員工和任務(wù)的重疊很少，比如說(shuō)只有一個(gè)人負(fù)責(zé)接聽(tīng)客戶電話，這時(shí)候靈活工作的成本就變高了，因?yàn)樵试S一個(gè)人放下工作就需要聘用和培訓(xùn)另一名員工，而且這兩個(gè)人還可能同時(shí)在崗。

But what if there’s only a small amount of redundancy among employees and tasks? For example, what if there is only one person to take client calls? Then the cost of flexibility is higher, since allowing one person to hand off their work requires hiring and training another employee and possibly having the two work together for part of the day.

最后，工時(shí)更長(zhǎng)、靈活性較低的工作通常時(shí)薪更高。簡(jiǎn)單地說(shuō)：如果每周工作70小時(shí)、可能晚上和周末都在工作的人拿到的時(shí)薪比每周工作35小時(shí)的人高出兩倍以上，這種工作就叫做“貪婪的工作”。

In the end, jobs that require more time and less flexible hours have generally been those that pay workers more per hour. Putting this simply: If the person who works 70 hours per week, possibly during evenings and weekends, gets a lot more than twice the wage per hour of the person who works 35 hours per week, we call that “greedy work.”

貪婪工作還牽涉什么？

What else does greedy work entail?

貪婪工作可以定義為在員工工作時(shí)間很長(zhǎng)或?qū)ぷ鲿r(shí)間自主權(quán)很小的情況下時(shí)薪超高的工作?？赡苁切枰s時(shí)間的工作，可能要在深夜11點(diǎn)應(yīng)付挑剔的客戶打來(lái)的電話，也可能是上司要求員工為項(xiàng)目放棄休假。公司認(rèn)為讓員工趕工、在特定時(shí)間完成或額外加班值得付出額外的薪水。另一個(gè)重要的方面是員工同意拿這份薪水加班。這是一種常見(jiàn)的供求關(guān)系。

Greedy work can be defined as a job that pays disproportionately more on a per-hour basis when someone works a greater number of hours or has less control over those hours. It could be a rush job, a demanding client who calls at 11 PM, or a supervisor who asks that the worker give up a vacation day for the project. The firm has deemed the additional payment worth it to have the work done over more hours, at a particular time, or during odd hours. The other critical aspect is that the worker agrees to do it at that wage. Supply and demand, all over again.

如果員工不在乎加班，公司就不必開(kāi)出高薪，但很多人在乎。這是一個(gè)復(fù)雜的平衡，薪資不足以讓一些員工（比如女性）放棄自己的時(shí)間或家庭生活，但對(duì)于另一些員工（比如男性）而言足夠了。這樣的情況下，女性會(huì)去找對(duì)時(shí)間要求不那么苛刻的公司，或者不再工作。

If workers did not care about giving the additional time, then the firm would not have to pay them that much more. But many do care. It is a complicated equilibrium in which the compensation may be an insufficient reason for some workers (let’s say women) to give up their time or family life. But the compensation may be sufficient for some other workers (let’s say men) to do so. Under these conditions, women will shift to a firm with less demanding hours or leave the workforce.

根據(jù)我的研究，在很多專業(yè)領(lǐng)域，女性就職于對(duì)時(shí)間要求較寬松的企業(yè)或機(jī)構(gòu)。大部分女性是兼職教授而非終身教職教授，供職的會(huì)計(jì)和律師事務(wù)所規(guī)模比男性更小，在金融方面也常在HR等時(shí)間要求較低的職位而非投行。她們?cè)诠ぷ髦蝎@得各種福利，但賺的錢也更少，且往往會(huì)越來(lái)越少。

In many professions, women work in firms or for institutions that are less demanding of their time, according to my research. They are disproportionately adjunct faculty rather than tenure-track professors, they work for smaller accounting and law firms than men do, and they are in finance occupations, like HR, that require fewer hours than a job such as investment banking. They gain various amenities in their work, but they also earn less today and will often earn even less in the future.

為什么會(huì)變成這樣？

What are some of the mechanisms that got us here?

我們不清楚過(guò)去的工作是否不貪婪。美國(guó)人一直是工作狂，從很久以前就比歐洲人工作時(shí)間長(zhǎng)，現(xiàn)在也一樣。1831年亞歷克西斯?德托克維爾（Alexis de Tocqueville）訪問(wèn)美國(guó)，談到民主政體中的工人比貴族統(tǒng)治下勞動(dòng)得更多，因?yàn)橛猩仙臻g。有趣的是，比起法國(guó)、英國(guó)和德國(guó)，當(dāng)時(shí)美國(guó)是一個(gè)平等的國(guó)度。

We don’t really know whether work was far less greedy in the past. Americans have always been workaholics — they worked more hours than their European counterparts long ago, and they work more hours now. Alexis de Tocqueville, during his visit to America in 1831, remarked that workers in democracies labored more than in aristocracies because they could advance. Interestingly, at the time, America was the land of equality relative to France, Britain, and Germany.

然而現(xiàn)在催生了貪婪工作的大問(wèn)題卻是嚴(yán)重的經(jīng)濟(jì)不平等。收入不平等從20世紀(jì)80年代開(kāi)始加劇，由于目前尚不得而知的原因，在21世紀(jì)初的十年里達(dá)到巔峰。最頂層的10%、1%乃至0.1%的人獲得的社會(huì)財(cái)富比例增加，催生了貪婪工作。頂層獲得的收入比略低一層的人們高出那么多，一些人就會(huì)拼命努力爭(zhēng)取走上頂層的機(jī)會(huì)。

The big issue that powers greediness in work today, however, is the enormous degree of economic?inequality. Inequality of earnings began to rise in the 1980s, and for reasons that we are still exploring, top-end inequality exploded in the 2000s. The increase in the fraction of income earned by the top 10%, the top 1%, and even the top 0.1% fuels greedy work. If earnings in the top position are so much greater than in a position slightly below it, some will work enormously hard for the chance to have that top position.

經(jīng)濟(jì)不平等還給面向客戶的公司增加了許多壓力，從各個(gè)角度助長(zhǎng)了貪婪工作。其中之一是贏家通吃形的工作增加。最好的例子是娛樂(lè)和體育行業(yè)，但法律、會(huì)計(jì)和金融行業(yè)也有很多。比如法律行業(yè)，如果聘用某一位律師可以提升勝訴的可能性，勝訴的價(jià)值比聘用成本高得多，你就會(huì)去找這個(gè)人，愿意為他支付高額時(shí)薪。不過(guò)，貪婪工作盛行的不止面向客戶的企業(yè)。大部分有“非升即走”職位的公司和機(jī)構(gòu)，亦即涉及成為合伙人、拿到終身教職或獲得重要晉升的地方，都會(huì)助長(zhǎng)這種貪婪。

Economic inequality also puts pressure on client-facing firms in a number of ways that further drive greedy work. One way concerns the increase in winner-takes-all positions. The best examples are in entertainment and sports, but there are many in law, accounting, and finance. In law, for example, if hiring a particular person increases the probability of winning a case, the case is now worth so much more, and you would pursue that particular lawyer and be willing to pay a tremendous amount more for that person’s hours. But client-facing firms aren’t the only ones that have greedy workplaces. Most firms and institutions with positions that are “up or out” and that involve making partner, getting tenure, or achieving a major promotion will give rise to the type of greediness I’ve mentioned.

有沒(méi)有抵制貪婪工作趨勢(shì)的公司或行業(yè)？抵制獲得了什么益處？

Are there examples of companies or industries that are bucking the greedy work trend? What benefits are they seeing?

一些變化自然而然地發(fā)生。比如以前獨(dú)立經(jīng)營(yíng)藥店的藥劑師會(huì)雇用另一位藥劑師當(dāng)助手，通常是女性，賺的錢遠(yuǎn)少于他，主要因?yàn)樗恰笆Ｓ嗨魅?quán)人”，要為藥店承擔(dān)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和投入時(shí)間。

Some changes happen organically. The example of pharmacists comes to mind. There was a time when a pharmacist would own his business. He might hire another pharmacist as an assistant, and often that pharmacist was a woman. She would earn far less than he did, largely because he was the “residual claimant” who would take on the risks and the time commitment of ownership.

后來(lái)發(fā)生了許多變化，獨(dú)立經(jīng)營(yíng)的藥店減少，與CVS、Walgreens和Rite Aid等公司相關(guān)的企業(yè)模式興起。藥品標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化和詳盡的信息技術(shù)，使得藥劑師彼此之間的可代替性更高。藥劑師不再獲得獨(dú)立經(jīng)營(yíng)的經(jīng)濟(jì)回報(bào)，也不必再承擔(dān)相應(yīng)的時(shí)間要求。藥店時(shí)薪的性別差距在高薪行業(yè)中達(dá)到最小，盡管很多女性藥劑師在職業(yè)發(fā)展的某些階段是兼職工作。

Many changes occurred that brought about the decrease in the fraction of independently owned pharmacies and the rise of the corporate model associated with CVS, Walgreens, and Rite Aid. Pharmacists became much better substitutes for each other through the standardization of drugs and the use of elaborate information technologies. They no longer receive the financial rewards, or have the time demands, of ownership. And the gender earnings gap for hourly earnings in pharmacy is among the lowest among high-paying professions, even though a substantial fraction of female pharmacists work part-time at some point in their career.

兒科的變化則是因?yàn)榻厝徊煌脑?。很多兒科醫(yī)生，不論性別，都希望有更高的靈活性，并且組成醫(yī)療團(tuán)隊(duì)，以便獲得更大的選擇空間。這樣一來(lái)，顧客也能多認(rèn)識(shí)幾位團(tuán)隊(duì)里的醫(yī)生，減少孩子這次見(jiàn)到的不是上次那位醫(yī)生的沮喪。醫(yī)生和患者都更滿意了。獸醫(yī)領(lǐng)域也發(fā)生了類似的變化。這兩個(gè)領(lǐng)域的女性比例都有所增加——現(xiàn)在的獸醫(yī)學(xué)學(xué)生里約77%是女性，1975年僅有10%。

A very different set of reasons for change is found in pediatrics. In that case, it appears that many pediatricians — independent of gender — wanted more flexibility and formed group practices that enabled them to better choose their schedules. At the same time, their clients could get to know various pediatricians in the group, so their children would be less upset if the doctor they saw last time was not the one on call this time. The physicians were happier and their patients were happier. Similar changes occurred in veterinary medicine. In both fields, the fraction of the group that is female increased — it is around 77% among veterinary students today, up from 10% in 1975.

另外，還有一些公司鼓勵(lì)父親為家庭原因請(qǐng)假。我在幾項(xiàng)關(guān)于公司為什么提供帶薪家務(wù)假的研究里注意到，很多公司希望男性員工利用休假，部分目的是減少女性員工休產(chǎn)假招致的抱怨。鼓勵(lì)男性休假并真正將時(shí)間用于家庭，是在公司和伴侶之間促進(jìn)平等的一種好方法。

Plus, there are firms that appreciate when dads take time off for family reasons. In some research I’ve done concerning why firms provide paid family leave, I noticed that many firms want their male employees to take advantage of their leave benefits, in part to have less resentment when women in the firm take parental leave. Encouraging men to take the leave and really use it for family matters is a good way to increase equity in the firm and in couples.

伴侶之間該如何減少貪婪工作相關(guān)的不平等？

How can couples make an imbalance around greedy work less likely to occur?

五五分是一個(gè)崇高的目標(biāo)。但工作貪婪程度越高，伴侶之間五五分的成本就越高，每次分?jǐn)偧覄?wù)隱含的“損失”越大?，F(xiàn)狀是伴侶雙方不會(huì)都從高薪工作轉(zhuǎn)為時(shí)間更靈活的工作，而是只有其中一方，通常是女性這樣做。如果是異性伴侶，那么女性在事業(yè)發(fā)展中后退一步，性別不平等隨之產(chǎn)生。即使是同性伴侶，貪婪工作也會(huì)影響雙方的平等，但不會(huì)助長(zhǎng)性別不平等。

Fifty-fiftyness is a noble goal. But the greedier work is, the more expensive 50-50 equity in a couple becomes. Every time the couple tries to share, they will implicitly “pay” more. Rather than having both give up higher-paying jobs for more flexible ones, just one member of the couple will, and it is often the woman. In consequence, if they are a heterosexual couple, gender inequality will generally increase when the woman steps back from her career. Even for same-sex couples, greedy work will serve to upend couple equity, but it will not add to gender inequality.

簡(jiǎn)單地說(shuō)，非常重視平等的伴侶要準(zhǔn)備接受降薪，以及成為合伙人、獲得終身教職或重要晉升的可能性降低。比方說(shuō)，兩人都是律師，可以在中等規(guī)模的事務(wù)所工作，不要一個(gè)在大律所、一個(gè)在小律所。重點(diǎn)在于雙方平等是有成本的，比貪婪工作的成本高。

The short answer is for couples who greatly value a 50-50 balance to take the hit in terms of lower earnings today and a lower probability of making partner, getting tenure, or landing a big promotion. If they are both lawyers, for example, they could work at medium-size firms rather than one working at the big-ticket firm and the other at the boutique firm. The point is that couple equity costs money, and it costs more the greedier work is.

靈活工作的成本有沒(méi)有因?yàn)槲覀冊(cè)谝咔橹虏捎玫募夹g(shù)和居家辦公制度而降低？你如何看待這18個(gè)月以來(lái)的居家辦公狀況，這對(duì)工作場(chǎng)所的平等有什么影響？

Have the costs of job flexibility been lowered by the technologies and WFH arrangements we’ve used during the pandemic? What do you make of what we’ve seen over the past 18 months, and what might it mean for equity in the workplace?

工作總是可以靈活的。問(wèn)題在于公司要付出怎樣的成本，降薪的員工又要承擔(dān)多少。

Jobs can always be made flexible. The question is what the cost to the firm is and what the price to the worker will be in lower earnings.

疫情從多個(gè)角度降低了靈活工作的成本。企業(yè)和員工學(xué)會(huì)了使用遠(yuǎn)程會(huì)議技術(shù)，可以讓許多人一起遠(yuǎn)程開(kāi)會(huì)。

The pandemic appears to have lowered the cost of flexibility in various ways. Firms and workers have learned to use technologies that enable remote meetings, including those with huge numbers of participants.

我們20世紀(jì)90年代就有了遠(yuǎn)程會(huì)議軟件，卻直到最近才真正頻繁使用起來(lái)。部分原因是現(xiàn)在網(wǎng)速快了，但還有一部分原因是現(xiàn)在迫不得已，而且網(wǎng)絡(luò)用戶越廣泛，新入者的優(yōu)勢(shì)就越大。另外，聰明的初創(chuàng)企業(yè)已經(jīng)在開(kāi)發(fā)新型軟件——比如Sophya和Gather，可以提供比Zoom更靈活、更親密的虛擬空間——讓團(tuán)隊(duì)更有歸屬感，促使遠(yuǎn)程團(tuán)隊(duì)更好地建立信賴、發(fā)揮創(chuàng)造力。

Even though we’ve had teleconferencing software since the 1990s, we didn’t greatly depend on these tools until recently. Partly that’s because we now have high-speed internet, but partly it’s because we were forced to use them, and the more extensive the network of users, the greater the advantage to new entrants. In addition, clever startups have been inventing new types of software — like Sophya or Gather, which create virtual spaces that are more flexible and intimate than Zoom — that provide teams with a greater sense of familiarity and togetherness, promoting trust and enabling creativity among teams of remote workers.

這為什么會(huì)影響靈活工作，靈活工作又如何促進(jìn)工作場(chǎng)合的性別平等？

你不坐飛機(jī)就能跟東京或北京的客戶開(kāi)會(huì)談并購(gòu)，晚上要在家照顧孩子的家長(zhǎng)也可以接受這份工作——這個(gè)人很可能是女性。工作時(shí)長(zhǎng)可能是一樣的，但員工對(duì)時(shí)間有更多的控制權(quán)，比如可以騰出時(shí)間哄孩子睡覺(jué)或者跟家人共進(jìn)晚餐。

Why would this impact flexibility, and why would flexibility enhance gender equality in the workplace? If you can do an M&A meeting with a client in Tokyo or Beijing without ever getting on a plane, the parent who needs to be home at night can take that job — and that individual is likely to be a woman. The number of work hours may remain the same, but the employee has more control over which hours are free, like the ones just before a child goes to bed or when the family eats dinner together.

但在線合作依然有阻礙。我發(fā)現(xiàn)自己跟合著者直接見(jiàn)面的時(shí)候更有效率和創(chuàng)造力。我們要正視這個(gè)問(wèn)題，一些人際關(guān)系需要實(shí)際接觸。

But there are still snags in virtual collaborations. I find that I’m more productive and creative when my coauthors and I meet in person. Let’s face it, some relationships may always require some degree of physicality.

將來(lái)能不能讓工作變得對(duì)每個(gè)人都不這么貪婪，而且對(duì)女性特別是對(duì)母親更公平？我們?cè)鯓硬拍軐?shí)現(xiàn)這樣的未來(lái)？

Is there a future in which work becomes less greedy for everyone — and makes work more equal for women and, in particular, mothers? What do we need for that to happen?

如果經(jīng)濟(jì)不平等奇跡般地消失，那當(dāng)然很好。貪婪工作的一些方面會(huì)隨之改變。但短時(shí)間內(nèi)不會(huì)有這種好事。不過(guò)要?jiǎng)?chuàng)造公平的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)空間，還有其他方式，主要是孩子（令人吃驚?。?。舉例來(lái)說(shuō)，通過(guò)有補(bǔ)助的日托服務(wù)改變父母承擔(dān)的成本，并不會(huì)改變貪婪工作本身，但可以讓父母的時(shí)間更寬松，有余地跟其他同事?lián)Q班。但這樣還是解決不了由哪一方應(yīng)對(duì)校醫(yī)院打來(lái)的緊急電話、哪一方帶老人去看心臟病醫(yī)生的問(wèn)題。

It would be great if economic inequality would miraculously decrease. That would change some aspects of greedy work. But that isn’t going to happen soon. There are other ways to even the playing field, though, and they mainly involve (surprise!) children. Changing the cost to parents through subsidized day care, for example, won’t change greedy work, but it will mean that the time of parents is less critical. Parents will substitute someone else’s time for their own. However, there will still be issues regarding which parent will respond to the emergency call from the school nurse or take the older relative to the cardiologist.

比如瑞典的日托服務(wù)有大量補(bǔ)貼，收入不平等狀況也比美國(guó)好得多。我覺(jué)得獲得更平等的收入對(duì)于大學(xué)畢業(yè)生而言是更為決定性的因素，對(duì)社會(huì)其他人群可能也一樣。

Sweden, for example, has heavily subsidized day care, and it also has far lower income inequality than the U.S. My sense is that having more-equal incomes is the bigger game changer for those who are college graduates and probably for the rest of society as well.

格蕾琴·加維特是《哈佛商業(yè)評(píng)論》高級(jí)編輯。

Gretchen Gavett?is a senior editor at Harvard Business Review.